The cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus vaccination in the Philippines.

Cervical cancer is the second most common cancer among women in the Philippines. Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination provides protection from the most common cancer-causing HPV types. This analysis used a proportionate outcomes model to estimate the potential cost-effectiveness of four different HPV vaccine products-Cervarix™, Cecolin®, GARDASIL®, and GARDASIL®9-for routine HPV vaccination of 10 cohorts of 9-year-old girls from the government and societal perspectives. Model parameters included cervical cancer burden, healthcare and program costs, vaccine efficacy with and without potential cross-protection, and vaccination coverage. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses evaluated the impact of uncertainty on model results. Compared to no vaccination, HPV programs with Cecolin®, Cervarix™, and GARDASIL® are projected to be cost-effective at US$1,210, US$1,300, and US$2,043 per DALY averted, respectively, from the government perspective, and at US$173, US$263, and US$1,006 per DALY averted, respectively, from the societal perspective when cross-protection was considered. When direct comparisons were made across vaccines, GARDASIL® was dominated by Cervarix™ and Cecolin®. In a scenario where cross-protection was not considered, results were similar except that Cervarix™ and GARDASIL® were both dominated by Cecolin®. GARDASIL®9 was not cost-effective under any of the modeled scenarios.

Estimating the costs of HIV clinic integrated versus non-integrated treatment of pre-cancerous cervical lesions and costs of cervical cancer treatment in Kenya.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the modified societal costs of cervical cancer treatment in Kenya; and to compare the modified societal costs of treatment for pre-cancerous cervical lesions integrated into same-day HIV care compared to "non-integrated" treatment when the services are not coordinated on the same day. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A micro-costing study was conducted at Coptic Hope Center for Infectious Diseases and Kenyatta National Hospital from July 1-October 31, 2014. Interviews were conducted with 54 patients and 23 staff. Direct medical, non-medical (e.g., overhead), and indirect (e.g., time) costs were calculated for colposcopy, cryotherapy, Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure (LEEP), and treatment of cancer. All costs are reported in 2017 US dollars. RESULTS: Patients had a mean age of 41 and daily earnings of $6; travel time to the facility averaged 2.8 hours. From the modified societal perspective, per-procedure costs of colposcopy were $41 (integrated) vs. $91 (non-integrated). Per-procedure costs of cryotherapy were $22 (integrated) vs. $46 (non-integrated), whereas costs of LEEP were $50 (integrated) and $99 (non-integrated). This represents cost savings of $25 for cryotherapy and $50 for colposcopy and LEEP when provided on the same day as an HIV-care visit. Treatment for cervical cancer cost $1,345-$6,514, depending on stage. Facility-based palliative care cost $59/day. CONCLUSIONS: Integrating treatment of pre-cancerous lesions into HIV care is estimated to be cost-saving from a modified societal perspective. These costs can be applied to financial and economic evaluations in Kenya and similar urban settings in other low-income countries.

Costs of integrating cervical cancer screening at an HIV clinic in Kenya.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the societal-level costs of integrating cervical cancer screening into HIV clinics in Nairobi, Kenya. METHODS: A cross-sectional micro-costing study was performed at Coptic Hope Center for Infectious Diseases and Kenyatta National Hospital, Kenya, between July 1 and October 31, 2014. To estimate direct medical, non-medical, and indirect costs associated with screening, a time-and-motion study was performed, and semi-structured interviews were conducted with women aged at least 18 years attending the clinic for screening during the study period and with clinic staff who had experience relevant to cervical cancer screening. RESULTS: There were 148 patients and 23 clinic staff who participated in interviews. Visual inspection with acetic acid was associated with the lowest estimated marginal per-screening costs ($3.30), followed by careHPV ($18.28), Papanicolaou ($24.59), and Hybrid Capture 2 screening ($31.15). Laboratory expenses were the main cost drivers for Papanicolaou and Hybrid Capture 2 testing ($11.61 and $16.41, respectively). Overhead and patient transportation affected the costs of all methods. Indirect costs were cheaper for single-visit screening methods ($0.43 per screening) than two-visit screening methods ($2.88 per screening). CONCLUSIONS: Integrating cervical cancer screening into HIV clinics would be cost-saving from a societal perspective compared with non-integrated screening. These findings could be used in cost-effectiveness analyses to assess incremental costs per clinical outcome in an integrated setting.