medigraphic.com
Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública

2008, Number 4

<< Back Next >>

salud publica mex 2008; 50 (4)

Cost-effectiveness of conventional cytology and HPV DNA testing for cervical cancer screening in Colombia

Andrés-Gamboa O, Chicaíza L, García-Molina M, Díaz J, González M, Murillo R, Ballesteros M, Sánchez R

Language: English
References: 41
Page: 276-285
PDF size: 182.75 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective: To assess cost-effectiveness of conventional cytology and HPV DNA testing for cervical-cancer screening in Colombia. Material and Methods: The National Cancer Institute of Colombia (NCIC) in 2007 developed a Markov model on the natural history of cervical cancer; no screening, conventional cytology, and HPV DNA testing were compared. Only direct costs were used. Outcomes comprise cervical cancer mortality, years of life saved, and lifetime costs. Discounted incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were estimated and sensitivity analyses were conducted for key parameters. Results: Depending on the screening strategy a 69-81% mortality reduction might be expected. The HPV DNA testing every five years is a cost-effective strategy (Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER): USD$44/YLS) if the cost per test is under USD$31. The effectiveness was sensitive to coverage and primarily to follow-up. Conclusions: HPV DNA testing is a cost-effective alternative for screening in Colombia. Not only high coverage but high follow-up rates are critical for successful screening programs.


REFERENCES

  1. Ferlay J, Bray F, Pisani P, Parkin DM. GLOBOCAN 2002 cancer incidence, mortality and prevalence worldwide. IARC CancerBase No. 5 version 2.0. Lyon: IARC Press,2004.

  2. Lynge E, Madsen M, Engholm G. Effect of organised screening on incidence and mortality of cervical cancer in Denmark. Cancer Res 1989; 49(8): 2157-2160.

  3. Neto JE, Ramalho CM. Cervical Cancer in Laitn America. Semin Oncol 2001; 28(2):188-197.

  4. Pineros M, Hernandez G, Bray F. Increasing mortality rates of common malignancies in Colombia: an emerging problem. Cancer 2004;101(10):2285-2292.

  5. Goldie SJ. Chapter 15: Public health policy and cost-effectiveness analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2003; 31: 102-110

  6. Goldie SJ, Gaffikin L, Goldhaber JD, Gordillo A, Levin C, Wright T, et al. Cost-Effectiveness of cervical-cancer screening in five developing countries. N Engl J Med 2005; 353:2158-2168.

  7. Goldie SJ, Kuhn L, Denny L, Pollack A, Wright T. Policy analysis of cervical cancer screening strategies in low-resource settings. JAMA 2001; 285(24): 3107-3126.

  8. Legood R, Gray A, Mahé C, Javant k, Nene BM, Sankaranarayanan R, et al. Screening for cervical cancer in India: How much will it cost? A trial based analysis of the cost per case detected. Int J Cancer 2005; 117: 981-987.

  9. Holmes J, Hemmett L, Garfield S. The cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus screening for cervical cancer. Eur J Health Econom 2005; 50: 30-37.

  10. Flores Y, Bishai D, Lazcano E, Shah K, Lörincz A, Hernández M, et al. Improving cervical cancer screening in Mexico: results from the Morelos HPV Study. Salud Publica Mex 2003;45 Suppl 3:S388-S398.

  11. Kim JJ, Leung GM, Woo P, Goldie SJ. Cost-effectiveness of organized versus opportunistic cervical cytology screening in Hong Kong. J Public Health 2004; 26(2): 130-137.

  12. Instituto Nacional de Cancerología. Recomendaciones para la tamización de neoplasias de cuello uterino en mujeres sin antecedentes de patología cervical (preinvasora o invasora) en Colombia. Bogotá: INC, 2007.

  13. Prieto L, Sacristán JA, Antoñanzas F, Terrés CR, Pinto JL, Rovira J. Análisis coste-efectividad en la evaluación económica de intervenciones sanitarias. Med Clin (Barc) 2004; 122 (13):505-510.

  14. World Health Organization. Macroeconomics and health: investing in health for economic development: report of the Commission on Macroeconomics and Health. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2001.

  15. Departamento Administrativo Nacional de Estadística (DANE). Cuentas regionales. [Accesed February 11, 2008]. Available at: www.dane.gov.co/files/investigaciones/pib/departamentales.

  16. Departamento Administrativo Nacional de Estadística (DANE). Población: indicadores demográficos según departamento. [Accesed August 31, 2007]. Available at: www.dane.gov.co.

  17. Muñoz N, Méndez F, Posso H, Molano M, van de Brule A, Muñoz A, et al. Incidence, duration, and determinants of cervical human papillomavirus infection in a cohort of Colombian women with normal cytological results. J Infect Dis 2004;190(12):2077-2087.

  18. Moscicki A, Schiffman M, Kjaer S, Villa L. Updating the Natural History of HPV and anogenital cancer. Vaccine 2006; 24(3): S42-S51.

