Sociodemographic characteristics associated with cervical cancer screening participation by send-to-all and opt-in HPV self-sampling: Who benefits? Results from a randomized controlled trial among long-term non-attending women in Norway.

With the objective to investigate associations between sociodemographic characteristics and participation in interventions designed to increase participation in cervical cancer screening among under-screened women, we randomized a random sample of 6000 women in Norway aged 35-69 years who had not attended cervical screening for ≥10 years to receive either (i) a reminder to attend regular screening (control), (ii) an offer to order a self-sampling kit (opt-in), or (iii) a self-sampling kit unsolicited (send-to-all). We analyzed how sociodemographic characteristics were associated with screening participation within and between screening arms. In the send-to-all arm, increased screening participation ranged from 17.1% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] = 10.3% to 23.8%) to 30.0% (95% CI = 21.5% to 38.6%) between sociodemographic groups. In the opt-in arm, we observed smaller, and at times, non-significant increases within the range 0.7% (95% CI = -5.8% to 7.3%) to 19.1% (95% CI = 11.6% to 26.7%). In send-to-all versus control comparisons, there was greater increase in participation for women in the workforce versus not (6.1%, 95% CI = 1.6% to 10.6%), with higher versus lower income (7.6%, 95% CI = 2.2% to 13.1%), and with university versus primary education (8.5%, 95% CI = 2.4% to 14.6%). In opt-in versus control comparisons, there was greater increase in participation for women in the workforce versus not (4.6%, 95% CI = 0.7% to 8.5%), with higher versus lower income (6.3%, 95% CI = 1.5% to 11.1%), but lower increase for Eastern European versus Norwegian background (-12.7%, 95% CI = -19.7% to -5.7%). Self-sampling increased cervical screening participation across all sociodemographic levels, but inequalities in participation should be considered when introducing self-sampling, especially with the goal to reach long-term non-attending women.

Cost-effectiveness of primary human papillomavirus triage approaches among vaccinated women in Norway: A model-based analysis.

As Norway considers revising triage approaches following their first adolescent cohort with human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination entering the cervical cancer screening program, we analyzed the health impact and cost-effectiveness of alternative primary HPV triage approaches for women initiating cervical cancer screening in 2023. We used a multimodeling approach that captured HPV transmission and cervical carcinogenesis to evaluate the health benefits, harms and cost-effectiveness of alternative extended genotyping and age-based triage strategies under five-yearly primary HPV testing (including the status-quo screening strategy in Norway) for women born in 1998 (ie, age 25 in 2023). We examined 35 strategies that varied alternative groupings of high-risk HPV genotypes ("high-risk" genotypes; "medium-risk" genotypes or "intermediate-risk" genotypes), number and types of HPV included in each group, management of HPV-positive women to direct colposcopy or active surveillance, wait time for re-testing and age at which the HPV triage algorithm switched from less to more intensive strategies. Given the range of benchmarks for severity-specific cost-effectiveness thresholds in Norway, we found that the preferred strategy for vaccinated women aged 25 years in 2023 involved an age-based switch from a less to more intensive follow-up algorithm at age 30 or 35 years with HPV-16/18 genotypes in the "high-risk" group. The two potentially cost-effective strategies could reduce the number of colposcopies compared to current guidelines and simultaneously improve health benefits. Using age to guide primary HPV triage, paired with selective HPV genotype and follow-up time for re-testing, could improve both the cervical cancer program effectiveness and efficiency.

Vaccination and screening strategies to accelerate cervical cancer elimination in Norway: a model-based analysis.

BACKGROUND: Experts have proposed an 'EVEN FASTER' concept targeting age-groups maintaining circulation of human papillomavirus (HPV). We explored effects of the vaccination component of these proposals compared with cervical cancer (CC) screening-based interventions on age-standardized incidence rate (ASR) and CC elimination (<4 cases/100,000) timing in Norway. METHODS: We used a model-based approach to evaluate HPV vaccination and CC screening scenarios compared with a status-quo scenario reflecting previous vaccination and screening. For cohorts ages 25-30 years, we examined 6 vaccination scenarios that incrementally increased vaccination coverage from current cohort-specific rates. Each vaccination scenario was coupled with three screening strategies that varied screening frequency. Additionally, we included 4 scenarios that alternatively increased screening adherence. Population- and cohort-level outcomes included ASR, lifetime risk of CC, and colposcopy referrals. RESULTS: Several vaccination strategies coupled with de-intensified screening frequencies lowered ASR, but did not accelerate CC elimination. Alternative strategies that increased screening adherence could both accelerate elimination and improve ASR. CONCLUSIONS: The vaccination component of an 'EVEN FASTER' campaign is unlikely to accelerate CC elimination in Norway but may reduce population-level ASR. Alternatively, targeting under- and never-screeners may both eliminate CC faster and lead to greater health benefits compared with vaccination-based interventions we considered.

