A cost-effectiveness analysis of adding a human papillomavirus vaccine to the Australian National Cervical Cancer Screening Program

Sexual Health ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shalini Kulasingam ◽  
Luke Connelly ◽  
Elizabeth Conway ◽  
Jane S. Hocking ◽  
Evan Myers ◽  
...  

Background: The cost-effectiveness of adding a human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine to the Australian National Cervical Screening Program compared to screening alone was examined. Methods: A Markov model of the natural history of HPV infection that incorporates screening and vaccination was developed. A vaccine that prevents 100% of HPV 16/18-associated disease, with a lifetime duration of efficacy and 80% coverage offered through a school program to girls aged 12 years, in conjunction with current screening was compared with screening alone using cost (in Australian dollars) per life-year (LY) saved and quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) saved. Sensitivity analyses included determining the cost-effectiveness of offering a catch-up vaccination program to 14–26-year-olds and accounting for the benefits of herd immunity. Results: Vaccination with screening compared with screening alone was associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $51 103 per LY and $18 735 per QALY, assuming a cost per vaccine dose of $115. Results were sensitive to assumptions about the duration of vaccine efficacy, including the need for a booster ($68 158 per LY and $24 988 per QALY) to produce lifetime immunity. Accounting for herd immunity resulted in a more attractive ICER ($36 343 per LY and $13 316 per QALY) for girls only. The cost per LY of vaccinating boys and girls was $92 052 and the cost per QALY was $33 644. The cost per LY of implementing a catch-up vaccination program ranged from $45 652 ($16 727 per QALY) for extending vaccination to 14-year-olds to $78 702 ($34 536 per QALY) for 26-year-olds. Conclusions: These results suggest that adding an HPV vaccine to Australia’s current screening regimen is a potentially cost-effective way to reduce cervical cancer and the clinical interventions that are currently associated with its prevention via screening alone.

Sexual Health ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 12 (6) ◽  
pp. 520 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luke B. Connelly ◽  
Ha N. D. Le

Background Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines and their widespread adoption have the potential to relieve a large part of the burden of cervical cancer morbidity and mortality, particularly in countries that have low screening rates or, like Japan, lack a cohesive universal screening program. An economic evaluation was conducted to assess the cost-effectiveness of introducing a bivalent HPV vaccination program in Japan from a healthcare perspective. Methods: A Markov model of the natural history of HPV infection that incorporates both vaccination and screening was developed for Japan. The modelled intervention, a bivalent HPV vaccine with a 100% lifetime vaccine efficacy and 80% vaccine coverage, given to a cohort of 12-year-old Japanese girls in conjunction with the current screening program, was compared with screening alone in terms of costs and effectiveness. A discount rate of 5% was applied to both costs and utilities where relevant. Results: Vaccination alongside screening compared with screening alone is associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of US$20 315 per quality-adjusted-life-year gained if 80% coverage is assumed. The ICER at 5% coverage with the vaccine plus screening, compared with screening alone, is US$1158. Conclusion: The cost-effectiveness results suggest that the addition of a HPV vaccination program to Japan’s cervical cancer screening program is highly likely to prove a cost-effective way to reduce the burden of cervical cancer, precancerous lesions and HPV16/18-related diseases.


2008 ◽  
Vol 24 (01) ◽  
pp. 10-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Bergeron ◽  
Nathalie Largeron ◽  
Ruth McAllister ◽  
Patrice Mathevet ◽  
Vanessa Remy

Objectives:A vaccine to prevent diseases due to human papillomavirus (HPV) types 6, 11, 16, and 18 is now available in France. The objective of this study was to assess the health and economic impact in France of implementing a quadrivalent HPV vaccine alongside existing screening practices versus screening alone.Methods:A Markov model of the natural history of HPV infection incorporating screening and vaccination, was adapted to the French context. A vaccine that would prevent 100 percent of HPV 6, 11, 16, and 18-associated diseases, with lifetime duration and 80 percent coverage, given to girls at age 14 in conjunction with current screening was compared with screening alone. Results were analyzed from both a direct healthcare cost perspective (DCP) and a third-party payer perspective (TPP). Indirect costs such as productivity loss were not taken into account in this analysis.Results:The incremental cost per life-year gained from vaccination was €12,429 (TPP) and €20,455 (DCP). The incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) for the introduction of HPV vaccination alongside the French cervical cancer screening program was €8,408 (TPP) and €13,809 (DCP). Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that cost-effectiveness was stable, but was most sensitive to the discount rate used for costs and benefits.Conclusions:Considering the commonly accepted threshold of €50,000 per QALY, these analyses support the fact that adding a quadrivalent HPV vaccine to the current screening program in France is a cost-effective strategy for reducing the burden of cervical cancer, precancerous lesions, and genital warts caused by HPV types 6, 11, 16, and 18.


BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. e031186 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y Jiang ◽  
Weiyi Ni ◽  
Jing Wu

ObjectivesTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the 9-valent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine for the prevention of cervical cancer in China.DesignHealth economic modelling using the Papillomavirus Rapid Interface for Modelling and Economics (PRIME) model populated with China-specific data.SettingIndividual cervical cancer prevention in China using the 9-valent HPV vaccine from the perspective of private sector purchasers in relation to receiving other HPV vaccines and not receiving vaccination for 16-year-old girls in China who had not been previously infected with HPV.ParticipantsNot applicable.InterventionsVaccination using the 9-valent, the quadrivalent and the bivalent vaccines.Primary outcome measureIncremental costs per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) prevented.ResultsIn the base case, the incremental costs per DALY prevented were, respectively, US$35 000 and US$50 455 compared with the quadrivalent and the bivalent vaccines, both of which were above the cost-effective threshold of US$25 920/DALY prevented. To be cost-effective in these comparisons, the 9-valent vaccine should be priced at $550 and $450 for the full doses, respectively. To be highly cost-effective, the price thresholds were $435 and $335. The incremental costs per DALY prevented in relation to no vaccination was US$23 012, making the 9-valent vaccine marginally cost-effective. The results were robust in most one-way sensitivity analyses including changing vaccination age to 13 and 26 years.ConclusionsAt the current price, the 9-valent HPV vaccine is not cost-effective compared with the quadrivalent and the bivalent vaccines for young girls in China who had not been previously infected with HPV. Policymakers and clinicians should keep potential vaccine recipients informed about the economic profile of the 9-valent vaccine and carefully consider expanding its use in China at the current price.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. e052682
Author(s):  
Wenchuan Shi ◽  
Xiaoli Cheng ◽  
Haitao Wang ◽  
Xiao Zang ◽  
Tingting Chen

ObjectivesChina suffers from high burdens of human papillomavirus (HPV) and cervical cancer, whereas the uptake of HPV vaccine remains low. The first Chinese domestic HPV vaccine was released in 2019. However, collective evidence on cost-effectiveness of HPV vaccination in China has yet to be established. We summarised evidence on the cost-effectiveness of HPV vaccine in China.DesignSystematic review and narrative synthesisData sourcesPubMed, EMBASE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and Wanfang Data were searched through 2 January 2021Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesCost-effectiveness studies using a modelling approach focusing on HPV vaccination interventions in the setting of China were included for review.Data extraction and synthesisWe extracted information from the selected studies focusing on cost-effectiveness results of various vaccination programmes, key contextual and methodological factors influencing cost-effectiveness estimates and an assessment of study quality.ResultsA total of 14 studies were included for review. Considerable heterogeneity was found in terms of the methodologies used, HPV vaccination strategies evaluated and study quality. The reviewed studies generally supported the cost-effectiveness of HPV vaccine in China, although some reached alternative conclusions, particularly when assessed incremental to cervical cancer screening. Cost of vaccination was consistently identified as a key determinant for the cost-effectiveness of HPV vaccination programmes.ConclusionsImplementing HPV vaccination programmes should be complemented with expanded cervical cancer screening, while the release of lower-priced domestic vaccine offers more promising potential for initiating public HPV vaccination programmes. Findings of this study contributes important evidence for policies for cervical cancer prevention in China and methodological implications for future modelling efforts.


2011 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 290-297 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizaveta Sopina ◽  
Toni Ashton

Objectives: Recent introduction of a quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine for girls in New Zealand is expected to decrease the incidence of HPV infection as well as resultant cytological abnormalities and cervical cancer. This may affect the cost-effectiveness of the national cervical screening program by reducing the incidence of lesions detected. This study investigates the cost-effectiveness of the current cervical screening policy with and without the HPV vaccine and compares these results with the cost-effectiveness of a range of other screening strategies.Methods: A Markov state-transition model was built based on the natural history of HPV and cervical carcinogenesis. The model followed a hypothetical cohort of girls from 12 years to 85 years of age or death, through screening and treatment pathways. The model compared a “no vaccine and current screening” strategy with a selection of screening strategies with different age ranges and frequency intervals.Results: The most cost-effective cervical screening strategy in the presence of the HPV vaccine would be screening women aged 30–60 every 5 years. Moving to this screening strategy from the base case of no vaccine and the current New Zealand strategy of screening women aged 20–69 every 3 years is predicted to have an incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained of NZ$9,841 (€4,428).Conclusions: Reducing screening intensity from 3 to 5 years as well as narrowing the screening age range for the vaccinated cohort once they reach mid-twenties is recommended. The importance of achieving a high vaccine uptake in New Zealand remains high.


2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (S1) ◽  
pp. 49-49
Author(s):  
Triin Võrno ◽  
Kaja-Triin Laisaar ◽  
Terje Raud ◽  
Kai Jõers ◽  
Doris Meigas-Tohver ◽  
...  

IntroductionIn Estonia, organized cervical cancer screening program is targeted at women aged 30–55(59) years and Pap-tests are taken every five years. Since cervical cancer is associated with human papillomavirus (HPV), a number of countries have introduced the HPV-test as the primary method of screening. The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of organized cervical cancer screening program in Estonia by comparing HPV- and Pap-test based strategies.MethodsFor the cost-effectiveness analysis, a Markov cohort model was developed. The model was used to estimate costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of eight screening strategies, varying the primary screening test and triage scenarios, upper age limit of screening, and testing interval. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated in comparison to current screening practice as well as to the next best option. Sensitivity analysis was performed by varying one or more similar parameter(s) at a time, while holding others at their base case value. The analysis was performed from the healthcare payer perspective adopting a five percent annual discount rate for both costs and utilities.ResultsIn the base-case scenario, ICER for HPV-test based strategies in comparison to the current screening practice was estimated at EUR 8,596–9,786 per QALY. For alternative Pap-test based strategies ICER was estimated at EUR 2,332–2,425 per QALY. In comparison to the next best option, HPV-test based strategies were dominated by Pap-test based strategies. At the cost-effectiveness threshold of EUR 10,000 per QALY Pap-testing every three years would be the cost-effective strategy for women participating in the screening program from age 30 to 63 (ICER being EUR 3,112 per QALY).ConclusionsDecreasing Pap-test based screening interval or changing to HPV-test based screening can both improve the effectiveness of cervical cancer screening program in Estonia, but based on the current cost-effectiveness study Pap-test based screening every three years should be preferred.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kiesha Prem ◽  
Yoon Hong Choi ◽  
Élodie Bénard ◽  
Emily A Burger ◽  
Liza Hadley Mmath ◽  
...  

