Economic evaluation of three populational screening strategies for cervical cancer in the county of Valles Occidental: CRICERVA clinical trial

Amelia Acera, Ana Rodriguez, Marta Trapero-Bertran, Pilar Soteras, Norman Sanchez, Josep M Bonet, Josep M Manresa, Pablo Hidalgo, Pere Toran, Gemma Prieto, Amelia Acera, Ana Rodriguez, Marta Trapero-Bertran, Pilar Soteras, Norman Sanchez, Josep M Bonet, Josep M Manresa, Pablo Hidalgo, Pere Toran, Gemma Prieto

Abstract

Background: A high percentage of cervical cancer cases have not undergone cytological tests within 10 years prior to diagnosis. Different population interventions could improve coverage in the public system, although costs will also increase. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness and the costs of three types of population interventions to increase the number of female participants in the screening programmes for cancer of the cervix carried out by Primary Care in four basic health care areas.

Methods/design: A cost-effectiveness analysis will be performed from the perspective of public health system including women from 30 to 70 years of age (n = 20,994) with incorrect screening criteria from four basic health care areas in the Valles Occidental, Barcelona, Spain. The patients will be randomly distributed into the control group and the three intervention groups (IG1: invitation letter to participate in the screening; IG2: invitation letter and informative leaflet; IG3: invitation letter, informative leaflet and a phone call reminder) and followed for three years. Clinical effectiveness will be measured by the number of HPV, epithelial lesions and cancer of cervix cases detected. The number of deaths avoided will be secondary measures of effectiveness. The temporal horizon of the analysis will be the life expectancy of the female population in the study. Costs and effectiveness will be discounted at 3%. In addition, univariate and multivariate sensitivity analysis will be carried out.

Discussion: IG3 is expected to be more cost-effective intervention than IG1 and IG2, with greater detection of HPV infections, epithelial lesions and cancer than other strategies, albeit at a greater cost.

Trial registration: Clinical Trials.gov Identifier NCT01373723.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Timing of the Project.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Study Algorithm.