Global impact and cost-effectiveness of one-dose versus two-dose human papillomavirus vaccination schedules: a comparative modelling analysis.

BACKGROUND: To eliminate cervical cancer as a public health problem, the World Health Organization had recommended routine vaccination of adolescent girls with two doses of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine before sexual initiation. However, many countries have yet to implement HPV vaccination because of financial or logistical barriers to delivering two doses outside the infant immunisation programme. METHODS: Using three independent HPV transmission models, we estimated the long-term health benefits and cost-effectiveness of one-dose versus two-dose HPV vaccination, in 188 countries, under scenarios in which one dose of the vaccine gives either a shorter duration of full protection (20 or 30 years) or lifelong protection but lower vaccine efficacy (e.g. 80%) compared to two doses. We simulated routine vaccination with the 9-valent HPV vaccine in 10-year-old girls at 80% coverage for the years 2021-2120, with a 1-year catch-up campaign up to age 14 at 80% coverage in the first year of the programme. RESULTS: Over the years 2021-2120, one-dose vaccination at 80% coverage was projected to avert 115.2 million (range of medians: 85.1-130.4) and 146.8 million (114.1-161.6) cervical cancers assuming one dose of the vaccine confers 20 and 30 years of protection, respectively. Should one dose of the vaccine provide lifelong protection at 80% vaccine efficacy, 147.8 million (140.6-169.7) cervical cancer cases could be prevented. If protection wanes after 20 years, 65 to 889 additional girls would need to be vaccinated with the second dose to prevent one cervical cancer, depending on the epidemiological profiles of the country. Across all income groups, the threshold cost for the second dose was low: from 1.59 (0.14-3.82) USD in low-income countries to 44.83 (3.75-85.64) USD in high-income countries, assuming one dose confers 30-year protection. CONCLUSIONS: Results were consistent across the three independent models and suggest that one-dose vaccination has similar health benefits to a two-dose programme while simplifying vaccine delivery, reducing costs, and alleviating vaccine supply constraints. The second dose may become cost-effective if there is a shorter duration of protection from one dose, cheaper vaccine and vaccination delivery strategies, and high burden of cervical cancer.

The cost-effectiveness of opt-in and send-to-all HPV self-sampling among long-term non-attenders to cervical cancer screening in Norway: The Equalscreen randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: We assessed the cost-effectiveness of mailing a human papillomavirus self-sampling (HPV-ss) kit, directly or via invitation to order, compared with mailing reminder letters among long-term non-attenders in Norway. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis using the Equalscreen study data with 6000 women aged 35-69 years who had not screened in 10+ years. Participants were equally randomized into three arms: reminder letter (control); invitation to order HPV-ss kit (opt-in); directly mailed HPV-ss kit (send-to-all). Cost-effectiveness (2020 Great British Pounds (GBP)) was estimated using incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per additional screened woman, and per additional cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) from extended and direct healthcare perspectives. RESULTS: Participation, CIN2+ detection, and total screening costs were highest in the send-to-all arm, followed by the opt-in and control arms. Non-histological physician appointments contributed to 67% of the total costs in the control arm and ≤ 31% in the self-sampling arms. From an expanded healthcare perspective, the ICERs were 135 GBP and 169 GBP per additional screened woman, and 2864 GBP and 4165 GBP per additional CIN2+ detected for the opt-in and send-to-all, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Opt-in and send-to-all self-sampling were more effective and, depending on willingness-to-pay, may be considered cost-effective alternatives to improve screening attendance in Norway.

Designing Guidelines for Those Who Do Not Follow Them: The Impact of Adherence Assumptions on Optimal Screening Guidelines.

OBJECTIVES: Model-based cost-effectiveness analyses can inform decisions about screening guidelines by quantifying consequences of alternative algorithms. Although actual screening adherence is imperfect, incorporating nonadherence into analyses that aim to determine optimal screening may affect the policy recommendations. We evaluated the impact of nonadherence assumptions on the optimal cervical cancer screening in Norway. METHODS: We used a microsimulation model of cervical carcinogenesis to project the long-term health and economic outcomes under alternative screening algorithms and adherence patterns. We compared 18 algorithms involving primary human papillomavirus testing (5-yearly) that varied follow-up management of different human papillomavirus results. We considered 12 adherence scenarios: perfect adherence, 8 high- and low-coverage "random-complier" scenarios, and 3 "systematic-complier" scenarios that reflect conditional screening behavior over a lifetime. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and considered a strategy with the highest incremental cost-effectiveness ratio < 55 000 US dollars/quality-adjusted life-year as "optimal." RESULTS: Under perfect adherence, the least intensive screening strategy was optimal; in contrast, assuming any nonadherence resulted in a more intensive optimal strategy. Accounting for lower adherence resulted in both lower costs and health benefits, which allowed for a more intensive strategy to be considered optimal, but more harms for women who screen according to guidelines (ie, up to 41% more colposcopies when comparing the optimal strategy in the lowest-adherence scenario with the optimal strategy under perfect adherence). CONCLUSIONS: Assuming nonadherence in analyses designed to inform national guidelines may lead to a relatively more intensive recommendation. Designing guidelines for those who do not adhere to them may lead to over-screening of those who do.

