Cost effectiveness of human papillomavirus-16/18 genotyping in cervical cancer screening

Comparative pilot study about HPV test with partial genotyping in primary screening versus other strategies for cervical cancer population screening, CRYGEN 16/18 study

INTRODUCTION

The early detection of cervical cancer requires the implementation of molecular screening programmes for human papillomavirus (HPV). However, there are discrepancies in the optimization of screening protocols. The performance of 10 primary screening strategies based on molecular, cytological or combined techniques is now evaluated.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A blind, prospective, and interventional study was designed in 1.977 35-year-old women. The molecular determination was carried out by the Cobas 4800 HPV platform. Cytological analysis were performed on the same samples without knowledge of the result of the molecular assay. All women in whom HPV-16/HPV-18 was detected or presented cytological alteration together with detection of other high-risk genotypes (HPVhr) were referred to colposcopy.

RESULTS

The molecular assay detected the presence of HPVhr genotypes in 12.5% of the women, while only 8.1% of the cytologies were pathological. Among the patients referred to colposcopy, in 19.5% high-grade lesions were observed, being HPV-16 present in 65.3% of them. In six of these high-grade lesions (associated with HPV-16 in all cases), cytology was reported as normal. The follow-up one year later, of women with normal cytology and HPVhr detection a HSIL/CIN2+ lesion was detected (associated to HPV-33). In the comparative study with other strategies, the protocol called CRYGEN 16/18 yielded the best balance of sensitivity and specificity with the least referral to colposcopy.

CONCLUSIONS

Performing molecular detection of HPVhr with partial first-line genotyping of at least HPV-16, with direct referral to colposcopy, increases the detection rate of HSIL/CIN2+ lesions.

Histologıcal results of HPV genotyping from a colposcopy center

PURPOSE

To investigate the role of partial human papillomavirus (HPV) genotyping tests in predicting the diagnosis of high-grade cervical intraepithelial lesion and cancer (HSIL +) as a result of colposcopic histopathology.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study included 2872 patients who presented at our colposcopy unit between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2019 and underwent colposcopy for the first time. The patients were compared in terms of HSIL + results as HPV 16/18 and HPV other type positive groups.

RESULTS

HSIL + was determined at the rate of 22.3% in the HPV 16/18 group and at 7.0% in the HPV Other group, and the difference was statistically significant (p = 0.000). HPV 16/18 types were found to be responsible for 84.8% of cervical cancers and 83.5% of HSIL and worse cases.

CONCLUSION

Partial HPV 16/18 genotyping is an effective strategy in the triage of HPV-positive women. HPV type identification consistent with the epidemiology of HPV types in HSIL + cases in the screened population, and the age-appropriate use of primary HPV tests will determine the sensitivity and cost effectiveness of screening.

Distribution of human papillomavirus genotypes by severity of cervical lesions in HPV screened positive women from the ESTAMPA study in Latin America

The proportion of HPV16 and 18-associated cervical cancer (CC) appears rather constant worldwide (≥70%), but the relative importance of the other HR-HPV differs slightly by geographical region. Here, we studied the HPV genotype distribution of HPV positive Latin American (LA) women by histological grade, in a sub-cohort from the ESTAMPA study; we also explored the association of age-specific HPV genotypes in severe lesions. Cervical samples from 1,252 participants (854 ≤CIN1, 121 CIN2, 194 CIN3 and 83 CC) were genotyped by two PCRs-Reverse Blotting Hybridization strategies: i) Broad-Spectrum General Primers 5+/6+ and ii) PGMY9/11 PCRs. HPV16 was the most frequently found genotype in all histological grades, and increased with the severity of lesions from 14.5% in ≤ CIN1, 19.8% in CIN2, 51.5% in CIN3 to 65.1% in CC (p < 0.001). For the remaining HR-HPVs their frequency in CC did not increase when compared to less severe categories. The nonavalent vaccine HR-types ranked at the top in CC, the dominant ones being HPV16 and HPV45. HR-HPV single infection occurs, respectively, in 57.1% and 57.0% of ≤CIN1 and CIN2, increasing to 72.2% and 91.6% in CIN3 and CC (p<0.001). No association between age and HPV type was observed in CC, although the risk of HPV16 infection in CIN3 cases increased with age. Results confirm the relevance of HPV16 in the whole clinical spectrum, with a strong rise of its proportion in CIN3 and cancer. This information will be relevant in evaluating the impact of HPV vaccination, as a baseline against which to compare genotype changes in HPV type-specific distribution as vaccinated women participate in screening in LA region. Likewise, these data may help select the best HPV testing system for HPV-based efficient, affordable, and sustainable screening programmes.

Comparative pilot study about HPV test with partial genotyping in primary screening versus other strategies for cervical cancer population screening, CRYGEN 16/18 study

INTRODUCTION

The early detection of cervical cancer requires the implementation of molecular screening programs for human papillomavirus (HPV). However, there are discrepancies in the optimization of screening protocols. The performance of 10 primary screening strategies based on molecular, cytological or combined techniques is now evaluated.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A blind, prospective, and interventional study was designed in 1977 35-year-old women. The molecular determination was carried out by the Cobas 4800 HPV platform. Cytological analysis was performed on the same samples without knowledge of the result of the molecular assay. All women in whom HPV-16/HPV-18 was detected or presented cytological alteration together with detection of other high-risk genotypes (HPVhr) were referred to colposcopy.

RESULTS

The molecular assay detected the presence of HPVhr genotypes in 12.5% of the women, while only 8.1% of the cytologies were pathological. Among the patients referred to colposcopy, in 19.5% high-grade lesions were observed, being HPV-16 present in 65.3% of them. In six of these high-grade lesions (associated with HPV-16 in all cases), cytology was reported as normal. The follow-up one year later, of women with normal cytology and HPVhr detection a HSIL/CIN2+ lesion was detected (associated to HPV-33). In the comparative study with other strategies, the protocol called CRYGEN 16/18 yielded the best balance of sensitivity and specificity with the least referral to colposcopy.

