BACKGROUND: The benefits of the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP) on cervical cancer screening for participating uninsured low-income women have never been measured. PURPOSE: To estimate the benefits in life-years (LYs) gained; quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained; and deaths averted. METHODS: A cervical cancer simulation model was constructed based on an existing cohort model. The model was applied to NBCCEDP participants aged 18-64 years. Screening habits for uninsured low-income women were estimated using National Health Interview Survey data from 1990 to 2005 and NBCCEDP data from 1991 to 2007. The study was conducted during 2011-2012 and covered all 68 NBCCEDP grantees in 50 states, the District of Columbia, five U.S. territories, and 12 tribal organizations. Separate simulations were performed for the following three scenarios: (1) women who received NBCCEDP (Program) screening; (2) women who received screening without the program (No Program); and (3) women who received no screening (No Screening). RESULTS: Among 1.8 million women screened in 1991-2007, the Program added 10,369 LYs gained compared to No Program, and 101,509 LYs gained compared to No Screening. The Program prevented 325 women from dying of cervical cancer relative to No Program, and 3,829 relative to No Screening. During this time period, the Program accounted for 15,589 QALYs gained when compared with No Program, and 121,529 QALYs gained when compared with No Screening. CONCLUSIONS: These estimates suggest that NBCCEDP cervical cancer screening has reduced mortality among medically underserved low-income women who participated in the program. Published by Elsevier Inc.
BACKGROUND: The benefits of the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP) on cervical cancer screening for participating uninsured low-income women have never been measured. PURPOSE: To estimate the benefits in life-years (LYs) gained; quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained; and deaths averted. METHODS: A cervical cancer simulation model was constructed based on an existing cohort model. The model was applied to NBCCEDP participants aged 18-64 years. Screening habits for uninsured low-income women were estimated using National Health Interview Survey data from 1990 to 2005 and NBCCEDP data from 1991 to 2007. The study was conducted during 2011-2012 and covered all 68 NBCCEDP grantees in 50 states, the District of Columbia, five U.S. territories, and 12 tribal organizations. Separate simulations were performed for the following three scenarios: (1) women who received NBCCEDP (Program) screening; (2) women who received screening without the program (No Program); and (3) women who received no screening (No Screening). RESULTS: Among 1.8 million women screened in 1991-2007, the Program added 10,369 LYs gained compared to No Program, and 101,509 LYs gained compared to No Screening. The Program prevented 325 women from dying of cervical cancer relative to No Program, and 3,829 relative to No Screening. During this time period, the Program accounted for 15,589 QALYs gained when compared with No Program, and 121,529 QALYs gained when compared with No Screening. CONCLUSIONS: These estimates suggest that NBCCEDP cervical cancer screening has reduced mortality among medically underserved low-income women who participated in the program. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Authors: Vicki B Benard; Meg Watson; Mona Saraiya; Rhea Harewood; Julie S Townsend; Antoinette M Stroup; Hannah K Weir; Claudia Allemani Journal: Cancer Date: 2017-12-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Kelly L Wilson; Clayton J Cowart; Brittany L Rosen; Jairus C Pulczinski; Kayce D Solari; Marcia G Ory; Matthew Lee Smith Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 2.037
Authors: Lisa M Pollack; Donatus U Ekwueme; Mei-Chuan Hung; Jacqueline W Miller; Su-Hsin Chang Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2020-05-20 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Jonah Musa; Chad J Achenbach; Linda C O'Dwyer; Charlesnika T Evans; Megan McHugh; Lifang Hou; Melissa A Simon; Robert L Murphy; Neil Jordan Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-09-05 Impact factor: 3.240