Literature DB >> 11988058

Benefits and costs of using HPV testing to screen for cervical cancer.

Jeanne S Mandelblatt1, William F Lawrence, Sharita Mizell Womack, Denise Jacobson, Bin Yi, Yi-ting Hwang, Karen Gold, James Barter, Keerti Shah.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: Despite quality assurance standards, Papanicolaou (Pap) test characteristics remain less than optimal.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the societal costs and benefits of human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, Pap testing, and their combination to screen for cervical cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND POPULATION: A simulation model of neoplasia natural history was used to estimate the societal costs and quality-adjusted life expectancy associated with 18 different general population screening strategies: Pap plus HPV testing, Pap testing alone, and HPV testing alone every 2 or 3 years among hypothetical longitudinal cohorts of US women beginning at age 20 years and continuing to 65 years, 75 years, or death. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Discounted costs per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) saved of each screening strategy.
RESULTS: Maximal savings in lives were achieved by screening every 2 years until death with combined HPV and Pap testing at an incremental cost of $76 183 per QALY compared with Pap testing alone every 2 years. Stopping biennial screening with HPV and Pap testing at age 75 years captures 97.8% of the benefits of lifetime screening at a cost of $70 347 per QALY. Combined biennial HPV and Pap testing to age 65 years captures 86.6% of the benefits achievable by continuing to screen until age 75 years. Human papillomavirus screening alone was equally effective as Pap testing alone at any given screening interval or age of screening cessation but was more costly and therefore was dominated. In sensitivity analyses, HPV testing would be more effective and less costly than Pap testing at a cost threshold of $5 for an HPV test.
CONCLUSIONS: Screening with HPV plus Pap tests every 2 years appears to save additional years of life at reasonable costs compared with Pap testing alone. Applying age limits to screening is a viable option to maintain benefits while reducing costs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11988058     DOI: 10.1001/jama.287.18.2372

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  54 in total

1.  Bayesian meta-analysis of Papanicolaou smear accuracy.

Authors:  Xiuyu Cong; Dennis D Cox; Scott B Cantor
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 5.482

2.  Measuring the value of public health systems: the disconnect between health economists and public health practitioners.

Authors:  Peter J Neumann; Peter D Jacobson; Jennifer A Palmer
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2008-10-15       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  Overview of the CDC Cervical Cancer (Cx3) Study: an educational intervention of HPV testing for cervical cancer screening.

Authors:  Vicki B Benard; Mona Saraiya; April Greek; Nikki A Hawkins; Katherine B Roland; Diane Manninen; Donatus U Ekwueme; Jacqueline W Miller; Elizabeth R Unger
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2013-12-31       Impact factor: 2.681

Review 4.  Calibration methods used in cancer simulation models and suggested reporting guidelines.

Authors:  Natasha K Stout; Amy B Knudsen; Chung Yin Kong; Pamela M McMahon; G Scott Gazelle
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Cervical cancer screening with AMIGAS: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  David R Lairson; Yu-Chia Chang; Theresa L Byrd; Judith Lee Smith; Maria E Fernandez; Katherine M Wilson
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 5.043

6.  Accuracy and cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening by high-risk human papillomavirus DNA testing of self-collected vaginal samples.

Authors:  Akhila Balasubramanian; Shalini L Kulasingam; Atar Baer; James P Hughes; Evan R Myers; Constance Mao; Nancy B Kiviat; Laura A Koutsky
Journal:  J Low Genit Tract Dis       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 1.925

7.  Cost-Effectiveness of Primary HPV Testing, Cytology and Co-testing as Cervical Cancer Screening for Women Above Age 30 Years.

Authors:  Xian Wen Jin; Laura Lipold; Julie Foucher; Andrea Sikon; Jennifer Brainard; Jerome Belinson; Sarah Schramm; Kelly Nottingham; Bo Hu; Michael B Rothberg
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2016-07-14       Impact factor: 5.128

8.  Patient time requirements for anticoagulation therapy with warfarin.

Authors:  Daniel E Jonas; Betsy Bryant Shilliday; W Russell Laundon; Michael Pignone
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2009-09-22       Impact factor: 2.583

9.  Prevalence of various human papillomavirus (HPV) genotypes among women who subjected to routine Pap smear test in Bushehr city (south west of Iran) 2008-2009.

Authors:  Keivan Zandi; Seyed Sajjad Eghbali; Rasool Hamkar; Shahnaz Ahmadi; Elissa Ramedani; Iman Deilami; Heidar Aziz Nejad; Fatemeh Farshadpour; Zahra Rastian
Journal:  Virol J       Date:  2010-03-22       Impact factor: 4.099

Review 10.  Epidemiologic natural history and clinical management of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Disease: a critical and systematic review of the literature in the development of an HPV dynamic transmission model.

Authors:  Ralph P Insinga; Erik J Dasbach; Elamin H Elbasha
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2009-07-29       Impact factor: 3.090

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.