CONCLUSIONS

Performing molecular detection of HPVhr with partial first-line genotyping of at least HPV-16, with direct referral to colposcopy, increases the detection rate of HSIL/CIN2+ lesions.

The Potential Clinical and Economic Value of a Human Papillomavirus Primary Screening Test That Additionally Identifies Genotypes 31, 45, 51, and 52 Individually

BACKGROUND

Although current human papillomavirus (HPV) genotype screening tests identify genotypes 16 and 18 and do not specifically identify other high-risk types, a new extended genotyping test identifies additional individual (31, 45, 51, and 52) and groups (33/58, 35/39/68, and 56/59/66) of high-risk genotypes.

METHODS

We developed a Markov model of the HPV disease course and evaluated the clinical and economic value of HPV primary screening with Onclarity (BD Diagnostics, Franklin Lakes, NJ) capable of extended genotyping in a cohort of women 30 years or older. Women with certain genotypes were later rescreened instead of undergoing immediate colposcopy and varied which genotypes were rescreened, disease progression rate, and test cost.

RESULTS

Assuming 100% compliance with screening, HPV primary screening using current tests resulted in 25,194 invasive procedures and 48 invasive cervical cancer (ICC) cases per 100,000 women. Screening with extended genotyping (100% compliance) and later rescreening women with certain genotypes averted 903 to 3163 invasive procedures and resulted in 0 to 3 more ICC cases compared with current HPV primary screening tests. Extended genotyping was cost-effective ($2298-$7236/quality-adjusted life year) when costing $75 and cost saving (median, $0.3-$1.0 million) when costing $43. When the probabilities of disease progression increased (2-4 times), extended genotyping was not cost-effective because it resulted in more ICC cases and accrued fewer quality-adjusted life years.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study identified the conditions under which extended genotyping was cost-effective and even cost saving compared with current tests. A key driver of cost-effectiveness is the risk of disease progression, which emphasizes the need to better understand such risks in different populations.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of primary human papillomavirus testing in cervical cancer screening: Results from the HPV FOCAL Trial

The Human Papillomavirus FOr CervicAL cancer (HPV FOCAL) trial is a large randomized controlled trial comparing the efficacy of primary HPV testing to cytology among women in the population-based Cervix Screening Program in British Columbia, Canada. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis based on the HPV FOCAL trial to estimate the incremental cost per detected high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or worse lesions (CIN2+). A total of 19,009 women aged 25 to 65 were randomized to one of two study groups. Women in the intervention group received primary HPV testing with reflex liquid-based cytology (LBC) upon a positive finding with a screening interval of 48 months. Women in the control group received primary LBC testing, and those negative returned at 24 months for LBC and again at 48 months for exit screening. Both groups received HPV and LBC co-testing at the 48-month exit. Incremental costs during the course of the trial were comparable between the intervention and control groups. The intervention group had lower overall costs and detected a larger number of CIN2+ lesions, resulting in a lower mean cost per CIN2+ detected ($7551) than the control group ($8325), a difference of -$773 [all costs in 2018 USD]. Cost per detected lesion was sensitive to the costs of sample collection, HPV testing, and LBC testing. The HPV FOCAL Trial results suggest that primary HPV testing every 4 years produces similar outcomes to LBC-based testing every 2 years for cervical cancer screening at a lower cost.

Effect of introducing human papillomavirus genotyping into real-world screening on cervical cancer screening in China: a retrospective population-based cohort study

Background:

China’s Fujian Cervical Pilot Project (FCPP) transitioned cervical cancer screening from high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) nongenotyping to genotyping. We investigated the clinical impact of this introduction, comparing performance indicators between HR-HPV genotyping combined with cytology screening (HR-HPV genotyping period) and the previous HR-HPV nongenotyping combined with cytology screening (HR-HPV nongenotyping period).

Methods:

A retrospective population-based cohort study was performed using data from the FCPP for China. We obtained data for the HR-HPV nongenotyping period from 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2013, and for the HR-HPV genotyping period from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2016. Propensity score matching was used to match women from the two periods. Multivariable Cox regression was used to assess factors associated with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or worse (CIN2+). The primary outcome was the incidence of CIN2+ in women aged ⩾25 years. Performance was assessed and included consistency, reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation and cost.

Results:

Compared with HR-HPV nongenotyping period, in the HR-HPV genotyping period, more CIN2+ cases were identified at the initial screening (3.06% versus 2.32%; p < 0.001); the rate of colposcopy referral was higher (10.87% versus 6.64%; p < 0.001); and the hazard ratio of CIN2+ diagnosis was 1.64 (95% confidence interval, 1.43–1.88; p < 0.001) after controlling for health insurance status and age. The total costs of the first round of screening (US$66,609 versus US$65,226; p = 0.293) were similar during the two periods. Higher screening coverage (25.95% versus 25.19%; p = 0.007), higher compliance with age recommendations (92.70% versus 91.69%; p = 0.001), lower over-screening (4.92% versus 10.15%; p < 0.001), and reduced unqualified samples (cytology: 1.48% versus 1.73%, p = 0.099; HR-HPV: 0.57% versus 1.34%, p < 0.001) were observed in the HR-HPV genotyping period.

Conclusions:

Introduction of an HR-HPV genotyping assay in China could detect more CIN2+ lesions at earlier stages and improve programmatic indicators. Evidence suggests that the introduction of HR-HPV genotyping is likely to accelerate the elimination of cervical cancer in China.

A cross-sectional study exploring triage of human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive women by visual assessment, manual and computer-interpreted cytology, and HPV-16/18-45 genotyping in Cameroon

BACKGROUND

High-risk human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive women require triage to identify those at higher risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+). We aimed to compare visual assessment of the cervix, manual cytology and automated cytology as triage tests to screen HPV-positive women, and to assess over-treatment rates after visual assessment and over-referral rates to colposcopy after cytology.

