-
Systematic Reviews Aug 2022The aims of this systematic review were to (1) identify primary- and model-based economic evaluations of cervical cancer screening methods and to (2) provide a...
OBJECTIVE
The aims of this systematic review were to (1) identify primary- and model-based economic evaluations of cervical cancer screening methods and to (2) provide a contextual summary of valuation outcomes associated with three types of cervical cancer screening tests: visual inspection with acetic acid, human papillomavirus deoxyribonucleic acid, and Papanicolaou smear.
INTRODUCTION
Cervical cancer screening is an important public health priority with the potential to improve the detection of precancerous lesions in high-risk females for early intervention and disease prevention. Test performance and cost-effectiveness differ based on the specific screening method used across different platforms. There is a need to appraise existing economic evaluations of cervical cancer screening methods.
METHODS
This review considered primary-based and model-based full economic evaluations of cervical cancer screening methods. The evaluation methods of interest included cost-effectiveness analysis, cost-utility analysis, cost-minimization analysis, cost-benefit analysis, and cost-consequence analysis. We searched Scopus, PubMed, National Health Economic Evaluation Database (NH EED), Cochrane, and the Health Economic Evaluation Database for full economic evaluations of cancer screening methods. No formal date restrictions were applied. Model-based and primary-based full economic evaluations were included. A critical appraisal of included studies was performed by the main investigator, while a second independent reviewer assessed critical appraisal findings for any inconsistencies. Data were extracted using a standardised data extraction tool for economic evaluations. The ultimate outcomes of costs, effectiveness, benefits, and utilities of cervical cancer screening modalities were extracted from included studies, analysed, and summarised.
RESULTS
From a total of 671 screened studies, 44 studies met the study inclusion criteria. Forty-three studies were cost-effectiveness analyses, one study reported both cost-utility and cost-effectiveness outcomes, and another study reported cost utilities of cervical cancer screening methods only. Human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing was reported as a dominant stand-alone screening test by 14 studies, while five studies reported visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) as a dominant stand-alone screening test. Primary HPV screening strategies were dominant in 21 studies, while three studies reported cytology-based screening strategies as the dominant screening method.
CONCLUSIONS
Existing evidence indicates that HPV-based and VIA testing strategies are cost-effective, but this is dependent on setting. Our review suggests the limited cost-effectiveness of cytology-based testing, which may be due in part to the need for specific infrastructures and human resources.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42020212454 .
Topics: Cost-Benefit Analysis; Early Detection of Cancer; Female; Humans; Mass Screening; Papillomavirus Infections; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms; Vaginal Smears
PubMed: 35945642
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-022-02017-z -
Health Technology Assessment... May 2004To update an earlier published report reviewing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of liquid-based cytology (LBC). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
To update an earlier published report reviewing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of liquid-based cytology (LBC).
DATA SOURCES
Electronic bibliographic databases, relevant articles, sponsor submissions and various health services research-related resources.
REVIEW METHODS
The selected data were reviewed and assessed with respect to the quality of the evidence. Pooled estimates of the parameters of interest were derived from the original and the updated studies. Meta-analyses were undertaken where appropriate. The mathematical model developed for the original rapid review of LBC was adapted to synthesise the updated data to estimate costs, survival and quality-adjusted survival of patients tested using LBC and using Papanicolaou (Pap) smear testing. Cost data from published sources were incorporated into the above model to allow economic, as well as clinical, implications of treatment to be assessed. The primary incremental cost-effectiveness ratio is the cost per life year gained (LYG), although estimates of the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained are also presented. A sensitivity analysis was undertaken to identify the key parameters that determine the cost-effectiveness of the treatments, with the objective of identifying how robust the results of the economic analysis are, given the current level of evidence.