References

    1. Maxwell D, Bray F. Magnitud de los cánceres atribuibles al VPH. Vaccine de. 2006;24(Sup 3):11–24.
    1. Bosch FX, Castellsagué X, Cortés J, Puig-Tintoré LM, Roura E, de Sanjose S, Torné A. Estudio AFRODITA: cribado del cáncer de cuello uterino en España y factores relacionados. Madrid: Edición patrocinada por GSK; 2009.
    1. Muñoz N, Castellsagué X, de González AB, Gissmann L. HPV in the etiology of human cancer. Vaccine de. 2006;24(Sup 3):1–10.
    1. Walboomers JM, Jacobs MV, Manos MM, Bosch FX, Kummer JA, Shah KV, Snijders PJ, Peto J, Meijer CJ, Muñoz N. Human papillomavirus is a necessary cause of invasive cervical cancer worldwide. J Clin Pathol. 1999;189(1):12–9.
    1. Cortés J, Alba A, Andía D, Ramón y Cajal JM, Velasco J, Vilaplana E. Actas del Primer Foro Español sobre el Virus del Papiloma Humano: 13-14 de junio de 2008. Sevilla. Madrid: Sanofi Pasteur MSD; 2010. Interacción vacuna frente al VPH/cribado del Cáncer de Cuello de Útero.
    1. De Sanjosé S. Actas de la Segunda Jornada Internacional sobre virus del papiloma humano y cáncer: 29 de enero de 2009. Barcelona. Barcelona: GlaxoSmithKline; 2009. The value of Pap screening after the introduction of HPV vaccines.
    1. Wright TC, Bosch FX, Franco EL, Cuzick J, Schiller JT, Garnett GP, Meheus A. Las vacunas contra el VPH y el cribado en la prevención de cáncer de cuello uterino: Conclusiones de una reunión internacional de expertos celebrada en el año 2006. Vaccine de. 2006;24(Sup 3):279–290.
    1. Kitchener HC, Castle PE, Cox JT. Logros y limitaciones del cribado citológico cervical. Vaccine de. 2006;24(Sup 3):67–75.
    1. Protocolo de las actividades para el cribado del cáncer de cuello uterino en Atención Primaria (monografía en internet) Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya, Departament o de Salud; 2006. (citado el 15 de noviembre de 2008). Disponible en.
    1. Moscicki AB, Schiffman M, Kjaer S, Villa LL. Avances recientes en la historia natural del VPH y del cáncer anogenital. Vaccine de. 2006;24(Sup 3):43–53.
    1. Clare J, Edwards D, Bagnall H, Pearmain P, Lawrence G. The use of cervical screening history data to interpret cervical cancer incidence trends. Journal of Public Health. 2008;30(2):171–7. doi: 10.1093/pubmed/fdn008.
    1. Díaz M. Proceeding of the Workshop on Human Papìllomavirus (HPV) and Cancer: 29 de enero de 2009. Barcelona. Barcelona: GlaxoSmithKline; 2009. Challenges of HPV Vaccination.
    1. Oncoguía SEGO. Guías de práctica clínica en cáncer ginecológico i mamario. Publicaciones SEGO; 2008. Cáncer de Cuello Uterino 2008.
    1. Stockholm. European CDC (ECDC); 2008. Guidance for the introduction of hpv vaccines in European Union countries. .
    1. Protocolo para mejorar la cobertura del cribado de cáncer de cuello de útero a partir de la red asistencial pública en Cataluña. Newsletter on Human Papillomavirus. 2008. Disponible en.
    1. Forbes C, Jepson R, Martin-Hirsch P. Intervenciones para estimular la participación de las mujeres en el cribaje de cáncer cervicouterino (Revisión Cochrane traducida) 3. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2008. En: La Biblioteca Cochrane Plus, 2008 Número 4. Oxford: Update Software Ltd.
    1. Eaker S, Adami HO, Granath F, Wilander E, Spare'n P. A large population-based randomized controlled trial to increase attendance at screening for cervical cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomardkers Prev. 2004;13(3):346–54.
    1. Bosch FX, de Sanjosé S, Miralles C. Castellsagué X La prevención del pre-cáncer i del cáncer cervical en España: nuevas opciones para el siglo XXI. Folia clínica en Obstetricia Ginecología 2010 (n° 81). Disponible en.
    1. Cuzick J, Sasieni P, Davies P, Adams J, Normand C, Frater A, Van Ballegooijen M, Van den Akker-van Marle E. Assessing effectiveness, costs and cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening and HPV testing (Chapter 7). In: A systematic review of the role of human papillomavirus testing within a cervical screening programme. Health Technology Assessment. 1999;3(14):95–123.
    1. Mansley EC, McKenna MT. Importance of perspective in economic analyses of cancer screening decisions. The Lancet. 2001;358:1169–73. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(01)06258-4.
    1. Rossi PG, Esposito G, Brezzi S, Brachini A, Raggi P, Federici A. Estimation of Pap-test coverage an area with am organized screening. BMC Health services research. 2006;6:36–46. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-6-36.
    1. Lopez Bastida J, Oliva J, Antonanzas F, Garcia-Altes A, Gisbert R, Mar J, Puig-Junoy J. Propuesta de guía para la evaluación económica aplicada a las tecnologías sanitarias. Gaceta Sanitaria. 2009.
    1. Adams G, Gulliford MC, Ukoumunne OC, Eldridge S, Chinn S, Campbell MJ. Patterns of intra-cluster correlation from primary care research to inform study design and analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004;57:785–794. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2003.12.013.
    1. Parker DR, Evangelou E, Eaton CB. Intraclass correlation coefficients for cluster randomized trials in primary care: the cholesterol education and research trial (CEART) Contemp Clin Trials. 2005;26:260–267. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2005.01.002.
    1. Ukoumunne OC, Gulliford MC, Chinn S, Sterne JA, Burney PG. Methods for evaluating area-wide and organisation-based interventions in health and health care: a systematic review. Health Technol Assess. 1999;3(5):iii–92.
    1. Goldie SJ, Gaffikin L, Goldhaber-Fiebert JD, Gordillo-Tobar A, Levin C, Mahé C, Wright TC. Cost-effectiveness of Cervical-Cancer Screening in Five Developing Countries. The New England Journal of Medicine. 2005;353:2158–68. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa044278.
    1. Siebert U, Sroczynski G, Hillemanns P, Engel J, Stabenow R, Stegmaier C, Voigt K, Gibis B, Hölzel D, Goldie SJ. The German Cervical Cancer Screening Model: development and validation of a decision-analytic model for cervical cancer screening in Germany. European Journal of Public Health. 2006;16(2):185–92.
    1. Mandelblatt JS, Lawrence WF, Mizell Womack S, Jacobson D, Yi B, Hwang Y, Gold K, Barter J, Shah K. Benefits and Costs of Using HPV Testing to Screen for Cervical Cancer. JAMA. 2002;287(18):2372–81. doi: 10.1001/jama.287.18.2372.
    1. Goldie S, Kuhn L, Denny L, Pollack A, Wright TC. Policy Analysis of Cervical Cancer Screening Strategies in Low-Resource Settings. JAMA. 2001;285(24):3107–15. doi: 10.1001/jama.285.24.3107.
    1. Berkhof J, de Bruijne MC, Zielinski GD, Bulkmans NWJ, Rozendaal L, Snijders PJF, Verheijen RH, Meijer CJ. Evaluation of cervical screening strategies with adjunct high-risk human papillomavirus testing for women with borderline or mild dyskaryosis. International Journal of cancer. 2006;118:1759–68. doi: 10.1002/ijc.21513.
    1. Mittendorf T, Petry KU, Iftner T, Greiner W, von der Schulenburg JM. Economic evaluation of human papillomavirus screening in Germany. European Journal of Health Economics. 2003;4(3):209–15. doi: 10.1007/s10198-003-0187-0.
    1. Vijayaraghavan A, Efrusy M, Lindeque G, Dreyer G, Santas C. Cost effectiveness of high-risk HPV DNA testing for cervical cancer screening in South Africa. Gynecologic Oncology. 2009;112(2):377–83. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.08.030.
    1. Kim JJ, Wright TC, Goldie SJ. Cost-effectiveness of Alternative Triage Strategies for Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance. JAMA. 2002;287(18):2382–90. doi: 10.1001/jama.287.18.2382.
    1. Holmes J, Hemmett L, Garfield S. The cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus screening for cervical cancer. A review of recent modeling studies. European Journal of Health Economics. 2005;6(1):30–7. doi: 10.1007/s10198-004-0254-1.
    1. Briggs A, Sculpher M. An introduction to Markov modelling for economic evaluation. Pharmacoeconomics. 1998;13(4):397–409. doi: 10.2165/00019053-199813040-00003.
    1. Karnon J, Brown J. Selecting a decision model for economic evaluation: a case study and review. Health Care Management Science. 1998;1:133–140. doi: 10.1023/A:1019090401655.
    1. Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, O'Brien BJ, Stoddart GL. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford university Press; 2005.

Source: PubMed

Спонсоры и соавторы

Заболевания

Медикаментозные вмешательства

Подписаться