METHODS

The present cross-sectional study is nested in a large prospective screening trial in Cameroon. Evaluations of the tests have been conducted individually and in combination with HPV-16/HPV-18/45 genotyping. For the evaluation of over-treatment and colposcopic over-referral, we simulated two screening scenarios: (1) one-visit scenario (test-triage-and-treatment); and (2) two-visit scenario (test-triage-and-colposcopy).

RESULTS

1582 women with a median age of 40 years (IQR 35-45) performed self-sampling for HPV testing, of which 294 (18.6%) were HPV-positive, and 12.2% had CIN2+. Sensitivities for CIN2+ detection were 77.1% for visual assessment, 80.0% for manual cytology, and 84.8% for automated cytology. Sensitivity of combined tests was higher compared with single tests. The highest sensitivity was obtained by the combination of genotyping and automated cytology (91.2%). In the one-visit scenario, the over-treatment rate was 83.9% in referred women, with a ratio of 6.2 treated women per CIN2+. In the two-visit scenario, the lowest over-referral rate would have been under manual cytology (45.0%), with a ratio of 1.8 referred women per CIN2+. Single and combined triage strategies by automated cytology gave rise to over-referral rates of 69.2% and 76.7%, respectively, and a ratio of 3.2 and 4.3 referred women per CIN2+, respectively.

DISCUSSION

Triage of HPV-positive women using a combination of genotyping and automated cytology for CIN2+ detection may provide public benefits in low- and middle-income countries.

Cervical screening: ESGO-EFC position paper of the European Society of Gynaecologic Oncology (ESGO) and the European Federation of Colposcopy (EFC)

This paper summarises the position of ESGO and EFC on cervical screening based on existing guidelines and opinions of a team of lead experts. HPV test is replacing cytology as this offers greater protection against cervical cancer and allows longer screening intervals. Only a dozen of HPV tests are considered as clinically validated for screening. The lower specificity of HPV test dictates the use of triage tests that can select women for colposcopy. Reflex cytology is currently the only well validated triage test; HPV genotyping and p16 immunostaining may be used in the future, although methylation assays and viral load also look promising. A summary of quality assurance benchmarks is provided, and the importance to audit the screening histories of women who developed cancer is noted as a key objective. HPV-based screening is more cost-effective than cytology or cotesting. HPV-based screening should continue in the post-vaccination era. Only a fraction of the female population is vaccinated, and this varies across countries. A major challenge will be to personalise screening frequency according to vaccination status. Still the most important factor for successful prevention by screening is high population coverage and organised screening. Screening with self-sampling to reach under-screened women is promising.

PCR-reverse dot blot human papillomavirus genotyping as a primary screening test for cervical cancer in a hospital-based cohort

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-reverse-dot-blot (RDB) human papillomavirus (HPV) genotyping test as a feasible assay for the cervical cancer primary screening.

METHODS

In a hospital-based cohort, a total of 21,568 women were voluntarily enrolled from March 2009 to November 2016 for evaluating the 3 current cervical cancer screening strategies: co-test, cytology primary and high-risk HPV (HR-HPV) primary by using PCR-RDB HPV genotyping and liquid-based cytology (thinprep cytologic test [TCT]). Women with HR-HPV infection and/or abnormal cytology were referred for colposcopy, and the biopsy or conization was performed according to the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology (ASCCP) guidelines.

RESULTS

Overall, 18.20% (3,935/21,568) of the women were detected as HR-HPV-positive, 5.04% (1,088/21,568) were diagnosed with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or higher (CIN2+), and 3.43% (739/21,568) with CIN3+. The cumulative incidence rates for CIN2+/CIN3+ in patients with HPV-16/18-positive were 48.28%/37.20%, while they were 0.86%/0.38%, 0.30%/0.15% and 0.18%/0.09% in cytology-negative, HR-HPV-negative and co-test-negative population, respectively. Using CIN2+ and CIN3+ as the observed endpoints, the sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV) of HR-HPV genotyping as a primary screening tool were 90.99%/99.49% and 91.57%/99.80%. Moreover, using HR-HPV genotyping primary screening could detect the same more CIN2+/CIN3+ cases in baseline-detection as co-testing (990/700 vs. 991/701) and far more than cytology primary screening (903/656, p<0.05). It also achieved the lowest misdiagnosis rate (8.01%/5.02%). Although HPV genotyping primary screening required an increased number of colposcopies (2.75/3.89 per CIN2+/CIN3+ case), it yielded an acceptable rate.

CONCLUSIONS

The PCR-RDB HPV genotyping test is a cost-effective and beneficial cervical cancer primary screening for hospital-based opportunistic screening.

Economic evaluation of HPV DNA test as primary screening method for cervical cancer: A health policy discussion in Greece

Background

HPV test appears to be more effective in cervical cancer (CC) screening. However, the decision of its adoption as a primary screening method by substituting the established cytology lies in the evaluation of multiple criteria. Aim of this study is to evaluate the economic and clinical impact of HPV test as primary screening method for CC.

Methods

A decision tree and a Markov model were developed to simulate the screening algorithm and the natural history of CC. Fourteen different screening strategies were evaluated, for women 25–65 years old. Clinical inputs were drawn from the HERMES study and cost inputs from the official price lists. In the absence of CC treatment cost data, the respective Spanish costs were used after being converted to 2017 Greek values. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted.

Results

All screening strategies, that offer as primary screening method triennial HPV genotyping (simultaneous or reflex) alone or as co-testing with cytology appear to be more effective than all other strategies, with regards to both annual CC mortality, due to missed disease (-10.1), and CC incidence(-7.5) versus annual cytology (current practice). Of those, the strategy with HPV test with simultaneous 16/18 genotyping is the strategy that provides savings of 1.050 million euros annually. However, when the above strategy is offered quinquennially despite the fact that outcomes are decreased it remains more effective than current practice (-7.7 deaths and -1.3 incidence) and more savings per death averted (1.323 million) or incidence reduced (7.837 million) are realized.

Conclusions

HPV 16/18 genotyping as a primary screening method for CC appears to be one of the most effective strategies and dominates current practice in respect to both cost and outcomes. Even when compared with all other strategies, the outcomes that it generates justify the cost that it requires, representing a good value for money alternative.

Methylation estimates the risk of precancer in HPV-infected women with discrepant results between cytology and HPV16/18 genotyping

BACKGROUND

Vigilant management of women with high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) is necessary in cancer screening programs. To this end, we evaluated the performance of S5 (targeting DNA methylation in HPV16, HPV18, HPV31, HPV33, and human gene EPB41L3) to predict cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher (CIN2+) in a sample of hrHPV-infected women referred to colposcopy in the FRIDA Study, a large screening trial in Mexico. A nested case-control sample with women referred to colposcopy either by atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or higher (ASCUS+) in cytology and/or positive for HPV types 16 or 18 was tested by S5. Seventy-nine cases of CIN2+ were age-matched to 237 controls without a diagnosis of CIN2+ (

RESULTS

The S5 classifier separated women with CIN2+ from

CONCLUSIONS

S5 testing on hrHPV-positive women significantly increased diagnostic information compared to triage by HPV16/18 plus cytology and appears to have clinical utility as an additional test to substantially lessen burdens on colposcopy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The FRIDA Study is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT02510027.

Collapse

Key Words

• Cervical cancer
• Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia
• DNA methylation
• EPB41L3
• Human papillomavirus
• S5 classifier
• Triage

Collapse

MESH Headings

• Adult
• Area Under Curve
• Case-Control Studies
• Clinical Trials as Topic
• Colposcopy
• DNA Methylation
• DNA, Viral/genetics
• Early Detection of Cancer/methods
• Epigenesis, Genetic
• Female
• Genotype
• Human papillomavirus 16/genetics
• Human papillomavirus 18/genetics
• Humans
• Mexico
• Microfilament Proteins/genetics
• Middle Aged
• Papillomavirus Infections/complications
• Papillomavirus Infections/genetics
• Sensitivity and Specificity
• Sequence Analysis, DNA
• Triage
• Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis
• Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/genetics
• Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/virology
• Uterine Cervical Dysplasia/diagnosis
• Uterine Cervical Dysplasia/genetics
• Uterine Cervical Dysplasia/virology

Collapse

Grants

• 21070 Cancer Research UK
• 27046 Cancer Research UK
• P30 CA016672 NCI NIH HHS
• C569/A10404 Cancer Research UK
• Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social
• Secretaría de Salud
• Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología
• Instituto Nacional de Salud Publica

Collapse

Affiliation(s)

Rubí Hernández-López Centro de Investigación en Salud Poblacional, Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública, Cuernavaca, Morelos México Centro de Investigación en Políticas, Población y Salud, Universidad Nacional Autónoma, Ciudad de México, México
Attila T. Lorincz Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Centre for Cancer Prevention, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
Leticia Torres-Ibarra Centro de Investigación en Salud Poblacional, Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública, Cuernavaca, Morelos México
Caroline Reuter Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Centre for Cancer Prevention, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
Dorota Scibior-Bentkowska Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Centre for Cancer Prevention, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
Rhian Warman Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Centre for Cancer Prevention, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
Belinda Nedjai Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Centre for Cancer Prevention, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
Indira Mendiola-Pastrana Centro de Investigación en Salud Poblacional, Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública, Cuernavaca, Morelos México
Leith León-Maldonado Centro de Investigación en Políticas, Población y Salud, Universidad Nacional Autónoma, Ciudad de México, México Cátedra-CONACYT, Centro de Investigación en Salud Poblacional, Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública, Cuernavaca, Morelos México
Berenice Rivera-Paredez Centro de Investigación en Salud Poblacional, Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública, Cuernavaca, Morelos México Centro de Investigación en Políticas, Población y Salud, Universidad Nacional Autónoma, Ciudad de México, México
Paula Ramírez-Palacios Unidad de Investigación Epidemiológica y en Servicios de Salud, Delegación Morelos, Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, Cuernavaca, Morelos México
Eduardo Lazcano-Ponce Centro de Investigación en Salud Poblacional, Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública, Cuernavaca, Morelos México
Jack Cuzick Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Centre for Cancer Prevention, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
Jorge Salmerón Centro de Investigación en Políticas, Población y Salud, Universidad Nacional Autónoma, Ciudad de México, México

Collapse

Estimated Quality of Life and Economic Outcomes Associated With 12 Cervical Cancer Screening Strategies: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis

IMPORTANCE

Many cervical cancer screening strategies are now recommended in the United States, but the benefits, harms, and costs of each option are unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of 12 cervical cancer screening strategies.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The cross-sectional portion of this study enrolled a convenience sample of 451 English-speaking or Spanish-speaking women aged 21 to 65 years from September 22, 2014, to June 16, 2016, identified at women's health clinics in San Francisco. In this group, utilities (preferences) were measured for 23 cervical cancer screening-associated health states and were applied to a decision model of type-specific high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV)-induced cervical carcinogenesis. Test accuracy estimates were abstracted from systematic reviews. The evaluated strategies were cytologic testing every 3 years for women aged 21 to 65 years with either repeat cytologic testing in 1 year or immediate hrHPV triage for atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US), cytologic testing every 3 years for women age 21 to 29 years followed by cytologic testing plus hrHPV testing (cotesting), or primary hrHPV testing alone for women aged 30 to 65 years. Screening frequency, abnormal test result management, and the age to switch from cytologic testing to hrHPV testing (25 or 30 years) were varied. Analyses were conducted from both the societal and health care sector perspectives.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Utilities for 23 cervical cancer screening-associated health states (cross-sectional study) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and total costs for each strategy.

