TY - JOUR
T1 - Will cervical screening remain cost-effective in women offered the next generation nonavalent HPV vaccine? Results for four developed countries
AU - Simms, Kate T.
AU - Smith, Megan A.
AU - Lew, Jie Bin
AU - Kitchener, Henry C.
AU - Castle, Philip E.
AU - Canfell, Karen
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 UICC
PY - 2016/12/15
Y1 - 2016/12/15
N2 - A next generation nonavalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine (“HPV9 vaccine”) is being introduced in several countries. The aims of this study were to evaluate whether cervical screening will remain cost-effective in cohorts offered nonavalent vaccines and if so, to characterize the optimal number of screening tests. We used a dynamic model of HPV vaccination and cervical screening to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of strategies involving varying numbers of primary HPV tests per lifetime for cohorts offered the nonavalent vaccine as 12 year-olds. For each of four countries—the USA, New Zealand (NZ), Australia and England—we considered local factors including vaccine uptake rates (USA/NZ uptake ∼50%; Australia/England uptake >70%), attributable fractions of HPV9-included types, demographic factors, costs and indicative willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds. Extensive probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed. We found that, in the USA, four screens per lifetime was the most likely scenario, with 34% probability of being optimal at WTP US$50,000/LYS, increasing to 84% probability at US$100,000/LYS. In New Zealand, five screens per lifetime was the most likely scenario, with 100% probability of being optimal at NZ$42,000/LYS, given the assumptions used. In Australia, two screens per lifetime was the most likely scenario, with 62% probability of being optimal at AU$50,000/LYS. In England, four screens per lifetime was the most likely scenario, with 32% probability of being optimal at GB£20,000/LYS, increasing to 96% probability at GB£30,000/LYS. We conclude that some cervical screening will remain cost-effective, even in countries with high vaccination coverage. However, the optimal number of screens may vary between countries.
AB - A next generation nonavalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine (“HPV9 vaccine”) is being introduced in several countries. The aims of this study were to evaluate whether cervical screening will remain cost-effective in cohorts offered nonavalent vaccines and if so, to characterize the optimal number of screening tests. We used a dynamic model of HPV vaccination and cervical screening to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of strategies involving varying numbers of primary HPV tests per lifetime for cohorts offered the nonavalent vaccine as 12 year-olds. For each of four countries—the USA, New Zealand (NZ), Australia and England—we considered local factors including vaccine uptake rates (USA/NZ uptake ∼50%; Australia/England uptake >70%), attributable fractions of HPV9-included types, demographic factors, costs and indicative willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds. Extensive probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed. We found that, in the USA, four screens per lifetime was the most likely scenario, with 34% probability of being optimal at WTP US$50,000/LYS, increasing to 84% probability at US$100,000/LYS. In New Zealand, five screens per lifetime was the most likely scenario, with 100% probability of being optimal at NZ$42,000/LYS, given the assumptions used. In Australia, two screens per lifetime was the most likely scenario, with 62% probability of being optimal at AU$50,000/LYS. In England, four screens per lifetime was the most likely scenario, with 32% probability of being optimal at GB£20,000/LYS, increasing to 96% probability at GB£30,000/LYS. We conclude that some cervical screening will remain cost-effective, even in countries with high vaccination coverage. However, the optimal number of screens may vary between countries.
KW - HPV vaccine
KW - cervical screening
KW - nonavalent HPV vaccine
KW - primary HPV screening
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84994171984&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84994171984&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/ijc.30392
DO - 10.1002/ijc.30392
M3 - Article
C2 - 27541596
AN - SCOPUS:84994171984
SN - 0020-7136
VL - 139
SP - 2771
EP - 2780
JO - International Journal of Cancer
JF - International Journal of Cancer
IS - 12
ER -