Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness analysis of human papillomavirus DNA testing and Pap smear for cervical cancer screening in a publicly financed health-care system.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: to evaluate the long-term cost-effectiveness of different strategies for human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing combined with Pap smear for cervical cancer screening in Taiwan. METHODS: this study adopts a perspective of Department of Health in cost-effectiveness analysis to compare a no-screening strategy with nine different screening strategies. These strategies comprise three screening tools (Pap smear alone, HPV DNA testing followed by Pap smear triage, and HPV DNA testing combined with Pap smear), and three screening intervals (annually, every 3 years, and every 5 years). Outcomes are life expectancy, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), lifetime costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSAs) were conducted to assess parameter uncertainty. RESULTS: when three times gross domestic product per capita is used as the decision threshold, all nine screening strategies were cost-effective compared with the no-screening strategy. Compared with the current screening strategy (an annual Pap smear), HPV DNA testing followed by Pap smear triage every 5 years and every 3 years were cost-effective. Results of PSA also indicated that a HPV DNA testing followed by Pap smear triage every 5 or every 3 years achieved the highest expected net benefits. CONCLUSIONS: possible economic advantages are associated with extending the cervical cancer screening interval from one Pap smear annually to HPV DNA testing followed by Pap smear triage every 5 years with an ICER $1 247 000 per QALY gained, especially in a country with a publicly financed health-care system.

SUBMITTER: Chow IH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3008604 | biostudies-other | 2010 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

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: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:BackgroundCervical cancer is a major global public health concern, with 85% of cases occurring in low- and middle-income countries. In South Africa, it is the second most common cancer amongst women. Screening and treatment of cervical cancer precursor lesions is associated with a lower incidence and mortality. This research determines the associations between women's beliefs about cervical cancer and screening and the uptake of Papanicolaou (Pap) smears in Johannesburg, where cervical screening uptake is suboptimal.MethodsThis research was approved by the University of Witwatersrand Human Research Ethics Committee (Medical), clearance certificate number: M170243 and the Johannesburg District Heath Research Committee prior to conducting the study. All participants signed a consent form prior to participating in this study. This cross-sectional analytical study used an interviewer-administered validated measurement scale based on the Health Belief Model (HBM) to describe health beliefs regarding cervical cancer and screening among 280 women aged 30 years and older, attending Johannesburg primary care facilities in 2017. Logistic regression models, with robust estimation of variance to account for clustering of women within clinics, were fitted to identify health beliefs (perceived susceptibility, severity, barriers and benefit, cues to action, and self-efficacy) associated with ever having had a Pap smear (screening uptake), while controlling for knowledge of screening and potential confounders.ResultsOf the 280 women, 177 (63.2%) had ever been screened, 180 (64.3%) were never married, 199 (71.1%) attained secondary education and 133 (47.5%) were employed full time. Women of older age (AOR = 1.6 for a 5-year increase in age; CI: 1.3-1.9; P<0.001), with higher knowledge scores (AOR = 2.5 for a 5-point increase in knowledge score; 95% CI:1.0-6.3;P = 0.051), with lower perceived barriers scores (AOR = 0.4 for a 5-point increase in barriers score; 95% CI:0.3-0.5; P<0.001) and higher perceived severity scores (AOR = 1.3 for a 5-point increase in severity score; 95% CI:1.0-1.6; P = 0.017) were more likely to have had a Pap smear.ConclusionsThis study shows that women who take up screening are older, more knowledgeable regarding cervical cancer and screening, less likely to perceive screening barriers, and more likely to perceive cervical cancer as a severe disease. This highlights that for public health interventions to increase screening uptake, the focus should include tailored behaviour change communication strategies that address women's beliefs regarding screening barriers and emphasize the severity of cervical cancer.

Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness analysis of human papillomavirus DNA testing and Pap smear for cervical cancer screening in a publicly financed health-care system.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets