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.

An Insight Into Cervical Cancer Screening and Treatment Capacity in Sub Saharan Africa.

OBJECTIVE: Approximately 85% of cervical cancer cases and deaths occur in resource-constrained countries where best practices for prevention, particularly for women with HIV infection, still need to be developed. The aim of this study was to assess cervical cancer prevention capacity in select HIV clinics located in resource-constrained countries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of sub-Saharan African sites of 4 National Institutes of Health-funded HIV/AIDS networks was conducted. Sites were surveyed on the availability of cervical cancer screening and treatment among women with HIV infection and without HIV infection. Descriptive statistics and χ or Fisher exact test were used as appropriate. RESULTS: Fifty-one (65%) of 78 sites responded. Access to cervical cancer screening was reported by 49 sites (96%). Of these sites, 39 (80%) performed screening on-site. Central African sites were less likely to have screening on-site (p = .02) versus other areas. Visual inspection with acetic acid and Pap testing were the most commonly available on-site screening methods at 31 (79%) and 26 (67%) sites, respectively. High-risk HPV testing was available at 29% of sites with visual inspection with acetic acid and 50% of sites with Pap testing. Cryotherapy and radical hysterectomy were the most commonly available on-site treatment methods for premalignant and malignant lesions at 29 (74%) and 18 (46%) sites, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Despite limited resources, most sites surveyed had the capacity to perform cervical cancer screening and treatment. The existing infrastructure of HIV clinical and research sites may provide the ideal framework for scale-up of cervical cancer prevention in resource-constrained countries with a high burden of cervical dysplasia.