SummaryBackgroundTo eliminate cervical cancer as a public health problem, WHO currently recommends routine vaccination of adolescent girls with two doses of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine before sexual debut. However, many countries have yet to implement this because of financial or logistical barriers to delivering two doses outside the infant immunisation programme.MethodsUsing three independent HPV transmission models, we estimated the long-term health benefits and cost-effectiveness of one-dose versus two-dose HPV vaccination, in 192 countries, assuming that one dose of the vaccine gives either a shorter duration of full protection (20 or 30 years) or lifelong protection but lower vaccine efficacy (e.g., 80%) compared to two doses. We simulated routine vaccination with the 9-valent HPV vaccine in 10-year-old girls at 80% coverage for the years 2021–2120, with a one-year catch-up of 80% 11–14-year-old girls on the first year of the programme.FindingsOver the next century, one-dose vaccination at 80% coverage could avert 64 million (80%UI 62·2–64·8) and 66·6 million (80%UI 63·4–69·1) cervical cancer cases should one dose of the vaccine confer 20 and 30 years of protection, respectively. Should one dose of the vaccine provide lifelong protection at 80% vaccine efficacy, 68·4 million (80%UI 63·8–69·4) cervical cancer cases could be prevented. Across all country income groups, two-dose schedules conferring lifelong protection would avert only slightly more cases (2·1–8·7 million) than the one-dose scenarios explored. Around 330 to 5230 additional girls need to be vaccinated with the second dose to prevent one cervical cancer case, depending on the epidemiological profiles of the country.InterpretationResults were consistent across the three independent models and suggest that one-dose vaccination has similar health benefits to a two-dose programme while simplifying vaccine delivery, reducing costs and alleviating vaccine supply constraints.FundingBill & Melinda Gates FoundationResearch in contextEvidence before this studyPrimary prevention of cervical cancer is now available with human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination. Initially administered as a three-dose regimen, the HPV vaccine schedule recommended by WHO has now switched to two doses for individuals below the age of 15 years. Although WHO recommends all countries to routinely immunise adolescent girls with two doses, many low- and middle-income countries, with high disease burden, have yet to implement national HPV vaccination programmes because of the challenges of delivering two vaccine doses to adolescent females. Recently, HPV vaccine implementation in many countries has been further delayed due to constraints in vaccine supply and difficulties in access during COVID-19 epidemics. These financial, logistical, and supply constraints have motivated research into one-dose vaccination schedules. Evidence emerging from trials and observational studies suggests that one dose may also provide a high level of protection against incident and persistent HPV infections. If proven effective, the one-dose HPV vaccination schedule would simplify vaccine delivery and lower costs of national vaccination programmes, potentially enabling more countries to implement one and as a result, facilitating global cervical cancer prevention. We searched PubMed for trials, cohort and modelling studies published in 2018 and 2020, with the terms “(health impact OR impact OR modelling OR cost-effectiveness OR CEA OR durability OR effectiveness) AND (HPV OR human papillomavirus OR cervical cancer)” and identified 151 results. Ten published articles—four trials, three cohort studies, two modelling analyses, one systematic review of trials—evaluated the population impact of one dose of the vaccine on cervical cancer disease outcome among females and all studies showed one dose of the vaccine might be as effective as two doses in preventing HPV infection. However as the trials and cohorts were single-country studies in select populations, the global impact remains unknown. Both published modelling analyses only used one model to estimate the impact of one-dose vaccination, and only examined a few countries. To our knowledge, no published article has modelled the global impact of routine one-dose vaccination on cervical cancer prevention by synthesising the results from more than one model.Added value of this studyThis study presents the first evidence on the potential global impact of a routine one-dose regimen, from a comparative modelling analysis that synthesises results from three published dynamic models calibrated to countries with varying epidemiological and demographic profiles. We found consistent results across all models suggesting that routine one-dose vaccination provides the majority of health benefits to the two-dose programme should a single dose of the vaccine confer more than 20 years of protection at full potential efficacy or 80% efficacy with lifelong protection.Implications of all the available evidenceFindings suggest that routine one-dose vaccinations could avert almost as many cervical cancer cases as a two-dose programme. The one-dose regimen would be cheaper and easier to implement for most countries while alleviating vaccine supply constraints. To cope with the COVID-19 pandemic, many governments have had to implement stringent physical distancing measures, which has led to the suspension of routine immunisation programmes. Public health authorities grapple with the logistic challenges of delivering immunisation services while minimising the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Compared to the two-dose vaccination schedule, a one-dose vaccination schedule would reduce interactions between vaccinees and health workers, simplifying vaccine delivery while also decreasing SARS-CoV-2 exposure.


2020 ◽  
Vol 131 ◽  
pp. 105931
Author(s):  
Nicole G. Campos ◽  
Karla Alfaro ◽  
Mauricio Maza ◽  
Stephen Sy ◽  
Mario Melendez ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document