Literature DB >> 27754955

Optimal Cervical Cancer Screening in Women Vaccinated Against Human Papillomavirus.

Jane J Kim1, Emily A Burger1,2, Stephen Sy1, Nicole G Campos1.   

Abstract

Background: Current US cervical cancer screening guidelines do not differentiate recommendations based on a woman's human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination status. Changes to cervical cancer screening policies in HPV-vaccinated women should be evaluated.
Methods: We utilized an individual-based mathematical model of HPV and cervical cancer in US women to project the health benefits, costs, and harms associated with screening strategies in women vaccinated with the bivalent, quadrivalent, or nonavalent vaccine. Strategies varied by the primary screening test, including cytology, HPV, and combined cytology and HPV "cotesting"; age of screening initiation and/or switching to a new test; and interval between routine screens. Cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from the societal perspective to identify screening strategies that would be considered good value for money according to thresholds of $50 000 to $200 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained.
Results: Among women fully vaccinated with the bivalent or quadrivalent vaccine, optimal screening strategies involved either cytology or HPV testing alone every five years starting at age 25 or 30 years, with cost-effectiveness ratios ranging from $34 680 to $138 560 per QALY gained. Screening earlier or more frequently was either not cost-effective or associated with exceedingly high cost-effectiveness ratios. In women vaccinated with the nonavalent vaccine, only primary HPV testing was efficient, involving decreased frequency (ie, every 10 years) starting at either age 35 years ($40 210 per QALY) or age 30 years ($127 010 per QALY); with lower nonavalent vaccine efficacy, 10-year HPV testing starting at earlier ages of 25 or 30 years was optimal. Importantly, current US guidelines for screening were inefficient in HPV-vaccinated women. Conclusions: This model-based analysis suggests screening can be modified to start at later ages, occur at decreased frequency, and involve primary HPV testing in HPV-vaccinated women, providing more health benefit at lower harms and costs than current screening guidelines.
© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27754955      PMCID: PMC5068562          DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djw216

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst        ISSN: 0027-8874            Impact factor:   13.506


  31 in total

1.  Use of primary high-risk human papillomavirus testing for cervical cancer screening: interim clinical guidance.

Authors:  Warner K Huh; Kevin A Ault; David Chelmow; Diane D Davey; Robert A Goulart; Francisco A R Garcia; Walter K Kinney; L Stewart Massad; Edward J Mayeaux; Debbie Saslow; Mark Schiffman; Nicolas Wentzensen; Herschel W Lawson; Mark H Einstein
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2015-01-08       Impact factor: 5.482

2.  American Cancer Society, American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology, and American Society for Clinical Pathology screening guidelines for the prevention and early detection of cervical cancer.

Authors:  Debbie Saslow; Diane Solomon; Herschel W Lawson; Maureen Killackey; Shalini L Kulasingam; Joanna Cain; Francisco A R Garcia; Ann T Moriarty; Alan G Waxman; David C Wilbur; Nicolas Wentzensen; Levi S Downs; Mark Spitzer; Anna-Barbara Moscicki; Eduardo L Franco; Mark H Stoler; Mark Schiffman; Philip E Castle; Evan R Myers
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2012-03-14       Impact factor: 508.702

3.  Early effect of the HPV vaccination programme on cervical abnormalities in Victoria, Australia: an ecological study.

Authors:  Julia M L Brotherton; Masha Fridman; Cathryn L May; Genevieve Chappell; A Marion Saville; Dorota M Gertig
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2011-06-18       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  A 9-valent HPV vaccine against infection and intraepithelial neoplasia in women.

Authors:  Elmar A Joura; Anna R Giuliano; Ole-Erik Iversen; Celine Bouchard; Constance Mao; Jesper Mehlsen; Edson D Moreira; Yuen Ngan; Lone Kjeld Petersen; Eduardo Lazcano-Ponce; Punnee Pitisuttithum; Jaime Alberto Restrepo; Gavin Stuart; Linn Woelber; Yuh Cheng Yang; Jack Cuzick; Suzanne M Garland; Warner Huh; Susanne K Kjaer; Oliver M Bautista; Ivan S F Chan; Joshua Chen; Richard Gesser; Erin Moeller; Michael Ritter; Scott Vuocolo; Alain Luxembourg
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2015-02-19       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Incidence, duration, and determinants of cervical human papillomavirus infection in a cohort of Colombian women with normal cytological results.

