Author(s)
Sroczynski G1, Gogollari A2, Naslazi E3, Pashayan N4, Widschwendter M5, Siebert U6
1UMIT - University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Hall i.T., Austria, 2ONCOTIROL and Department of Public Health, Health Services Research and Health Technology Assessment, UMIT - University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Austria, Hall i. T., Austria, 3Department of Public Health, Health Services Research and Health Technology Assessment, UMIT - University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Austria, Hall i. T., UK, 4Department of Applied Health Research, Institute of Epidemiology and Healthcare, UCL - University College London, London, UK, 5Department of Women's Cancer, UCL - University College London, London, UK, 6UMIT - University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology / Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health / Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA, Hall i.T., Austria
OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to systematically review the current evidence on long-term effectiveness and cost effectiveness of cervical cancer screening in Europe with specific interest on risk-adapted strategies. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search to identify decision-analytic modelling studies assessing the cost effectiveness of cervical cancer screening strategies in Europe using relevant databases (Medline/Embase/Cochrane Library/CRD/EconLit). Study characteristics and results were summarized in standardized evidence tables. Outcomes included quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), life-years gained (LYG), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). Economic results were converted to 2015 Euros using the GDP-PPP and CPI. RESULTS: Fourteen studies mostly from countries with population-based organized screening were eligible for inclusion. HPV-based screening was reported to be more effective in terms of patient-relevant outcomes compared to cytology alone independent of HPV vaccination status. Overall, HPV-based screening strategies were considered to be cost effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of 50,000 Euro/LYG conditional on screening intervals of at least three years in non-vaccinated women and at least five years in vaccinated women. HPV screening was mostly accompanied with a triage test for HPV-positive women. Most studies recommended starting screening at age 25 using cytology with cross over to HPV-based screening at age 30 years or older and ending screening at 65 years. While studies considering generic cancer risk aspects to restrict screening algorithms, further more personalized screening, follow-up strategies according to a woman’s screening, vaccination history and taking into account other risk factors have not been evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: Our research suggests that HPV-based screening is more effective compared to cytology alone, and can be considered cost effective at screening intervals of at least 3 (non-vaccinated) to 5 years (vaccinated women). Current risk-tailored screening programs are based on generic restrictions to a specific age and using triage or follow-up tests for HPV-positive women before referring to colposcopy directed biopsy.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2018-11, ISPOR Europe 2018, Barcelona, Spain
Value in Health, Vol. 21, S3 (October 2018)
Code
PMD83
Topic
Economic Evaluation
Topic Subcategory
Cost-comparison, Effectiveness, Utility, Benefit Analysis
Disease
Oncology