Switching clinic-based cervical cancer screening programs to human papillomavirus self-sampling: A cost-effectiveness analysis of vaccinated and unvaccinated Norwegian women.

Several countries have implemented primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for cervical cancer screening. HPV testing enables home-based, self-collected sampling (self-sampling), which provides similar diagnostic accuracy as clinician-collected samples. We evaluated the impact and cost-effectiveness of switching an entire organized screening program to primary HPV self-sampling among cohorts of HPV vaccinated and unvaccinated Norwegian women. We conducted a model-based analysis to project long-term health and economic outcomes for birth cohorts with different HPV vaccine exposure, that is, preadolescent vaccination (2000- and 2008-cohorts), multiage cohort vaccination (1991-cohort) or no vaccination (1985-cohort). We compared the cost-effectiveness of switching current guidelines with clinician-collected HPV testing to HPV self-sampling for these cohorts and considered an additional 44 strategies involving either HPV self-sampling or clinician-collected HPV testing at different screening frequencies for the 2000- and 2008-cohorts. Given Norwegian benchmarks for cost-effectiveness, we considered a strategy with an additional cost per quality-adjusted life-year below $55 000 as cost-effective. HPV self-sampling strategies considerably reduced screening costs (ie, by 24%-40% across cohorts and alternative strategies) and were more cost-effective than clinician-collected HPV testing. For cohorts offered preadolescent vaccination, cost-effective strategies involved HPV self-sampling three times (2000-cohort) and twice (2008-cohort) per lifetime. In conclusion, we found that switching from clinician-collected to self-collected HPV testing in cervical screening may be cost-effective among both highly vaccinated and unvaccinated cohorts of Norwegian women.

Potential effectiveness of a therapeutic HPV intervention campaign in Uganda.

Cervical cancer is a major source of morbidity and mortality in Uganda. In addition to prophylactic HPV vaccination, secondary prevention strategies are needed to reduce cancer burden. We evaluated the potential cancer reductions associated with a hypothetical single-contact therapeutic HPV intervention-with 70% coverage and variable efficacy [30%-100%]-using a three-stage HPV modeling framework reflecting HPV and cervical cancer burden in Uganda. In the reference case, we assumed prophylactic preadolescent HPV vaccination starting in 2020 with 70% coverage. A one-time therapeutic intervention targeting 35-year-old women in 2025 (not age-eligible for prophylactic vaccination) averted 1801 cervical cancers per 100 000 women over their lifetime (100% efficacy) or 533 cancers per 100 000 (30% efficacy). Benefits were considerably smaller in birth cohorts eligible for prophylactic HPV vaccination (768 cases averted per 100 000 at 100% efficacy). Evaluating the population-level impact over 40 years, we found introduction of a therapeutic intervention in 2025 with 100% efficacy targeted annually to 30-year-old women averted 139 000 incident cervical cancers in Uganda. This benefit was greatly reduced if efficacy was lower (30% efficacy; 41 000 cases averted), introduction was delayed (2040 introduction; 72 000 cases averted) or both (22 000 cases averted). We demonstrate the potential benefits of a single-contact HPV therapeutic intervention in a low-income setting, but show the importance of high therapeutic efficacy and early introduction timing relative to existing prophylactic programs. Reduced benefits from a less efficacious intervention may be somewhat offset if available within a shorter time frame.

Now or later: Health impacts of delaying single-dose HPV vaccine implementation in a high-burden setting.

We aimed to quantify the health impact of immediate introduction of a single-dose human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination program in a high-burden setting, as waiting until forthcoming trials are completed to implement single-dose HPV vaccination may result in health losses, particularly for cohorts who would age-out of vaccination eligibility. Two mathematical models fitted to a high-burden setting projected cervical cancer incidence rates associated with (a) immediate implementation of one-dose HPV vaccination vs (b) waiting 5 years for evidence from randomized trials to determine if one- or two-doses should be implemented. We conducted analyses assuming a single dose was either noninferior or inferior to two doses. The models projected that immediate implementation of a noninferior single-dose vaccine led to a 7.2% to 9.6% increase in cancers averted between 2021 to 2120, compared to waiting 5 years. Health benefits remained greater with immediate implementation despite an inferior single-dose efficacy (80%), but revaccination of one-dose recipients became more important assuming vaccine waning. Under most circumstances, immediate vaccination avoided health losses for those aging out of vaccine eligibility, leading to greater health benefits than waiting for more information in 5 years.

Choosing the optimal HPV vaccine: The health impact and economic value of the nonavalent and bivalent HPV vaccines in 48 Gavi-eligible countries.

The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines may provide some level of cross-protection against high-risk HPV genotypes not directly targeted by the vaccines. We evaluated the long-term health and economic impacts of routine HPV vaccination using either the nonavalent HPV vaccine or the bivalent HPV vaccine in the context of 48 Gavi-eligible countries. We used a multi-modeling approach to compare the bivalent with or without cross-protection and the nonavalent HPV vaccine. The optimal, that is, most cost-effective, vaccine was the vaccine with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio below the per-capita gross domestic product (GDP) for each country. By 2100 and assuming 70% HPV vaccination coverage, a bivalent vaccine without cross-protection, a bivalent vaccine with favorable cross-protection and the nonavalent vaccine were projected to avert 14.9, 17.2 and 18.5 million cumulative cases of cervical cancer across all 48 Gavi-eligible countries, respectively. The relative value of the bivalent vaccine compared to the nonavalent vaccine increased assuming a bivalent vaccine conferred high cross-protection. For example, assuming a cost-effectiveness threshold of per-capita GDP, the nonavalent vaccine was optimal in 83% (n = 40) of countries if the bivalent vaccine did not confer cross-protection; however, the proportion of countries decreased to 63% (n = 30) if the bivalent vaccine conferred high cross-protection. For lower cost-effectiveness thresholds, the bivalent vaccine was optimal in a greater proportion of countries, under both cross-protection assumptions. Although the nonavalent vaccine is projected to avert more cases of cervical cancer, the bivalent vaccine with favorable cross-protection can prevent a considerable number of cases and would be considered a high-value vaccine for many Gavi-eligible countries.

Human papillomavirus vaccination for adults aged 30 to 45 years in the United States: A cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: A nonavalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine has been licensed for use in women and men up to age 45 years in the United States. The cost-effectiveness of HPV vaccination for women and men aged 30 to 45 years in the context of cervical cancer screening practice was evaluated to inform national guidelines. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We utilized 2 independent HPV microsimulation models to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of extending the upper age limit of HPV vaccination in women (from age 26 years) and men (from age 21 years) up to age 30, 35, 40, or 45 years. The models were empirically calibrated to reflect the burden of HPV and related cancers in the US population and used standardized inputs regarding historical and future vaccination uptake, vaccine efficacy, cervical cancer screening, and costs. Disease outcomes included cervical, anal, oropharyngeal, vulvar, vaginal, and penile cancers, as well as genital warts. Both models projected higher costs and greater health benefits as the upper age limit of HPV vaccination increased. Strategies of vaccinating females and males up to ages 30, 35, and 40 years were found to be less cost-effective than vaccinating up to age 45 years, which had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) greater than a commonly accepted upper threshold of $200,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. When including all HPV-related outcomes, the ICER for vaccinating up to age 45 years ranged from $315,700 to $440,600 per QALY gained. Assumptions regarding cervical screening compliance, vaccine costs, and the natural history of noncervical HPV-related cancers had major impacts on the cost-effectiveness of the vaccination strategies. Key limitations of the study were related to uncertainties in the data used to inform the models, including the timing of vaccine impact on noncervical cancers and vaccine efficacy at older ages. CONCLUSIONS: Our results from 2 independent models suggest that HPV vaccination for adult women and men aged 30 to 45 years is unlikely to represent good value for money in the US.

