Cost-effectiveness of Human Papillomavirus Self-collection Intervention on Cervical Cancer Screening Uptake among Underscreened US Persons with a Cervix

被引:1
|
作者
Spees, Lisa P. [1 ,2 ,7 ]
Biddell, Caitlin B. [1 ,2 ]
Smith, Jennifer S. [2 ,3 ]
Des Marais, Andrea C. [3 ]
Hudgens, Michael G. [4 ]
Sanusi, Busola [5 ]
Jackson, Sarah [3 ]
Brewer, Noel T. [2 ,6 ]
Wheeler, Stephanie B. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ N Carolina, Gillings Sch Global Publ Hlth, Dept Hlth Policy & Management, Chapel Hill, NC USA
[2] Univ N Carolina, Lineberger Comprehens Canc Ctr, Chapel Hill, NC 27599 USA
[3] Univ N Carolina, Gillings Sch Global Publ Hlth, Dept Epidemiol, Chapel Hill, NC 27599 USA
[4] Univ N Carolina, Gillings Sch Global Publ Hlth, Dept Biostat, Chapel Hill, NC USA
[5] Harvard TH Chan Sch Publ Hlth, Ctr Biostat AIDS Res, Boston, MA USA
[6] Univ N Carolina, Gillings Sch Global Publ Hlth, Dept Hlth Behav, Chapel Hill, NC USA
[7] Univ North Carolina Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599 USA
关键词
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED-TRIAL; CHINESE WOMEN; BREAST; KNOWLEDGE; PROGRAM;
D O I
10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-22-1267
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background: We evaluate the cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-collection (followed by scheduling assistance for those who were HPV thorn or inconclusive) compared with scheduling assistance only and usual care among underscreened persons with a cervix (PWAC).Methods: A decision tree analysis was used to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER), or the cost per additional PWAC screened, from the Medicaid/state and clinic perspectives. A hypothetical cohort represented 90,807 lowincome, underscreened individuals. Costs and health outcomes were derived from the MyBodyMyTest-3 randomized trial except the usual care health outcomes were derived from literature. We performed probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) to evaluate model uncertainty. Results: Screening uptake was highest in the self-collection alternative (n = 65,721), followed by the scheduling assistance alternative (n = 34,003) and usual care (n = 18,161). The self collection alternative costs less and was more effective than the scheduling assistance alternative from the Medicaid/state perspective. Comparing the self-collection alternative with usual care, the ICERs were $284 per additional PWAC screened from the Medicaid/state perspective and $298 per additional PWAC screened from the clinic perspective. PSAs demonstrated that the self collection alternative was cost-effective compared with usual care at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $300 per additional PWAC screened in 66% of simulations from the Medicaid/state perspective and 58% of simulations from the clinic perspective.Conclusions: Compared with usual care and scheduling assistance, mailing HPV self-collection kits to underscreened individuals appears to be cost-effective in increasing screening uptake.Impact: This is the first analysis to demonstrate the costeffectiveness of mailed self-collection in the United States.
引用
收藏
页码:1097 / 1106
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Evaluation of Cervical Cancer Screening Uptake and Adherence Among Women Without Human Papillomavirus Vaccination in the US
    Sonawane, Kalyani
    Suk, Ryan
    Chiao, Elizabeth Y.
    Schmeler, Kathleen M.
    Montealegre, Jane
    Fernandez, Maria E.
    Deshmukh, Ashish A.
    JAMA NETWORK OPEN, 2021, 4 (10)
  • [32] Qualitative Evidence Synthesis on Self-Collection for Human Papillomavirus-Based Cervical Screening: Protocol for Systematic Review
    Camara, Hawa
    Zhang, Ye
    Lafferty, Lise
    Vallely, Andrew
    Guy, Rebecca
    Kelly-Hanku, Angela
    JMIR RESEARCH PROTOCOLS, 2020, 9 (10):
  • [33] HPV self-collection for cervical cancer screening among survivors of sexual trauma: a qualitative study
    Madding, Rachel A.
    Currier, Jessica J.
    Yanit, Keenan
    Hedges, Madeline
    Bruegl, Amanda
    BMC WOMENS HEALTH, 2024, 24 (01)
  • [34] Cost-effectiveness analysis of human papillomavirus vaccines for the prevention of cervical cancer in India
    Arora, Shiksha
    Tuffaha, Haitham
    ASIA-PACIFIC JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2024, 20 (01) : 55 - 62
  • [35] The Potential Cost-Effectiveness of Extended Genotyping in US Cervical Cancer Screening Paradigms
    Asjes, Caitlin
    Andrews, Jeff
    OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2018, 131 : 188S - 188S
  • [36] Impact of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-collection on subsequent cervical cancer screening completion among under-screened US women: MyBodyMyTest-3 protocol for a randomized controlled trial
    Spees, Lisa P.
    Des Marais, Andrea C.
    Wheeler, Stephanie B.
    Hudgens, Michael G.
    Doughty, Sarah
    Brewer, Noel T.
    Smith, Jennifer S.
    TRIALS, 2019, 20 (01)
  • [37] Clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of primary cytology versus human papillomavirus testing for cervical cancer screening in England
    Bains, Irenjeet
    Choi, Yoon Hong
    Soldan, Kate
    Jit, Mark
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER, 2019, 29 (04) : 669 - 675
  • [38] Cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus DNA testing for cervical cancer screening in women aged 30 years or more
    Goldie, SJ
    Kim, JJ
    Wright, TC
    OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2004, 103 (04): : 619 - 631
  • [39] Cost-effectiveness of High-risk Human Papillomavirus Testing for Cervical Cancer Screening in Québec, Canada
    Arthi Vijayaraghavan
    Molly B. Efrusy
    Marie-Hélène Mayrand
    Christopher C. Santas
    Patricia Goggin
    Canadian Journal of Public Health, 2010, 101 : 220 - 225
  • [40] Cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening with human papillomavirus DNA testing and HPV-16,18 vaccination
    Goldhaber-Fiebert, Jeremy D.
    Stout, Natasha K.
    Salomon, Joshua A.
    Kuntz, Karen M.
    Goldie, Sue J.
    JNCI-JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2008, 100 (05): : 308 - 320