Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Cost-effectiveness of single-visit cervical cancer screening in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa: a model-based analysis accounting for the HIV epidemic.
Tran, Jacinda; Hathaway, Christine Lee; Broshkevitch, Cara Jill; Palanee-Phillips, Thesla; Barnabas, Ruanne Vanessa; Rao, Darcy White; Sharma, Monisha.
Affiliation
  • Tran J; The Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics (CHOICE) Institute, Department of Pharmacy, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.
  • Hathaway CL; Division of Infectious Diseases, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States.
  • Broshkevitch CJ; Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States.
  • Palanee-Phillips T; Faculty of Health Sciences, Wits RHI, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
  • Barnabas RV; Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.
  • Rao DW; Division of Infectious Diseases, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States.
  • Sharma M; Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.
Front Oncol ; 14: 1382599, 2024.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38720798
ABSTRACT

Introduction:

Women living with human immunodeficiency virus (WLHIV) face elevated risks of human papillomavirus (HPV) acquisition and cervical cancer (CC). Coverage of CC screening and treatment remains low in low-and-middle-income settings, reflecting resource challenges and loss to follow-up with current strategies. We estimated the health and economic impact of alternative scalable CC screening strategies in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, a region with high burden of CC and HIV.

Methods:

We parameterized a dynamic compartmental model of HPV and HIV transmission and CC natural history to KwaZulu-Natal. Over 100 years, we simulated the status quo of a multi-visit screening and treatment strategy with cytology and colposcopy triage (South African standard of care) and six single-visit comparator scenarios with varying 1) screening strategy (HPV DNA testing alone, with genotyping, or with automated visual evaluation triage, a new high-performance technology), 2) screening frequency (once-per-lifetime for all women, or repeated every 5 years for WLHIV and twice for women without HIV), and 3) loss to follow-up for treatment. Using the Ministry of Health perspective, we estimated costs associated with HPV vaccination, screening, and pre-cancer, CC, and HIV treatment. We quantified CC cases, deaths, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) averted for each scenario. We discounted costs (2022 US dollars) and outcomes at 3% annually and calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

Results:

We projected 69,294 new CC cases and 43,950 CC-related deaths in the status quo scenario. HPV DNA testing achieved the greatest improvement in health outcomes, averting 9.4% of cases and 9.0% of deaths with one-time screening and 37.1% and 35.1%, respectively, with repeat screening. Compared to the cost of the status quo ($12.79 billion), repeat screening using HPV DNA genotyping had the greatest increase in costs. Repeat screening with HPV DNA testing was the most effective strategy below the willingness to pay threshold (ICER $3,194/DALY averted). One-time screening with HPV DNA testing was also an efficient strategy (ICER $1,398/DALY averted).

Conclusions:

Repeat single-visit screening with HPV DNA testing was the optimal strategy simulated. Single-visit strategies with increased frequency for WLHIV may be cost-effective in KwaZulu-Natal and similar settings with high HIV and HPV prevalence.
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Language: En Journal: Front Oncol Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Country of publication:

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Language: En Journal: Front Oncol Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Country of publication: