Cost-effectiveness of primary cytology and HPV DNA cervical screening

International Journal of Cancer

Volumn 122, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 372-376

  Bistoletti, Peter ^a,b   Sennfält, Karin ^b   Dillner, Joakim ^c  

^a Nacka Hospital   (Sweden)

^b LINKÖPING UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^c LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Cervical cancer; Health economics; Markov model; Organized screening

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER CYTODIAGNOSIS; CANCER PREVENTION; CANCER REGISTRY; CANCER SCREENING; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; COST MINIMIZATION ANALYSIS; DNA DETERMINATION; HEALTH CARE COST; LIFE EXPECTANCY; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; PERSISTENT VIRUS INFECTION; POPULATION RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; SCREENING TEST; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY; WART VIRUS;

ADULT; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DNA, NEOPLASM; FEMALE; HUMANS; MARKOV CHAINS; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; PAPILLOMAVIRUS INFECTIONS; PROBABILITY; SOFTWARE; TIME FACTORS; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS;

EID: 36849007139     PISSN: 00207136     EISSN: 10970215     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ijc.23124     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Cuschieri KS, Cubie HA. The role of human papillomavirus testing in cervical screening. J Clin Virol 2005;32(Suppl 1):S34-S42.
2. Wright TC, Jr, Schiffman M, Solomon D, Cox JT, Garcia F, Goldie S, Hatch K, Noller KL, Roach N, Runowicz C, Saslow D. Interim guidance for the use of human papillomavirus DNA testing as an adjunct to cervical cytology for screening. Obstet Gynecol 2004;103:304-9.
3. Iftner T, Villa LL. Chapter 12: Human papillomavirus technologies. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2003;31:80-8.
4. Lorincz AT, Richart RM. Human papillomavirus DNA testing as an adjunct to cytology in cervical screening programs. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2003;127:959-68.
5. Petry KU, Menton S, Menton M, van Loenen-Frosch F, de Carvalho Gomes H, Holz B, Schopp B, Garbrecht-Buettner S, Davies P, Boehmer G, van den Akker E, Iftner T. Inclusion of HPV testing in routine cervical cancer screening for women above 29 years in Germany: results for 8466 patients. Br J Cancer 2003;88:1570-7.
6. 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.
7. Goldie SJ. Health economics and cervical cancer prevention: a global perspective. Virus Res 2002;89:301-9.
8. Raffle AE, Alden B, Quinn M, Babb PJ, Brett MT. Outcomes of screening to prevent cancer: analysis of cumulative incidence of cervical abnormality and modelling of cases and deaths prevented. BMJ 2003;326:901.
9. Hakama M, Hristova L. Effect of screening in the Nordic cancer control up to the year 2017. Acta Oncol 1997;36:119-28.
10. Mandelblatt JS, Fahs MC. The cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening for low-income elderly women. JAMA 1988;259:2409-13.
11. Eddy DM. Screening for cervical cancer. Ann Intern Med 1990;113:214-26.
12. Holmes J, Hemmett L, Garfield S. The cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus screening for cervical cancer. A review of recent modelling studies. Eur J Health Econ 2005;6:30-7.
13. Mandelblatt JS, Lawrence WF, Gaffikin L, Limpahayom KK, Lumbiganon P, Warakamin S, King J, Yi B, Ringers P, Blumenthal PD. Costs and benefits of different strategies to screen for cervical cancer in less-developed countries. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002;94:1469-83.
14. Mandelblatt JS, Lawrence WF, Womack SM, Jacobson D, Yi B, Hwang YT, Gold K, Barter J, Shah K. Benefits and costs of using HPV testing to screen for cervical cancer. JAMA 2002;287:2372-81.
15. van den Akker-van Marle ME, van Ballegooijen M, van Oortmarssen GJ, Boer R, Habbema JD. Cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening: comparison of screening policies. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002;94:193-204.
