Socio-cultural and financial issues against breast cancer screening behaviour among eligible Indian women: evidence for action.

PURPOSE: Breast cancer, a common malignancy in Indian women, is preventable and curable upon early diagnosis. Screening is the best control strategy against breast cancer, but its uptake is low in India despite dedicated strategies and programmes. We explored the impact of socio-cultural and financial issues on the uptake of breast cancer screening behaviour among Indian women. METHODS: Breast cancer screening-uptake and relevant social, cultural, and financial data obtained from the National Family Health Survey (NFHS) round 5 were used for analysis. We studied 399,039 eligible females to assess their breast cancer screening behavior and determine the impact of socio-cultural and financial issues on such behavior using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Most participants were 30-34-year-old (27.8%), educated to the secondary level (38.0%), and 81.5% had bank accounts. A third (35.0%) had health insurance, and anaemia was the most common comorbidity (56.1%). Less than 1.0% had undergone breast cancer screening. Higher age, education, urban residence, employment, less privileged social class, and access to the Internet and mass media were predictors of positive screening-uptake behavior (p < 0.05). Mothers of larger number of children, tobacco- and alcohol-users, the richer and having health insurance had negative uptake behavior (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: A clear impact of socio-cultural and financial factors on breast cancer screening behavior is evident among Indian women. Therefore, apart from the ongoing health system strengthening efforts, our findings call for targeted interventions against prevailing misconceptions and taboos along with economic and social empowerment of women for the holistic success of India's cancer screening strategy.

Wide Area Transepithelial Sampling with Computer-Assisted Analysis (WATS3D) Is Cost-Effective in Barrett's Esophagus Screening.

BACKGROUND: Wide area transepithelial sampling with three-dimensional computer-assisted analysis (WATS3D) is an adjunct to the standard random 4-quadrant forceps biopsies (FB, "Seattle protocol") that significantly increases the detection of Barrett's esophagus (BE) and associated neoplasia in patients undergoing screening or surveillance. AIMS: To examine the cost-effectiveness of adding WATS3D to the Seattle protocol in screening patients for BE. METHODS: A decision analytic model was used to compare the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of two alternative BE screening strategies in chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease patients: FB with and without WATS3D. The reference case was a 60-year-old white male with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Effectiveness was measured by the number needed to screen to avert one cancer and one cancer-related death, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Cost was measured in 2019 US$, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was measured in $/QALY using thresholds for cost-effectiveness of $100,000/QALY and $150,000/QALY. Cost was measured in 2019 US$. Cost and QALYs were discounted at 3% per year. RESULTS: Between 320 and 337 people would need to be screened with WATS3D in addition to FB to avert one additional cancer, and 328-367 people to avert one cancer-related death. Screening with WATS3D costs an additional $1219 and produced an additional 0.017 QALYs, for an ICER of $71,395/QALY. All one-way sensitivity analyses resulted in ICERs under $84,000/QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Screening for BE in 60-year-old white male GERD patients is more cost-effective when WATS3D is used adjunctively to the Seattle protocol than with the Seattle protocol alone.

Economic Implications of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance and Treatment: A Guide for Clinicians.

The incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is increasing worldwide, with significant morbidity and associated costs. Treatment allocation depends on the stage of diagnosis; however, resource utilization can be significant across all stages. We aimed to summarize the available data on the cost effectiveness of surveillance of and treatments for HCC in the context of current treatment guidelines. We performed a focused review of studies investigating the economic burden and cost effectiveness of HCC surveillance treatment modalities published between January 2000 and January 2019. The overall economic burden of HCC is increasing in the USA and in several countries worldwide due to its rising incidence and the proliferation of therapies. Liver transplantation is a cost-effective strategy for early-stage HCC treatment in selected patients. In settings where liver transplantation is not available or in patients awaiting transplant, ablative or locoregional therapies are cost effective with increases in quality-adjusted life-years. First-line therapy with sorafenib for advanced stage HCC is cost effective in the treatment of compensated cirrhosis. The cost effectiveness of recently approved systemic therapies for advanced HCC require further investigation. Existing studies have shown that guideline-recommended surveillance techniques and several available therapies for the treatment of HCC are cost effective; however, there are limitations in the literature, including reliance on suboptimal modeling with incomplete/simplified model structure or inadequate inputs. With increasing therapeutic options in patients with HCC, understanding their relative value is critical in designing HCC treatment algorithms.

The case for philanthropic investment to increase colorectal cancer screening rates: A novel paradigm to address a public health challenge.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains a leading cause of cancer-related death despite being highly preventable. Efforts to increase participation in CRC screening have not met national goals. We developed a novel approach: building a business case for philanthropic investment in CRC screening. METHODS: A taskforce representing the public health community, professional societies, charitable foundations, academia, and industry was assembled to: (a) quantify the impact of improving CRC screening rates; (b) identify barriers to screening; (c) estimate the "activation cost" to overcome barriers and screen one additional person; (d) develop a holistic business case that is attractive to philanthropists; and (e) launch a demonstration project. RESULTS: We estimated that of 50 600 CRC deaths annually in the US, 55% occur in 50- to 85-year-olds and are potentially addressable by improvements in CRC screening. Barriers to screening were identified in all patient journey phases, including lack of awareness or insurance and logistical challenges in the pre-physician phase. The cost to activate one person to undergo screening was $25-175. This translated into a cost of $6000-36 000 per CRC death averted by philanthropic investment. Based on this work, the Colorectal Cancer Alliance launched the effort "March Forth" to prevent 100 000 CRC deaths in the US over 10 years, with the first pilot in Philadelphia. CONCLUSIONS: A holistic business plan can attract philanthropy to promote CRC screening. A simple message of "You can save a life from CRC with a $25 000 donation" can motivate demonstration projects in regions with high CRC rates and low screening participation.

Financial Incentives to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake and Decrease Disparities: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Colorectal cancer screening rates are suboptimal, particularly among sociodemographically disadvantaged groups. Objective: To examine whether guaranteed money or probabilistic lottery financial incentives conditional on completion of colorectal cancer screening increase screening uptake, particularly among groups with lower screening rates. Design, Setting, and Participants: This parallel, 3-arm randomized clinical trial was conducted from March 13, 2017, through April 12, 2018, at 21 medical centers in an integrated health care system in western Washington. A total of 838 age-eligible patients overdue for colorectal cancer screening who completed a questionnaire that confirmed eligibility and included sociodemographic and psychosocial questions were enrolled. Interventions: Interventions were (1) mail only (n = 284; up to 3 mailings that included information on the importance of colorectal cancer screening and screening test choices, a fecal immunochemical test [FIT], and a reminder letter if necessary), (2) mail and monetary (n = 270; mailings plus guaranteed $10 on screening completion), or (3) mail and lottery (n = 284; mailings plus a 1 in 10 chance of receiving $50 on screening completion). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was completion of any colorectal cancer screening within 6 months of randomization. Secondary outcomes were FIT or colonoscopy completion within 6 months of randomization. Intervention effects were compared across sociodemographic subgroups and self-reported psychosocial measures. Results: A total of 838 participants (mean [SD] age, 59.7 [7.2] years; 546 [65.2%] female; 433 [52.2%] white race and 101 [12.1%] Hispanic ethnicity) were included in the study. Completion of any colorectal screening was not significantly higher for the mail and monetary group (207 of 270 [76.7%]) or the mail and lottery group (212 of 284 [74.6%]) than for the mail only group (203 of 284 [71.5%]) (P = .11). For FIT completion, interventions had a statistically significant effect (P = .04), with a net increase of 7.7% (95% CI, 0.3%-15.1%) in the mail and monetary group and 7.1% (95% CI, -0.2% to 14.3%) in the mail and lottery group compared with the mail only group. For patients with Medicaid insurance, the net increase compared with mail only in FIT completion for the mail and monetary or the mail and lottery group was 37.7% (95% CI, 11.0%-64.3%) (34.2% for the mail and monetary group and 40.4% for the mail and lottery group) compared with a net increase of only 5.6% (95% CI, -0.9% to 12.2%) among those not Medicaid insured (test for interaction P = .03). Conclusions and Relevance: Financial incentives increased FIT uptake but not overall colorectal cancer screening. Financial incentives may decrease screening disparities among some sociodemographically disadvantaged groups. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00697047.

Awardee-specific economic costs of providing cancer screening and health promotional services to medically underserved women eligible in the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate awardee-specific costs of delivering breast and cervical cancer screening services in their jurisdiction and to assess potential variation in the cost of key activities across awardees. METHODS: We developed the cost assessment tool to collect resource use and cost data from the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program awardees for 3 years between 2006 and 2010 and generated activity-based cost estimates. We estimated awardee-specific cost per woman served for all activities, clinical screening delivery services, screening promotion interventions, and overarching program support activities. RESULTS: The total cost per woman served by the awardees varied greatly from $205 (10th percentile) to $499 (90th percentile). Differences in the average (median) cost per person served for clinical services, health promotion interventions, and overarching support activities ranged from $51 to $125. CONCLUSIONS: The cost per woman served varied across awardee and likely reflected underlying differences across awardees in terms of screening infrastructure, population served, and barriers to screening uptake. Collecting information on contextual factors at the awardee, health system, provider, and individual levels may assist in understanding this variation in cost.

The combined impact of implementing HPV immunisation and primary HPV screening in New Zealand: Transitional and long-term benefits, costs and resource utilisation implications.

BACKGROUND: In response to emergent evidence, many countries are transitioning from cytology-based to HPV screening. We evaluated the impact of an upcoming transition on health outcomes and resource utilisation in New Zealand. METHODS: An extensively validated model of HPV transmission, vaccination, natural history and cervical screening ('Policy1-Cervix') was utilised to simulate a transition from three-yearly cytology for women 20-69 years to five-yearly HPV screening with 16/18 genotyping for women 25-69 years, accounting for population growth and the impact of HPV immunisation. Cervical cancer rates, resources use (test volumes), costs, and test positivity rates from 2015 to 2035 were estimated. FINDINGS: By 2035, the transition to HPV screening will result in declines in cervical cancer incidence and mortality rates by 32% and 25%, respectively, compared to 2018. A potentially detectable 5% increase in cervical cancer incidence due to earlier detection is predicted for the year of transition. Annual numbers of women screened will fluctuate with the five-year screening interval. Cytology volumes will reduce by over 80% but colposcopy volumes will be similar to pre-transition rates, and program costs will be reduced by 16%. A 9% HPV test positivity rate is expected in the first round of HPV screening (2019-2023), with 2.7% of women referred for colposcopy. Transitioning from cytology to primary HPV cervical screening could avert 149 cancer cases and 45 deaths by 2035. CONCLUSION: Primary HPV screening and vaccination will reduce cervical cancer and resources use. A small transient apparent increase of invasive cancer rates due to earlier detection may be detectable at the population level, reflecting the introduction of a more sensitive screening test. These findings can be used to inform health services planning and public communications surrounding program implementation.

Balancing Adherence and Expense: The Cost-Effectiveness of Two-Sample vs One-Sample Fecal Immunochemical Test.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) causes more than 50,000 deaths each year in the United States but early detection through screening yields survival gains; those diagnosed with early stage disease have a 5-year survival greater than 90%, compared to 12% for those diagnosed with late stage disease. Using data from a large integrated health system, this study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), a common CRC screening tool. A probabilistic decision-analytic model was used to examine the costs and outcomes of positive test results from a 1-FIT regimen compared with a 2-FIT regimen. The authors compared 5 diagnostic cutoffs of hemoglobin concentration for each test (for a total of 10 screening options). The principal outcome from the analysis was the cost per additional advanced neoplasia (AN) detected. The authors also estimated the number of cancers detected and life-years gained from detecting AN. The following costs were included: program management of the screening program, patient identification, FIT kits and their processing, and diagnostic colonoscopy following a positive FIT. Per-person costs ranged from $33 (1-FIT at 150ng/ml) to $92 (2-FIT at 50ng/ml) across screening options. Depending on willingness to pay, the 1-FIT 50 ng/ml and the 2-FIT 50 ng/ml are the dominant strategies with cost-effectiveness of $11,198 and $28,389, respectively, for an additional AN detected. The estimates of cancers avoided per 1000 screens ranged from 1.46 to 4.86, depending on the strategy and the assumptions of AN to cancer progression.

