The cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus self-collection among cervical cancer screening non-attenders in El Salvador

Comparison of the ScreenFire and Xpert HPV assays for the detection of human papillomavirus and cervical precancer among women living with HIV in Malawi

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization recommends human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for primary cervical cancer screening, including among women living with HIV (WLWH). Low-and-middle-income countries account for 85% of the cervical cancer burden globally, yet have limited access to HPV-based screening, largely due to cost. This study aims to compare the performance of a rapid, isothermal amplification HPV assay (ScreenFire) to that of the Xpert HPV assay for the detection of HPV and cervical precancer among WLWH in Malawi.

METHODS

We utilized stored self- and provider-collected specimens from a prospective cohort study of WLWH in Malawi from July 2020 to February 2022. Specimens were tested with both Xpert and ScreenFire HPV assays. The overall and within-channel non-hierarchical agreement between ScreenFire and Xpert was determined for both self- and provider-collected specimens. Hierarchical ScreenFire HPV positivity by channel was compared to Xpert for each histological diagnosis-cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) compared to

RESULTS

315 matched self- and provider-collected specimens had valid results from both Xpert and ScreenFire testing and were included in analyses, of which 279 and 36 were HPV positive and HPV negative, respectively, on Xpert self-collection. Of the 315, 245 (78%) had normal pathology, 21 CIN1 (7%), 14 CIN2 (4%), and 35 CIN3 (11%). Of the 245 with normal pathology, 213 (87%) and 188 (77%) were HPV-positive on Xpert and ScreenFire self-collected specimens, respectively. Among provider-collected specimens, the assays had 80% agreement on overall HPV positivity (unweighted kappa 0.59, 95% 0.50-0.69). ScreenFire was HPV-positive in 90% of self-collected specimens that were HPV-positive on Xpert. Channel agreement between the assays was high for both self- and provider-collected specimens, but slightly lower for HPV18/45. In hierarchical analysis, ScreenFire demonstrated high concordance with Xpert testing for detecting CIN2+ cases in all channels, missing no HPV 16 or HPV 18/45 positive CIN2+ case that was positive on Xpert, in both self- and provider-collected specimens.

CONCLUSION

In this study of stored specimens, the ScreenFire HPV assay performed well in the detection of HPV and CIN2+ among WLWH compared to the Xpert HPV assay. If supported by larger validation studies, ScreenFire could be an affordable alternative point-of-care HPV assay for use in LMICs.

Collapse

Key Words Collapse

MESH Headings Collapse

Grants

• K12 HD103085 NICHD NIH HHS
• U54 CA254564 NCI NIH HHS
• K12HD103085 Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development of the National Institutes of Health
• Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development of the National Institutes of Health

Collapse

Affiliation(s)

Chemtai Mungo Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Anagha Guliam Barnard College of Columbia University, New York City, NY, USA
Lameck Chinula Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA University of North Carolina Project-Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi
Federica Inturrisi Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, USA
Lizzie Msowoya University of North Carolina Project-Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi
Tawonga Mkochi University of North Carolina Project-Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi
Siniya Jawadu University of North Carolina Project-Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi
Silvia de Sanjosé Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, USA ISGlobal, Barcelona, Spain
Mark Schiffman Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, USA
Jennifer H Tang Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA University of North Carolina Project-Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi
Jennifer S Smith Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA

Collapse

Comparison of the ScreenFire and Xpert HPV assays for the detection of human papillomavirus and cervical precancer among women living with HIV in Malawi

Background

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for primary cervical cancer screening, including among women living with HIV (WLWH). Low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs) account for 85% of the cervical cancer burden globally, yet have limited access to HPV-based screening, largely due to cost. This study aims to compare the performance of a rapid, isothermal amplification HPV assay (ScreenFire) to that of the Xpert HPV assay for the detection of HPV and cervical precancer among WLWH in Malawi.