RESULTS
From the evidence available, it is likely that the LBC technique will reduce the number of false-negative test results. Modelling analyses undertaken as part of this study indicate that this would reduce the incidence of invasive cancer. There is now more evidence to support improvements emanating from the use of LBC screening in terms of a reduced number of unsatisfactory specimens and a decrease in the time needed to obtain the smear samples. The estimated annual gross cost of consumables and operating equipment, and other one-off conversion costs associated with introducing the new technique, will be between 17 British pounds and 38 British pounds million in England and Wales, depending on the LBC system and the configuration of the service. Analyses based on models of disease natural history, conducted in this study, showed that conventional Pap smear screening was extendedly dominated by LBC (LBC was always more cost-effective than conventional Pap smear testing over the same screening interval). Comparing LBC across alternative screening intervals gave a cost-effectiveness of under 10,000 British pounds per LYG when screening was undertaken every 3 years. The cost-effectiveness results were relatively stable under most conditions, although if screening outcomes such as borderline results and colposcopy are assumed to induce even small amounts of disutility then LBC screening at 5-yearly intervals may be the most cost-effective option.
CONCLUSIONS
This updated analysis provides more certainty with regard to the potential cost-effectiveness of LBC compared with conventional Pap smear testing. However, there is uncertainty regarding the relative effectiveness (and cost-effectiveness) of the two main LBC techniques. Further research in the area of utility assessment may be worthwhile and possibly a full cost-effectiveness study of LBC based on a trial of its introduction in a low-prevalence population, although the results of the modelling analysis provide a robust argument that LBC is a cost-effective alternative to conventional cervical cancer screening. A randomised comparison of the two main techniques may also be useful.
Topics: Cost-Benefit Analysis; Female; Humans; Mass Screening; Papanicolaou Test; Sensitivity and Specificity; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms; Vaginal Smears
PubMed: 15147611
DOI: 10.3310/hta8200 -
PharmacoEconomics 2009The recent approval of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine means that decision makers need information beyond that available from randomized clinical trials to recommend... (Review)
Review
The recent approval of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine means that decision makers need information beyond that available from randomized clinical trials to recommend funding for this vaccination programme. Modelling and economic studies have addressed some of those information needs. We conducted a qualitative systematic review to summarize the existing data. Review articles were obtained from an extensive literature search on studies using mathematical modelling (either a Markov or transmission dynamic model) to determine the effectiveness or cost effectiveness of an HPV vaccine compared with the current cytology-based Pap smear screening programme. A total of 21 studies (but 22 models) were included in the review after being assessed for methodological quality. All of the included studies had used a mathematical model to determine the effectiveness of an HPV vaccine, whilst 13 had also conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis. Although the studies used different model structures, baseline parameters and assumptions, all studies showed that vaccination would decrease rates of HPV infection, precancerous lesions and cervical cancer. Studies had a consistent message with respect to cost effectiveness: a female-only vaccination programme is cost effective compared with the current cytology-based Pap smear screening programme, while the cost effectiveness of a male and female vaccination programme is generally not cost effective compared with female-only vaccination.
Topics: Cost-Benefit Analysis; Early Detection of Cancer; Female; Humans; Immunization Programs; Markov Chains; Models, Economic; Papillomavirus Infections; Papillomavirus Vaccines; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms; Women's Health
PubMed: 19254046
DOI: 10.2165/00019053-200927020-00004 -
Psycho-oncology Feb 2017As uptake of cervical screening continues to decline, this systematic review synthesises the qualitative literature on women's perceptions and experiences of cervical... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
As uptake of cervical screening continues to decline, this systematic review synthesises the qualitative literature on women's perceptions and experiences of cervical screening in the context of an organised call-recall programme, in order to understand the barriers to informed uptake.
METHODS
We searched nine databases for English language peer-reviewed publications reporting on qualitative data from screening-eligible women, exploring barriers to cervical screening in countries that offer a nationally organised call-recall programme. Evidence was integrated using thematic synthesis.