16. Koopmanschap MA, Lubbe KT, van Oortmarssen GJ, van Agt HM, van Ballegooijen M, Habbema JK. Economic aspects of cervical cancer screening. Soc Sci Med 1990;30:1081-7.
17. Koopmanschap MA, van Oortmarssen GJ, van Agt HM, van Ballegooijen M, Habbema JD, Lubbe KT. Cervical-cancer screening: attendance and cost-effectiveness. Int J Cancer 1990;45:410-15.
18. Fahs MC, Mandelblatt J, Schechter C, Muller C. Cost effectiveness of cervical cancer screening for the elderly. Ann Intern Med 1992;117:520-7.
19. Kim JJ, Wright TC, Goldie SJ. Cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus DNA testing in the United Kingdom, The Netherlands, France, and Italy. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97:888-95.
20. 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.
21. Myers ER, McCrory DC, Subramanian S, McCall N, Nanda K, Datta S, Matchar DB. Setting the target for a better cervical screening test: characteristics of a cost-effective test for cervical neoplasia screening. Obstet Gynecol 2000;96:645-52.
22. Brown AD, Garber AM. Cost-effectiveness of 3 methods to enhance the sensitivity of Papanicolaou testing. JAMA 1999;281:347-53.
23. Gustafsson L, Adami HO. Optimization of cervical cancer screening. Cancer Causes Control 1992;3:125-36.
24. van Oortmarssen GJ, Habbema JD, van Ballegooijen M. Predicting mortality from cervical cancer after negative smear test results. BMJ 1992;305:449-51.
25. Canfell K, Barnabas R, Patnick J, Beral V. The predicted effect of changes in cervical screening practice in the UK: results from a modelling study. Br J Cancer 2004;91:530-6.
26. Goldie SJ. Chapter 15: public health policy and cost-effectiveness analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2003;31:102-10.
27. Briggs AH. Handling uncertainty in cost-effectiveness models. Pharmacoeconomics 2000;17:479-500.
28. Brennan A, Akehurst R. Modelling in health economic evaluation. What is its place? What is its value? Pharmacoeconomics 2000;17:445-59.
29. Grimes DA, Schulz KF. Surrogate end points in clinical research: hazardous to your health. Obstet Gynecol 2005;105:1114-18.
30. Dillner J. Cervical cancer screening in Sweden. Eur J Cancer 2000;36:2255-9.
31. Forslund O, Antonsson A, Edlund K, van den Brule AJ, Hansson BG, Meijer CJ, Ryd W, Rylander E, Strand A, Wadell G, Dillner J, Johansson B. Population-based type-specific prevalence of high-risk human papillomavirus infection in middle-aged Swedish women. J Med Virol 2002;66:535-41.
32. Elfgren K, Rylander E, Rådberg T, Strander B, Strand A, Paajanen K, Sjöberg I, Ryd W, Silins I, Dillner J, Swedescreen Study Group. Colposcopic and histopathologic evaluation of women participating in population-based screening for human papillomavirus deoxyribonucleic acid persistence. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005;193:650-7.
33. Gustafsson L, Sparén P, Gustafsson M, Wilander E, Bergström R, Adami HO. Efficiency of organized and opportunistic cytological screening for cancer in situ of the cervix. Br J Cancer 1995;72:498-505.
34. Ponten J, Adami HO, Bergstrom R, Dillner J, Friberg LG, Gustafsson L, Miller AB, Parkin DM, Sparen P, Trichopoulos D. Strategies for global control of cervical cancer. Int J Cancer 1995;60:1-26.
35. Talback M, Stenbeck M, Rosen M, Barlow L, Glimelius B. Cancer survival in Sweden 1960-1998 - developments across four decades. Acta Oncol 2003;42:637-59.
36. Näslund I. Evaluation of screening procedures for uterine cervical carcinoma. Stockholm: Karolinska Institutet, 1985.
37. Pettersson F, Bjorkholm E, Naslund I. Evaluation of screening for cervical cancer in Sweden: trends in incidence and mortality 1958-1980. Int J Epidemiol 1985;14:521-7.
38. Helms LJ, Melnikow J. Determining costs of health care services for cost-effectiveness analyses: the case of cervical cancer prevention and treatment. Med Care 1999;37:652-61.
39. Soto J. Health economic evaluations using decision analytic modeling. Principles and practices - utilization of a checklist to their development and appraisal. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2002;18:94-111.
40. Buxton MJ, Drummond MF, Van Hout BA, Prince RL, Sheldon TA, Szucs T, Vray M. Modelling in economic evaluation: an unavoidable fact of life. Health Econ 1997;6:217-27.
41. Etzioni R, Thomas DB. Modelling the effect of screening for cervical cancer on the population. Lancet 2004;364:224-6.
42. Inadomi JM. Decision analysis and economic modelling: a primer. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2004;16:535-42.
43. Wacholder S. Chapter 18: statistical issues in the design and analysis of studies of human papillomavirus and cervical neoplasia. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2003:125-30.
44. Bergstrom R, Sparen P, Adami HO. Trends in cancer of the cervix uteri in Sweden following cytological screening. Br J Cancer 1999;81:159-66.
45. Briggs AH. Statistical approaches to handling uncertainty in health economic evaluation. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2004;16:551-61.
46. van Ballegooijen M, van den Akker-van Marle ME, Warmerdam PG, Meijer CJ, Walboomers JM, Habbema JD. Present evidence on the value of HPV testing for cervical cancer screening: a model-based exploration of the (cost-) effectiveness. Br J Cancer 1997;76:651-7.
47. Baay MF, Smits E, Tjalma WA, Lardon F, Weyler J, Van Royen P, Van Marck EA, Vermorken JB. Can cervical cancer screening be stopped at 50? The prevalence of HPV in elderly women. Int J Cancer 2004;108:258-61.
48. Cruickshank ME, Chambers G, Murray G, McKenzie L, Donaldson C, Andrew J, Campbell MK, Kitchener HC. Age-restricted cervical screening: HPV testing at age 50 identifies a high risk group for cervical disease. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2002;12:735-40.
49. Raffle AE. Cervical screening. BMJ 2004;328:1272-3.
50. Gustafsson L, Sparen P, Gustafsson M, Pettersson B, Wilander E, Bergstrom R, Adami HO. Low efficiency of cytologic screening for cancer in situ of the cervix in older women. Int J Cancer 1995;63:804-9.
51. Welch HG. Right and wrong reasons to be screened. Ann Intern Med 2004;140:754-5.
52. Brink AA, Zielinski GD, Steenbergen RD, Snijders PJ, Meijer CJ. Clinical relevance of human papillomavirus testing in cytopathology. Cytopathology 2005;16:7-12.
53. Wright TC, Goldie SJ, Cain JM, Howett MK. Screening for cervical cancer. Science 2000;290:1651.
54. zur Hausen H. Papillomaviruses and cancer: from basic studies to clinical application. Nat Rev Cancer 2002;2:342-50.
55. Gustafsson L, Adami HO. Natural history of cervical neoplasia: consistent results obtained by an identification technique. Br J Cancer 1989;60:132-41.
56. Stoler MH, Schiffman M. Interobserver reproducibility of cervical cytologic and histologic interpretations: realistic estimates from the ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study. JAMA 2001;285:1500-5.
57. Östör AG. Natural history of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a critical review. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1993;12:186-92.
58. Luoto R, Raitanen J, Pukkala E, Anttila A. Effect of hysterectomy on incidence trends of endometrial and cervical cancer in Finland 1953-2010. Br J Cancer 2004;90:1756-9.
59. Redburn JC, Murphy MF. Hysterectomy prevalence and adjusted cervical and uterine cancer rates in England and Wales. Br J Obstet Gynecol 2001;108:388-95.
60. Siegel JE, Weinstein MC, Russell LB, Gold MR. Recommendations for reporting cost-effectiveness analyses. Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. JAMA 1996;276:1339-41.
61. Scott DR, Hagmar B, Maddox P, Hjerpe A, Dillner J, Cuzick J, Sherman ME, Stoler MH, Kurman RJ, Kiviat NB, Manos MM, Schiffman M. Use of human papillomavirus DNA testing to compare equivocal cervical cytologic interpretations in the United States, Scandinavia, and the United Kingdom. Cancer 2002;96:14-20.
62. Linos A, Riza E. Comparisons of cervical cancer screening programmes in the European Union. Eur J Cancer 2000;36:2260-5.
63. Miller AB. Quality assurance in screening strategies. Virus Res 2002;89:295-9.