Lifetime effects, costs, and cost effectiveness of testing for human papillomavirus to manage low grade cytological abnormalities: results of the NHS pilot studies

Abstract Objectives To predict the incremental lifetime effects, costs, and cost effectiveness of using human papillomavirus testing to triage women with borderline or mildly dyskaryotic cervical smear results for immediate colposcopy. Design Modelling study. Setting Three centres participating in NHS pilot studies, United Kingdom. Population Women aged 25-64 with borderline or mildly dyskaryotic cervical smear results. Interventions Screening using conventional cytology, liquid based cytology, and four strategies with different age cut-off points and follow up times that used combined liquid based cytology and human papillomavirus testing (adjunctive human papillomavirus testing). Results The model predicts that compared with using conventional cytology without testing for human papillomavirus, testing for the virus in conjunction with liquid based cytology for women with borderline or mildly dyskaryotic cervical smear results (aged 35 or more) would cost £3735 (euros5528; $6474) per life year saved. Extending adjunctive human papillomavirus testing in combination with liquid based cytology to include women aged between 25 and 34 costs an additional £4233 per life year saved. Human papillomavirus testing is likely to reduce lifetime repeat smears by 52%-86% but increase lifetime colposcopies by 64%-138%. Conclusions Testing for human papillomavirus to manage all women with borderline or mildly dyskaryotic cervical smear results is likely to be cost effective. The predicted increase in lifetime colposcopies, however, deserves careful consideration.

[1]  Jonathan Karnon,et al.  Alternative decision modelling techniques for the evaluation of health care technologies: Markov processes versus discrete event simulation. , 2003, Health economics.

[2]  Z. Philips,et al.  An evaluation of liquid-based cytology and human papillomavirus testing within the UK cervical cancer screening programme , 2004, British Journal of Cancer.

[3]  D. Whynes,et al.  Stage-specific treatment costs for cervical cancer in the United Kingdom. , 1998, European journal of cancer.

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

[5]  Evan R. Myers,et al.  Accuracy of the Papanicolaou Test in Screening for and Follow‐up of Cervical Cytologic Abnormalities: A Systematic Review , 2001 .

[6]  A. Culyer,et al.  Community provision of hearing aids and related audiology services. , 2000, Health technology assessment.

[7]  In Forth Valley CERVICAL SCREENING PROGRAMME , 2004 .

[8]  Joakim Dillner,et al.  Virologic versus cytologic triage of women with equivocal Pap smears: a meta-analysis of the accuracy to detect high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia. , 2004, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

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

[10]  Ann Netten,et al.  Unit Costs of Health and Social Care 2002 , 2000 .

[11]  L. Curtis,et al.  Unit Costs of Health and Social Care 2016 , 2015 .

[12]  Ron Goeree,et al.  Probabilistic Analysis of Cost-Effectiveness Models: Choosing between Treatment Strategies for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease , 2002, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[13]  M. Sculpher,et al.  Representing uncertainty: the role of cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. , 2001, Health economics.

[14]  J. Cuzick,et al.  Human papillomavirus testing in primary cervical screening , 1995, The Lancet.

[15]  U Menon,et al.  Management of women who test positive for high-risk types of human papillomavirus: the HART study , 2003, The Lancet.

[16]  H O Dickinson,et al.  Cancer trends in England and Wales , 2000, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

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

[18]  P. Babb,et al.  Cancer Trends in England & Wales 1950-1999 , 2002 .

[19]  Thomas C Wright,et al.  2001 Consensus Guidelines for the Management of Women with Cervical Cytological Abnormalities. , 2002, Journal of lower genital tract disease.

[20]  R. Dickson Management of carcinoma of the cervix. , 1980, The Practitioner.

[21]  A. Culyer,et al.  Liquid-based cytology in cervical screening: a rapid and systematic review. , 2000, Health technology assessment.

[22]  J. Peto,et al.  The cervical cancer epidemic that screening has prevented in the UK , 2004, The Lancet.

[23]  Evan R. Myers,et al.  Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Liquid-Based Cytology and Human Papillomavirus Testing in Cervical Cancer Screening , 2006, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[24]  農林水産奨励会農林水産政策情報センター,et al.  The green book : appraisal and evaluation in central government , 2003 .