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

Self-Collection for HPV Testing: Potential Issues Related to Performance Measures and Quality Improvement Among Federally Qualified Health Centers

CONTEXT

Most incident cases of cervical cancer in the United States are attributable to inadequate screening. Federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) serve a large proportion of women who are low-income, have no insurance, and are underserved-risk factors for insufficient cervical cancer screening. FQHCs must maintain quality measures to preserve their accreditation, address financial reimbursements, and provide quality care. Implementation of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-collection can improve cervical cancer screening coverage within FQHCs.

OBJECTIVES

To understand perspectives from clinical personnel on current cervical cancer screening rates at FQHCs in North Carolina and the impact of implementing HPV self-collection among underscreened patients on screening rates and performance measures.

DESIGN

The study used focus groups and key informant interviews. Coding-based thematic analysis was applied to both focus group and interview transcripts. Emergent themes regarding perspectives on self-collection implementation were mapped onto Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) constructs to identify future barriers and facilitators to implementation.

SETTING

Two FQHCs in North Carolina and a cloud-based videoconferencing platform.

PARTICIPANTS

Six FQHCs in North Carolina; 45 clinical and administrative staff from the 6 FQHCs; 1 chief executive officer (n = 6), 1 senior-level administrator (n = 6), 1 chief medical officer (n = 6), and 1 clinical data manager (n = 6) from each FQHC.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Achievement of clinical perspectives.

RESULTS

Societal-, practice-, and patient-level factors currently contribute to subpar cervical cancer screening rates. HPV self-collection was expected to improve screening uptake among underscreened women at FQHCs, and thus quality and performance measures, by offering an alternative screening approach for in-clinic or at-home use. Implementation barriers include financial uncertainties and HPV self-collection not yet a Food and Drug Administration-approved test.

CONCLUSION

HPV self-collection has potential to improve cervical cancer screening quality and performance measures of FQHCs. For a successful implementation, multilevel factors that are currently affecting low screening uptake need to be addressed. Furthermore, the financial implications of implementation and approval of HPV self-collection as a test for cervical cancer screening quality measures need to be resolved.

Building Capacity for Cervical Cancer Prevention in U.S.-Affiliated Pacific Islands: The Pacific Against Cervical Cancer Project

The U.S.-affiliated Pacific Islands (USAPI) have higher cervical cancer incidence and mortality rates and lower screening coverage compared with the United States. This is likely because of economic, geographical, health care delivery, and cultural barriers for women living in these resource-constrained, isolated regions. The most recent U.S. and World Health Organization cervical cancer screening guidelines recommended primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing as one screening option or the preferred screening modality. Primary HPV screening-based strategies offer several advantages over current screening methods in the USAPI. However, adoption of this newer screening modality has been slow in the United States and not yet incorporated into USAPI screening programs. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and partners initiated the Pacific Against Cervical Cancer (PACe) project in 2019 to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and cost-effectiveness of primary HPV testing-based strategies in Guam and in Yap, Federated States of Micronesia. This report provides an overview of the PACe project and outlines the approaches we took in implementing primary HPV testing as a new cervical cancer screening strategy (including the option of self-sampling in Yap), encompassing four core components: (1) community engagement and education, (2) medical and laboratory capacity building, (3) health information and system improvement, and (4) modeling and cost-effectiveness analysis. The PACe project provides examples of systematic implementation and resource appropriate technologies to the USAPI, with broader implications for never screened and under-screened populations in the United States and Pacific as they face similar barriers to accessing cervical cancer screening services.

Data gaps and opportunities for modeling cancer health equity

Population models of cancer reflect the overall US population by drawing on numerous existing data resources for parameter inputs and calibration targets. Models require data inputs that are appropriately representative, collected in a harmonized manner, have minimal missing or inaccurate values, and reflect adequate sample sizes. Data resource priorities for population modeling to support cancer health equity include increasing the availability of data that 1) arise from uninsured and underinsured individuals and those traditionally not included in health-care delivery studies, 2) reflect relevant exposures for groups historically and intentionally excluded across the full cancer control continuum, 3) disaggregate categories (race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, gender, sexual orientation, etc.) and their intersections that conceal important variation in health outcomes, 4) identify specific populations of interest in clinical databases whose health outcomes have been understudied, 5) enhance health records through expanded data elements and linkage with other data types (eg, patient surveys, provider and/or facility level information, neighborhood data), 6) decrease missing and misclassified data from historically underrecognized populations, and 7) capture potential measures or effects of systemic racism and corresponding intervenable targets for change.