Impact of HPV vaccination and cervical screening on cervical cancer elimination: a comparative modelling analysis in 78 low-income and lower-middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: The WHO Director-General has issued a call for action to eliminate cervical cancer as a public health problem. To help inform global efforts, we modelled potential human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination and cervical screening scenarios in low-income and lower-middle-income countries (LMICs) to examine the feasibility and timing of elimination at different thresholds, and to estimate the number of cervical cancer cases averted on the path to elimination. METHODS: The WHO Cervical Cancer Elimination Modelling Consortium (CCEMC), which consists of three independent transmission-dynamic models identified by WHO according to predefined criteria, projected reductions in cervical cancer incidence over time in 78 LMICs for three standardised base-case scenarios: girls-only vaccination; girls-only vaccination and once-lifetime screening; and girls-only vaccination and twice-lifetime screening. Girls were vaccinated at age 9 years (with a catch-up to age 14 years), assuming 90% coverage and 100% lifetime protection against HPV types 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52, and 58. Cervical screening involved HPV testing once or twice per lifetime at ages 35 years and 45 years, with uptake increasing from 45% (2023) to 90% (2045 onwards). The elimination thresholds examined were an average age-standardised cervical cancer incidence of four or fewer cases per 100 000 women-years and ten or fewer cases per 100 000 women-years, and an 85% or greater reduction in incidence. Sensitivity analyses were done, varying vaccination and screening strategies and assumptions. We summarised results using the median (range) of model predictions. FINDINGS: Girls-only HPV vaccination was predicted to reduce the median age-standardised cervical cancer incidence in LMICs from 19·8 (range 19·4-19·8) to 2·1 (2·0-2·6) cases per 100 000 women-years over the next century (89·4% [86·2-90·1] reduction), and to avert 61·0 million (60·5-63·0) cases during this period. Adding twice-lifetime screening reduced the incidence to 0·7 (0·6-1·6) cases per 100 000 women-years (96·7% [91·3-96·7] reduction) and averted an extra 12·1 million (9·5-13·7) cases. Girls-only vaccination was predicted to result in elimination in 60% (58-65) of LMICs based on the threshold of four or fewer cases per 100 000 women-years, in 99% (89-100) of LMICs based on the threshold of ten or fewer cases per 100 000 women-years, and in 87% (37-99) of LMICs based on the 85% or greater reduction threshold. When adding twice-lifetime screening, 100% (71-100) of LMICs reached elimination for all three thresholds. In regions in which all countries can achieve cervical cancer elimination with girls-only vaccination, elimination could occur between 2059 and 2102, depending on the threshold and region. Introducing twice-lifetime screening accelerated elimination by 11-31 years. Long-term vaccine protection was required for elimination. INTERPRETATION: Predictions were consistent across our three models and suggest that high HPV vaccination coverage of girls can lead to cervical cancer elimination in most LMICs by the end of the century. Screening with high uptake will expedite reductions and will be necessary to eliminate cervical cancer in countries with the highest burden. FUNDING: WHO, UNDP, UN Population Fund, UNICEF-WHO-World Bank Special Program of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction, Canadian Institute of Health Research, Fonds de recherche du Québec-Santé, Compute Canada, National Health and Medical Research Council Australia Centre for Research Excellence in Cervical Cancer Control.

Mortality impact of achieving WHO cervical cancer elimination targets: a comparative modelling analysis in 78 low-income and lower-middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: WHO is developing a global strategy towards eliminating cervical cancer as a public health problem, which proposes an elimination threshold of four cases per 100 000 women and includes 2030 triple-intervention coverage targets for scale-up of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination to 90%, twice-lifetime cervical screening to 70%, and treatment of pre-invasive lesions and invasive cancer to 90%. We assessed the impact of achieving the 90-70-90 triple-intervention targets on cervical cancer mortality and deaths averted over the next century. We also assessed the potential for the elimination initiative to support target 3.4 of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)-a one-third reduction in premature mortality from non-communicable diseases by 2030. METHODS: The WHO Cervical Cancer Elimination Modelling Consortium (CCEMC) involves three independent, dynamic models of HPV infection, cervical carcinogenesis, screening, and precancer and invasive cancer treatment. Reductions in age-standardised rates of cervical cancer mortality in 78 low-income and lower-middle-income countries (LMICs) were estimated for three core scenarios: girls-only vaccination at age 9 years with catch-up for girls aged 10-14 years; girls-only vaccination plus once-lifetime screening and cancer treatment scale-up; and girls-only vaccination plus twice-lifetime screening and cancer treatment scale-up. Vaccination was assumed to provide 100% lifetime protection against infections with HPV types 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52, and 58, and to scale up to 90% coverage in 2020. Cervical screening involved HPV testing at age 35 years, or at ages 35 years and 45 years, with scale-up to 45% coverage by 2023, 70% by 2030, and 90% by 2045, and we assumed that 50% of women with invasive cervical cancer would receive appropriate surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy by 2023, which would increase to 90% by 2030. We summarised results using the median (range) of model predictions. FINDINGS: In 2020, the estimated cervical cancer mortality rate across all 78 LMICs was 13·2 (range 12·9-14·1) per 100 000 women. Compared to the status quo, by 2030, vaccination alone would have minimal impact on cervical cancer mortality, leading to a 0·1% (0·1-0·5) reduction, but additionally scaling up twice-lifetime screening and cancer treatment would reduce mortality by 34·2% (23·3-37·8), averting 300 000 (300 000-400 000) deaths by 2030 (with similar results for once-lifetime screening). By 2070, scaling up vaccination alone would reduce mortality by 61·7% (61·4-66·1), averting 4·8 million (4·1-4·8) deaths. By 2070, additionally scaling up screening and cancer treatment would reduce mortality by 88·9% (84·0-89·3), averting 13·3 million (13·1-13·6) deaths (with once-lifetime screening), or by 92·3% (88·4-93·0), averting 14·6 million (14·1-14·6) deaths (with twice-lifetime screening). By 2120, vaccination alone would reduce mortality by 89·5% (86·6-89·9), averting 45·8 million (44·7-46·4) deaths. By 2120, additionally scaling up screening and cancer treatment would reduce mortality by 97·9% (95·0-98·0), averting 60·8 million (60·2-61·2) deaths (with once-lifetime screening), or by 98·6% (96·5-98·6), averting 62·6 million (62·1-62·8) deaths (with twice-lifetime screening). With the WHO triple-intervention strategy, over the next 10 years, about half (48% [45-55]) of deaths averted would be in sub-Saharan Africa and almost a third (32% [29-34]) would be in South Asia; over the next 100 years, almost 90% of deaths averted would be in these regions. For premature deaths (age 30-69 years), the WHO triple-intervention strategy would result in rate reductions of 33·9% (24·4-37·9) by 2030, 96·2% (94·3-96·8) by 2070, and 98·6% (96·9-98·8) by 2120. INTERPRETATION: These findings emphasise the importance of acting immediately on three fronts to scale up vaccination, screening, and treatment for pre-invasive and invasive cervical cancer. In the next 10 years, a one-third reduction in the rate of premature mortality from cervical cancer in LMICs is possible, contributing to the realisation of the 2030 UN SDGs. Over the next century, successful implementation of the WHO elimination strategy would reduce cervical cancer mortality by almost 99% and save more than 62 million women's lives. FUNDING: WHO, UNDP, UN Population Fund, UNICEF-WHO-World Bank Special Program of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction, Germany Federal Ministry of Health, National Health and Medical Research Council Australia, Centre for Research Excellence in Cervical Cancer Control, Canadian Institute of Health Research, Compute Canada, and Fonds de recherche du Québec-Santé.

Impact and cost-effectiveness of strategies to accelerate cervical cancer elimination: A model-based analysis.

Following the global call for action by the World Health Organization to eliminate cervical cancer (CC), we evaluated how each CC policy decision in Norway influenced the timing of CC elimination, and whether introducing nonavalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine would accelerate elimination timing and be cost-effective. We used a multi-modeling approach that captured HPV transmission and cervical carcinogenesis to estimate the CC incidence associated with six past and future CC prevention policy decisions compared with a pre-vaccination scenario involving 3-yearly cytology-based screening. Scenarios examined the introduction of routine HPV vaccination of 12-year-old girls with quadrivalent vaccine in 2009, a temporary catch-up program for females aged up to 26 years in 2016-2018 with bivalent vaccine, the universal switch to bivalent vaccine in 2017, expansion to include 12-year-old boys in 2018, the switch from cytology- to HPV-based screening for women aged 34-69 in 2020, and the potential switch to nonavalent vaccine in 2021. Introducing routine female vaccination in 2009 enabled elimination to be achieved by 2056 and prevented 17,300 cases. Cumulatively, subsequent policy decisions accelerated elimination to 2039. According to our modeling assumptions, switching to the nonavalent vaccine would not be considered 'good value for money' at relevant cost-effectiveness thresholds in Norway unless the incremental cost was $19 per dose or less (range: $17-24) compared to the bivalent vaccine. CC control policies implemented over the last decade in Norway may have accelerated the timeframe to elimination by more than 17 years and prevented over 23,800 cases by 2110.

Impact of disruptions and recovery for established cervical screening programs across a range of high-income country program designs, using COVID-19 as an example: A modelled analysis.

COVID-19 has disrupted cervical screening in several countries, due to a range of policy-, health-service and participant-related factors. Using three well-established models of cervical cancer natural history adapted to simulate screening across four countries, we compared the impact of a range of standardised screening disruption scenarios in four countries that vary in their cervical cancer prevention programs. All scenarios assumed a 6- or 12-month disruption followed by a rapid catch-up of missed screens. Cervical screening disruptions could increase cervical cancer cases by up to 5-6%. In all settings, more than 60% of the excess cancer burden due to disruptions are likely to have occurred in women aged less than 50 years in 2020, including settings where women in their 30s have previously been offered HPV vaccination. Approximately 15-30% of cancers predicted to result from disruptions could be prevented by maintaining colposcopy and precancer treatment services during any disruption period. Disruptions to primary screening had greater adverse effects in situations where women due to attend for screening in 2020 had cytology (vs. HPV) as their previous primary test. Rapid catch-up would dramatically increase demand for HPV tests in 2021, which it may not be feasible to meet because of competing demands on the testing machines and reagents due to COVID tests. These findings can inform future prioritisation strategies for catch-up that balance potential constraints on resourcing with clinical need.