Financial Analysis of Free Lung Cancer Screening Program Shows Profitability Using Broader NCCN Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) chest scans in high-risk populations has been established as an effective measure of preventive medicine by the National Lung Screening Trial. However, the sustainability of funding a program is still controversial. We present a 2.5-year profitability analysis of our screening program by using the broader National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria. METHODS: Retrospective chart review was performed on the initial 2.5-year data set of a free LDCT chest scan program that targeted the underserved Southeastern United States. Patients were selected by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network high-risk criteria, screening twice as many patients compared with Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services criteria. LDCT scans were performed during the off-service hours of our positron emission tomography CT scanner. Analysis of fiscal years 2015 to 2017 was done to evaluate indirect cost, direct cost, and adjusted net margin per case after factoring downstream revenue from positive scans and other findings. RESULTS: A total of 705 scans were performed with 418 patients referred for subsequent procedures or specialist evaluations. The mean overhead cost over total cost was 42.3%. The adjusted net margin per case was -$212 in the first year but turned positive to $177 in the third fiscal year. The total break-even point of adjusted net margin was between 6% and 7% of indirect cost as a function of charges. Of the 60 new patients introduced to the hospital system, a gross margin per case of $211 was found. CONCLUSIONS: Free lung cancer screening can demonstrate profitability from downstream revenue with a lag time of 2 years.

A blueprint for the primary prevention of cancer: Targeting established, modifiable risk factors.

In the United States, it is estimated that more than 1.7 million people will be diagnosed with cancer, and more than 600,000 will die of the disease in 2018. The financial costs associated with cancer risk factors and cancer care are enormous. To substantially reduce both the number of individuals diagnosed with and dying from cancer and the costs associated with cancer each year in the United States, government and industry and the public health, medical, and scientific communities must work together to develop, invest in, and implement comprehensive cancer control goals and strategies at the national level and expand ongoing initiatives at the state and local levels. This report is the second in a series of articles in this journal that, together, describe trends in cancer rates and the scientific evidence on cancer prevention, early detection, treatment, and survivorship to inform the identification of priorities for a comprehensive cancer control plan. Herein, we focus on existing evidence about established, modifiable risk factors for cancer, including prevalence estimates and the cancer burden due to each risk factor in the United States, and established primary prevention recommendations and interventions to reduce exposure to each risk factor.

A conceptual framework and metrics for evaluating multicomponent interventions to increase colorectal cancer screening within an organized screening program.

BACKGROUND: Multicomponent, evidence-based interventions are viewed increasingly as essential for increasing the use of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening to meet national targets. Multicomponent interventions involve complex care pathways and interactions across multiple levels, including the individual, health system, and community. METHODS: The authors developed a framework and identified metrics and data elements to evaluate the implementation processes, effectiveness, and cost effectiveness of multicomponent interventions used in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Colorectal Cancer Control Program. RESULTS: Process measures to evaluate the implementation of interventions to increase community and patient demand for CRC screening, increase patient access, and increase provider delivery of services are presented. In addition, performance measures are identified to assess implementation processes along the continuum of care for screening, diagnosis, and treatment. Series of intermediate and long-term outcome and cost measures also are presented to evaluate the impact of the interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the effectiveness of multicomponent, evidence-based interventions and identifying successful approaches that can be replicated in other settings are essential to increase screening and reduce CRC burden. The use of common framework, data elements, and evaluation methods will allow the performance of comparative assessments of the interventions implemented across CRCCP sites to identify best practices for increasing colorectal screening, particularly among underserved populations, to reduce disparities in CRC incidence and mortality.

Early Results From the Implementation of a Lung Cancer Screening Program: The Beaumont Health System Experience.

