Lifetime effects, costs, and cost effectiveness of testing for human papillomavirus to manage low grade cytological abnormalities: Modelling study

British Medical Journal

Volumn 332, Issue 7533, 2006, Pages 79-83

  Legood, Rosa ^a   Gray, Alastair ^a   Wolstenholme, Jane ^a   Moss, Sue ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^b INSTITUTE OF CANCER RESEARCH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; ARTICLE; COLPOSCOPY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; CYTODIAGNOSIS; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; LIFESPAN; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SCREENING TEST; UNITED KINGDOM; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY; VERRUCA VULGARIS; VIRUS DIAGNOSIS; WART VIRUS;

ADULT; CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; COSTS AND COST ANALYSIS; CYTOLOGICAL TECHNIQUES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; PAPILLOMAVIRIDAE; PATIENT ACCEPTANCE OF HEALTH CARE; PILOT PROJECTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STATE MEDICINE; TUMOR VIRUS INFECTIONS; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 30744474962     PISSN: 09598146     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.38698.458866.7C     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Walboomers JMM, Jacobs MV, Manos MM, Bosch FX, Kummer JA, Shah KV, et al. Human papillomavirus is a necessary cause of invasive cervical cancer worldwide. J Pathol 1999;189:12-9.
2. Wright TC, Cox JT, Massad LS, Twiggs LB, Wilkinson EJ. 2001 Consensus guidelines for the management of women with cervical cytological abnormalities. JAMA 2004;287:2120-9.
3. Agence Nationale d'Accreditation et d'Evaluation en Sante. Management of a patient with an abnormal smear. Service recommendations et references professionelles et service evaluation economique. Paris, France: ANAES, 2002:1-92.
4. Moss S, Gray A, Legood R, Vessey M, Patnick J, Kitchener H. Effect of testing for human papillomavirus as a triage during screening for cervical cancer: observational before and after study. BMJ 2006;332:83-5.
5. Myers ER, McCrory DC, Nanda K, Bastian L, Matchar DB. Mathematical model for the natural history of human papillomavirus infection and cervical carcinogenesis. Am J Epidemiol 2000;151(12):1158-71.
6. West Midlands Cancer Intelligence Unit. Invasive cervical cancer relative survival by stage in the West Midlands: tumours diagnosed 1995-1997 followed up to the end of 2002. University of Birmingham: WMCIU, 2003.
7. Quinn M, Babb P, Brock A, Kirby L, Jones J. Cancer trends in England and Wales 1950-1999. London: Stationery Office, 2001.
8. Government Actuary's Department. Life tables: females England and Wales. London: GAD, 2003.
9. Dickson RJ. Management of carcinoma in the cervix. Practitioner 1980;22:899-904.
10. Department of Health. Cervical screening programme. England: 2002-2003. Statistical Bulletin 2003/24. London: DoH, 2003.
11. Abryn M, Buntinx F, Van Ranst M, Paraskevaidas E, Martin-Hirsh P, Dillner J. Virologic versus cytologic triage of women with equivocal pap smears: a meta-analysis of the accuracy to detect high grade intraepithelial neoplasia. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004;96:280-93.
12. Cuzick J, Szareweski A, Terry G, Ho L, Hanby A, Maddox P, et al. Human papillomavirus testing in primary cervical screening. Lancet 1995;345:1533-6.
13. Noorani HZ, Brown AB, Skidmore B, Stuart GCE. Liquid-Based Cytology and human papillomavirus testing in cervical screening. Technology report No 40. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment, 2004.
14. Netten A, Rees T, Harrison G. Unit costs of health and social care. Canterbury: University of Kent, 2001.
15. Wolstenholme JL, Whynes DK. Stage-specific treatment costs for cervical cancer in the United Kingdom. Eur J Cancer 1998;34:1889-93.
16. National Audit Office. The performance of the NHS cervical screening programme. London: Stationery Office, 1998.
17. Great Britain HM Treasury. Green book, appraisal and evaluation in central government. London: Stationery Office, 2003.
18. Nanda K, McCrory DC, Myers ER, Bastian LA, Hasselblad V, Hickey JD, et al. Accuracy of the Papanicolaou test in screening for and follow-up of cervical cytologic abnormalities: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med 2000;132:810-9.
19. Briggs AH, Goeree R, Blackhouse G, O'Brien BJ. Probalistic analysis of cost effectiveness models: choosing between treatment strategies for gastroesophagael reflux disease. Med Decis Making 2002;22:290-308.
20. Fenwick E, Claxton K, Sculpher M. Representing uncertainty: the role of cost effectiveness acceptability curves. Health Econ 2001;10:779-87.
21. Cuzick J, Szarewki A, Cubie H, Kitchener H, Luesley D, McGoogan E, et al. Management of women who test positive for high-risk types of human papillomavirus: the HART study. Lancet 2003;362:1871-6.
22. Kim JJ, Wright TC, Goldie SJ. Cost-effectiveness of alternative triage strategies for atypical cells of undetermined significance. JAMA 2002;287:2382-90.
23. Sherlaw-Johnson C, Phillips Z. An evaluation of liquid-based cytology and human papillomavirus testing within the UK cervical cancer screening programme. Brit J Cancer 2004;91:84-91.