Historical and projected hysterectomy rates in the USA: Implications for future observed cervical cancer rates and evaluating prevention interventions.

BACKGROUND: SEER-reported cervical cancer incidence rates reflect the total female population including women no longer at risk due to hysterectomy. Hysterectomy rates have been declining in the United States as alternative treatments have become available, which could result in an apparent increase in SEER-reported cervical cancer rates. We aimed to obtain nationally representative historical data on hysterectomy rates in USA, use trends analysis to project rates back to 1935 and forward to 2035, and then predict the impact of changing hysterectomy rates on SEER-reported cervical cancer rates. METHODS: We performed a systematic search of Medline, Embase, Premedline, Cochrane Central databases and extracted nationally-representative hysterectomy incidence data from 1965 to 2009, including data on the number of cervix-preserving (subtotal) procedures. We then projected rates back to 1935, and forward to 2035 based on trends from joinpoint regression. These rates were then used to estimate hysterectomy prevalence out to 2035, and then to predict the impact of changing hysterectomy rates on SEER-reported cervical cancer rates to 2035. We examined alternative assumptions regarding projected hysterectomy incidence rates out to 2035, including a scenario in which rates decline no further from 2009 rates, and a scenario where rates decline at twice the baseline rate. RESULTS: Estimated age-standardized hysterectomy incidence increased from 2.4 to 10.6 per 1000 women between 1935 and 1975. Thereafter, rates are predicted to fall to 3.9 per 1000 by 2035. Subtotal hysterectomy procedures declined from being the predominant method in 1935 to less than 12% of procedures from 1970 onwards. Consequently, holding all else constant, an increase in SEER-reported age-standardized cervical cancer incidence rates (ages 0-85+) of 9% is expected from 2009 to 2035. The predictions were minimally impacted by alternative scenarios for future hysterectomy rates. CONCLUSIONS: Declining hysterectomy rates have implications for the interpretation of SEER-reported cervical cancer rates. A background increase in cervical cancer rates due to decreasing population hysterectomy exposure may partially offset expected decreases from recent cervical screening changes recommended by the US Preventive Services Task Force. Evaluations of new cervical cancer prevention opportunities should consider the background impact of historical and projected hysterectomy rates.

Scale-up of radiotherapy for cervical cancer in the era of human papillomavirus vaccination in low-income and middle-income countries: a model-based analysis of need and economic impact.

BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy is standard of care for cervical cancer, but major global gaps in access exist, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries. We modelled the health and economic benefits of a 20-year radiotherapy scale-up to estimate the long-term demand for treatment in the context of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination. METHODS: We applied the Global Task Force on Radiotherapy for Cancer Control investment framework to model the health and economic benefits of scaling up external-beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy for cervical cancer in upper-middle-income, lower-middle-income, and low-income countries between 2015 and 2035. We estimated the unique costs of external-beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy and included a specific valuation of women's caregiving contributions. Model outcomes life-years gained and the human capital and full income net present value of investment. We estimated the effects of stage at diagnosis, radiotherapy delivery system, and simultaneous HPV vaccination (75% coverage) up to a time horizon set at 2072. FINDINGS: For the period from 2015 to 2035, we estimated that 9·4 million women in low-income and middle-income countries required treatment with external-beam radiotherapy, of which 7·0 million also required treatment with brachytherapy. Incremental scale-up of radiotherapy in these countries from 2015 to meet optimal radiotherapy demand by 2035 yielded 11·4 million life-years gained, $59·3 billion in human capital net present value (-$1·5 billion in low-income, $19·9 billion in lower-middle-income, and $40·9 billion in upper-middle-income countries), and $151·5 billion in full income net present value ($1·5 billion in low-income countries, $53·6 billion in lower-middle-income countries, and $96·4 billion in upper-middle-income countries). Benefits increased with advanced stage of cervical cancer and more efficient scale up of radiotherapy. Bivalent HPV vaccination of 12-year-old girls resulted in a 3·9% reduction in incident cases from 2015-2035. By 2072, when the first vaccinated cohort of girls reaches 70 years of age, vaccination yielded a 22·9% reduction in cervical cancer incidence, with 38·4 million requiring external-beam radiotherapy and 28·8 million requiring brachytherapy. INTERPRETATION: Effective cervical cancer control requires a comprehensive strategy. Even with HPV vaccination, radiotherapy treatment scale-up remains essential and produces large health benefits and a strong return on investment to countries at different levels of development. FUNDING: None.