Authors:  Nubia Muñoz; Fabián Méndez; Héctor Posso; Mónica Molano; Adrian J C van den Brule; Margarita Ronderos; Chris Meijer; Alvaro Muñoz
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  2004-11-22       Impact factor: 5.226

6.  An updated natural history model of cervical cancer: derivation of model parameters.

Authors:  Nicole G Campos; Emily A Burger; Stephen Sy; Monisha Sharma; Mark Schiffman; Ana Cecilia Rodriguez; Allan Hildesheim; Rolando Herrero; Jane J Kim
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2014-07-31       Impact factor: 4.897

7.  Inefficiencies and High-Value Improvements in U.S. Cervical Cancer Screening Practice: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

Authors:  Jane J Kim; Nicole G Campos; Stephen Sy; Emily A Burger; Jack Cuzick; Philip E Castle; William C Hunt; Alan Waxman; Cosette M Wheeler
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2015-09-29       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  Cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening with human papillomavirus DNA testing and HPV-16,18 vaccination.

Authors:  Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert; Natasha K Stout; Joshua A Salomon; Karen M Kuntz; Sue J Goldie
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2008-02-26       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 9.  Perinatal mortality and other severe adverse pregnancy outcomes associated with treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: meta-analysis.

Authors:  M Arbyn; M Kyrgiou; C Simoens; A O Raifu; G Koliopoulos; P Martin-Hirsch; W Prendiville; E Paraskevaidis
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2008-09-18

10.  National, Regional, State, and Selected Local Area Vaccination Coverage Among Adolescents Aged 13-17 Years--United States, 2014.

Authors:  Sarah Reagan-Steiner; David Yankey; Jenny Jeyarajah; Laurie D Elam-Evans; James A Singleton; C Robinette Curtis; Jessica MacNeil; Lauri E Markowitz; Shannon Stokley
Journal:  MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep       Date:  2015-07-31       Impact factor: 17.586

View more
  29 in total

1.  Pap Testing in the USA and Potential Association with HPV Vaccination: a Cross-sectional Analysis of the BRFSS Data (2007-2016).

Authors:  Dongyu Zhang; Xuezheng Sun
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Relative Performance of HPV and Cytology Components of Cotesting in Cervical Screening.

Authors:  Mark Schiffman; Walter K Kinney; Li C Cheung; Julia C Gage; Barbara Fetterman; Nancy E Poitras; Thomas S Lorey; Nicolas Wentzensen; Brian Befano; John Schussler; Hormuzd A Katki; Philip E Castle
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2018-05-01       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 3.  Cervical Cancer Screening.

Authors:  George F Sawaya; Megan J Huchko
Journal:  Med Clin North Am       Date:  2017-04-21       Impact factor: 5.456

4.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of the 2019 American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology Risk-Based Management Consensus Guidelines for the management of abnormal cervical cancer screening tests and cancer precursors.

Authors:  Vidit N Munshi; Rebecca B Perkins; Stephen Sy; Jane J Kim
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2021-09-20       Impact factor: 10.693

5.  Adapting cervical cancer screening for women vaccinated against human papillomavirus infections: The value of stratifying guidelines.

Authors:  Kine Pedersen; Emily A Burger; Mari Nygård; Ivar S Kristiansen; Jane J Kim
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2018-01-12       Impact factor: 9.162

6.  Nanoparticles Based on Poly (β-Amino Ester) and HPV16-Targeting CRISPR/shRNA as Potential Drugs for HPV16-Related Cervical Malignancy.

Authors:  Da Zhu; Hui Shen; Songwei Tan; Zheng Hu; Liming Wang; Lan Yu; Xun Tian; Wencheng Ding; Ci Ren; Chun Gao; Jing Cheng; Ming Deng; Rong Liu; Junbo Hu; Ling Xi; Peng Wu; Zhiping Zhang; Ding Ma; Hui Wang
Journal:  Mol Ther       Date:  2018-07-25       Impact factor: 11.454

7.  Age of Acquiring Causal Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Infections: Leveraging Simulation Models to Explore the Natural History of HPV-induced Cervical Cancer.

Authors:  Emily A Burger; Jane J Kim; Stephen Sy; Philip E Castle
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2017-09-15       Impact factor: 9.079

8.  Historical and projected hysterectomy rates in the USA: Implications for future observed cervical cancer rates and evaluating prevention interventions.

Authors:  Kate T Simms; Susan Yuill; James Killen; Megan A Smith; Shalini Kulasingam; Inge M C M de Kok; Marjolein van Ballegooijen; Emily A Burger; Catherine Regan; Jane J Kim; Karen Canfell
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2020-07-26       Impact factor: 5.482

9.  The Differential Risk of Cervical Cancer in HPV-Vaccinated and -Unvaccinated Women: A Mathematical Modeling Study.

Authors:  Emi Naslazi; Jan A C Hontelez; Steffie K Naber; Marjolein van Ballegooijen; Inge M C M de Kok
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2021-04-09       Impact factor: 4.090

10.  Projected time to elimination of cervical cancer in the USA: a comparative modelling study.

Authors:  Emily A Burger; Megan A Smith; James Killen; Stephen Sy; Kate T Simms; Karen Canfell; Jane J Kim
Journal:  Lancet Public Health       Date:  2020-02-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.