  19. Cali S. Poblation Registry of Cancer. Health Faculty-Universidad del Valle Colombia. Cances Statistics [Accesed March 115, 2008] Available at: http://rpcc.univalle.edu.coles/Mortalidad/frames.php.

  20. Departamento Administrativo Nacional de Estadística (DANE). Población: estadísticas vitales. [Accesed April 15, 2007]. Available at: www. dane.gov.co.

  21. Myers E, McCrory D, Nanda K, Bastian L, Matchar D. Mathematical Model for the Natural History of Human Papillomavirus Infection and Cervical Carcinogenesis. Am J Epidemiol 2000; 151(12): 1158-1171.

  22. Goldie SJ, Kim JJ, Wright TC. Cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus DNA testing for cervical cancer screening in women aged 30 year or more. Obstet Gynecol 2004; 103: 619-631.

  23. Muñoz N, Bosch X, Sanjosé S, Herrero R, Castellsagué X, Shah KV, et al. Epidemiologic classification of human papillomavirus types associated with cervical cancer. N Engl J Med 2003; 348: 518-527.

  24. Clifford G, Franceschi S, Diaz M, Muñoz N, Villa L. HPV typedistribution in women with and without cervical neoplastic diseases. Vaccine 2006; 24(3):S42-S51.

  25. Molano M, van de Brule A, Plummer M, Weiderpass E, Posso H, Aíslan A, et al. Determinants of Clearance of Human Papillomavirus Infections in Colombia Women with Normal Cytology: A Population-based, 5- year Follow- up study. Am J Epidemiol 2003; 158: 486-494.

  26. Sanders G, Taira A. Cost-effectiveness of a potential vaccine for human papillomavirus. Emerg Infect Dis 2003; 9(1): 37-48.

  27. Östör A. Natural History of Cervical Intraepiyhelial Neoplasis: A Critical Review. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1993; 12: 186-192.

  28. Melnikow J, Nuevo J, Willan A, Chan B, Howell L. Natural History of Cervical Squamous Intraepithelial Lesions: A meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 1998; 4(2): 727-735.

  29. Koliopoulos G, Arbyn M, Martin-Hirsch P, Kyrgiou M, Prendiville W, Paraskevaidis E. Diagnostic accuracy of human papillomavirus testing in primary cervical screening: A systematic review and meta-analysis of nonrandomized studies. Gynecol Oncol 2007;104(1):232-246.

  30. Olaniyan O. Validity of colposcopy in the diagnosis of early cervical neoplasia: a review. Afr J Reprod Health 2002;6(3):59-69.

  31. Hirsch M, Kitchener P. Surgery for Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasis. The Cochrane Collaboration 1999. [Accesed May 15, 2007]. Available at: The Cochrane Library: www.cochrane.org.

  32. Miller DK, Homan SM. Determining transition probabilities: confusion and suggestions. Med Decis Making 1994;14: 52-58.

  33. Fundación para la Investigación y Desarrollo de la Salud y La Seguridad Social. Construcción de un sistema de pagos por paquetes de diagnóstico e intervención en enfermedades neoplásicas. Bogotá: Fedesalud, 2003.

  34. McCrory DC, Matchar DB, Bastian L, Datta S, Hasselblad V, Hickey J, et al. Evaluation of cervical cytology. Evidence report/technology assessment no. 5. (Prepared by Duke University under contract no. 290-97-0014). Rockville, MD: Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, 1999. (AHCPR publication no. 99-E010).

  35. Mandelblatt JS, Lawrence WF, Gaffikin L, Limpahayom KK, Lumbiganon P, Warakamin S, et al. Costs and benefits of different strategies to screen for cervical cancer in less-developed countries. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002;94(19):1469-1483.

  36. Cuzick J, Szarewski A, Cubie H, Hulman G, Kitchener H, Luesley D, et al. Management of women who test positive for high-risk types of human papillomavirus: the HART study. Lancet 2003;362(9399):1871-1876.

  37. Mandelblatt JS, Lawrence WF, Womack SM, Jacobson D, Yi B, Hwang YT, et al. Benefits and costs of using HPV testing to screen for cervical cancer. JAMA 2002;287(18):2372-2381.

  38. Cuzick J, Sasieni P, Davies P, Adams J, Normand C, Frater A, et al. A systematic review of the role of human papillomavirus testing within a cervical screening program. Health Technol Assess 1999;3(14):i-iv, 1-204.

  39. IARC. Handbooks of cancer prevention. Cervix cancer screening. Lyon: IARC Press, 2005.

  40. Sankaranarayanan R, Esmy PO, Rajkumar R, Muwonge R, Swaminathan R, Shanthakumari S, et al. Effect of visual screening on cervical cancer incidence and mortality in Tamil Nadu, India: a cluster-randomised trial. Lancet 2007;370(9585):398-406.

  41. Goldie SJ, Kim JJ, Myers E. Chapter 19: Cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening. Vaccine 2006;24 Suppl 3:S164-S170.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com