PURPOSE: In 2010, a new study published by the National Lung Screening Trial showed a 20% reduction in mortality for those patients screened with low-dose computed topography (CT) versus x-ray. Recently, the Centers of Medicare and Medicaid have agreed to cover this service for those patients who meet the screening criteria. We compare the outcomes and costs associated with developing and implementing a lung cancer screening program. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One thousand sixty-five patients were screened from January 2014 to December 2014. These patients were screened on a low-dose CT screening protocol throughout Beaumont Health System. The American College of Radiology Lung Imaging Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) were used to assign the score for each patient. Screening eligibility criteria were based on the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. Downstream activity and revenue was determined after initial low-dose CT screening. RESULTS: At 1 year, 20 patients (1.6%) were diagnosed with lung cancer and another 15 patients were diagnosed with another form of cancer after screening. The median age, packs per day, and pack years smoked for all patients was 63, 1.0, and 39.0 years, respectively. Lung-RADS scores for all patients was 18% (1), 24.1% (2), 6.3% (3), and 5.4% (4). The net revenue for all activity after screening was $3.2 million. CONCLUSIONS: The establishment of a low-dose CT lung cancer screening program improved the ability to screen patients as demonstrated by the number of patients screened and those diagnosed with a malignancy. These findings were also consistent with the findings from the National Lung Screening Trial study.

[New strategies for the prevention and control of cervical cancer in Chile.] / Nuevas estrategias de prevención y control de cáncer de cuello uterino en Chile.

OBJECTIVE: To discuss cervical cancer (CC), Human PapillomaVirus (HPV),CC control program and propose alternatives for Chile. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed the national program of CC 1966-2015 and the clinical CC guideline 2015-2020;HPV prevalence in women and in cases of CC; HPV infection and serology; the self-vaginal sample; the accuracy and cost-effectiveness of screening with HPV versus Papanicolaou,and triage options among HPV-AR positives. RESULTS: 600 women die of CC each year in Chile, mainly from low resources. Papanicolaou coverage is <70%; Papanicolaou sensitivity is much lowerthan HPV test.Change from Papanicolaou to HPV test is cost-effective. Since 2015, girls under 13 have been vaccinated against HPV. CONCLUSIONS: .There are the technical and economic conditions for a substantial improvement of CC in Chile: replacement of the Papanicolaou by HPV; screening every five years, with the option of self-sampling, and triage based on HPV 16/18 or Papanicolaou typing.

OBJETIVO: Discutir el cáncer cervicouterino (CC), el virus del papiloma humano (VPH),el programa de control del CC y proponer alternativas para Chile. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: Se analiza el programa nacional del CC 1966-2015 y la guía clínica 2015-2020, la prevalencia deVPH en mujeres y en casos de CC; la infección y serología deVPH; la autotoma; la precisión y rentabilidad del tamizaje con VPH contra el Papanicolaou y las opciones de triaje enVPH AR positivas. RESULTADOS: En Chile mueren 600 mujeres (principalmente de bajos recursos) al año por CC. La cobertura del Papanicolaou es <70%, sensibilidad muy inferior al test de VPH, por lo que el cambio esrentable.Desde 2015 se vacuna contraVPH a niñas menores de 13 años. CONCLUSIONES: Las condiciones técnicas y económicas existen en Chile para lograr una mejoría sustancial del CC:se sugiere el reemplazo del Papanicolaou por el examen deVPH;tamizaje cada cinco años con opción de autotoma; triaje con base en la tipificación deVPH 16/18 o Papanicolaou.

Value of a short-term imaging follow-up after a benign result in a one-stop breast unit: Is it still useful?

INTRODUCTION: A short-term radiologic follow-up after a benign breast biopsy or fine needle aspiration (FNA) is recommended in many guidelines. However, the current trend is to reduce imaging investigations, radiation dose and costs. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the cancer detection rate at short-term follow-up and to estimate its cost. METHODS: We retrospectively assessed all consecutive patients referred to our 'one-stop' breast unit between 2004 and 2012, with a benign histological or cytological result and at least one short-term follow-up within 3-12 months after the initial diagnosis. We evaluated the number of cancers detected, as well as the mean cost to detect each cancer and per patient. RESULTS: About 1366 patients were eligible for this study. Ten patients were diagnosed with cancers (0.73%) at short-term follow-up; six of 10 were low-grade tumours or ductal carcinoma in situ. The cost for detecting one cancer was 19,043€, with mean cost per patient of 139€. CONCLUSION: The cancer detection rate at short-term follow-up after benign biopsy or FNA was low and was similar to that of most national screening programs. The cost of cancer detection appeared high, considering that most cancers were indolent. This suggests that radiologic follow-up could reasonably be carried out at a later point in time.