Methods

We utilized stored self- and provider-collected specimens from a prospective cohort study of WLWH in Malawi from July 2020 to February 2022. Specimens were tested with both Xpert and ScreenFire HPV assays. The overall and within-channel non-hierarchical agreement between ScreenFire and Xpert was determined for both self- and provider-collected specimens. Hierarchical ScreenFire HPV positivity by channel was compared to Xpert for each histological diagnosis - cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) compared to

Results

315 matched self- and provider-collected specimens had valid results from both Xpert and ScreenFire testing and were included in analyses. Of these, 245 (78%) had normal pathology, 21 CIN1 (7%), 14 CIN2 (4%), and 35 CIN3 (11%). Among provider-collected specimens, the assays had 80% agreement on overall HPV positivity (unweighted kappa 0.59, 95% 0.50-0.69). ScreenFire was HPV-positive in 90% of self-collected specimens that were HPV-positive on Xpert. Channel agreement between the assays was high for both self- and provider-collected specimens, but slightly lower for HPV18/45. In hierarchical analysis, ScreenFire demonstrated high concordance with Xpert testing for detecting CIN2+ cases in all channels, missing no HPV 16 or HPV 18/45 positive CIN2+ case that was positive on Xpert, in both self- and provider-collected specimens.

Conclusion

In this study of stored specimens, the ScreenFire HPV assay performed well in the detection of HPV and CIN2+ among WLWH compared to the Xpert HPV assay. If supported by larger validation studies, ScreenFire could be an affordable alternative point-of-care HPV assay for use in LMICs.

Collapse

Key Words Collapse

MESH Headings Collapse

Grants

• K12 HD103085 NICHD NIH HHS

Collapse

Affiliation(s)

Chemtai Mungo Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill
Anagha Guliam Barnard College of Columbia University
Lameck Chinula Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill University of North Carolina Project-Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi
Federica Inturrisi Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, USA
Lizzie Msowoya University of North Carolina Project-Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi
Tawonga Mkochi University of North Carolina Project-Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi
Siniya Jawadu University of North Carolina Project-Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi
Silvia de Sanjosé Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, USA Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill
Mark Schiffman Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, USA
Jennifer H. Tang Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill University of North Carolina Project-Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi
Jennifer S. Smith Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill

Collapse

Cost-utility and budget impact analyses of cervical cancer screening using self-collected samples for HPV DNA testing in Thailand

INTRODUCTION

Cervical cancer ranks as the third most prevalent cancer among women in Thailand. However, the effectiveness of cervical cancer screening programs is limited by several factors that impede the screening rate. The utilization of self-collected samples for screening purposes has the potential to alleviate barriers to screening in Thai women. This study assessed the cost-utility and budget impact of implementing cervical cancer screening using self-collected samples for human papillomavirus (HPV) deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) testing in Thailand.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We employed a decision tree integrated with a Markov model to estimate the lifetime costs and health benefits associated with the cervical cancer screening program for women aged 25-65. The analysis was conducted from a societal perspective. Four screening policy options were compared: (1) additional self-collected samples for HPV DNA testing, (2) clinician-collected samples for HPV DNA testing only, (3) clinician-collected samples for cytology test (i.e., status quo), and (4) no screening. The model inputs were based on unvaccinated women. The screening strategies and management in those with positive results were assumed followed to the Thai clinical practice guideline. Costs were reported in 2022 Thai baht. Sensitivity analyses were conducted. The ten-year budget impacts of the additional self-collected samples for HPV DNA testing were calculated from a payer perspective.

RESULTS

All screening policies were cost-saving compared to no screening. When comparing the additional self-collected samples for HPV DNA testing with the clinician-collected samples policy, it emerged as the dominant strategy. The incremental benefit in cervical cancer prevention achieved by incorporating self-collected samples for screening was observed at any additional screening rate that could be achieved through their use. Sensitivity analyses yielded consistently favorable results for the screening policies. The average annual budget impact of the additional self-collected samples for screening policy amounted to 681 million Thai baht. This budget allocation could facilitate cervical cancer screening for over 10 million women.

CONCLUSIONS

An addition of self-collected samples for HPV DNA testing into the cervical cancer screening program is cost-saving. The benefits of this screening policy outweigh the associated incremental costs. Policymakers should consider this evidence during the policy optimization process.

