Jacob A Miller1, Quynh-Thu Le1, Benjamin A Pinsky2,3, Hannah Wang2. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA. 2. Department of Pathology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA. 3. Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases and Geographic Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The incidence of endemic Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)-associated nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) varies considerably worldwide. In high-incidence regions, screening trials have been conducted. We estimated the mortality reduction and cost-effectiveness of EBV-based NPC screening in populations worldwide. METHODS: We identified 380 populations in 132 countries with incident NPC and developed a decision-analytic model to compare 10 unique onetime screening strategies with no screening for men and women aged 50 years. Screening performance and the stage distribution of undiagnosed NPC were derived from a systematic review of prospective screening trials. RESULTS: Screening was cost-effective in up to 14.5% of populations, depending on the screening strategy. These populations were limited to East Asia, Southeast Asia, and North Africa or were Asian, Pacific Islander, or Inuit populations in North America. A combination of serology and nasopharyngeal polymerase chain reaction was most cost-effective, but other combinations of serologic and/or plasma polymerase chain reaction screening were also cost-effective. The estimated reduction in NPC mortality was similar across screening strategies. For a hypothetical cohort of patients in China, the 10-year survival improved from 71.0% (95% confidence interval = 68.8% to 73.0%) without screening to a median of 86.3% (range = 83.5%-88.2%) with screening. This corresponded to a median 10-year reduction in NPC mortality of 52.9% (range = 43.1%-59.3%). Screening interval affected absolute mortality reduction and cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: We observed decreased NPC mortality with EBV-based screening. Screening was cost-effective in many high-incidence populations and could be extended to men and women as early as age 40 years in select regions. These findings may be useful when choosing among local public health initiatives.
BACKGROUND: The incidence of endemic Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)-associated nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) varies considerably worldwide. In high-incidence regions, screening trials have been conducted. We estimated the mortality reduction and cost-effectiveness of EBV-based NPC screening in populations worldwide. METHODS: We identified 380 populations in 132 countries with incident NPC and developed a decision-analytic model to compare 10 unique onetime screening strategies with no screening for men and women aged 50 years. Screening performance and the stage distribution of undiagnosed NPC were derived from a systematic review of prospective screening trials. RESULTS: Screening was cost-effective in up to 14.5% of populations, depending on the screening strategy. These populations were limited to East Asia, Southeast Asia, and North Africa or were Asian, Pacific Islander, or Inuit populations in North America. A combination of serology and nasopharyngeal polymerase chain reaction was most cost-effective, but other combinations of serologic and/or plasma polymerase chain reaction screening were also cost-effective. The estimated reduction in NPC mortality was similar across screening strategies. For a hypothetical cohort of patients in China, the 10-year survival improved from 71.0% (95% confidence interval = 68.8% to 73.0%) without screening to a median of 86.3% (range = 83.5%-88.2%) with screening. This corresponded to a median 10-year reduction in NPC mortality of 52.9% (range = 43.1%-59.3%). Screening interval affected absolute mortality reduction and cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: We observed decreased NPC mortality with EBV-based screening. Screening was cost-effective in many high-incidence populations and could be extended to men and women as early as age 40 years in select regions. These findings may be useful when choosing among local public health initiatives.
Authors: Sukhkaran S Aulakh; Dustin A Silverman; Kurtis Young; Steven K Dennis; Andrew C Birkeland Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-06-16 Impact factor: 6.575
Authors: Jacob A Miller; Malaya K Sahoo; Fumiko Yamamoto; ChunHong Huang; Hannah Wang; James L Zehnder; Quynh-Thu Le; Benjamin A Pinsky Journal: Mol Cancer Date: 2022-07-28 Impact factor: 41.444