RESULTS

Utilities were measured in a sociodemographically diverse group of 451 women (mean [SD] age, 38.2 [10.7] years; 258 nonwhite [57.2%]). Cytologic testing every 3 years with repeat cytologic testing for ASC-US yielded the most lifetime QALYs and conferred more QALYs at higher costs ($2166 per QALY) than the lowest-cost strategy (cytologic testing every 3 years with hrHPV triage of ASC-US). All cytologic testing plus hrHPV testing (cotesting) and primary hrHPV testing strategies provided fewer QALYs at higher costs. Adding indirect costs did not change the conclusions. In sensitivity analyses, hrHPV testing every 5 years with genotyping triage beginning at age 30 years was the lowest-cost strategy when hrHPV test sensitivity was markedly higher than cytologic test sensitivity or when hrHPV test cost was equated to the lowest reported cytologic test cost ($14).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Cytologic testing every 3 years for women aged 21 to 29 years with either continued cytologic testing every 3 years or switching to a low-cost hrHPV test every 5 years confers a reasonable balance of benefits, harms, and costs. Comparative modeling is needed to confirm the association of these novel utilities with cost-effectiveness.

Role of Ancillary Techniques in Gynecologic Cytopathology Specimens

The association between high-risk genotypes of human papillomavirus (hr-HPV) and cervical cancer is well established. As hr-HPV testing is rapidly becoming a part of routine cervical cancer screening, either in conjunction with cytology or as primary testing, the management of hr-HPV-positive women has to be tailored in a way that increases the detection of cervical abnormalities while decreasing unnecessary colposcopic biopsies or other invasive procedures. In this review, we discuss the overall utility and strategies of hr-HPV testing, as well as the advantages and limitations of potential triage strategies for hr-HPV-positive women, including HPV genotyping, p16/Ki-67 dual staining, and methylation assays.

Testing for Human Papillomavirus Strains 16 and 18 Helps Predict the Presence of Anal High-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesions

BACKGROUND

More than 90% of anal cancers are caused by human papillomavirus, and human papillomavirus strains 16 and 18 are the most oncogenic. Anal high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions are cancer precursors. Treating these high-grade intraepithelial lesions likely reduces the risk of cancer, but cytology is an imperfect screening test.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine whether human papillomavirus 16 and/or 18 testing better predicts the presence of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions.

DESIGN

In this retrospective study, 894 consecutive patients underwent anal dysplasia screening with digital anorectal examination, anal cytology, high-risk human papillomavirus testing, and high-resolution anoscopy with biopsy. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of each test and for a novel screening protocol. The absolute and relative risk of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions for all of the cytology/human papillomavirus combinations were also calculated.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at a single practice specializing in anal dysplasia.

PATIENTS

Ninety-two percent of participants were men who have sex with men. Forty-four percent were HIV-positive individuals who were well controlled on antiretroviral therapy. The median age was 50 years.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The presence of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions as a function of human papillomavirus and the cytology results were measured.

RESULTS

High-risk human papillomavirus testing alone demonstrated better sensitivity (96% vs 89%; p = 0.03) and negative predictive value (99% vs 96%; p = 0.008) over cytology. Human papillomavirus 16/18 testing increased specificity (48% to 71%; p < 0.0001) and positive predictive value (24% to 37%; p = 0.003) over testing for all of the high-risk strains. For each cytology category, high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions were more prevalent when human papillomavirus 16/18 was detected. Benign cytology with 16/18 had a 31-fold increased risk of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions.

LIMITATIONS

This study was conducted in a single private practice specializing in anal dysplasia screening with a mostly male population, and results might not be generalizable.

CONCLUSIONS

Testing of high-risk human papillomavirus strains 16/18 improves specificity and positive predictive value over cytology for anal dysplasia screening. Patients testing positive for strains 16/18 are at a high risk for high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions and should undergo high-resolution anoscopy regardless of the cytology result. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A654.

Simple but not simpler: a systematic review of Markov models for economic evaluation of cervical cancer screening

The aim of this study was to critically evaluate the quality of the models used in economic evaluations of screening strategies for cervical cancer prevention. We systematically searched multiple databases, selecting model-based full economic evaluations (cost-effectiveness analyses, cost-utility analyses, and cost-benefit analyses) of cervical cancer screening strategies. Two independent reviewers screened articles for relevance and performed data extraction. Methodological assessment of the quality of the models utilized formal checklists, and a qualitative narrative synthesis was performed. Thirty-eight articles were reviewed. The majority of the studies were conducted in high-income countries (82%, n=31). The Pap test was the most used screening strategy investigated, which was present in 86% (n=33) of the studies. Half of the studies (n=19) used a previously published Markov model. The deterministic sensitivity analysis was performed in 92% (n=35) of the studies. The mean number of properly reported checklist items was 9 out of the maximum possible 18. Items that were better reported included the statement of decision problem, the description of the strategies/comparators, the statement of time horizon, and information regarding the disease states. Compliance with some items of the checklist was poor. The Markov models for economic evaluation of screening strategies for cervical cancer varied in quality. The following points require improvement: 1) assessment of methodological, structural, heterogeneity, and parameter uncertainties; 2) model type and cycle length justification; 3) methods to account for heterogeneity; and 4) report of consistency evaluation (through calibration and validation methods).

Quality of life assumptions determine which cervical cancer screening strategies are cost-effective

Quality-adjusted life years are used in cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs). To calculate QALYs, a "utility" (0-1) is used for each health state induced or prevented by the intervention. We aimed to estimate the impact of quality of life (QoL) assumptions (utilities and durations of health states) on CEAs of cervical cancer screening. To do so, 12 alternative sets of utility assumptions were retrieved from published cervical cancer screening CEAs. Two additional sets were based on empirical QoL data that were integrally obtained through two different measures (SF-6D and EQ-5D) from eight groups of women (total n = 3,087), from invitation for screening to diagnosis with cervical cancer. Per utility set we calculated the number of quality-adjusted days lost (QADL) for each relevant health state in cervical cancer screening, by multiplying the study-specific assumed disutilities (i.e., 1-utility) with study-specific durations of the loss in QoL, resulting in 14 "QADL-sets." With microsimulation model MISCAN we calculated cost-effectiveness of 342 alternative screening programs (varying in primary screening test [Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vs. cytology], starting ages, and screening interval) for each of the 14 QADL-sets. Utilities used in CEAs appeared to differ largely. We found that ten QADL-sets from the literature resulted in HPV and two in cytology as preferred primary test. The SF-6D empirical QADL-set resulted in cytology and the EQ-5D one in HPV as preferred primary test. In conclusion, assumed utilities and health state durations determine cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening. Also, the measure used to empirically assess utilities can be crucial for CEA conclusions.

Circulating tumor DNA: a promising biomarker in the liquid biopsy of cancer

Tissue biopsy is the standard diagnostic procedure for cancers and also provides a material for genotyping, which can assist in the targeted therapies of cancers. However, tissue biopsy-based cancer diagnostic procedures have limitations in their assessment of cancer development, prognosis and genotyping, due to tumor heterogeneity and evolution. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is single- or double-stranded DNA released by the tumor cells into the blood and it thus harbors the mutations of the original tumor. In recent years, liquid biopsy based on ctDNA analysis has shed a new light on the molecular diagnosis and monitoring of cancer. Studies found that the screening of genetic mutations using ctDNA is highly sensitive and specific, suggesting that ctDNA analysis may significantly improve current systems of tumor diagnosis, even facilitating early-stage detection. Moreover, ctDNA analysis is capable of accurately determining the tumor progression, prognosis and assisting in targeted therapy. Therefore, using ctDNA as a liquid biopsy may herald a revolution for tumor management. Herein, we review the biology of ctDNA, its detection methods and potential applications in tumor diagnosis, treatment and prognosis.

Cost-effectiveness analysis study of HPV testing as a primary cervical cancer screening in Thailand

Objectives

The aim of this study is to compare the cost and benefit of four different cervical cancer screening strategies involving primary HPV 16/18 genotyping, hrHPV testing alone and cytology for detecting CIN2 +.

Methods

Economical analysis using Markov modeling approach to combine the epidemiological data from current population-based study of The National Cancer Institute of Thailand. A cohort of 100,000 hypothetical female population age 30–65 years was simulated in each strategy. The compared strategies are HPV 16/18 genotyping with reflexed cytology, hrHPV testing alone followed by colposcopy, Papanicolaou standard cytology and liquid based cytology followed by colposcopy. The interval of screening was 5 years' interval. The main outcomes were defined as a number of CIN2 + cases and cost per 100,000 women screening over 35 years.

Results

Model predictions indicated that, the most cost-effectiveness strategy is hrHPV testing alone by reducing cost and also increase CIN2 + detection rate. It identify an additional 130 cases and decrease cost by 46,950,840 THB (1,394,441 USD) per 100,000 women screened when compared to HPV 16/18 genotyping. Compared with cytology, hrHPV testing decrease cost by 51,279,781 THB (1,523,011 USD) and detected more 506 cases of CIN2 +. From sensitivity analysis, the cost of HPV testing, cost of colposcopy, incidence of HPV infection and sensitivity of cytology may affect the results. (1 USD = 33.67 Baht).

Conclusion

The results of this cost-effectiveness analysis support the full scale implementation of HPV testing as a primary cervical cancer screening in Thailand.

•

This is the first economic study of HPV testing as a screening method in Thailand.

•

The primary HPV testing is more effective than cytology method.

•

The most cost-effectiveness strategy is HR-HPV testing alone.

Human papillomavirus E7 protein detection as a method of triage to colposcopy of HPV positive women, in comparison to genotyping and cytology. Final results of the PIPAVIR study

The objective of the presented cross-sectional-evaluation-screening study is the clinical evaluation of high-risk(hr)HPVE7-protein detection as a triage method to colposcopy for hrHPV-positive women, using a newly developed sandwich-ELISA-assay. Between 2013-2015, 2424 women, 30-60 years old, were recruited at the Hippokratio Hospital, Thessaloniki/Greece and the Im Mare Klinikum, Kiel/Germany, and provided a cervical sample used for Liquid Based Cytology, HPV DNA genotyping, and E7 detection using five different E7-assays: "recomWell HPV16/18/45KJhigh", "recomWell HPV16/18/45KJlow", "recomWell HPV39/51/56/59", "recomWell HPV16/31/33/35/52/58" and "recomWell HPVHRscreen" (for 16,18,31,33,35,39,45,51,52,56,58,59 E7), corresponding to different combinations of hrHPVE7-proteins. Among 1473 women with eligible samples, those positive for cytology (ASCUS+ 7.2%), and/or hrHPV DNA (19.1%) were referred for colposcopy. Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) was detected in 27 women (1.8%). For HPV16/18-positive women with no triage, sensitivity, positive predictive value (PPV) and the number of colposcopies needed to detect one case of CIN2+ were 100.0%, 11.11% and 9.0 respectively. The respective values for E7-testing as a triage method to colposcopy ranged from 75.0-100.0%, 16.86-26.08% and 3.83-5.93. Sensitivity and PPV for cytology as triage for hrHPV(non16/18)-positive women were 45.45% and 27.77%; for E7 test the respective values ranged from 72.72-100.0% and 16.32-25.0%. Triage of HPV 16/18-positive women to colposcopy with the E7 test presents better performance than no triage, decreasing the number of colposcopies needed to detect one CIN2+. In addition, triage of hrHPV(non16/18)-positive women with E7 test presents better sensitivity and slightly worse PPV than cytology, a fact that advocates for a full molecular screening approach.

Detection Rate of High-Grade Cervical Neoplasia and Cost-Effectiveness of High-Risk Human Papillomavirus Genotyping with Reflex Liquid-based Cytology in Cervical Cancer Screening

Introduction: This study aimed to determine the prevalence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse (≥CIN3) and cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus (HPV) genotyping with reflex liquid-based cytology (LBC) for cervical cancer screening in Singapore. Materials and Methods: Women who were ≥25 years old and undertook co-testing with LBC and HPV-genotyping (Cobas-4800, Roche, USA) for HPV-16, HPV-18 and 12 high-risk HPV types in a single institution were studied retrospectively. A single cervical smear in ThinPrep® PreservCyt® solution (Hologic, USA) was separated for tests in independent cytology and molecular pathology laboratories. The results were reviewed by a designated gynaecologist according to institutional clinical management protocols. Those who tested positive for HPV-16 and/or HPV-18 (regardless of cytology results), cytology showing low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL) or high-grade SIL (HSIL), or atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) with positive 12 high-risk HPV types were referred for colposcopy. Colposcopy was performed by experienced colposcopists. Cervical biopsy, either directed punch biopsies or excisional biopsy, was determined by a colposcopist. The diagnosis of ≥CIN3 was reviewed by a gynaecologic pathologist. Cost-effectiveness of HPV-based screening in terms of disease and financial burden was analysed using epidemiological, clinical and financial input data from Singapore. Results: Of 1866 women studied, 167 (8.9%) had abnormal cytology (≥ASCUS) and 171 (9.2%) tested positive for high-risk HPV. Twenty-three CIN were detected. Three of the 10 ≥CIN3 cases had negative cytology but positive HPV-16. Compared to cytology, HPV genotyping detected more ≥CIN3 (OR: 1.43). HPV+16/18 genotyping with reflex LBC was superior in terms of cost-effectiveness to LBC with reflex HPV, both for disease detection rate and cost per case of ≥CIN2 detected. Conclusion: Compared to cytology, HPV+16/18 genotyping with reflex LBC detected more ≥CIN3 and was cost-effective for cervical screening in Singapore. Key words: Co-Testing, Incidence trend, Mortality, Intraepithelial neoplasia, Pap smear

A Model Approach for Assessing the Benefits of HPV Testing against Cytology in Screening for Cervical Cancer Precursors in Thailand

Objective:

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of HPV 16/18 genotyping test, high risk HPV DNA testing, alone and in conjunction with the liquid-based cytology method in screening for cervical cancer precursors.

Methods:

A Markov model was used to describe the course of the cases of CIN2+ that had been detected over a 35 year period. Screening programs started at age 30 and were performed at an interval of once every five years. The model compared three strategies of HPV 16/18 genotyping with reflex cytology triage, high-risk HPV testing alone with referral to colposcopy and cytology-based screening with referral to colposcopy. We assumed the rate of patients lost to follow-up for those referred to colposcopy would be 0%. The clinical parameters were estimated using the data from a study conducted by the Thailand National Cancer Institute.

Result:

Of the three screening strategies evaluated, the high risk HPV DNA testing alone was the most effective for detecting CIN2+ over the 35 year study period. It detected 143 and 510 cases per 100,000 women more than the HPV 16/18 genotyping test and cytology-based strategy, respectively. The HPV genotyping test detected 368 cases per 100,000 women more than the cytology-based approach. In addition, when viewed with five year intervals, there were missed cases totaling approximately half of the detected cases screened by the cytology strategy and 10% of cases detected with screening by the HPV genotyping test.

Conclusion:

This study strongly indicates that HPV/DNA testing is preferable to cytology-based screening for cervical cancer precursors. However, the balance between the benefits, burdens and cost of each screening program should be considered.

Approaches for triaging women who test positive for human papillomavirus in cervical cancer screening

Substantial evidence exists to support the introduction of molecular testing for human papillomavirus (HPV) as the primary technology in cervical cancer screening. While HPV testing is much more sensitive than cytology for detection of high-grade precancerous lesions, it is less specific. To improve efficiency, it is therefore recommended that a specific test (like cytology) be used in triaging HPV positive women to colposcopy. A number of studies have been conducted that support the use of cytology alone or in conjunction with HPV genotyping for triage. The decision to incorporate genotyping also depends on the commercial HPV test that is selected since not all tests provide results for certain individual high-risk types. Regardless of whether policy officials decide to adopt a triage approach that incorporates genotyping, the use of liquid based cytology (LBC) may also improve screening performance by reducing diagnostic delays. With LBC, the same cell suspension from a single collection may be used for HPV testing and a smear can be immediately prepared if HPV status is positive. This was a critical lesson from a community based demonstration project in Montreal (VASCAR study), where conventional cytology exists and specimen co-collection was not permitted for ethical reasons, requiring HPV positive women to return for an additional screening visit prior to colposcopy.

Introduction of molecular HPV testing as the primary technology in cervical cancer screening: Acting on evidence to change the current paradigm

Since being introduced in the 1940s, cervical cytology - despite its limitations - has had unequivocal success in reducing cervical cancer burden in many countries. However, we now know that infection with human papillomavirus (HPV) is a necessary cause of cervical cancer and there is overwhelming evidence from large-scale clinical trials, feasibility studies and real-world experience that supports the introduction of molecular testing for HPV as the primary technology in cervical cancer screening (i.e., "HPV primary screening"). While questions remain about the most appropriate age groups for screening, screening interval and triage approach, these should not be considered barriers to implementation. Many countries are in various stages of adopting HPV primary screening, whereas others have not taken any major steps towards introduction of this approach. As a group of clinical experts and researchers in cervical cancer prevention from across Canada, we have jointly authored this comprehensive examination of the evidence to implement HPV primary screening. Our intention is to create a common understanding among policy makers, agencies, clinicians, researchers and other stakeholders about the evidence concerning HPV primary screening to catalyze the adoption of this improved approach to cervical cancer prevention. With the first cohort of vaccinated girls now turning 21, the age when routine screening typically begins, there is increased urgency to introduce HPV primary screening, whose performance may be less adversely affected compared with cervical cytology as a consequence of reduced lesion prevalence post-vaccination.

A cross-sectional study on HPV testing with type 16/18 genotyping for cervical cancer screening in 11,064 Chinese women

Cytology‐based cervical cancer screening is restricted because of a lack of cytologists. Thus, HPV‐based instead of cytology‐based screening may be a more suitable strategy in China. Here, we assessed the effectiveness of HPV testing (Cobas^® 4800 Test, Roche) and HPV‐based programs to detect high‐grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) or cancer compared with cytology (Thinprep, Hologic) and cytology‐based programs through a cross‐sectional study in 11,064 Chinese women aged 21–65 years who were enrolled from Longyou County in Zhejiang Province, China. The rates of HPV positivity and cytology abnormality were 9.8% and 6.1%, respectively. The HPV positivity rate had two age peaks, 21–24 (15.4%) and 60–65 (14.4%) years. According to adjusted data, HPV testing demonstrated significantly higher sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV) than cytology for detecting CIN2 or worse (90.0% vs. 66.7%, 99.9% vs. 99.5%), and there was an acceptable specificity (91.3%) and positive predictive value (PPV, 12.5%). Furthermore, primary HPV testing with type 16/18 genotyping showed the highest sensitivity (78.6%) and NPV (99.7%) among four screening strategies, and there was similar specificity (96.8%) and PPV (23.9%) compared with co‐testing screening to detect CIN2+, while there were fewer colposcopies (4.2) and tests (106.3) performed than with co‐testing and primary cytology screening to detect a case of high‐grade CIN. The differences in effectiveness were approximately similar when CIN3+ was the identifying target. Our findings suggest that primary HPV testing with type 16/18 genotyping has a higher sensitivity and NPV, possesses optimal cost/effectiveness in the first round of screening and is a feasible strategy of cervical cancer screening for Chinese women.

Feasibility of thermocoagulation in a screen-and-treat approach for the treatment of cervical precancerous lesions in sub-Saharan Africa

BACKGROUND

The use of thermocoagulation for the treatment of cervical precancerous lesions has recently generated a great deal of interest. Our aim was to determine the feasibility of this outpatient procedure in the context of a cervical cancer (CC) screen-and-treat campaign in sub-Saharan Africa.

METHODS

Between July and December 2015, women living in the area of Dschang (Cameroon) aged between 30 and 49 years, were enrolled in a CC screening study. HPV self-sampling was performed as a primary screening test and women who were either "HPV 16/18/45-positive" or "positive to other HPV types and to VIA" were considered screen-positive, thus requiring further management. The primary outcome was the percentage of screen-positive patients who met the criteria to undergo thermocoagulation. The secondary outcome was the assessment of the procedure's side effects immediately after treatment and at the 1-month follow-up visit.

RESULTS

A total of 1012 women were recruited in the study period. Among 121 screen-positive women, 110 of them (90.9%) were eligible to be treated with thermocoagulation. No patients discontinued treatment because of pain or other side effects. The mean ± SD (Standard Deviation) score measured on the 10-point Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) was 3.0 ± 1.6. Women having less than 2 children were more likely to report a higher pain score than those with more than two (4.2 ± 2.0 versus 2.9 ± 1.5, respectively; p value = 0.016). A total of 109/110 (99.1%) patients came to the 1-month follow-up visit. Vaginal discharge was reported in 108/109 (99.1%) patients throughout the month following treatment. Three patients (2.8%) developed vaginal infection requiring local antibiotics. No hospitalizations were required.

CONCLUSION

The majority of screen-positive women met the criteria and could be treated by thermocoagulation. The procedure was associated to minor side effects and is overall feasible in the context of a CC screen-and-treat campaign in sub-Saharan Africa.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was retrospectively registered on November 11, 2015 with the identifier: ISRCTN99459678 .

Triage of high-risk HPV positive women in cervical cancer screening

INTRODUCTION

High-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing is expected to replace cytology as primary screening method for cervical cancer screening in an increasing number of countries. The high sensitivity of hrHPV testing is combined with a limited specificity which makes triaging of hrHPV positive women necessary. As an ideal triage method does not yet exist, an optimal triage strategy for hrHPV positive women based on current knowledge should be obtained. The aim of this article is to present an overview of available options for triage of hrHPV positive women, with their strengths and limitations and possible future opportunities.

AREAS COVERED

Current knowledge on morphological biomarkers, molecular biomarkers and combined triage strategies will be discussed to give an overview of the state-of-the-art on triaging hrHPV positive women. The literature search was limited to studies on triage strategies for hrHPV positive women. Expert commentary: Experience with morphology-based biomarkers makes these a valuable triage method. However, they lack the ability of differentiating productive from transforming infections. Molecular biomarkers are objective, highly reproducible, can be used in high throughput testing, and show promising results. With more extensive knowledge on these molecular markers, cervical cancer screening may transform to a full molecular screening in the future.

The Clinical and Economic Benefits of Co-Testing Versus Primary HPV Testing for Cervical Cancer Screening: A Modeling Analysis

Background: Consensus United States cervical cancer screening guidelines recommend use of combination Pap plus human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for women aged 30 to 65 years. An HPV test was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2014 for primary cervical cancer screening in women age 25 years and older. Here, we present the results of clinical-economic comparisons of Pap plus HPV mRNA testing including genotyping for HPV 16/18 (co-testing) versus DNA-based primary HPV testing with HPV 16/18 genotyping and reflex cytology (HPV primary) for cervical cancer screening.

Methods: A health state transition (Markov) model with 1-year cycling was developed using epidemiologic, clinical, and economic data from healthcare databases and published literature. A hypothetical cohort of one million women receiving triennial cervical cancer screening was simulated from ages 30 to 70 years. Screening strategies compared HPV primary to co-testing. Outcomes included total and incremental differences in costs, invasive cervical cancer (ICC) cases, ICC deaths, number of colposcopies, and quality-adjusted life years for cost-effectiveness calculations. Comprehensive sensitivity analyses were performed.

Results: In a simulation cohort of one million 30-year-old women modeled up to age 70 years, the model predicted that screening with HPV primary testing instead of co-testing could lead to as many as 2,141 more ICC cases and 2,041 more ICC deaths. In the simulation, co-testing demonstrated a greater number of lifetime quality-adjusted life years (22,334) and yielded $39.0 million in savings compared with HPV primary, thereby conferring greater effectiveness at lower cost.

Conclusions: Model results demonstrate that co-testing has the potential to provide improved clinical and economic outcomes when compared with HPV primary. While actual cost and outcome data are evaluated, these findings are relevant to U.S. healthcare payers and women's health policy advocates seeking cost-effective cervical cancer screening technologies.