The healthcare costs of treating human papillomavirus-related cancers in Norway.

BACKGROUND: Public health efforts to prevent human papillomavirus (HPV)-related cancers include HPV vaccination and cervical cancer screening. We quantified the annual healthcare cost of six HPV-related cancers in order to provide inputs in cost-effectiveness analyses and quantify the potential economic savings from prevention of HPV-related cancers in Norway. METHODS: Using individual patient-level data from three unlinked population-based registries, we estimated the mean healthcare costs 1) annually across all phases of disease, 2) during the first 3 years of care following diagnosis, and 3) for the last 12 months of life for patients diagnosed with an HPV-related cancer. We included episodes of care related to primary care physicians, specialist care (private specialists and hospital-based care and prescriptions), and prescription drugs redeemed at pharmacies outside hospitals between 2012 and 2014. We valued costs (2014 €1.00 = NOK 8.357) based on diagnosis-related groups (DRG), patient copayments, reimbursement fees and pharmacy retail prices. RESULTS: In 2014, the total healthcare cost of HPV-related cancers amounted to €39.8 million, of which specialist care accounted for more than 99% of the total cost. The annual maximum economic burden potentially averted due to HPV vaccination will be lower for vulvar, penile and vaginal cancer (i.e., €984,620, €762,964 and €374,857, respectively) than for cervical, anal and oropharyngeal cancers (i.e., €17.2 million, €6.7 million and €4.6 million, respectively). Over the first three years of treatment following cancer diagnosis, patients diagnosed with oropharyngeal cancer incurred the highest total cost per patient (i.e. €49,774), while penile cancer had the lowest total cost per patient (i.e. €18,350). In general, costs were highest the first year following diagnosis and then declined; however, costs increased rapidly again towards end of life for patients who did not survive. CONCLUSION: HPV-related cancers constitute a considerable economic burden to the Norwegian healthcare system. As the proportion of HPV-vaccinated individuals increase and secondary prevention approaches advance, this study highlights the potential economic burden avoided by preventing these cancers.

Impact of human papillomavirus vaccination on the clinical meaning of cervical screening results.

Women previously vaccinated against human papillomavirus (HPV) type 16 and 18 are now reaching the age (21 years) at which cervical-cancer screening is recommended in the U.S. The impact of HPV vaccination on risks of cervical precancer following a positive and negative screen among women aged 21-24 years who just started routine cervical screening are not well described. Therefore, three-year absolute and relative (RR) cumulative risks of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more severe diagnoses (≥CIN2) and grade 3 or more severe diagnoses (≥CIN3) were estimated for women undergoing cervical screening at Kaiser Permanente Northern California. Risks were estimated in women aged 21-24 years (n = 75,008) undergoing cervical screening since late 2006, 6 months after HPV vaccination became available; women were categorized vaccinated at ages <18, 18-20, and 21-24 years and compared to those who were unvaccinated. Three-year risks were estimated for normal, low-grade, and high-grade cytology results. Three-year risks of ≥CIN2 and ≥CIN3 for unvaccinated women following low-grade cytology were 10.89% for and 3.70%, respectively. By comparison, Three-year risks of ≥CIN2 and ≥CIN3 were 5.26% (RR = 0.48, 95%CI = 0.24-0.99) and 0.99% (RR = 0.27, 95%CI = 0.06-1.13), respectively, for women vaccinated under the age of 18 years. Three-year ≥CIN2 and ≥CIN3 risks were lower for those HPV vaccinated at younger age for any screening result (ptrend ≤ 0.01 for all comparisons). These data support initiating cervical screening at an older age or changing the management of a low-grade cytology result in women aged 21-24 years who were vaccinated against HPV younger than age of 18 years.

Inefficiencies of over-screening and under-screening for cervical cancer prevention in the U.S.

There is limited information on the cost-inefficiencies of non-adherence to recommended cervical cancer screening or the potential value for improving non-adherence. We estimated the incremental value of adhering to recommended screening every three years with cytology, using a disease simulation model that integrated real-world screening practice data from New Mexico. The amount that can be spent to improve adherence was estimated by calculating the incremental net monetary benefit (INMB) under scenarios of Current Practice (assuming a population of mixed adherence) and Uniformly Non-Adherent populations with imperfect or perfect adherence to follow-up of screen-positive women. Getting unscreened women screened every three years by cytology was a better value than increasing screening in the under-screened or reducing screening in the over-screened. For example, INMBs were $3998 for screening previously unscreened women versus $136 for eliminating annual screening at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Strategies to reach unscreened women are potentially high-value investments.