RESULTS
Thirty-nine papers from the UK, Australia, Sweden and Korea were included. The majority of participants had attended screening at least once. Two broad themes were identified: (a) should I go for screening? and (b) screening is a big deal. In considering whether to attend, women discussed the personal relevance and value of screening. Women who had previously attended described how it was a big deal, physically and emotionally, and the varied threats that screening presents. Practical barriers affected whether women translated screening intentions into action.
CONCLUSIONS
The variation in women's understanding and perceptions of cervical screening suggests that interventions tailored to decisional stage may be of value in increasing engagement with the invitation and uptake of screening in those who wish to take part. There is also a need for further research with women who have never attended screening, especially those who remain unaware or unengaged, as their perspectives are lacking in the existing literature. © 2016 The Authors. Psycho-Oncology Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Topics: Australia; Comprehension; Female; Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; Humans; Mass Screening; Patient Compliance; Patient Participation; Republic of Korea; Sweden; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms; Vaginal Smears; Women's Health
PubMed: 27072589
DOI: 10.1002/pon.4126 -
Obesity (Silver Spring, Md.) Feb 2009Obese women are at an increased risk of death from cervical cancer, but the explanation for this is unknown. Through our systematic review, we sought to determine... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
Obese women are at an increased risk of death from cervical cancer, but the explanation for this is unknown. Through our systematic review, we sought to determine whether obesity is associated with cervical cancer screening and whether this association differs by race. We identified original articles evaluating the relationship between body weight and Papanicolaou (Pap) testing in the United States through electronic (PubMed, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library) and manual searching. We excluded studies in special populations or those not written in English. Two reviewers sequentially extracted study data and independently extracted quality using standardized forms. A total of 4,132 citations yielded 11 relevant studies. Ten studies suggested an inverse association between obesity and cervical cancer screening. Compared to women with a normal BMI, the combined odds ratios (95% CI) for Pap testing were 0.91 (0.80-1.03), 0.81 (0.70-0.93), 0.75 (0.64-0.88), and 0.62 (0.55-0.69) for the overweight and class I, class II, and class III obesity categories, respectively. Three out of four studies that presented the results by race found this held true for white women, but no study found this for black women. In conclusion, obese women are less likely to report being screened for cervical cancer than their lean counterparts, and this does not hold true for black women. Less screening may partly explain the higher cervical cancer mortality seen in obese white women.
Topics: Black People; Female; Humans; Mass Screening; Obesity; Papanicolaou Test; United States; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms; Vaginal Smears; White People
PubMed: 18997682
DOI: 10.1038/oby.2008.480 -
JCO Global Oncology Apr 2020Cervical cancer screening is not well implemented in many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Mobile health (mHealth) refers to utilization of mobile technologies...
PURPOSE
Cervical cancer screening is not well implemented in many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Mobile health (mHealth) refers to utilization of mobile technologies in health promotion and disease management. We aimed to qualitatively synthesize published articles reporting the impact of mHealth on cervical cancer screening-related health behaviors.
METHODS
Three reviewers independently reviewed articles with the following criteria: the exposure or intervention of interest was mHealth, including messages or educational information sent via mobile telephone or e-mail; the comparison was people not using mHealth technology to receive screening-related information, and studies comparing multiple different mHealth interventional strategies were also eligible; the primary outcome was cervical cancer screening uptake, and secondary outcomes included awareness, intention, and knowledge of screening; appropriate research designs included randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental or observational research; and the study was conducted in an LMIC.
RESULTS
Of the 8 selected studies, 5 treated mobile telephone or message reminders as the exposure or intervention, and 3 compared the effects of different messages on screening uptake. The outcomes were diverse, including screening uptake (n = 4); health beliefs regarding the Papanicolaou (Pap) test (n = 1); knowledge of, attitude toward, and adherence to colpocytologic examination (n = 1); interest in receiving messages about Pap test results or appointment (n = 1); and return for Pap test reports (n = 1).
