An updated natural history model of cervical cancer: derivation of model parameters.

Mathematical models of cervical cancer have been widely used to evaluate the comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of preventive strategies. Major advances in the understanding of cervical carcinogenesis motivate the creation of a new disease paradigm in such models. To keep pace with the most recent evidence, we updated a previously developed microsimulation model of human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and cervical cancer to reflect 1) a shift towards health states based on HPV rather than poorly reproducible histological diagnoses and 2) HPV clearance and progression to precancer as a function of infection duration and genotype, as derived from the control arm of the Costa Rica Vaccine Trial (2004-2010). The model was calibrated leveraging empirical data from the New Mexico Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Registry (1980-1999) and a state-of-the-art cervical cancer screening registry in New Mexico (2007-2009). The calibrated model had good correspondence with data on genotype- and age-specific HPV prevalence, genotype frequency in precancer and cancer, and age-specific cancer incidence. We present this model in response to a call for new natural history models of cervical cancer intended for decision analysis and economic evaluation at a time when global cervical cancer prevention policy continues to evolve and evidence of the long-term health effects of cervical interventions remains critical.

[1]  K. Auranen,et al.  Impact of Vaccination on 14 High-Risk HPV Type Infections: A Mathematical Modelling Approach , 2013, PloS one.

[2]  J. Cuzick,et al.  A population‐based study of human papillomavirus genotype prevalence in the United States: Baseline measures prior to mass human papillomavirus vaccination , 2013, International journal of cancer.

[3]  E. Kliewer,et al.  Population-level impact of the bivalent, quadrivalent, and nonavalent human papillomavirus vaccines: a model-based analysis. , 2012, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[4]  Nicolas Wentzensen,et al.  Molecular mapping of high‐grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia shows etiological dominance of HPV16 , 2012, International journal of cancer.

[5]  Natasha K. Stout,et al.  Calibration Methods Used in Cancer Simulation Models and Suggested Reporting Guidelines , 2012, PharmacoEconomics.

[6]  E. Unger,et al.  Prevalence of genital human papillomavirus among females in the United States, the National Health And Nutrition Examination Survey, 2003-2006. , 2011, The Journal of infectious diseases.

[7]  E. Unger,et al.  Human papillomavirus (HPV) 6, 11, 16, and 18 prevalence among females in the United States--National Health And Nutrition Examination Survey, 2003-2006: opportunity to measure HPV vaccine impact? , 2011, The Journal of infectious diseases.

[8]  S. Kulasingam,et al.  Screening for Cervical Cancer: A Decision Analysis for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force , 2011 .

[9]  M. Schiffman The Need for Forward-Looking Decision Analyses to Guide Cervical Cancer Prevention , 2011, Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.

[10]  C. Wheeler,et al.  Incident Cervical HPV Infections in Young Women: Transition Probabilities for CIN and Infection Clearance , 2011, Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.

[11]  T. Iftner,et al.  Long-term absolute risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse following human papillomavirus infection: role of persistence. , 2010, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[12]  Diane Solomon,et al.  Longitudinal study of human papillomavirus persistence and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2/3: critical role of duration of infection. , 2010, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[13]  P. Castle,et al.  Benefits and risks of HPV testing in cervical cancer screening. , 2010, The Lancet. Oncology.

[14]  J. Savarino,et al.  Bayesian Calibration of Microsimulation Models , 2009, Journal of the American Statistical Association.

[15]  S. Goldie,et al.  Cost effectiveness analysis of including boys in a human papillomavirus vaccination programme in the United States , 2009, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[16]  Elamin H Elbasha,et al.  Epidemiologic natural history and clinical management of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Disease: a critical and systematic review of the literature in the development of an HPV dynamic transmission model , 2009, BMC infectious diseases.

[17]  C. Wheeler,et al.  Human Papillomavirus Genotype Distributions: Implications for Vaccination and Cancer Screening in the United States , 2009, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[18]  Diane Solomon,et al.  Rationale and design of a community-based double-blind randomized clinical trial of an HPV 16 and 18 vaccine in Guanacaste, Costa Rica. , 2008, Vaccine.

[19]  Sue J Goldie,et al.  Health and economic implications of HPV vaccination in the United States. , 2008, The New England journal of medicine.