The acceptability of HPV vaginal self-sampling for cervical cancer screening in Latin America: A systematic review

Objective

This review summarizes women's acceptability of vaginal self-sampling for cervical cancer screening in Latin America.

Study design

Systematic review.

Method

A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase regarding the acceptance of HPV vaginal self-sampling by women over 18 years old. Articles were selected for research that was conducted in Latin America and published between January 1st, 1993, and December 31st, 2022.

Results

Fifteen publications were included. Eight publications reported an acceptance of HPV self-sampling as high as 80%, six papers found an acceptance rate between 50 and 80% and only one found an acceptance rate of less than 50%. Based on non-standardized questionnaires, women considered self-sampling more comfortable, easier, and less painful than conventional cytology. The procedure was associated with less embarrassment and a greater sense of privacy.

Conclusion

HPV vaginal-self sampling appears to be an acceptable screening method amongst eligible Latin American women.

A Systematic Review of Health Economic Evaluations and Budget Impact Analyses to Inform Healthcare Decision-Making in Central America

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the quality, quantity and disease areas analysed by health economic research that inform healthcare decision-making in Central America. This study aimed to review the existing health economic evaluations (HEEs) and budget impact analyses (BIAs) evidence in Central America based on scope and reporting quality.

METHODS

HEEs and BIAs published from 2000 to April 2021 were searched in five electronic databases: PubMed, Embase, LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Literature), EconLIT and OVID Global Health. Two reviewers assessed titles, abstracts and full texts of studies for eligibility. The quality appraisal for the reporting was based on La Torre and colleagues' version of the Drummond checklist and the ISPOR good practices for BIA. For each country, we correlated the number of studies by disease area with their respective burden of disease to identify under-researched health areas.

RESULTS

102 publications were eligible for this review. Ninety-four publications reported a HEE, six publications reported a BIA, and two studies reported both a HEE and a BIA. Costa Rica had the highest number of publications (n = 28, 27.5%), followed by Guatemala (n = 25, 24.5%). Cancer and respiratory infections were the most common types of disease studied. Diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney diseases, and mental disorders were under-researched relative to their disease burden in most of the countries. The overall mean quality reporting score for HEE and BIA studies were 71/119 points (60%) and 7/10 points (70%), respectively; however, these assessments were made on different scales.

CONCLUSION

In Central America, health economic research is sparse and is considered as suboptimal quality for reporting. The findings reported information useful to other low- and middle-income countries with similar advances in the application of economics to promote health policy decision-making.

Implementing HPV testing in 9 Latin American countries: The laboratory perspective as observed in the ESTAMPA study

Background

Replacement of cytology screening with HPV testing is recommended and essential for cervical cancer elimination. HPV testing for primary screening was implemented in 12 laboratories within 9 Latin American countries, as part of the ESTAMPA cervical cancer screening study. Our observations provide information on critical operational aspects for HPV testing implementation in diverse resource settings.

Methods

We describe the implementation process of HPV testing in ESTAMPA, focusing on laboratory aspects. We assess the readiness of 12 laboratories to start HPV testing and their continuity capacity to maintain good quality HPV testing until end of recruitment or up to December 2021. Readiness was based on a checklist. Information from the study database; regular meetings and monitoring visits; and a questionnaire on laboratory operational aspects sent in May 2020 were used to assess continuity capacity. Compliance with seven basic requirements (readiness) and eight continuity requirements (continuity capacity) was scored (1 = compliant, 0 = not compliant) and totaled to classify readiness and continuity capacity as very limited, limited, moderate or high. Experiences, challenges, and enablers of the implementation process are also described.

Results

Seven of 12 laboratories had high readiness, three moderate readiness, and of two laboratories new to HPV testing, one had limited readiness and the other very limited readiness. Two of seven laboratories with high readiness also showed high continuity capacity, one moderate continuity capacity, and the other four showed limited continuity capacity since they could not maintain good quality HPV testing over time. Among three laboratories with moderate readiness, one kept moderate continuity capacity and two reached high continuity capacity. The two laboratories new to HPV testing achieved high continuity capacity. Based on gained expertise, five laboratories have become part of national screening programs.

