Cost-effectiveness of 21 alternative cervical cancer screening strategies

Value in Health

Volumn 13, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 169-179

  Chuck, Anderson ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF HEALTH ECONOMICS   (Canada)

Author keywords

Cancer; Cost effectiveness analysis; Economic evaluation; Markov model

Indexed keywords

VIRUS DNA;

ADULT; AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; BUDGET; CALCULATION; CANCER SCREENING; COST CONTROL; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DNA DETERMINATION; FEMALE; HOSPITAL PATIENT; HUMAN; LIQUID BASED CYTOLOGY; MONEY; OUTPATIENT CARE; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PHYSICIAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; SIMULATION; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY; WART VIRUS;

EID: 77149151199     PISSN: 10983015     EISSN: 15244733     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00611.x     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Denny LA, Wright TC. Human papillomavirus testing and screening. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2005 19 : 501 515.
2. Davies P, Arbyn M, Dillner J, et al. A report on the current status of European research on the use of human papillomavirus testing for primary cervical cancer screening. Int J Cancer 2006 118 : 791 796.
3. Krahn M, McLachlin M, Pham B, et al. Liquid-based techniques for cervical cancer screening: systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis. Technology report number 103. 2008 Ottawa : Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health.
4. Valdespino VM. Cervical cancer screening: state of the art. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2006 18 : 35 40.
5. Mandelblatt JS, Lawrence WF, Womack SM, et al. Benefits and costs of using HPV testing to screen for cervical cancer. JAMA 2002 287 : 2372 2381.
6. Sheriff SK, Petry KU, Ikenberg H, et al. An economic analysis of human papillomavirus triage for the management of women with atypical and abnormal Pap smear results in Germany. Eur J Health Econ 2007 8 : 153 160.
7. Kulasingam SL, Kim JJ, Lawrence WF, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis based on the atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance/low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion triage study (ALTS). J Natl Cancer Inst 2006 98 : 92 100.
8. Straughn JM, Numnum TM, Rocconi RP, et al. A cost-effectiveness analysis of screening strategies for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2004 280 284.
9. Maxwell GL, Carlson JW, Ochoa M, et al. Costs and effectiveness of alternative strategies for cervical cancer screening in military beneficiaries. Obstet Gynecol 2002 100 : 740 748.
10. Legwood R, Gray A, Wolstenholme J, et al. Lifetime effects, costs, and cost effectiveness of testing for human papillomavirus to manage low grade cytological abnormalities: results of the NHS pilot studies. BMJ 2006 332 : 79 85.
11. 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.
12. 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 : 619 631.
13. Sherlaw-Johnson C, Philips Z. An evaluation of liquid-based cytology and human papillomavirus testing within the UK cervical cancer screening programme. Br J Cancer 2004 91 : 84 91.
14. Mittendorf T, Petry KU, Iftner T, et al. Economic evaluation of human papillomavirus screening in Germany. Eur J Health Econ 2003 4 : 209 215.
15. Knudsen AB, McMahon PM, Gazelle SG. Use of modeling to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of cancer screening programs. J Clin Oncol 2007 25 : 203 208.
16. Goldie SJ, Grima D, Kohli M, et al. A comprehensive natural history model of HPV infection and cervical cancer to estimate the clinical impact of a prophylactic HPV-16/18 vaccine. Int J Cancer 2003 106 : 896 904.
17. Goldie SJ, Kohli M, Grima K, et al. Projected clinical benefits and cost-effectiveness of a human papillomavirus 16/18 vaccine. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004 96 : 604 615.
18. Koliopoulos G, Arbyn M, Martin-Hirsch P, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of human papillomavirus testing in primary cervical screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis of non-randomized studies. Gynecol Oncol 2007 104 : 232 246.
19. Chirenje ZM, Rusakaniko S, Akino V, et al. A randomized clinical trial of loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) versus cryotherapy in the treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. J Obstet Gynaecol 2001 21 : 617 621.
20. Alberta Health & Wellness. Medical Procedures List. Edmonton : Alberta Health & Wellness, 2008.