Karl Ulrich Petry1, Cordula Barth2, Jürgen Wasem2, Anja Neumann2. 1. Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Klinikum Wolfsburg, Sauerbruchstrasse 7, 38440 Wolfsburg, Germany. Electronic address: k.u.petry@klinikum.wolfsburg.de. 2. Institute for Health Care Management and Research, Thea-Leymann-Strasse 9, 45127 Essen, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We modelled human papilloma virus (HPV) primary screening scenarios compared with Pap cytology to evaluate clinical effectiveness and projected annual costs in Germany. STUDY DESIGN: A Markov cohort model was built to compare the budget impact of annual Pap cytology with different 5-yearly HPV screening scenarios: (1) a positive HPV test followed by Pap cytology; (2) a positive HPV test followed by p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology; (3) a positive HPV test followed by colposcopy if HPV-16/18-positive or p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology if positive for other subtypes; (4) co-testing with HPV and Pap. Screening scenarios were based on a 10-year horizon. RESULTS: All HPV screening scenarios in the model were associated with fewer deaths from missed diagnosis of cervical cancer compared with Pap screening; 10-year totals n=172-344 (1.5-3 per 100,000) versus n=477 (4.1 per 100,000), respectively. Total annual costs were lower with HPV screening than Pap cytology. The projected average annual cost for HPV screening ranged from €117 million to €136 million compared with €177 million for Pap screening, representing annual savings of €41-60 million. The greatest clinical impact was achieved with primary HPV screening (with genotyping) followed by colposcopy for HPV 16/18-positive women or p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology for women positive for other HPV subtypes. CONCLUSION: Screening strategies including primary HPV testing for high-risk subtypes (HPV-16/18) in conjunction with p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology can improve the detection of cervical cancer at a lower total annual cost than conventional Pap cytology screening.
OBJECTIVES: We modelled human papilloma virus (HPV) primary screening scenarios compared with Pap cytology to evaluate clinical effectiveness and projected annual costs in Germany. STUDY DESIGN: A Markov cohort model was built to compare the budget impact of annual Pap cytology with different 5-yearly HPV screening scenarios: (1) a positive HPV test followed by Pap cytology; (2) a positive HPV test followed by p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology; (3) a positive HPV test followed by colposcopy if HPV-16/18-positive or p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology if positive for other subtypes; (4) co-testing with HPV and Pap. Screening scenarios were based on a 10-year horizon. RESULTS: All HPV screening scenarios in the model were associated with fewer deaths from missed diagnosis of cervical cancer compared with Pap screening; 10-year totals n=172-344 (1.5-3 per 100,000) versus n=477 (4.1 per 100,000), respectively. Total annual costs were lower with HPV screening than Pap cytology. The projected average annual cost for HPV screening ranged from €117 million to €136 million compared with €177 million for Pap screening, representing annual savings of €41-60 million. The greatest clinical impact was achieved with primary HPV screening (with genotyping) followed by colposcopy for HPV 16/18-positive women or p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology for women positive for other HPV subtypes. CONCLUSION: Screening strategies including primary HPV testing for high-risk subtypes (HPV-16/18) in conjunction with p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology can improve the detection of cervical cancer at a lower total annual cost than conventional Pap cytology screening.
Authors: Miguel Amézquita; Geny Carolina Silva; Diego Antonio Restrepo; Linda Margarita Ibata; Rafael Niño; Maximiliano Bustacara; Víctor Alexander Sáenz; Dieric Anderson Díaz; Milena Alarcón; Luz Adriana Quintero Journal: Biomedica Date: 2022-06-01 Impact factor: 1.173
Authors: Wai Sing Chan; Tsun Leung Chan; Chun Hang Au; Chin Pang Leung; Man Yan To; Man Kin Ng; Sau Man Leung; May Kwok Mei Chan; Edmond Shiu Kwan Ma; Bone Siu Fai Tang Journal: Diagn Pathol Date: 2020-05-06 Impact factor: 2.644