CONCLUSION
Overall, our systematic review suggests that mobile technologies, particularly telephone reminders or messages, lead to increased Pap test uptake; additional work is needed to unequivocally verify whether mhealth interventions can improve knowledge regarding cervical cancer. Our study will inform mHealth-based interventions for cervical cancer screening promotion in LMICs.
Topics: Developing Countries; Early Detection of Cancer; Female; Humans; Papanicolaou Test; Technology; Telemedicine; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
PubMed: 32302236
DOI: 10.1200/JGO.19.00201 -
Cancer Epidemiology Apr 2017Comorbidity is associated with poor outcomes for cancer patients but it is less clear how it influences cancer prevention and early detection. This review synthesizes... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Comorbidity is associated with poor outcomes for cancer patients but it is less clear how it influences cancer prevention and early detection. This review synthesizes evidence from studies that have quantified the association between comorbidity and participation in breast and cervical screening.
METHODS
PubMed, CINAHL and EMBASE databases were systematically searched using key terms related to cancer screening and comorbidity for original research articles published between 1 January 1991 and 21 March 2016. Two reviewers independently screened 1283 studies that met eligibility criteria related to Population (adult, non-cancer populations), Exposure (comorbidity), Comparison (a 'no comorbidity' group), and Outcome (participation in breast cancer or cervical screening). Data was extracted and risk of bias assessed using a standardised tool from the 22 studies identified for inclusion (17 breast; 13 cervical). Meta-analyses were performed for participation in breast and cervical screening, stratified by important study characteristics.
RESULTS
The majority of studies were conducted in the United States. Results of individual studies were variable. Most had medium to high risk of bias. Based on the three "low risk of bias" studies, mammography screening was less common among those with comorbidity (pooled Odds Ratio 0.66, 95%CI 0.44-0.88). The one "low risk of bias" study of cervical screening reported a negative association between comorbidity and participation.
CONCLUSION
While a definitive conclusion could not be drawn, the results from high quality studies suggest that women with comorbidity are less likely to participate in breast, and possibly cervical, cancer screening.
Topics: Breast Neoplasms; Comorbidity; Early Detection of Cancer; Female; Humans; Patient Participation; Population Surveillance; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
PubMed: 28086199
DOI: 10.1016/j.canep.2016.12.010 -
Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer... Dec 2017Objective: Ageing population and noticeable changes in lifestyle in developing countries like Iran caused an increase in cancer incidence. This requires organized cancer... (Review)
Review
Objective: Ageing population and noticeable changes in lifestyle in developing countries like Iran caused an increase in cancer incidence. This requires organized cancer prevention and screening programs in population level, but most importantly community should be aware of these programs and willing to use them. This study explored existing evidence on public awareness and practice, as well as, adherence to cancer screening in Iranian population. Methods: Major English databases including Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, and domestic Persian databases i.e., SID, Magiran, and Barakat search engines were searched. All publications with focus on Iranian public awareness about cancer prevention, screening, and early detection programs which were published until August 2015, were explored in this systematic review. For this purpose, we used sensitive Persian phrases/key terms and English keywords which were extracted from medical subject headings (MeSH). Taking PRISMA guidelines into considerations eligible documents, were evaluated and abstracted by two separate reviewers. Results: We found 72 articles relevant to this topic. Screening tests were known to, or being utilized by only a limited number of Iranians. Most Iranian women relied on physical examination particularly self-examination, instead of taking mammogram, as the most standard test to find breast tumors. Less than half of the average-risk adult populations were familiar with colorectal cancer risk factors and its screening tests, and only very limited number of studies reported taking at least one time colonoscopy or FOBT, at most 5.0% and 15.0%, respectively. Around half of women were familiar with cervical cancer and Pap-smear test with less than 45% having completed at least one lifetime test. The lack of health insurance coverage was a barrier to participate in screening tests. Furthermore some people would not select to be screened only because they do not know how or where they can receive these services. Conclusion: Low awareness and suboptimal use of screening tests in Iran calls for effective programs to enhance intention and compliance to screening, improving the patient-physician communication, identifying barriers for screening and providing tailored public awareness and screening programs.
Topics: Developing Countries; Early Detection of Cancer; Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; Humans; Iran; Neoplasms
PubMed: 29281865
DOI: 10.22034/APJCP.2017.18.12.3187 -
Biology Jun 2022Human papillomaviruses (HPVs) are common sexually transmitted infectious agents responsible for several anogenital and head and neck cancers. Cervical cancer (CC) is the... (Review)
Review
Human papillomaviruses (HPVs) are common sexually transmitted infectious agents responsible for several anogenital and head and neck cancers. Cervical cancer (CC) is the fourth leading cause of death in women with cancer. The progression of a persistent HPV infection to cancer takes 15-20 years and can be preventable through screening. Cervical cytology (Pap smear) is the standard screening test for CC and precancerous lesions. For ASC-US and ASC-H lesions, a combination of Pap smear and HR-HPV analysis is recommended as a triage step before colposcopy. However, these tests cannot predict progression to CC. For this purpose, we summarized current scientific data on the role of p16/Ki-67 immunohistostaining, telomerase and fibronectin in predicting progression to CC. p16 and p16/Ki-67 dual staining (DS) were more specific than HR-HPV DNA testing for the detection of CIN2+/CIN3+ in women with ASC-US and LSIL. Similarly, hTERC FISH analysis significantly improved the specificity and positive predictive value of HPV DNA testing in differentiating CIN2+ from CIN2 cytological samples. In conclusion, p16 IHC, p16/Ki-67 DS and hTERC FISH amplification are all valid adjunctive biomarkers which significantly increase the sensitivity and specificity of cervical dysplasia diagnosis, especially when combined with HPV DNA testing. However, considering the global socioeconomic background, we can postulate that p16 and p16/ Ki-67 IHC can be used as a next step after positive cytology for ASC-US or LSIL specimens in low-income countries, instead of HPV DNA testing. Alternatively, if HPV DNA testing is covered by insurance, p16 or p16/Ki-67 DS and HPV DNA co-testing can be performed. In middle- and high-income countries, hTERC amplification can be performed as an adjunctive test to HPV DNA testing in women with ASC-US and LSIL.
PubMed: 36101337
DOI: 10.3390/biology11070956 -
Preventive Medicine Dec 2015To assess the inequalities in adherence to breast and cervical cancer screening according to educational level. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To assess the inequalities in adherence to breast and cervical cancer screening according to educational level.
METHODS
A systematic review was carried out between 2000 and 2013 by querying an electronic database using specific keywords. Studies published in English reporting an estimation of the association between level of education and adherence to breast and/or cervical cancer screening were included in the study. Two different meta-analyses were carried out for adherence to breast and cervical cancer screening, respectively: women with the highest level of education and women with the lowest level of education were compared. The level of heterogeneity was investigated and subgroup analyses were carried out.
RESULTS
Of 1231 identified articles, 10 cross-sectional studies were included in the analysis. The meta-analyses showed that women with the highest level of education were more likely to have both screenings with an overall OR=1.61 (95% CI 1.36-1.91; I(2)=71%) for mammography and OR=1.96 (95% CI 1.79-2.16; I(2)=0%) for Pap test, respectively. Stratified meta-analysis for breast cancer screening included only studies that reported guidelines with target age of population ≥50 years and showed a reduction in the level of heterogeneity and an increase of 36% in the adherence (95% CI 1.19-1.55; I(2)=0%).
CONCLUSIONS
This study confirms and reinforces evidence of inequalities in breast and cervical cancer screening adherence according to educational level.
Topics: Adult; Breast Neoplasms; Early Detection of Cancer; Educational Status; Female; Guideline Adherence; Humans; Mammography; Mass Screening; Middle Aged; Papanicolaou Test; Patient Acceptance of Health Care; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
PubMed: 26408405
DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2015.09.011