Revisiting the Cost-Effectiveness of HPV Co-Testing Versus Primary HPV Testing for Cervical Cancer Screening

2021 ◽  
Vol 04 (04) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey D Miller ◽  
Adrian Vilalta ◽  
Kathleen A Troeger
2019 ◽  
Vol 145 (1) ◽  
pp. 40-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole G. Campos ◽  
Mauricio Maza ◽  
Karla Alfaro ◽  
Julia C. Gage ◽  
Philip E. Castle ◽  
...  

1997 ◽  
Vol 76 (5) ◽  
pp. 651-657 ◽  
Author(s):  
M van Ballegooijen ◽  
ME van den Akker-van Marle ◽  
PG Warmerdam ◽  
CJLM Meijer ◽  
JMM Walboomers ◽  
...  

2010 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca B. Perkins ◽  
Sarah M. Langrish ◽  
Linda J. Stern ◽  
James F. Burgess ◽  
Carol J. Simon

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Julio Cesar Teixeira ◽  
Diama Bhadra Vale ◽  
Joana Froes Bragança ◽  
Cirbia Silva Campos ◽  
Michelle Garcia Discacciati ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 543-552
Author(s):  
João Firmino-Machado ◽  
Djøra I Soeteman ◽  
Nuno Lunet

Abstract Background Cervical cancer screening is effective in reducing mortality, but adherence is generally low. We aimed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of a stepwise intervention to promote adherence to cervical cancer screening in Portugal. Methods We developed a decision tree model to compare the cost-effectiveness of four competing interventions to increase adherence to cervical cancer screening: (i) a written letter (standard-of-care); (ii) automated short message service text messages (SMS)/phone calls/reminders; (iii) automated SMS/phone calls/reminders + manual phone calls; (iv) automated SMS/phone calls/reminders + manual phone calls + face-to-face interviews. The main outcome measure was cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) measured over a 5-year time horizon. Costs were calculated from the societal and provider perspectives. Results From the societal perspective, the optimal strategy was automated SMS/phone calls/reminders, below a threshold of €8171 per QALY; above this and below €180 878 per QALY, the most cost-effective strategy was automated SMS/phone calls/reminders + manual phone calls and above this value automated SMS/phone calls/reminders + manual phone calls + face-to-face interviews. From the provider perspective, the ranking of the three strategies in terms of cost-effectiveness was the same, for thresholds of €2756 and €175 463 per QALY, respectively. Conclusions Assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of one time the national gross domestic product (€22 398/QALY), automated SMS/phone calls/reminders + manual phone calls is a cost-effective strategy to promote adherence to cervical cancer screening, both from the societal and provider perspectives.


2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (S1) ◽  
pp. 49-49
Author(s):  
Triin Võrno ◽  
Kaja-Triin Laisaar ◽  
Terje Raud ◽  
Kai Jõers ◽  
Doris Meigas-Tohver ◽  
...  

IntroductionIn Estonia, organized cervical cancer screening program is targeted at women aged 30–55(59) years and Pap-tests are taken every five years. Since cervical cancer is associated with human papillomavirus (HPV), a number of countries have introduced the HPV-test as the primary method of screening. The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of organized cervical cancer screening program in Estonia by comparing HPV- and Pap-test based strategies.MethodsFor the cost-effectiveness analysis, a Markov cohort model was developed. The model was used to estimate costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of eight screening strategies, varying the primary screening test and triage scenarios, upper age limit of screening, and testing interval. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated in comparison to current screening practice as well as to the next best option. Sensitivity analysis was performed by varying one or more similar parameter(s) at a time, while holding others at their base case value. The analysis was performed from the healthcare payer perspective adopting a five percent annual discount rate for both costs and utilities.ResultsIn the base-case scenario, ICER for HPV-test based strategies in comparison to the current screening practice was estimated at EUR 8,596–9,786 per QALY. For alternative Pap-test based strategies ICER was estimated at EUR 2,332–2,425 per QALY. In comparison to the next best option, HPV-test based strategies were dominated by Pap-test based strategies. At the cost-effectiveness threshold of EUR 10,000 per QALY Pap-testing every three years would be the cost-effective strategy for women participating in the screening program from age 30 to 63 (ICER being EUR 3,112 per QALY).ConclusionsDecreasing Pap-test based screening interval or changing to HPV-test based screening can both improve the effectiveness of cervical cancer screening program in Estonia, but based on the current cost-effectiveness study Pap-test based screening every three years should be preferred.


2017 ◽  
Vol 22 ◽  
pp. 58-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wichai Termrungruanglert ◽  
Nipon Khemapech ◽  
Tanitra Tantitamit ◽  
Suleeporn Sangrajrang ◽  
Piyalamporn Havanond ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 131 ◽  
pp. 105931
Author(s):  
Nicole G. Campos ◽  
Karla Alfaro ◽  
Mauricio Maza ◽  
Stephen Sy ◽  
Mario Melendez ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 669-675
Author(s):  
Irenjeet Bains ◽  
Yoon Hong Choi ◽  
Kate Soldan ◽  
Mark Jit

ObjectivesIn England, human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is to replace cytological screening by 2019–2020. We conducted a model-based economic evaluation to project the long-term clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of routine cytology versus HPV testing.MethodsAn individual-based model of HPV acquisition, natural history, and cervical cancer screening was used to compare cytological screening and HPV testing with cytology triage for women aged 25–64 years (with either 3- or 5-year screening intervals for women aged under 50 years). The model was fitted to data from England's National Health Service Cervical Screening Programme. Both clinical and economic outcomes were projected to inform cost-effectiveness analyses.ResultsHPV testing is likely to decrease annual cytology testing (by 2.76 million), cervical cancer incidence (by 290 cases), and health system costs (by £13 million). It may increase the number of colposcopies, although this could be reduced without leading to more cancers compared with primary cytology by increasing the interval between screens to 5 years. The impact in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) depends on the quality of life weight given to colposcopies versus cancer.ConclusionsEngland's move from cytology to HPV screening may potentially be life-saving and cost-effective. Cost-effectiveness can be improved further by extending the interval between screens or using alternative triage methods such as partial or full genotyping.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document