A Multigene Test Could Cost-Effectively Help Extend Life Expectancy for Women at Risk of Hereditary Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommends that women who carry gene variants that confer substantial risk for breast cancer consider risk-reduction strategies, that is, enhanced surveillance (breast magnetic resonance imaging and mammography) or prophylactic surgery. Pathogenic variants can be detected in women with a family history of breast or ovarian cancer syndromes by multigene panel testing. OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether using a seven-gene test to identify women who should consider risk-reduction strategies could cost-effectively increase life expectancy. METHODS: We estimated effectiveness and lifetime costs from a payer perspective for two strategies in two hypothetical cohorts of women (40-year-old and 50-year-old cohorts) who meet the National Comprehensive Cancer Network-defined family history criteria for multigene testing. The two strategies were the usual test strategy for variants in BRCA1 and BRCA2 and the seven-gene test strategy for variants in BRCA1, BRCA2, TP53, PTEN, CDH1, STK11, and PALB2. Women found to have a pathogenic variant were assumed to undergo either prophylactic surgery or enhanced surveillance. RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the seven-gene test strategy compared with the BRCA1/2 test strategy was $42,067 per life-year gained or $69,920 per quality-adjusted life-year gained for the 50-year-old cohort and $23,734 per life-year gained or $48,328 per quality-adjusted life-year gained for the 40-year-old cohort. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the seven-gene test strategy cost less than $100,000 per life-year gained in 95.7% of the trials for the 50-year-old cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Testing seven breast cancer-associated genes, followed by risk-reduction management, could cost-effectively improve life expectancy for women at risk of hereditary breast cancer.

Free Lung Cancer Screening Trends Toward a Twofold Increase in Lung Cancer Prevalence in the Underserved Southeastern United States.

OBJECTIVES: The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) reported that the prevalence of lung cancer in individuals at high risk for the disease is 1%, and that screening these individuals using low-dose helical computed tomography of the chest saves lives. To increase screening accessibility in the underserved southeastern United States, we developed a free lung screening program, modeled after the Lahey Hospital & Medical Center Free Lung Screening Program, for individuals meeting National Comprehensive Cancer Network high-risk criteria. METHODS: This was a chart review of 264 participants screened in the first year of our program. Participants were divided into categories based on the Lung Imaging Reporting and Diagnostic System. Categories three and four were considered positive findings, with demographic and disease criteria collected on these patients. RESULTS: Of 264 participants screened, 28 (10.6%) were Lung Imaging Reporting and Diagnostic System category four, 23 (8.7%) were category three, 78 (29.5%) were category two, and 135 (51.1%) were category one. Eight of the 264 participants (3.0%) had lung cancer, with 75% detected in early stages. CONCLUSIONS: We found a lung cancer prevalence in our high-risk screened population of 3.0% (8 of 264). After adjusting for patients who were symptomatic on clinical evaluation, we report a prevalence of cancer at 2.2% compared with 1.1% in the first year of the National Lung Screening Trial and a prevalence of 1.9% versus 0.6% compared with the National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria in the first 10 months at Lahey Hospital & Medical Center. This study justifies low-dose helical computed tomography screening in high-risk regions because lung cancer treatment before symptoms appear is more effective, and the prevalence of disease in the detectable preclinical phase is high.

