Literature DB >> 21838332

Economic evaluation of policy options for prevention and control of cervical cancer in Thailand.

Naiyana Praditsitthikorn1, Yot Teerawattananon, Sripen Tantivess, Supon Limwattananon, Arthorn Riewpaiboon, Saibua Chichareon, Nantakan Ieumwananonthachai, Viroj Tangcharoensathien.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Thai healthcare setting has seen patients with cervical cancer experience an increasing burden of morbidity and mortality, a stagnation in the performance of cervical screening programmes and the introduction of a vaccine for the prevention of human papillomavirus (HPV) infection.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify the optimum mix of interventions that are cost effective, from societal and healthcare provider perspectives, for the prevention and control of cervical cancer.
METHODS: A computer-based Markov model of the natural history of cervical cancer was used to simulate an age-stratified cohort of women in Thailand. The strategy comparators, including both control and prevention programmes, were (i) conventional cytology screening (Pap smears); (ii) screening by visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA); and (iii) HPV-16, -18 vaccination. Input parameters (e.g. age-specific incidence of HPV infection, progression and regression of the infection, test performance of screening methods and efficacy of vaccine) were synthesized from a systematic review and meta-analysis. Costs (year 2007 values) and outcomes were evaluated separately, and compared for each combination. The screening strategies were started from the age of 30-40 years and repeated at 5- and 10-year intervals. In addition, HPV vaccines were introduced at age 15-60 years.
RESULTS: All of the screening strategies showed certain benefits due to a decreased number of women developing cervical cancer versus 'no intervention'. Moreover, the most cost-effective strategy from the societal perspective was the combination of VIA and sequential Pap smear (i.e., VIA every 5 years for women aged 30-45 years, followed by Pap smear every 5 years for women aged 50-60 years). This strategy was dominant, with a QALY gain of 0.01 and a total cost saving of Baht (Bt) 800, compared with doing nothing. From the societal perspective, universal HPV vaccination for girls aged 15 years without screening resulted in a QALY gain of 0.06 at an additional cost of Bt 8,800, based on the cost of Bt 15,000 for a full immunization schedule. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, comparing HPV vaccinations for girls aged 15 years with the current national policy of Pap smears for women aged 35-60 years every 5 years, was approximately Bt 18,1000 per QALY gained. This figure was relatively high for the Thai setting.
CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that controlling cervical cancer by increasing the numbers of women accepting the VIA and Pap smear screening as routine and by improving the performance of the existing screening programmes is the most cost-effective policy option in Thailand.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21838332     DOI: 10.2165/11586560-000000000-00000

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics        ISSN: 1170-7690            Impact factor:   4.981


  28 in total

Review 1.  Handling uncertainty in cost-effectiveness models.

Authors:  A H Briggs
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 2.  Advantages of using the net-benefit approach for analysing uncertainty in economic evaluation studies.

Authors:  Niklas Zethraeus; Magnus Johannesson; Bengt Jönsson; Mickael Löthgren; Magnus Tambour
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Modelling the random effects covariance matrix in longitudinal data.

Authors:  Michael J Daniels; Yan D Zhao
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2003-05-30       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 4.  EuroQol: the current state of play.

Authors:  R Brooks
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 2.980

Review 5.  Prophylactic vaccination against human papillomavirus infection and disease in women: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Lisa Rambout; Laura Hopkins; Brian Hutton; Dean Fergusson
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2007-08-01       Impact factor: 8.262

6.  A guide to cost-effectiveness acceptability curves.

Authors:  Elisabeth Fenwick; Sarah Byford
Journal:  Br J Psychiatry       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 9.319

7.  Handling time in economic evaluation studies.

Authors:  Unchalee Permsuwan; Kansinee Guntawongwan; Piyaluk Buddhawongsa
Journal:  J Med Assoc Thai       Date:  2008-06

8.  Mathematical model for the natural history of human papillomavirus infection and cervical carcinogenesis.

Authors:  E R Myers; D C McCrory; K Nanda; L Bastian; D B Matchar
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2000-06-15       Impact factor: 4.897

9.  Safety, acceptability, and feasibility of a single-visit approach to cervical-cancer prevention in rural Thailand: a demonstration project.

