Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness analysis study of HPV testing as a primary cervical cancer screening in Thailand.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:The aim of this study is to compare the cost and benefit of four different cervical cancer screening strategies involving primary HPV 16/18 genotyping, hrHPV testing alone and cytology for detecting CIN2 +. METHODS:Economical analysis using Markov modeling approach to combine the epidemiological data from current population-based study of The National Cancer Institute of Thailand. A cohort of 100,000 hypothetical female population age 30-65 years was simulated in each strategy. The compared strategies are HPV 16/18 genotyping with reflexed cytology, hrHPV testing alone followed by colposcopy, Papanicolaou standard cytology and liquid based cytology followed by colposcopy. The interval of screening was 5 years' interval. The main outcomes were defined as a number of CIN2 + cases and cost per 100,000 women screening over 35 years. RESULTS:Model predictions indicated that, the most cost-effectiveness strategy is hrHPV testing alone by reducing cost and also increase CIN2 + detection rate. It identify an additional 130 cases and decrease cost by 46,950,840 THB (1,394,441 USD) per 100,000 women screened when compared to HPV 16/18 genotyping. Compared with cytology, hrHPV testing decrease cost by 51,279,781 THB (1,523,011 USD) and detected more 506 cases of CIN2 +. From sensitivity analysis, the cost of HPV testing, cost of colposcopy, incidence of HPV infection and sensitivity of cytology may affect the results. (1 USD = 33.67 Baht). CONCLUSION:The results of this cost-effectiveness analysis support the full scale implementation of HPV testing as a primary cervical cancer screening in Thailand.

SUBMITTER: Termrungruanglert W

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5633754 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cost-effectiveness analysis study of HPV testing as a primary cervical cancer screening in Thailand.

Termrungruanglert Wichai W Khemapech Nipon N Tantitamit Tanitra T Sangrajrang Suleeporn S Havanond Piyalamporn P Laowahutanont Piyawat P

Gynecologic oncology reports 20170928

<h4>Objectives</h4>The aim of this study is to compare the cost and benefit of four different cervical cancer screening strategies involving primary HPV 16/18 genotyping, hrHPV testing alone and cytology for detecting CIN2 +.<h4>Methods</h4>Economical analysis using Markov modeling approach to combine the epidemiological data from current population-based study of The National Cancer Institute of Thailand. A cohort of 100,000 hypothetical female population age 30-65 years was simulated in each s ...[more]

PMID: 29034308

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSeveral countries are implementing a transition to HPV testing for cervical screening in response to the introduction of HPV vaccination and evidence indicating that HPV screening is more effective than cytology. In Australia, a 2017 transition from 2-yearly conventional cytology in 18-20 to 69 years to 5-yearly primary HPV screening in 25 to 74 years will involve partial genotyping for HPV 16/18 with direct referral to colposcopy for this higher risk group. The objective of this study was to determine the optimal management of women positive for other high-risk HPV types (not 16/18) ('OHR HPV').MethodsWe used a dynamic model of HPV transmission, vaccination, natural history and cervical screening to determine the optimal management of women positive for OHR HPV. We assumed cytology triage testing was used to inform management in this group and that those with high-grade cytology would be referred to colposcopy and those with negative cytology would receive 12-month surveillance. For those with OHR HPV and low-grade cytology (considered to be a single low-grade category in Australia incorporating ASC-US and LSIL), we evaluated (1) the 20-year risk of invasive cervical cancer assuming this group are referred for 12-month follow-up vs. colposcopy, and compared this to the risk in women with low-grade cytology under the current program (i.e. an accepted benchmark risk for 12-month follow-up in Australia); (2) the population-level impact of the whole program, assuming this group are referred to 12-month surveillance vs. colposcopy; and (3) the cost-effectiveness of immediate colposcopy compared to 12-month follow-up. Evaluation was performed both for HPV-unvaccinated cohorts and cohorts offered vaccination (coverage ~72%).FindingsThe estimated 20-year risk of cervical cancer is ?1.0% at all ages if this group are referred to colposcopy vs. ?1.2% if followed-up in 12 months, both of which are lower than the ?2.6% benchmark risk in women with low-grade cytology in the current program (who are returned for 12-month follow-up). At the population level, immediate colposcopy referral provides an incremental 1-3% reduction in cervical cancer incidence and mortality compared with 12-month follow-up, but this is in the context of a predicted 24-36% reduction associated with the new HPV screening program compared to the current cytology-based program. Furthermore, immediate colposcopy substantially increases the predicted number of colposcopies, with >650 additional colposcopies required to avert each additional case of cervical cancer compared to 12-month follow-up. Compared to 12-month follow-up, immediate colposcopy has an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of A$104,600/LYS (95%CrI:A$100,100-109,100) in unvaccinated women and A$117,100/LYS (95%CrI:A$112,300-122,000) in cohorts offered vaccination [Indicative willingness-to-pay threshold: A$50,000/LYS].ConclusionsIn primary HPV screening programs, partial genotyping for HPV16/18 or high-grade triage cytology in OHR HPV positive women can be used to refer the highest risk group to colposcopy, but 12-month follow-up for women with OHR HPV and low-grade cytology is associated with a low risk of developing cervical cancer. Direct referral to colposcopy for this group would be associated with a substantial increase in colposcopy referrals and the associated harms, and is also cost-ineffective; thus, 12-month surveillance for women with OHR HPV and low-grade cytology provides the best balance between benefits, harms and cost-effectiveness.