Promoting colorectal cancer screening through a new model of delivering rural primary care in the USA: a qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the known benefits of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, rural areas have consistently reported lower screening rates than their urban counterparts. Alternative healthcare delivery models, such as accountable care organizations (ACOs), have the potential to increase CRC rates through collaboration among healthcare providers with the aim of improving quality and decreasing cost. However, researchers have not sufficiently explored how this innovative model could influence the promotion of cancer screening. The purpose of the study was to explore the mechanism of how CRC screening can be promoted in ACO-participating rural primary care clinics. METHODS: The study collected qualitative data from in-depth interviews with 21 healthcare professionals employed in ACO-participating primary care clinics in rural Nebraska. Participants were asked about their views on opportunities and challenges to promote CRC screening in an ACO context. Data were analyzed using a grounded theory approach. RESULTS: The study found that the new healthcare delivery model can offer opportunities to promote cancer screening in rural areas through enhanced electronic health record use, information sharing and collaborative learning within ACO networks, use of standardized quality measures and performance feedback, a shift to preventive/comprehensive care, adoption of team-based care, and empowered care coordinators. The perceived challenges were found in financial instability, increased staff workload, lack of provider training/education, and lack of resources in rural areas. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that the innovative care delivery model, ACO, could provide a well-designed platform for promoting CRC screening in rural areas, if sustainable resources (eg finance, health providers, and education) are provided. This study provides 'practical' information to identify effective and sustainable intervention programs to promote preventive screening. Further efforts are needed to facilitate delivery system reforms in rural primary care, such as improving performance evaluation measures and methods.

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.

Cost-Effectiveness of Primary HPV Testing, Cytology and Co-testing as Cervical Cancer Screening for Women Above Age 30 Years.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer screening guidelines for women aged ≥30 years allow for co-testing or primary cytology testing. Our objective was to determine the test characteristics and costs associated with Cytology, HPV and Co-testing screening strategies. MAIN METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of women undergoing cervical cancer screening with both cytology and HPV (Hybrid Capture 2) testing from 2004 to 2010 in an integrated health system. The electronic health record was used to identify women aged ≥30 years who had co-testing. Unsatisfactory or unavailable test results and incorrectly ordered tests were excluded. The main outcome was biopsy-proven cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or higher (CIN3+). KEY RESULTS: The final cohort consisted of 99,549 women. Subjects were mostly white (78.4 %), married (70.7 %), never smokers (61.3 %) and with private insurance (86.1 %). Overall, 5121 (5.1 %) tested positive for HPV and 6115 (6.1 %) had cytology ≥ ASCUS; 1681 had both and underwent colposcopy and 310 (0.3 %) had CIN3+. Sensitivity for CIN3+ was 91.9 % for Primary Cytology, 99.4 % for Co-testing, and 94.8 % for Primary HPV; specificity was 97.3 % for Co-testing and Primary Cytology and 97.9 % for Primary HPV. Over a 3-year screening interval, Primary HPV detected more cases of CIN3+ and was less expensive than Primary Cytology. Co-testing detected 14 more cases of CIN3+ than Primary HPV, but required an additional 100,277 cytology tests and 566 colposcopies at an added cost of $2.38 million, or $170,096 per additional case detected. CONCLUSIONS: Primary HPV was more effective and less expensive than Primary Cytology. Primary HPV screening appears to represent a cost-effective alternative to Co-testing.

Modeling the Cost-Effectiveness of Alternative Upper Age Limits for Breast Cancer Screening in England and Wales.

BACKGROUND: Currently in the United Kingdom, the National Health Service (NHS) Breast Screening Programme invites all women for triennial mammography between the ages of 47 and 73 years (the extension to 47-50 and 70-73 years is currently examined as part of a randomized controlled trial). The benefits and harms of screening in women 70 years and older, however, are less well documented. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to examine whether extending screening to women older than 70 years would represent a cost-effective use of NHS resources and to identify the upper age limit at which screening mammography should be extended in England and Wales. METHODS: A mathematical model that allows the impact of screening policies on cancer diagnosis and subsequent management to be assessed was built. The model has two parts: a natural history model of the progression of breast cancer up to discovery and a postdiagnosis model of treatment, recurrence, and survival. The natural history model was calibrated to available data and compared against published literature. The management of breast cancer at diagnosis was taken from registry data and valued using official UK tariffs. RESULTS: The model estimated that screening would lead to overdiagnosis in 6.2% of screen-detected women at the age of 72 years, increasing up to 37.9% at the age of 90 years. Under commonly quoted willingness-to-pay thresholds in the United Kingdom, our study suggests that an extension to screening up to the age of 78 years represents a cost-effective strategy. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides encouraging findings to support the extension of the screening program to older ages and suggests that further extension of the UK NHS Breast Screening Programme up to age 78 years beyond the current upper age limit of 73 years could be potentially cost-effective according to current NHS willingness-to-pay thresholds.