Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 21, 2025

An Improved and High Throughput Respiratory Syncytial Virus RSV Micro-neutralization Assay
Published on: January 26, 2019
Immunization, not vaccination: monoclonal antibodies for infant RSV prevention and the US vaccines for children
1Data for Decisions, LLC, Waltham, MA, USA.
Insights
Passive immunizations like nirsevimab should be eligible for the Vaccines for Children program. The type of immunity conferred, active or passive, is less important than the extent of protection against RSV for all infants.
Area of Science:
- Immunology
- Public Health Policy
- Health Economics
Background:
- Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) presents a substantial public health challenge in the US, particularly for infants.
- Current immunization options for RSV are limited, protecting only a small fraction of the infant population.
- The Vaccines for Children (VFC) program traditionally covers vaccines providing active immunity.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the policy grounds for including passive immunization products, such as nirsevimab, in the VFC program.
- To argue for the eligibility of passive immunizations based on public health goals and effectiveness.
Main Methods:
- Policy analysis based on health system goals (maximizing population health and social welfare).
- Comparative assessment of active versus passive immunization attributes and outcomes.
- Economic valuation of immunization products.
Main Results:
- Active and passive immunizations confer adaptive immunity with similar effects on infection, disease severity, and transmission.
- The distinction between active and passive immunity is less critical than the extent of immunity provided.
- Passive immunizations can be highly effective, even for immunocompromised individuals, and offer comparable duration and economic value to vaccines.
Conclusions:
- Excluding passive immunizations from the VFC program is not supported by policy grounds focused on maximizing population health.
- Eligibility should be based on the extent and effectiveness of immunity conferred, not the mechanism (active vs. passive).
- Inclusion of products like nirsevimab in the VFC would expand crucial RSV protection to all infants.
Abstract:
In the US, RSV imposes significant burdens on infants, households, and the health system. Yet the only licensed immunization is accessible to only certain risk groups comprising 2% of the infant population, leaving the remaining 98% unprotected. An effective immunization for all infants is a significant public health priority. One possible solution is the FDA-approved monoclonal antibody nirsevimab, which recent evidence suggests is safe and effective in preventing RSV in all infants, and which is currently being considered for inclusion in the pediatric immunization schedule and the federal Vaccines for Children (VFC) program. But the question arises whether passive immunization products like nirsevimab ought to be eligible for the VFC, which nominally and traditionally centers on vaccines providing active immunity. Addressing this is urgent because VFC inclusion will be decided on imminently. I argue there are strong policy grounds, i.e., reasons grounded in the ultimate health system goals of maximizing population health or social welfare subject to resource constraints, not to exclude passive immunization from VFC eligibility. Active and passive immunizations both provide adaptive immunity and can therefore produce qualitatively similar effects on risks of infection, disease, and transmission; on disease severity and duration; and on health, welfare, and health resource use. The distinction between active and passive immunization does not intrinsically matter since what matters for the attainment of health system goals is the extent of immunity conferred, not whether immunity is active or passive. Nor can passivity be considered a useful proxy for conferring a lesser extent of immunity, since no such proxy is needed (existing valuation methods can cope with variations in product attributes), and it is a poor proxy (passive immunizations can be better for individuals with impaired immune systems and can have comparable effectiveness durations and economic value as vaccines).
Related Concept Videos
Vaccinations
Cancer Vaccines
Cancer vaccines come in two categories: preventive (prophylactic) and treatment (active). Preventive vaccines, such as the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, protect against viruses that cause certain...