Cost-effectiveness of Human Papillomavirus Self-collection Intervention on Cervical Cancer Screening Uptake among Underscreened U.S. Persons with a Cervix

BACKGROUND

We evaluate the cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-collection (followed by scheduling assistance for those who were HPV+ or inconclusive) compared with scheduling assistance only and usual care among underscreened persons with a cervix (PWAC).

METHODS

A decision tree analysis was used to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER), or the cost per additional PWAC screened, from the Medicaid/state and clinic perspectives. A hypothetical cohort represented 90,807 low-income, underscreened individuals. Costs and health outcomes were derived from the MyBodyMyTest-3 randomized trial except the usual care health outcomes were derived from literature. We performed probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) to evaluate model uncertainty.

RESULTS

Screening uptake was highest in the self-collection alternative (n = 65,721), followed by the scheduling assistance alternative (n = 34,003) and usual care (n = 18,161). The self-collection alternative costs less and was more effective than the scheduling assistance alternative from the Medicaid/state perspective. Comparing the self-collection alternative with usual care, the ICERs were $284 per additional PWAC screened from the Medicaid/state perspective and $298 per additional PWAC screened from the clinic perspective. PSAs demonstrated that the self-collection alternative was cost-effective compared with usual care at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $300 per additional PWAC screened in 66% of simulations from the Medicaid/state perspective and 58% of simulations from the clinic perspective.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with usual care and scheduling assistance, mailing HPV self-collection kits to underscreened individuals appears to be cost-effective in increasing screening uptake.

IMPACT

This is the first analysis to demonstrate the cost-effectiveness of mailed self-collection in the United States.

Economic Evaluation of Mailed Home-Based Human Papillomavirus Self-sampling Kits for Cervical Cancer Screening

Importance

Human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling addresses barriers to cervical cancer screening, and mailed self-sampling kits have been reported to increase screening uptake. International research suggests mailed kits are cost-effective in certain settings. However, the cost-effectiveness of mailing HPV self-sampling kits for increasing screening uptake has not been evaluated in the US.

Objective

To conduct an economic evaluation of a mailed HPV self-sampling intervention among underscreened women enrolled in an integrated US health care system.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This economic evaluation involved a cost-effectiveness analysis of results from a randomized clinical trial of 19 851 women aged 30 to 64 years enrolled in a health plan from Kaiser Permanente Washington (KPWA), a US-based integrated health care system. Women were identified through electronic medical records, and eligible participants were enrolled in a health plan for at least 3 years and 5 months, had a primary care clinician, had not received a Papanicolaou test for at least 3 years and 5 months, and had not received a hysterectomy. Enrollment occurred from February 25, 2014, to August 29, 2016, with follow-up through February 25, 2018. The current economic evaluation was conducted between August 2, 2021, and July 30, 2022. Intervention delivery costs were calculated from both the KPWA and Medicare perspectives and were based on either wellness visit or Papanicolaou test-only visit costs.

Intervention

Participants in the control group received usual care, which comprised patient reminders and ad hoc outreach for screening. Participants in the intervention group received usual care plus a mailed HPV self-sampling kit.

Main Outcome and Measures

The primary economic outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for increased screening uptake, defined as the incremental difference in cost (intervention group minus control group) divided by the difference in the number of participants completing screening (intervention group minus control group) within 6 months of randomization.

Results

Among 19 851 women (mean [SD] age, 50.1 [9.5] years; 76.7% White), 9960 were randomized to the intervention group, and 9891 were randomized to the control group. Baseline ICERs ranged from $85.84 (95% CI, $85.68-$85.99) using KPWA wellness visits as the cost basis to $146.29 (95% CI, $146.20-$146.38) using Medicare Papanicolaou test-only visits as the cost source. Subgroups of participants aged 50 to 64 years and participants most recently overdue for screening achieved cost-effectiveness at lower levels of willingness to pay for an additional completed screening than other subgroups.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this economic evaluation, mailing HPV self-sampling kits to women overdue for cervical cancer screening was cost-effective for increased screening uptake relative to usual care. These results support mailing HPV kits as an efficient outreach strategy for increasing screening rates among eligible women in US health care systems.

Are intersectoral costs considered in economic evaluations of interventions relating to sexually transmitted infections (STIs)? A systematic review

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) not only have an impact on the health sector but also the private resources of those affected, their families and other sectors of society (i.e. labour, education). This study aimed to i) review and identify economic evaluations of interventions relating to STIs, which aimed to include a societal perspective; ii) analyse the intersectoral costs (i.e. costs broader than healthcare) included; iii) categorise these costs by sector; and iv) assess the impact of intersectoral costs on the overall study results.