Conclusion

High readiness of laboratories is an essential part of effective implementation of HPV testing. However, high readiness is insufficient to guarantee HPV testing high continuity capacity, for which a "culture of quality" should be established with regular training, robust monitoring and quality assurance systems tailored to local context. All efforts to strengthen HPV laboratories are valuable and crucial to guarantee effective implementation of HPV-based cervical screening.

Secondary Prevention of Cervical Cancer: ASCO Resource-Stratified Guideline Update

PURPOSE

To update resource-stratified, evidence-based recommendations on secondary prevention of cervical cancer globally.

METHODS

American Society of Clinical Oncology convened a multidisciplinary, multinational Expert Panel to produce recommendations reflecting four resource-tiered settings. A review of existing guidelines, formal consensus-based process, and modified ADAPTE process to adapt existing guidelines was conducted. Other experts participated in formal consensus.

RESULTS

This guideline update reflects changes in evidence since the previous update. Five existing guidelines were identified and reviewed, and adapted recommendations form the evidence base. Cost-effectiveness analyses provided indirect evidence to inform consensus, which resulted in ≥ 75% agreement.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing is recommended in all resource settings; visual inspection with acetic acid may be used in basic settings. Recommended age ranges and frequencies vary by the following setting: maximal: age 25-65 years, every 5 years; enhanced: age 30-65 years, if two consecutive negative tests at 5-year intervals, then every 10 years; limited: age 30-49 years, every 10 years; basic: age 30-49 years, one to three times per lifetime. For basic settings, visual assessment is used to determine treatment eligibility; in other settings, genotyping with cytology or cytology alone is used to determine treatment. For basic settings, treatment is recommended if abnormal triage results are obtained; in other settings, abnormal triage results followed by colposcopy is recommended. For basic settings, treatment options are thermal ablation or loop electrosurgical excision procedure; for other settings, loop electrosurgical excision procedure or ablation is recommended; with a 12-month follow-up in all settings. Women who are HIV-positive should be screened with HPV testing after diagnosis, twice as many times per lifetime as the general population. Screening is recommended at 6 weeks postpartum in basic settings; in other settings, screening is recommended at 6 months. In basic settings without mass screening, infrastructure for HPV testing, diagnosis, and treatment should be developed.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/resource-stratified-guidelines.

Optimization of Cervical Cancer Screening: A Stacking-Integrated Machine Learning Algorithm Based on Demographic, Behavioral, and Clinical Factors

PURPOSE

The purpose is to accurately identify women at high risk of developing cervical cancer so as to optimize cervical screening strategies and make better use of medical resources. However, the predictive models currently in use require clinical physiological and biochemical indicators, resulting in a smaller scope of application. Stacking-integrated machine learning (SIML) is an advanced machine learning technique that combined multiple learning algorithms to improve predictive performance. This study aimed to develop a stacking-integrated model that can be used to identify women at high risk of developing cervical cancer based on their demographic, behavioral, and historical clinical factors.

METHODS

The data of 858 women screened for cervical cancer at a Venezuelan Hospital were used to develop the SIML algorithm. The screening data were randomly split into training data (80%) that were used to develop the algorithm and testing data (20%) that were used to validate the accuracy of the algorithms. The random forest (RF) model and univariate logistic regression were used to identify predictive features for developing cervical cancer. Twelve well-known ML algorithms were selected, and their performances in predicting cervical cancer were compared. A correlation coefficient matrix was used to cluster the models based on their performance. The SIML was then developed using the best-performing techniques. The sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) of all models were calculated.

RESULTS

The RF model identified 18 features predictive of developing cervical cancer. The use of hormonal contraceptives was considered as the most important risk factor, followed by the number of pregnancies, years of smoking, and the number of sexual partners. The SIML algorithm had the best overall performance when compared with other methods and reached an AUC, sensitivity, and specificity of 0.877, 81.8%, and 81.9%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that SIML can be used to accurately identify women at high risk of developing cervical cancer. This model could be used to personalize the screening program by optimizing the screening interval and care plan in high- and low-risk patients based on their demographics, behavioral patterns, and clinical data.

