Literature DB >> 11042294

Setting the target for a better cervical screening test: characteristics of a cost-effective test for cervical neoplasia screening.

E R Myers1, D C McCrory, S Subramanian, N McCall, K Nanda, S Datta, D B Matchar.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the potential effects on costs and outcomes of changes in sensitivity and specificity with new screening methods for cervical cancer.
METHODS: Using a Markov model of the natural history of cervical cancer, we estimated the effects of sensitivity, specificity, and screening frequency on cost-effectiveness. Our estimates of conventional Papanicolaou test sensitivity of 51% and specificity of 97% were obtained from a meta-analysis. We estimated the effect of reducing false-negative rates from 40-90% and increasing false-positive rates by up to 20%, independently and jointly. We varied the marginal cost of improving sensitivity from $0 to $15.
RESULTS: When specificity was held constant, increasing sensitivity of the Papanicolaou test increased life expectancy and costs. When sensitivity was held constant, decreasing specificity of the Papanicolaou test increased costs, an effect that was more dramatic at more frequent intervals. Decreased specificity had a substantial effect on cost-effectiveness estimates of improved Papanicolaou test sensitivity. Most of those effects are related to the cost of evaluation and treatment of low-grade lesions.
CONCLUSION: Policies or technologies that increased sensitivity of cervical cytologic screening increased overall costs, even if the cost of the technology was identical to that of conventional Papanicolaou smears. These effects appear to be caused by relatively high prevalence of low-grade lesions and are magnified at frequent screening intervals. Efficient cervical cancer screening requires methods with greater ability to detect lesions that are most likely to become cancerous.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11042294     DOI: 10.1016/s0029-7844(00)00979-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  6 in total

Review 1.  Human papillomavirus and cervical cancer: biomarkers for improved prevention efforts.

Authors:  Vikrant V Sahasrabuddhe; Patricia Luhn; Nicolas Wentzensen
Journal:  Future Microbiol       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 3.165

2.  Multiclass discrimination of cervical precancers using Raman spectroscopy.

Authors:  Elizabeth M Kanter; Shovan Majumder; Elizabeth Vargis; Amy Robichaux-Viehoever; Gary J Kanter; Heidi Shappell; Howard W Jones; Anita Mahadevan-Jansen
Journal:  J Raman Spectrosc       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 3.133

Review 3.  Willingness to pay for cancer prevention.

Authors:  Timothy L Hunt; Bryan R Luce; Matthew J Page; Robin Pokrzywinski
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Application of Raman spectroscopy for cervical dysplasia diagnosis.

Authors:  Elizabeth M Kanter; Elizabeth Vargis; Shovan Majumder; Matthew D Keller; Emily Woeste; Gautam G Rao; Anita Mahadevan-Jansen
Journal:  J Biophotonics       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 3.207

Review 5.  Simple but not simpler: a systematic review of Markov models for economic evaluation of cervical cancer screening.

Authors:  Juliana Yukari Kodaira Viscondi; Christine Grutzmann Faustino; Alessandro Gonçalves Campolina; Alexander Itria; Patricia Coelho de Soárez
Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2018-07-10       Impact factor: 2.365

6.  Economic evaluation of cervical cancer screening strategies in urban China.

Authors:  Li Ma; Yuying Wang; Xiaohong Gao; Yi Dai; Yu Zhang; Zhaojing Wang; Xiaoxia Wang; Limin Wang; Jing Jiang; Xinhua Jing; Chunxia Yang; Fanghui Zhao; Jinghe Lang; Youlin Qiao
Journal:  Chin J Cancer Res       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 5.087

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.