METHODS

Seven databases were searched: MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE (Ovid), Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EconLit and NHS EED. Key search terms included terms for economic evaluation, STIs and specific infections. This review considered trial- and model-based economic evaluations conducted in an OECD member country. Studies were included that assessed intersectoral costs. Intersectoral costs were extracted and categorised by sector using Drummond's cost classification scheme (i.e. patient/family, productivity, costs in other sectors). A narrative synthesis was performed.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies qualified for data extraction and narrative synthesis. Twenty-eight studies applied a societal perspective of which 8 additionally adopted a healthcare or payer perspective, or both. One study used a modified payer perspective. The following sectors were identified: patient/family, informal care, paid labour (productivity), non-paid opportunity costs, education, and consumption. Patient/family costs were captured in 11 studies and included patient time, travel expenses, out-of-pocket costs and premature burial costs. Informal caregiver support (non-family) and unpaid help by family/friends was captured in three studies. Paid labour losses were assessed in all but three studies. Three studies also captured the costs and inability to perform non-paid work. Educational costs and future non-health consumption costs were each captured in one study. The inclusion of intersectoral costs resulted in more favourable cost estimates.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review suggests that economic evaluations of interventions relating to STIs that adopt a societal perspective tend to be limited in scope. There is an urgent need for economic evaluations to be more comprehensive in order to allow policy/decision-makers to make better-informed decisions.

Effectiveness and feasibility of self-sampling for human papillomavirus testing for internet-based cervical cancer screening

Objectives

Worldwide, around 18.2% of cervical cancer occurred in China, mainly because of lower screening coverage and screening quality in regional disparities. To assess self-sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, combined with the internet, as a primary cervical cancer screening (CCS) method in low-resource settings, and to establish an internet-based self-sampling CCS-management model.

Methods

The women who participated registered on a CCS website. We recruited 20,136 women, aged 30-59 years, from 13 provinces in China, to perform vaginal self-sampling for HPV testing as a primary CCS, based on the internet. A questionnaire was subsequently used to investigate the acceptability of self-sampling.

Results

Of the 20,103 women with qualified samples, 35.80% lived in remote areas, 37.69% had never undergone CCS, 59.96% were under-screened, and the overall prevalence of a high-risk of HPV was 13.86%. Of 8,136 respondents, 95.97% of women felt that self-sampling was easy to perform, 84.61% had no discomfort when using a self-sampling brush, 62.37% women were more likely to choose self-sampling for CCS in future, and 92.53% were willing to introduce the concept to others around them. The reliability and ease of self-sampling were independent factors influencing selection of self-sampling (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

The Internet-facilitated self-sampling for HPV testing and management model for cervical cancer prevention is feasible and effective. It can be used as a supplement to the conventional screening, particularly in outlying areas with few medical resources, to improve the coverage of CCS.

Clinical trial registration

https://www.chictr.org.cn, identifier: ChiCTR2000032331.

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.

Reducing Poverty-Related Disparities in Cervical Cancer: The Role of HPV Vaccination

BACKGROUND

Near elimination of cervical cancer in the United States is possible in coming decades, yet inequities will delay this achievement for some populations. We sought to explore the effects of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination on disparities in cervical cancer incidence between high- and low-poverty U.S. counties.

METHODS

We calibrated a dynamic simulation model of HPV infection to reflect average counties in the highest and lowest quartile of poverty (percent of population below federal poverty level), incorporating data on HPV prevalence, cervical cancer screening, and HPV vaccination. We projected cervical cancer incidence through 2070, estimated absolute and relative disparities in incident cervical cancer for high- versus low-poverty counties, and compared incidence with the near-elimination target (4 cases/100,000 women annually).

RESULTS

We estimated that, on average, low-poverty counties will achieve near-elimination targets 14 years earlier than high-poverty counties (2029 vs. 2043). Absolute disparities by county poverty will decrease, but relative differences are estimated to increase. We estimate 21,604 cumulative excess cervical cancer cases in high-poverty counties over the next 50 years. Increasing HPV vaccine coverage nationally to the Healthy People 2020 goal (80%) would reduce excess cancer cases, but not alter estimated time to reach the near-elimination threshold.

CONCLUSIONS

High-poverty U.S. counties will likely be delayed in achieving near-elimination targets for cervical cancer and as a result will experience thousands of potentially preventable cancers.

IMPACT

Alongside vaccination efforts, it is important to address the role of social determinants and health care access in driving persistent inequities by area poverty.