[20]  Charlotte Paul,et al.  Natural history of cervical neoplasia and risk of invasive cancer in women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3: a retrospective cohort study. , 2008, The Lancet. Oncology.

[21]  M. Plummer,et al.  A 2-Year Prospective Study of Human Papillomavirus Persistence Among Women With a Cytological Diagnosis of Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance or Low-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion , 2008 .

[22]  Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert,et al.  Modeling human papillomavirus and cervical cancer in the United States for analyses of screening and vaccination , 2007, Population health metrics.

[23]  Jose Jeronimo,et al.  Human papillomavirus and cervical cancer , 2007, The Lancet.

[24]  Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert,et al.  Cost-effectiveness of HPV 16, 18 vaccination in Brazil. , 2007, Vaccine.

[25]  S. Franceschi,et al.  Human papillomavirus type distribution in invasive cervical cancer and high‐grade cervical lesions: A meta‐analysis update , 2007, International journal of cancer.

[26]  Karen M Kuntz,et al.  Multiparameter calibration of a natural history model of cervical cancer. , 2007, American journal of epidemiology.

[27]  Diane Solomon,et al.  The relationship of community biopsy-diagnosed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 to the quality control pathology-reviewed diagnoses: an ALTS report. , 2007, American journal of clinical pathology.

[28]  J Dillner,et al.  Strategies for the introduction of human papillomavirus vaccination: modelling the optimum age- and sex-specific pattern of vaccination in Finland , 2007, British Journal of Cancer.

[29]  Haesook T. Kim Cumulative Incidence in Competing Risks Data and Competing Risks Regression Analysis , 2007, Clinical Cancer Research.

[30]  Erik J. Dasbach,et al.  Model for Assessing Human Papillomavirus Vaccination Strategies , 2007, Emerging infectious diseases.

[31]  Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert,et al.  Chapter 18: Public health policy for cervical cancer prevention: the role of decision science, economic evaluation, and mathematical modeling. , 2006, Vaccine.

[32]  M. Lehtinen,et al.  Epidemiology of HPV 16 and Cervical Cancer in Finland and the Potential Impact of Vaccination: Mathematical Modelling Analyses , 2006, PLoS medicine.

[33]  Sue J Goldie,et al.  Cost-effectiveness of cervical-cancer screening in five developing countries. , 2005, The New England journal of medicine.

[34]  A. Muñoz,et al.  Incidence, duration, and determinants of cervical human papillomavirus infection in a cohort of Colombian women with normal cytological results. , 2004, The Journal of infectious diseases.

[35]  G. Sanders,et al.  Evaluating Human Papillomavirus Vaccination Programs , 2004, Emerging infectious diseases.

[36]  J. T. Cox,et al.  Prospective follow-up suggests similar risk of subsequent cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or 3 among women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 1 or negative colposcopy and directed biopsy. , 2003, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[37]  James P. Hughes,et al.  The Theoretical Population-Level Impact of a Prophylactic Human Papilloma Virus Vaccine , 2002, Epidemiology.

[38]  S. Franceschi,et al.  Prevalence and determinants of HPV infection among Colombian women with normal cytology , 2002, British Journal of Cancer.

[39]  T. Wright,et al.  Cost-effectiveness of alternative triage strategies for atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. , 2002, JAMA.

[40]  H. Anton-Culver,et al.  A Randomized, Double Blind, Phase III Trial Using Oral β-Carotene Supplementation for Women with High-Grade Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia , 2001 .

[41]  H. Anton-Culver,et al.  A randomized, double blind, Phase III trial using oral beta-carotene supplementation for women with high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. , 2001, Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology.

[42]  D C McCrory,et al.  Mathematical model for the natural history of human papillomavirus infection and cervical carcinogenesis. , 2000, American journal of epidemiology.

[43]  J. Peto,et al.  Human papillomavirus is a necessary cause of invasive cervical cancer worldwide , 1999, The Journal of pathology.

[44]  J Crowley,et al.  Estimation of failure probabilities in the presence of competing risks: new representations of old estimators. , 1999, Statistics in medicine.

[45]  V. Hasselblad,et al.  Evaluation of cervical cytology. , 1999, Evidence report/technology assessment.

[46]  Jacques Ferlay,et al.  Cancer incidence in five continents. , 1976, IARC scientific publications.