Broadly protective coronavirus vaccines
Carnell 2025 released a preprint modeling study on the potential human and economic benefits of a broadly protective betacoronavirus vaccine. The authors ran simulations on the impact of vaccines being at various stages of clinical trials or stockpiling when needed and determined broadly protective coronavirus vaccines could significantly reduce economic and human impacts of new betacoronavirus outbreaks.
Whittaker 2025 conducted a modeling study to test ring and spatial vaccination (with and without quarantine) with a broadly protective sarbecovirus vaccine (BPSV) to simulate early mass vaccination of high-risk adults (60 years and older), varying R₀, surveillance sensitivity, vaccine efficacy and delay-to-protection, rollout speed, and timelines to a virus-specific vaccine (100 vs 250 days). They found that ring/spatial BSPV vaccination alone could not contain a SARS-CoV-2-like virus unless implementation was near-immediate, and paired with rapid isolation. However, they found that BPSV utilization alone could help contain a SARS-CoV-1-like virus. Modeled BPSV use reduced effective reproduction number, slowed growth, cut required non-pharmaceutical intervention (NPI) days (fewer work/school disruptions, preserved routine care capacity, lower hospital surge, etc.), and if stockpiled to protect older adults, could have theoretically averted ~21-78% of first-year COVID-19 deaths.
Bartsch 2024 demonstrated in a modelling study that a pan-coronavirus vaccine would be cost-saving in the US as a standalone intervention. For every 1% increase in efficacy between 10% and 50%, with uptake ≥10%, an additional 395,000 infections would be averted, and save ≥$1 billion in medical costs and productivity losses.
COVID-19 vaccines
Schmetz 2026 analyzed real-world data from Germany (September 2022–March 2024) to assess the clinical and economic benefits of seasonal COVID-19 vaccination, finding that vaccination was associated with reductions in hospitalizations, mortality, long COVID diagnoses, and healthcare costs, as well as decreased productivity losses, supporting the value of continued vaccination in the endemic phase.
Green 2025 conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis on the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on long COVID, finding that vaccination is associated with a reduced risk of developing long COVID, reinforcing the role of vaccination in lowering longer-term morbidity and strengthening its value beyond prevention of acute severe disease.
Le 2025 used dynamic transmission and cost-effectiveness modeling to assess COVID-19 booster vaccination strategies in the early post-Omicron era, finding that ongoing vaccination remains important for reducing severe disease and is most likely to be cost-effective when targeted to older adults and higher-risk populations, with cost-effectiveness varying by country income level, population age structure, and immune landscape.
Miranda 2025 conducted a cost-utility analysis of COVID-19 vaccination strategies in Canada, finding that annual vaccination of adults ≥65 years is cost-effective, while expansion to younger populations is sensitive to assumptions around vaccine effectiveness and disease burden.
Prosser 2025 conducted a decision-analytic modeling study in the United States, evaluating the cost-effectiveness of 2023–2024 COVID-19 mRNA vaccination. Vaccination was found to be cost-saving for adults aged ≥65 years and cost-effective for those aged 50–64 years, while results for younger adults were more sensitive to assumptions around vaccine effectiveness, cost, and disease burden.
Srinivasan 2025 presented updated economic analyses of COVID-19 vaccination strategies, finding that vaccination of adults ≥65 years is cost-saving, while broader adult vaccination may be cost-effective depending on assumptions around vaccine effectiveness, uptake, and timing.