Project description:The availability of human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing and vaccination against HPV types 16 and 18 (HPV-16,18) motivates questions about the cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer prevention in the United States for unvaccinated older women and for girls eligible for vaccination.An empirically calibrated model was used to assess the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), lifetime costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (2004 US dollars per QALY) of screening, vaccination of preadolescent girls, and vaccination combined with screening. Screening varied by initiation age (18, 21, or 25 years), interval (every 1, 2, 3, or 5 years), and test (HPV DNA testing of cervical specimens or cytologic evaluation of cervical cells with a Pap test). Testing strategies included: 1) cytology followed by HPV DNA testing for equivocal cytologic results (cytology with HPV test triage); 2) HPV DNA testing followed by cytology for positive HPV DNA results (HPV test with cytology triage); and 3) combined HPV DNA testing and cytology. Strategies were permitted to switch once at age 25, 30, or 35 years.For unvaccinated women, triennial cytology with HPV test triage, beginning by age 21 years and switching to HPV testing with cytology triage at age 30 years, cost $78,000 per QALY compared with the next best strategy. For girls vaccinated before age 12 years, this same strategy, beginning at age 25 years and switching at age 35 years, cost $41,000 per QALY with screening every 5 years and $188,000 per QALY screening triennially, each compared with the next best strategy. These strategies were more effective and cost-effective than screening women of all ages with cytology alone or cytology with HPV triage annually or biennially.For both vaccinated and unvaccinated women, age-based screening by use of HPV DNA testing as a triage test for equivocal results in younger women and as a primary screening test in older women is expected to be more cost-effective than current screening recommendations.

Project description:IntroductionCervical cancer ranks as the third most prevalent cancer among women in Thailand. However, the effectiveness of cervical cancer screening programs is limited by several factors that impede the screening rate. The utilization of self-collected samples for screening purposes has the potential to alleviate barriers to screening in Thai women. This study assessed the cost-utility and budget impact of implementing cervical cancer screening using self-collected samples for human papillomavirus (HPV) deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) testing in Thailand.Materials and methodsWe employed a decision tree integrated with a Markov model to estimate the lifetime costs and health benefits associated with the cervical cancer screening program for women aged 25-65. The analysis was conducted from a societal perspective. Four screening policy options were compared: (1) additional self-collected samples for HPV DNA testing, (2) clinician-collected samples for HPV DNA testing only, (3) clinician-collected samples for cytology test (i.e., status quo), and (4) no screening. The model inputs were based on unvaccinated women. The screening strategies and management in those with positive results were assumed followed to the Thai clinical practice guideline. Costs were reported in 2022 Thai baht. Sensitivity analyses were conducted. The ten-year budget impacts of the additional self-collected samples for HPV DNA testing were calculated from a payer perspective.ResultsAll screening policies were cost-saving compared to no screening. When comparing the additional self-collected samples for HPV DNA testing with the clinician-collected samples policy, it emerged as the dominant strategy. The incremental benefit in cervical cancer prevention achieved by incorporating self-collected samples for screening was observed at any additional screening rate that could be achieved through their use. Sensitivity analyses yielded consistently favorable results for the screening policies. The average annual budget impact of the additional self-collected samples for screening policy amounted to 681 million Thai baht. This budget allocation could facilitate cervical cancer screening for over 10 million women.ConclusionsAn addition of self-collected samples for HPV DNA testing into the cervical cancer screening program is cost-saving. The benefits of this screening policy outweigh the associated incremental costs. Policymakers should consider this evidence during the policy optimization process.

Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness analysis study of HPV testing as a primary cervical cancer screening in Thailand.

Publications

Cost-effectiveness analysis study of HPV testing as a primary cervical cancer screening in Thailand.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets