BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is not currently used in primary cervical cancer screening in Sweden, and corresponding cost-effectiveness is unclear. OBJECTIVE: From a societal perspective, to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of high-risk (HR)-HPV testing using self-collected vaginal samples. DESIGN: A cost-effectiveness analysis. SETTING: The Swedish organized cervical cancer screening program. METHODS: We constructed a model to simulate the natural history of cervical cancer using Swedish data on cervical cancer risk. For the base-case analysis we evaluated two screening strategies with different screening intervals: (i) cytology screening throughout the woman's lifetime (i.e. "conventional cytology strategy") and (ii) conventional cytology screening until age 35 years, followed by HR-HPV testing using self-collected vaginal samples in women aged ≥35 years (i.e. "combination strategy"). Sensitivity analyses were performed, varying model parameters over a significant range of values to identify cost-effective screening strategies. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Average lifetime cost, discounted and undiscounted life-years gained, reduction in cervical cancer risk, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios with and without the cost of added life-years. RESULTS: Depending on screening interval, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for the combination strategy ranged from €43,000 to €180,000 per life-years gained without the cost of added life-years, and from €74,000 to €206,000 with costs of added life-years included. CONCLUSION: The combination strategy with a 5-year screening interval is potentially cost-effective compared with no screening, and with current screening practice when using a threshold value of €80,000 per life-years gained.
BACKGROUND:Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is not currently used in primary cervical cancer screening in Sweden, and corresponding cost-effectiveness is unclear. OBJECTIVE: From a societal perspective, to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of high-risk (HR)-HPV testing using self-collected vaginal samples. DESIGN: A cost-effectiveness analysis. SETTING: The Swedish organized cervical cancer screening program. METHODS: We constructed a model to simulate the natural history of cervical cancer using Swedish data on cervical cancer risk. For the base-case analysis we evaluated two screening strategies with different screening intervals: (i) cytology screening throughout the woman's lifetime (i.e. "conventional cytology strategy") and (ii) conventional cytology screening until age 35 years, followed by HR-HPV testing using self-collected vaginal samples in women aged ≥35 years (i.e. "combination strategy"). Sensitivity analyses were performed, varying model parameters over a significant range of values to identify cost-effective screening strategies. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Average lifetime cost, discounted and undiscounted life-years gained, reduction in cervical cancer risk, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios with and without the cost of added life-years. RESULTS: Depending on screening interval, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for the combination strategy ranged from €43,000 to €180,000 per life-years gained without the cost of added life-years, and from €74,000 to €206,000 with costs of added life-years included. CONCLUSION: The combination strategy with a 5-year screening interval is potentially cost-effective compared with no screening, and with current screening practice when using a threshold value of €80,000 per life-years gained.