Cost-effectiveness analysis of liquid-based cytology and human papillomavirus testing in cervical cancer screening

Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 107, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 997-1005

  Bidus, Michael A ^b   Maxwell, G Larry ^b   Kulasingam, Shalini ^b   Rose, G Scott ^a   Elkas, John C ^b   Chernofsky, Mildred ^b   Myers, Evan R ^b  

^a WALTER REED ARMY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CANCER SCREENING; COHORT ANALYSIS; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DNA DETERMINATION; EVALUATION; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; LIQUID; LIQUID BASED CYTOLOGY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; SOLDIER; SQUAMOUS CELL; TIME; UNITED STATES; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY; VIRUS INFECTION; WART VIRUS;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; COHORT STUDIES; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; CYTOLOGICAL TECHNIQUES; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COSTS; HUMANS; PAPILLOMAVIRIDAE; UNITED STATES; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS; VIROLOGY;

EID: 33646789857     PISSN: 00297844     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000210529.70226.0a     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, Pisani P. Global cancer statistics, 2002. CA Cancer J Clin 2005;55:74-108.
2. Jemal A, Murray T, Ward E, Samuels A, Tiwari RC, Ghafoor A, et al. Cancer Statistics, 2005 [published erratum appears in CA Cancer J Clin 2005;55:259]. CA Cancer J Clin 2005;55:10-30.
3. Gustafsson L, Ponten J, Zack M, Adami HO. International incidence rates of invasive cervical cancer after introduction of cytological screening. Cancer Causes Control 1997;8:755-63.
4. Ries L, Kosary C, Hankey B, Miller BA, Edwards BK. SEER cancer statistics review, 1973-1995. Bethesda (MD): National Cancer Institute; 1998.
5. Smith RA, Cokkinides V, Eyre HJ. American Cancer Society guidelines for the early detection of cancer, 2005. CA Cancer J Clin 2005;55:31-44.
6. Solomon D, Schiffman M, Tarone R, ALTS Study Group. Comparison of three management strategies for patients with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: baseline results from a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001;93:293-9.
7. Wright TC Jr, Schiffman M. Adding a test for human papillomavirus DNA to cervical-cancer screening. N Engl J Med 2003;348:489-90.
8. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA News: FDA approves expanded use of HPV test. Available at: http:// www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/NEWS/2003/NEW00890.html. Retrieved July 1, 2005.
9. Maxwell GL, Carlson JW, Ochoa M, Krivak T, Rose GS, Myers ER. Costs and effectiveness of alternative strategies for cervical cancer screening in military beneficiaries. Obstet Gynecol 2002;100:740-8.
10. Wright TC Jr, Cox JT, Massad LS, Twiggs LB, Wilkinson EJ, ASCCP-Sponsored Consensus Conference. 2001 Consensus guidelines for the management of women with cervical cytological abnormalities. JAMA 2002;287:2120-9.
11. Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R, Moriarty A, O'Connor D, Prey M, et al. The 2001 Bethesda System: terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA 2002;287:2114-9.
12. Stany MP, Bidus MA, Reed EJ, Kaplan KJ, McHale MT, Rose GS, et al. The prevalence of HR-HPV DNA in ASC-US Pap smears: a military population study. Gynecol Oncol 2005 Nov 9; [Epub ahead of print].
13. Kulasingam SL, Hughes JP, Kiviat NB, Mao C, Weiss NS, Kuypers JM, et al. Evaluation of human papillomavirus testing in primary screening for cervical abnormalities: comparison of sensitivity, specificity, and frequency of referral. JAMA 2002;288:1749-57.
14. Kim JJ, Wright TC, Goldie SJ. Cost-effectiveness of alternative triage strategies for atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. JAMA 2002;287:2382-90.
15. Franco EL. Chapter 13: primary screening of cervical cancer with human papillomavirus tests. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2003;31:89-96.
16. McCrory DC, Matchar DB, Bastian L, Datta S, Hasselblad V, Hickey J, et al. Evaluation of cervical cytology. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Summ) 1999;5:1-6.
17. Office of the Secretary of Defense. Monthly basic pay table. Available at: http://www.dod.mil/militarypay/pay/bp/paytables/Jan2004.html. Retrieved 18 August, 2004.
18. Goldie SJ, Kim JJ, Wright TC. Cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus DNA testing for cervical cancer screening in women aged 30 years or more. Obstet Gynecol 2004;103:619-31.
19. Ollayos CW, Peterson M. Relative risks for squamous intraepithelial lesions detected by the Papanicolaou test among Air Force and Army beneficiaries of the Military Health Care System. Mil Med 2002;167:719-22.
20. Dewilde S, Anderson R. The cost-effectiveness of screening programs using single and multiple birth cohort simulations: a comparison using a model of cervical cancer. Med Decis Making 2004;24:486-92.
21. Shireman TI, Tsevat J, Goldie SJ. Time costs associated with cervical cancer screening. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2001;17:146-52.
22. Cervical cytology screening. Clinical Management Guidelines for Obstetrician-Gynecologists. Number 45. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol 2003;102:417-27.
23. Kulasingam SL, Myers ER. Potential health and economic impact of adding a human papillomavirus vaccine to screening programs. JAMA 2003;290:781-9.