Toward a Framework to Assess the Financial and Economic Burden of Cervical Cancer in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To review the economic burden assessment of cervical cancer in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and use the findings to develop a pragmatic, standardized framework for such assessment. METHODS: We first systematically reviewed articles indexed in scientific databases reporting the methodology for collecting and calculating costs related to the cervical cancer burden in LMICs. Data on study design, costing approach, cost perspective, costing period, and cost type (direct medical costs [DMC], direct nonmedical costs [DNMC], and indirect costs [IC]) were extracted. Finally, we summarized the reported limitations in the methodology and used the solutions to inform our framework. RESULTS: Cervical cancer treatment costs across LMICs vary greatly and can be extremely expensive, up to 70,968 International US dollars. Economic and financial assessment methods also vary greatly across countries. Of the 28 reviewed articles, 25 studies reported DMC for cervical cancer treatment by extracting cost information from billing or insurance databases (eight studies), conducting surveys (five), and estimating the costs (12). Only 11 studies-mainly through surveys-reported DNMC and IC. The economic burden assessment framework includes health care/payer and societal perspectives (DMC, DNMC, IC, and human capital loss) across the cervical cancer screening and treatment continuum. To assess health care/payer costs, we recommend combining the predefined treatment standards with actual local treatment practices, multiplied by unit costs. To assess societal costs, we recommend conducting a cost survey in line with a standardized yet adaptable protocol. CONCLUSION: Our standardized, pragmatic framework allows assessment of economic and financial burden of cervical cancer in LMICs despite the different levels of available resources across countries. This framework will facilitate global comparisons and monitoring and may also be applied to other cancers.

Understanding racial disparities in health care expenditures for cervical cancer.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer demonstrates a notable efficacy in treatment, evidenced by a 92% 5-year survival rate among cases diagnosed at a localized stage. In 2020, the estimated annual national expenditure for cervical cancer care amounted to $2.3 billion in the United States. Limited real-world data are available for racial disparities in health care expenditures for cervical cancer. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate racial disparities associated with annual health care expenditures among patients diagnosed with cervical cancer in the United States. METHODS: A retrospective observational cohort study of annual health care expenditures in patients with cervical cancer diagnosed during 2014-2019 was performed using the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey data. In addition to the descriptive weighted analysis, an unadjusted analysis of the annual health care expenditure was conducted. An adjusted linear regression model with log transformation of the outcome variable was used to evaluate the total annual health care expenditure as well as expenditures by category across the racial groups. RESULTS: Overall, 826 patients with cervical cancer were identified from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey during 2014-2019. The majority were classified as White patients (81.2%) and in the age group of 45-64 years (44.65%). On average, the total annual health care expenditure was $11,537 (95% CI = $9,887-$13,186) among the White cohort, $10,659 (95% CI = $6,704-$14,614) among the African American cohort, and $8,726 (95% CI = $6,113-$11,340) among the Hispanic cohort. After adjusting for covariates, the average total annual health care expenditure for the Hispanic cohort was 35% of the total health care expenditure of the White cohort (P < 0.001) and 46% of the African American cohort's health care expenditure (P = 0.02). Specifically, adjusted costs of office-based and outpatient visits for the Hispanic cohort were 47% (P = 0.009) and 57% (P = 0.005) lower than for the White cohort, respectively. The total annual home health care expenditure for the African American cohort was 49% lower than White patients (P = 0.03), and the Hispanic cohort's total expenditure, excluding prescription medicines, was 57% lower than African American patients (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides valuable information regarding the health care disparities that need to be addressed among certain minority races. Reducing the disparities in health care spending across racial groups should be included as a crucial element in tackling well-established health care inequities.

Cost-utility analysis of primary HPV testing through home-based self-sampling in comparison to visual inspection using acetic acid for cervical cancer screening in East district, Sikkim, India, 2023.

INTRODUCTION: Primary Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) testing offers higher sensitivity and specificity over Visual Inspection using Acetic acid (VIA) in cervical cancer screening. Self-sampling is a promising strategy to boost participation and reduce disparities. However, concerns about the initial costs hinder HPV testing adoption in low and middle-income countries. This study assesses the cost-utility of home-based HPV self-sampling versus VIA for cervical cancer screening in India. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in East district, Sikkim, India, comparing the costs and utility outcomes of population-based cervical cancer screening through VIA and primary HPV screening through self-sampling. Cost-related data were collected from April 2021 to March 2022 using the bottom-up micro-costing method, while utility measures were collected prospectively using the EuroQoL-5D-5L questionnaire. The utility values were converted into quality-adjusted life days (QALDs) for an 8-day period. The willingness to pay threshold (WTP) was based on per capita GDP for 2022. If the calculated Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) value is lower than the WTP threshold, it signifies that the intervention is cost-effective. RESULTS: The study included 95 women in each group of cervical cancer screening with VIA & HPV self-sampling. For eight days, the QALD was found to be 7.977 for the VIA group and 8.0 for the HPV group. The unit cost per woman screened by VIA and HPV self-testing was ₹1,597 (US$ 19.2) and ₹1,271(US$ 15.3), respectively. The ICER was ₹-14,459 (US$ -173.6), which was much below the WTP threshold for eight QALDs, i.e. ₹ 4,193 (US$ 50.4). CONCLUSION: The findings support HPV self-sampling as a cost-effective alternative to VIA. This informs policymakers and healthcare providers for better resource allocation in cervical cancer screening in Sikkim.

Cervical cancer screening and treatment costing in Senegal.

Introduction: in Senegal, cervical cancer is the leading cause of cancers among women. This study estimated the costs associated with cervical cancer screening and treatment for precancerous lesions from the health system perspective. Methods: we estimated costs for screening, diagnostics, and treatment. We conducted a cross-sectional study in seven regions with primary data collected from 50 health facilities. Data collection included structured questionnaires, with secondary data from the Ministry of Health and other sources. A mixed-methods approach combined ingredients-based costing and financial expenditures to estimate direct medical and non-medical costs. All costs are reported in 2019 USD. Results: average costs were $3.71 for visual inspection with acetic acid, $16.49 for Pap smear, and $46.65 for human papillomavirus deoxyribonucleic acid (HPV DNA) testing. Screening cost drivers were clinical exam supplies and clinical equipment for visual inspection with acetic acid, offsite processing of specimens for Pap smear, and lab equipment costs for HPV DNA procedure. The average cost of diagnosis via colposcopy alone was $25.73, and colposcopy with biopsy/endocervical curettage was $74.96. The average cost of treatment followed by one visit for pre-cancerous lesions was $195.24 for loop electrosurgical excision, $47.35 for cryotherapy, and $32.35 for thermal ablation. Clinical equipment and lab costs were the largest contributors to colposcopy and endocervical curettage/biopsy expenses. Clinical equipment made up the largest portion of cryotherapy, loop electrosurgical excision, and thermoablation costs. Conclusion: this study is the first to estimate the costs of HPV screening and treatment in Senegal, which can be used to inform decision-making on cervical cancer investments.

Cost-effectiveness of approaches to cervical cancer screening in Malawi: comparison of frequencies, lesion treatment techniques, and risk-stratified approaches.

BACKGROUND: Recently-updated global guidelines for cervical cancer screening incorporated new technologies-most significantly, the inclusion of HPV DNA detection as a primary screening test-but leave many implementation decisions at countries' discretion. We sought to develop recommendations for Malawi as a test case since it has the second-highest cervical cancer burden globally and high HIV prevalence. We incorporated updated epidemiologic data, the full range of ablation methods recommended, and a more nuanced representation of how HIV status intersects with cervical cancer risk and exposure to screening to model outcomes of different approaches to screening. METHODS: Using a Markov model, we estimate the relative health outcomes and costs of different approaches to cervical cancer screening among Malawian women. The model was parameterized using published data, and focused on comparing "triage" approaches-i.e., lesion treatment (cryotherapy or thermocoagulation) at differing frequencies and varying by HIV status. Health outcomes were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and deaths averted. The model was built using TreeAge Pro software. RESULTS: Thermocoagulation was more cost-effective than cryotherapy at all screening frequencies. Screening women once per decade would avert substantially more deaths than screening only once per lifetime, at relatively little additional cost. Moreover, at this frequency, it would be advisable to ensure that all women who screen positive receive treatment (rather than investing in further increases in screening frequency): for a similar gain in QALYs, it would cost more than four times as much to implement once-per-5 years screening with only 50% of women treated versus once-per-decade screening with 100% of women treated. Stratified screening schedules by HIV status was found to be an optimal approach. CONCLUSIONS: These results add new evidence about cost-effective approaches to cervical cancer screening in low-income countries. At relatively infrequent screening intervals, if resources are limited, it would be more cost-effective to invest in scaling up thermocoagulation for treatment before increasing the recommended screening frequency. In Malawi or countries in a similar stage of the HIV epidemic, a stratified approach that prioritizes more frequent screening for women living with HIV may be more cost-effective than population-wide recommendations that are HIV status neutral.

Productivity costs due to human papillomavirus-related cancer mortality in the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) causes several cancers such as cervical cancer and some head and neck (oral cavity, pharynx, and larynx), vulval, vaginal, anal, and penile cancers. As HPV vaccination is available, there is potential to prevent these cancers attributed to HPV and consequently the burden associated with them. The aim of this analysis was to estimate the number of HPV-related cancer deaths and the productivity costs due to years of life lost (YLL) in the United Kingdom (UK). METHOD: A model was developed utilizing UK 2019 mortality data sourced from country-specific databases for England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland for the following HPV-related cancers: head and neck (ICD-10 C00-14 and C32), cervix uteri (C53), vaginal (C51), vulval (C52), anal (C21), and penile (C60). The proportion of deaths and years of life lost (YLL) due to HPV were estimated using HPV attributable fractions for each anatomic location from the published literature. Labor force participation, retirement ages, and mean annual earnings, discounted at 3.5% annually, were applied to YLL to calculate the present value of future lost productivity (PVFLP). RESULTS: A total of 1817 deaths due to HPV-related cancers were reported in the UK in 2019 resulting in 31,804 YLL. Restricting to only YLL that occurred prior to retirement age yielded a total YPLL of 11,765 and a total PVFLP of £187,764,978. CONCLUSIONS: There is a high disease burden in the UK for HPV-related cancers, with a large economic impact on the wider economy due to productivity losses. Implementing and reinforcing public health measures to maintain high HPV vaccination coverage in both males and females may further facilitate reduction of this burden.

Unmet financial needs among patients crowdfunding to support gynecologic cancer care.

BACKGROUND: Patients may use crowdfunding to solicit donations, typically from multiple small donors using internet-based means, to offset the financial toxicity of cancer care. OBJECTIVE: To describe crowdfunding campaigns by gynecologic cancer patients and to compare campaign characteristics and needs expressed between patients with cervical, uterine, and ovarian cancer. STUDY DESIGN: We queried the public crowdfunding forum GoFundMe.com for "cervical cancer," "uterine cancer," and "ovarian cancer." The first 200 consecutive posts for each cancer type fundraising within the United States were analyzed. Data on campaign goals and needs expressed were manually extracted. Descriptive statistics and bivariate analyses were performed. RESULTS: Among the 600 fundraising pages, the median campaign goal was $10,000 [IQR $5000-$23,000]. Campaigns raised a median of 28.6% of their goal with only 8.7% of campaigns reaching their goal after a median of 54 days online. On average, ovarian cancer campaigns had higher monetary goals, more donors, and larger donation amounts than cervical cancer campaigns and raised more money than both cervical and uterine cancer campaigns. Campaigns were fundraising to support medical costs (80-85%) followed by lost wages (36-56%) or living expenses (27-41%). Cervical cancer campaigns reported need for non-medical costs more frequently than uterine or ovarian cancer campaigns. States without Medicaid expansions (31% of the national population) were over-represented among cervical cancer and uterine cancer, but not ovarian cancer campaigns. CONCLUSIONS: Crowdfunding pages reveal patients fundraising for out-of-pocket costs in the thousands of dollars and a wide range of unmet financial needs based on cancer type.

Care cascades following low-value cervical cancer screening in dually enrolled Veterans.

BACKGROUND: Veterans dually enrolled in the Veterans Health Administration (VA) and Medicare commonly experience downstream services as part of a care cascade after an initial low-value service. Our objective was to characterize the frequency and cost of low-value cervical cancer screening and subsequent care cascades among Veterans dually enrolled in VA and Medicare. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used VA and Medicare administrative data from fiscal years 2015 to 2019. The study cohort was comprised of female Veterans aged >65 years and at low risk of cervical cancer who were dually enrolled in VA and Medicare. Within this cohort, we compared differences in the rates and costs of cascade services related to low-value cervical cancer screening for Veterans who received and did not receive screening in FY2018, adjusting for baseline patient- and facility-level covariates using inverse probability of treatment weighting. RESULTS: Among 20,972 cohort-eligible Veterans, 494 (2.4%) underwent low-value cervical cancer screening with 301 (60.9%) initial screens occurring in VA and 193 (39%) occurring in Medicare. Veterans who were screened experienced an additional 26.7 (95% CI, 16.4-37.0) cascade services per 100 Veterans compared to those who were not screened, contributing to $2919.4 (95% CI, -265 to 6104.7) per 100 Veterans in excess costs. Care cascades consisted predominantly of subsequent cervical cancer screening procedures and related outpatient visits with low rates of invasive procedures and occurred in both VA and Medicare. CONCLUSIONS: Veterans dually enrolled in VA and Medicare commonly receive related downstream tests and visits as part of care cascades following low-value cervical cancer screening. Our findings demonstrate that to fully capture the extent to which individuals are subject to low-value care, it is important to examine downstream care stemming from initial low-value services across all systems from which individuals receive care.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of alternative screening strategies for the detection of cervical cancer among women in rural areas of Western Kenya.

While the incidence of cervical cancer has dropped in high-income countries due to organized cytology-based screening programs, it remains the leading cause of cancer death among women in Eastern Africa. Therefore, the World Health Organization (WHO) now urges providers to transition from widely prevalent but low-performance visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) screening to primary human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing. Due to high HPV prevalence, effective triage tests are needed to identify those lesions likely to progress and so avoid over-treatment. To identify the optimal cost-effective strategy, we compared the VIA screen-and-treat approach to primary HPV DNA testing with p16/Ki67 dual-stain cytology or VIA as triage. We used a Markov model to calculate the budget impact of each strategy with incremental quality-adjusted life years and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) as the main outcome. Deterministic cost-effectiveness analyses show that the screen-and-treat approach is highly cost-effective (ICER 2469 Int$), while screen, triage, and treat with dual staining is the most effective with favorable ICER than triage with VIA (ICER 9943 Int$ compared with 13,177 Int$). One-way sensitivity analyses show that the results are most sensitive to discounting, VIA performance, and test prices. In the probabilistic sensitivity analyses, the triage option using dual stain is the optimal choice above a willingness to pay threshold of 7115 Int$ being cost-effective as per WHO standards. The result of our analysis favors the use of dual staining over VIA as triage in HPV-positive women and portends future opportunities and necessary research to improve the coverage and acceptability of cervical cancer screening programs.

Treatment methods for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in England: A cost-effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the cost-effectiveness of different treatments for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). DESIGN: A cost-effectiveness analysis based on data available in the literature and expert opinion. SETTING: England. POPULATION: Women treated for CIN. METHODS: We developed a decision-analytic model to simulate the clinical course of 1000 women who received local treatment for CIN and were followed up for 10 years after treatment. In the model we considered surgical complications as well as oncological and reproductive outcomes over the 10-year period. The costs calculated were those incurred by the National Health Service (NHS) of England. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost per one CIN2+ recurrence averted (oncological outcome); cost per one preterm birth averted (reproductive outcome); overall cost per one adverse oncological or reproductive outcome averted. RESULTS: For young women of reproductive age, large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ) was the most cost-effective treatment overall at all willingness-to-pay thresholds. For postmenopausal women, LLETZ remained the most cost-effective treatment up to a threshold of £31,500, but laser conisation became the most cost-effective treatment above that threshold. CONCLUSIONS: LLETZ is the most cost-effective treatment for both younger and older women. However, for older women, more radical excision with laser conisation could also be considered if the NHS is willing to spend more than £31,500 to avert one CIN2+ recurrence.

Environmental and psychosocial predictors of cervical cancer screening among women in Gwagwalada Area Council, Abuja, North Central, Nigeria.

Cervical cancer (CC) is the second leading cause of cancer morbidity and mortality among Nigerian women. Although screening is a cost-effective strategy for reducing its burden, uptake remains sub-optimal. A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted among 514 sexually active women aged ≥25 years in Gwagwalada Area Council, Abuja, Nigeria using a semi-structured interviewer administered questionnaire. Mean age of respondents was 38.4±11.6years. 246(46.9%) had good knowledge of CC screening while 268(51.2%) had poor knowledge. Religion (aOR:1.8 [95% CI: 1.1 - 3.1]), location (aOR:1.2 [95% CI: 1.2 - 3.4) and number of children (aOR:2.3 [95% CI: 1.3 - 3.9]) were predictors for screening. Poor access routes to health facilities (aOR:0.5 [95% CI: 0.2 - 0.9]), high cost of screening (aOR:0.4 [95% CI: 0.2 - 0.9]), unaware of screening centers (aOR:0.4 [95% CI: 0.2 - 0.9]) and long waiting hours (aOR:0.5 [95% CI: 0.2 - 0.9) were identified environmental predictors. Fear of positive diagnosis/stigma (aOR:0.3 [95% CI: 0.1 - 0.9]), unacceptable touch (aOR:0.2 [95% CI: 0.1 - 0.8), deficiency in awareness programs (aOR:0.3 [95% CI: 0.2 - 0.7]), and not aware of appropriate screening age (aOR:0.1 [95% CI: 0.1 - 0.4]) were identified psychosocial predictors. This study highlights the need to intensify enlightenment programs, subsidize screening services, and encourage community screening.

Understanding the role of access in Hispanic cancer screening disparities.

BACKGROUND: Hispanic populations in the United States experience numerous barriers to care access. It is unclear how cancer screening disparities between Hispanic and non-Hispanic White individuals are explained by access to care, including having a usual source of care and health insurance coverage. METHODS: A secondary analysis of the 2019 National Health Interview Survey was conducted and included respondents who were sex- and age-eligible for cervical (n = 8316), breast (n = 6025), or colorectal cancer screening (n = 11,313). The proportion of ever screened and up to date for each screening type was compared.  Regression models evaluated whether controlling for reporting a usual source of care and type of health insurance (public, private, none) attenuated disparities between Hispanics and non-Hispanic White individuals. RESULTS: Hispanic individuals were less likely than non-Hispanic White individuals to be up to date with cervical cancer screening (71.6% vs. 74.6%) and colorectal cancer screening (52.9% vs. 70.3%), but up-to-date screening was similar for breast cancer (78.8% vs. 76.3%). Hispanic individuals (vs. non-Hispanic White) were less likely to have a usual source of care (77.9% vs. 86.0%) and more likely to be uninsured (23.6% vs. 7.1%). In regressions, insurance fully attenuated cervical cancer disparities. Controlling for both usual source of care and insurance type explained approximately half of the colorectal cancer screening disparities (adjusted risk difference: -8.3 [-11.2 to -4.8]). CONCLUSION: Addressing the high rate of uninsurance among Hispanic individuals could mitigate cancer screening disparities. Future research should build on the relative successes of breast cancer screening and investigate additional barriers for colorectal cancer screening. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: This study uses data from a national survey to compare cancer screening use those who identify as Hispanic with those who identify as non-Hispanic White. Those who identify as Hispanic are much less likely to be up to date with colorectal cancer screening than those who identify as non-Hispanic White, slightly less likely to be up to date on cervical cancer screening, and similarly likely to receive breast cancer screening. Improving insurance coverage is important for health equity, as is further exploring what drives higher use of breast cancer screening and lower use of colorectal cancer screening.

Treatment patterns and economic burden among newly diagnosed cervical and endometrial cancer patients.

Aim: This study evaluated treatment patterns, healthcare resource use and healthcare costs among newly diagnosed US patients with cervical or endometrial cancer. Materials & methods: The authors identified patients diagnosed between 2015 and 2018, described them by line of therapy (LOT), then summarized all-cause per patient per month healthcare resource use and healthcare costs per LOT. Results: Among 1004 patients with cervical cancer and 2006 patients with endometrial cancer, 65.2 and 71.4%, respectively, received at least LOT1. Common treatment modalities in LOT1 were surgery (cervical, 58.0%; endometrial, 92.6%), radiation therapy (cervical, 49.8%; 24.7%) and systemic therapy (cervical, 53.3%; endometrial, 26.1%). Mean per patient per month costs per LOT were pre-treatment (cervical, US$17,210; endometrial, US$14,601), LOT1 (cervical, US$10,929; endometrial, US$6859), LOT2 (cervical, US$15,183; endometrial, US$10,649) and LOT3+ (cervical, US$19,681; endometrial, US$9206). Conclusion: Overall, newly diagnosed patients with cervical or endometrial cancer received guideline-recommended treatment. Outpatient visits mainly drove healthcare costs across LOTs.

Global cervical cancer research: A scientometric density equalizing mapping and socioeconomic analysis.

Cervical cancer has caused substantial morbidity and mortality for millions of women over the past decades. While enormous progress has been made in diagnosis, prevention and therapy, the disease is still fatal for many women-especially in low-income countries. Since no detailed studies are available on the worldwide research landscape, we here investigated the global scientific output related to this cancer type by an established protocol. The "New Quality and Quantity Indices in Science" platform assessed all relevant cervical cancer research published in the Web of Science since 1900. A detailed analysis was conducted including country-specific research productivity, indicators for scientific quality, and relation of research activity to socioeconomic and epidemiologic figures. Visualization of data was generated by the use of density equalizing map projections. Our approach identified 22,185 articles specifically related to cervical cancer. From a global viewpoint, the United States of America was the dominating country in absolute numbers, being followed by China and Japan. By contrast, the European countries Sweden, Austria, and Norway were positioned first when the research activity was related to the population number. When the scientific productivity was related to annual cervical cancer cases, Scandinavian countries (Finland #1, Sweden #4, Norway #5, Denmark #7), the Alpine countries Austria (#2) and Switzerland (#6), and the Netherlands (#3) were leading the field. Density equalizing mapping visualized that large parts of Africa and South America were almost invisible regarding the global participation in cervical cancer research. Our data documented that worldwide cervical cancer research activity is continuously increasing but is imbalanced from a global viewpoint. Also, the study indicated that global and public health aspects should be strengthened in cervical carcinoma research in order to empower more countries to take part in international research activities.

Treatment patterns and economic burden among cervical and endometrial cancer patients newly initiating systemic therapy.

Aim: To evaluate treatment patterns, healthcare resource use (HCRU) and all-cause healthcare costs among patients with cervical or endometrial cancer newly initiating systemic therapy. Methods: We identified patients with cervical or endometrial cancer newly initiating systemic therapy - a claims-based proxy for advanced disease - between 2014 and 2019, described them by line of therapy (LOT), and summarized the per patient per month (PPPM) HCRU and healthcare costs per LOT. Results: Among 1229 patients with cervical cancer and 2659 patients with endometrial cancer, LOT1 therapies included systemic only (cervical, 50.1%; endometrial, 83.2%) and systemic with radiation therapy (cervical, 49.9%; endometrial, 16.8%). Mean PPPM total costs were: LOT1 (cervical, US$15,892; endometrial, US$11,363), LOT2 (US$20,193; US$14,019) and LOT3+ (US$16,576; US$14,645). Conclusions: Overall, patients received guideline-concordant care and experienced significant economic burden, which increased with LOT.

Does obesity influence the preferred treatment approach for early-stage cervical cancer? A cost-effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Abdominal radical hysterectomy in early-stage cervical cancer has higher rates of disease-free and overall survival compared with minimally invasive radical hysterectomy. Abdominal radical hysterectomy may be technically challenging at higher body mass index levels resulting in poorer surgical outcomes. This study sought to examine the influence of body mass index on outcomes and cost effectiveness between different treatments for early-stage cervical cancer. METHODS: A Markov decision-analytic model was designed using TreeAge Pro software to compare the outcomes and costs of primary chemoradiation versus surgery in women with early-stage cervical cancer. The study used a theoretical cohort of 6000 women who were treated with abdominal radical hysterectomy, minimally invasive radical hysterectomy, or primary chemoradiation therapy. We compared the results for three body mass index groups: less than 30 kg/m2, 30-39.9 kg/m2, and 40 kg/m2 or higher. Model inputs were derived from the literature. Outcomes included complications, recurrence, death, costs, and quality-adjusted life years. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of less than $100 000 per quality-adjusted life year was used as our willingness-to-pay threshold. Sensitivity analyses were performed broadly to determine the robustness of the results. RESULTS: Comparing abdominal radical hysterectomy with minimally invasive radical hysterectomy, abdominal radical hysterectomy was associated with 526 fewer recurrences and 382 fewer deaths compared with minimally invasive radical hysterectomy; however, abdominal radical hysterectomy resulted in more complications for each body mass index category. When the body mass index was 40 kg/m2 or higher, abdominal radical hysterectomy became the dominant strategy because it led to better outcomes with lower costs than minimally invasive radical hysterectomy. Comparing abdominal radical hysterectomy with primary chemoradiation therapy, recurrence rates were similar, with more deaths associated with surgery across each body mass index category. Chemoradiation therapy became cost effective when the body mass index was 40 kg/m2 or higher. CONCLUSION: When the body mass index is 40 kg/m2 or higher, abdominal radical hysterectomy is cost saving compared with minimally invasive radical hysterectomy and primary chemoradiation is cost effective compared with abdominal radical hysterectomy. Primary chemoradiation may be the optimal management strategy at higher body mass indexes.

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.

BACKGROUND: The guidelines for managing abnormal cervical cancer screening tests changed from a results-based approach in 2012 to a risk-based approach in 2019. OBJECTIVE: We estimated the cost-effectiveness of the 2019 management guidelines and the changes in resource utilization moving from 2012 to 2019 guidelines. STUDY DESIGN: We utilized a previously published model of cervical cancer natural history and screening to estimate and compare the lifetime costs and the number of screens, colposcopies, precancer treatments, cancer cases, and cancer deaths associated with the 2012 vs 2019 management guidelines. We assessed these guidelines under the scenarios of observed screening practice and perfect screening adherence to 3-year cytology starting at age 21, with a switch to either 3-year or 5-year cytology plus human papillomavirus cotesting at age 30. In addition, we estimated the lifetime costs and life years to determine the cost-effectiveness of shifting to the 2019 management guidelines. RESULTS: Under the assumptions of both observed screening practice and perfect screening adherence with a strategy of 3-year cytology at ages 21 to 29 and switching to 3-year cotesting at age 30, the management of the screening tests according to the 2019 guidelines was less costly and more effective than the 2012 guidelines. For 3-year cytology screening at ages 21 to 29 and switching to 5-year cotesting at age 30, the 2019 guidelines were more cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per life year gained. Across all scenarios, the 2019 management guidelines were associated with fewer colposcopies and cancer deaths. CONCLUSION: Our model-based analysis suggests that the 2019 guidelines are more effective overall and also more cost-effective than the 2012 guidelines, supporting the principle of "equal management of equal risks."

The Cost of Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer in Thailand: an Empirical Study for Economic Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate cost of illness of locally advanced cervical cancer patients from societal perspective in three scenarios including completely cured without severe late side effects (S1), completely cured with late grade 3-4 gastrointestinal side effects (S2.1) or genitourinary side effects (S2.2), and disease recurrence and death (S3). METHODS:  The incidence-based approach was conducted. The cost was calculated for 5-year time horizon starting for the treatment initiation. Direct medical costs were extracted from hospital database. Cost of using two-dimensional technique and three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy were calculated separately. Direct non-medical costs and indirect costs in terms of productivity loss were based on actual expenses from the interview of 194 locally advanced cervical cancer patients from two tertiary hospitals in Bangkok, during June to December 2019. All costs were converted to US dollar in 2019 values. RESULTS: For 5 years, cost of illness per patient for using two-dimensional technique and three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy were US $8,391 and US $10,418 for S1, US $18,018 and US $20,045 for S2.1, US $17,908 and US $19,936 for S2.2, and US $61,076 and US $63,103 for S3, respectively. The economic burden for newly diagnosed locally advanced cervical cancer patients in Thailand in 2018 was approximately US $129 million and US $131 million for using two-dimensional technique and three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy, respectively. Cost from S3 accounted for 70% of all total cost. Premature death was the most important cost driver of cost of illness accounted for 64 % of the total cost estimates. CONCLUSIONS: Cost of illness of locally advanced cervical cancer patients produced significant economic burden from societal perspective. Disease recurrence and early death from cancer was the most influential cause of this burden.

Factors associated with and socioeconomic inequalities in breast and cervical cancer screening among women aged 15-64 years in Botswana.

BACKGROUND: The most commonly diagnosed cancers among women are breast and cervical cancers, with cervical cancer being a relatively bigger problem in low and middle income countries (LMICs) than breast cancer. METHODS: The main aim of this study was to asses factors associated with and socioeconomic inequalities in breast and cervical cancer screening among women aged 15-64 years in Botswana. This study is part of the broad study on Chronic Non-Communicable Diseases in Botswana conducted (NCD survey) in 2016. The NCD survey was conducted across 3 cities and towns, 15 urban villages and 15 rural areas of Botswana. The survey collected information on several NCDs and risk factors including cervical and breast cancer screening. The survey adopted a multistage sampling design and a sample of 1178 participants (males and females) aged 15 years and above was selected in both urban and rural areas of Botswana. For this study, a sub-sample of 813 women aged 15-64 years was selected and included in the analysis. The inequality analysis was conducted using decomposition analysis using ADePT software version 6. Logistic regression models were used to show the association between socioeconomic variables and cervical and breast cancer screening using SPSS version 25. All comparisons were considered statistically significant at 5%. RESULTS: Overall, 6% and 62% of women reported that they were screened for breast and cervical cancer, respectively. Women in the poorest (AOR = 0.16, 95% CI = 0.06-0.45) and poorer (AOR = 0.37, 95% CI = 0.14-0.96) wealth quintiles were less likely to report cervical cancer screening compared to women in the richest wealth quintile. Similarly, for breast cancer, the odds of screening were found to be low among women in the poorest (AOR = 0.39, 95% CI = 0.06-0.68) and the poorer (AOR = 0.45, 95% CI = 0.13-0.81)) wealth quintiles. Concentration indices (CI) showed that cervical (CI = 0.2443) and breast cancer (CI = 0.3975) screening were more concentrated among women with high SES than women with low SES. Wealth status was observed to be the leading contributor to socioeconomic inequality observed for both cervical and breast cancer screening. CONCLUSIONS: Findings in this study indicate the need for concerted efforts to address the health care needs of the poor in order to reduce cervical and breast cancer screening inequalities.