Authors:  L Gaffikin; P D Blumenthal; M Emerson; K Limpaphayom
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2003-03-08       Impact factor: 79.321

10.  The potential cost-effectiveness of prophylactic human papillomavirus vaccines in Canada.

Authors:  Marc Brisson; Nicolas Van de Velde; Philippe De Wals; Marie-Claude Boily
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2007-05-22       Impact factor: 3.641

View more
  20 in total

1.  Are current cost-effectiveness thresholds for low- and middle-income countries useful? Examples from the world of vaccines.

Authors:  A T Newall; M Jit; R Hutubessy
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  The cost-effectiveness of bivalent, quadrivalent, and nine-valent HPV vaccination in Asia: a systematic review.

Authors:  Ke Zhu; Yuke Tian; Xiaomei Dong; Babatunde O Akinwunmi; Casper J P Zhang; Jian Huang; Wai-Kit Ming
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2022-04-05       Impact factor: 2.493

3.  Cost-effectiveness of two-dose human papillomavirus vaccination in Singapore.

Authors:  Sun Kuie Tay; Bee-Wah Lee; Woo Yun Sohn; I-Heng Lee; Gaurav Mathur; Melvin Sanicas; Georges Van Kriekinge
Journal:  Singapore Med J       Date:  2017-10-06       Impact factor: 1.858

4.  Human papillomavirus vaccine introduction in low-income and middle-income countries: guidance on the use of cost-effectiveness models.

Authors:  Mark Jit; Nadia Demarteau; Elamin Elbasha; Gary Ginsberg; Jane Kim; Naiyana Praditsitthikorn; Edina Sinanovic; Raymond Hutubessy
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2011-05-12       Impact factor: 8.775

5.  Parents' preferences and willingness-to-pay for human papilloma virus vaccines in Thailand.

Authors:  Surachat Ngorsuraches; Kornwan Nawanukool; Krittin Petcharamanee; Ungkanit Poopantrakool
Journal:  J Pharm Policy Pract       Date:  2015-07-22

Review 6.  Systematic review of model-based cervical screening evaluations.

Authors:  Diana Mendes; Iren Bains; Tazio Vanni; Mark Jit
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2015-05-01       Impact factor: 4.430

7.  Diagnosing cervical dysplasia using visual inspection of the cervix with acetic acid in a woman in rural Haiti.

Authors:  Elizabeth Roger; Oguchi Nwosu
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2014-11-28       Impact factor: 3.390

8.  Economic Evaluation of Screening Strategies Combined with HPV Vaccination of Preadolescent Girls for the Prevention of Cervical Cancer in Vientiane, Lao PDR.

Authors:  Phetsavanh Chanthavilay; Daniel Reinharz; Mayfong Mayxay; Keokedthong Phongsavan; Donald E Marsden; Lynne Moore; Lisa J White
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-09-15       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Economic analyses to support decisions about HPV vaccination in low- and middle-income countries: a consensus report and guide for analysts.

Authors:  Mark Jit; Carol Levin; Marc Brisson; Ann Levin; Stephen Resch; Johannes Berkhof; Jane Kim; Raymond Hutubessy
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2013-01-30       Impact factor: 8.775

10.  A cost-utility analysis of cervical cancer screening and human papillomavirus vaccination in the Philippines.

Authors:  Anna Melissa Guerrero; Anne Julienne Genuino; Melanie Santillan; Naiyana Praditsitthikorn; Varit Chantarastapornchit; Yot Teerawattananon; Marissa Alejandria; Jean Anne Toral
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2015-07-30       Impact factor: 3.295

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.