Will cervical screening remain cost-effective in women offered the next generation nonavalent HPV vaccine? Results for four developed countries

Kate T. Simms, Megan A. Smith, Jie Bin Lew, Henry C. Kitchener, Philip E. Castle, Karen Canfell

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

31 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2771-2780
Number of pages10
JournalInternational Journal of Cancer
Volume139
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 15 2016

Fingerprint

Papillomavirus Vaccines
Developed Countries
New Zealand
Costs and Cost Analysis
Vaccines
England
Vaccination
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Demography

Keywords

  • cervical screening
  • HPV vaccine
  • nonavalent HPV vaccine
  • primary HPV screening

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)
  • Oncology
  • Cancer Research

Cite this

Will cervical screening remain cost-effective in women offered the next generation nonavalent HPV vaccine? Results for four developed countries. / Simms, Kate T.; Smith, Megan A.; Lew, Jie Bin; Kitchener, Henry C.; Castle, Philip E.; Canfell, Karen.

In: International Journal of Cancer, Vol. 139, No. 12, 15.12.2016, p. 2771-2780.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Simms, Kate T. ; Smith, Megan A. ; Lew, Jie Bin ; Kitchener, Henry C. ; Castle, Philip E. ; Canfell, Karen. / Will cervical screening remain cost-effective in women offered the next generation nonavalent HPV vaccine? Results for four developed countries. In: International Journal of Cancer. 2016 ; Vol. 139, No. 12. pp. 2771-2780.
@article{2b7065ef3f6f457ca4bbee0c85703f02,
title = "Will cervical screening remain cost-effective in women offered the next generation nonavalent HPV vaccine? Results for four developed countries",
abstract = "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.",
keywords = "cervical screening, HPV vaccine, nonavalent HPV vaccine, primary HPV screening",
author = "Simms, {Kate T.} and Smith, {Megan A.} and Lew, {Jie Bin} and Kitchener, {Henry C.} and Castle, {Philip E.} and Karen Canfell",
year = "2016",
month = "12",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1002/ijc.30392",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "139",
pages = "2771--2780",
journal = "International Journal of Cancer",
issn = "0020-7136",
publisher = "Wiley-Liss Inc.",
number = "12",

}

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

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 - cervical screening

KW - HPV vaccine

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

VL - 139

SP - 2771

EP - 2780

JO - International Journal of Cancer

JF - International Journal of Cancer

SN - 0020-7136

IS - 12

ER -