Cervical Cancer Screening Postpandemic: Self-Sampling Opportunities to Accelerate the Elimination of Cervical Cancer

The persisting burden of cervical cancer in underserved populations and low-resource regions worldwide, worsened by the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, requires proactive strategies and expanded screening options to maintain and improve screening coverage and its effects on incidence and mortality from cervical cancer. Self-sampling as a screening strategy has unique advantages from both a public health and individual patient perspective. Some of the barriers to screening can be mitigated by self-sampling, and resources can be better allocated to patients at the highest risk of developing cervical cancer. This review summarizes the implementation options for self-sampling and associated challenges, evidence in support of self-sampling, the available devices, and opportunities for expansion beyond human papillomavirus testing.

Comparison of different strategies for the triage to colposcopy of women tested high-risk HPV positive on self-collected cervicovaginal samples

OBJECTIVE

To identify the optimal strategy for the triage of women who test high-risk (hr) HPV positive on self-collected cervicovaginal samples.

METHODS

This is a diagnostic accuracy sub-analysis of the GRECOSELF study, which reported on HPV-DNA testing with self-sampling in Greece. More than 13,000 women, 25-60 years old, who resided in rural areas of Greece, provided a self-collected cervicovaginal sample. Samples were tested for HPV-DNA and HPV16/18 genotyping with the cobas® HPV test (Roche® Molecular Systems, Pleasanton, CA, USA). HrHPV positive women were referred for colposcopy. Prior to colposcopy a physician-collected sample was obtained for cytology. After colposcopy/biopsy, women were classified as having cervical disease or not, and treated accordingly.

RESULTS

Out of 1070 hrHPV positive women, 773 were subjected to colposcopy. Seventeen triage strategies, combining HPV16/18 genotyping and cytology, were investigated. The strategy referring to colposcopy women positive for HPV16 regardless of the cytology report, and women positive for other hrHPVs, in case of a subsequent atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or worse (ASCUS+) cytology report, presented optimal trade-off; sensitivity 96.36% [(95%CI: (91.41-100.0)], positive predictive value (PPV) 27.46% [95%CI: (21.16-33.76)], and number of colposcopies required to detect one case of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia grade-2 or worse (CIN2+) 3.64.

CONCLUSIONS

The optimal strategy for the triage to colposcopy of hrHPV positive women, detected with the cobas® HPV test on self-collected cervicovaginal samples, is referring all HPV16 positive women directly to colposcopy, and women positive for HPV18 or other hrHPVs only after an ASCUS or worse cytology report.

Cost-Effectiveness of Offering Cervical Cancer Screening with HPV Self-Sampling among African-American Women in the Mississippi Delta

BACKGROUND

African-American women in the United States have an elevated risk of cervical cancer incidence and mortality. In the Mississippi Delta, cervical cancer disparities are particularly stark.

METHODS

We conducted a micro-costing study alongside a group randomized trial that evaluated the efficacy of a patient-centered approach ("Choice" between self-collection at home for HPV testing or current standard of care within the public health system in Mississippi) versus the current standard of care ["Standard-of-care screening," involving cytology (i.e., Pap) and HPV co-testing at the Health Department clinics]. The interventions in both study arms were delivered by community health workers (CHW). Using cost, screening uptake, and colposcopy adherence data from the trial, we informed a mathematical model of HPV infection and cervical carcinogenesis to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing the "Choice" and "Standard-of-care screening" interventions among un/underscreened African-American women in the Mississippi Delta.

RESULTS

When each intervention was simulated every 5 years from ages 25 to 65 years, the "Standard-of-care screening" strategy reduced cancer risk by 6.4% and was not an efficient strategy; "Choice" was more effective and efficient, reducing lifetime risk of cervical cancer by 14.8% and costing $62,720 per year of life saved (YLS). Screening uptake and colposcopy adherence were key drivers of intervention cost-effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Offering "Choice" to un/underscreened African-American women in the Mississippi Delta led to greater uptake than CHW-facilitated screening at the Health Department, and may be cost-effective.

IMPACT

We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of an HPV self-collection intervention to reduce disparities.