Cost-effectiveness of strategies to increase screening coverage for cervical cancer in Spain: the CRIVERVA study

A systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of interventions to increase cervical cancer screening among underserved women in Europe

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to conduct a systematic review of the cost-effectiveness studies of interventions to increase cervical cancer screening uptake rates in underserved women in Europe.

METHODS

A search of Embase, Medline, Global Health, PsychINFO, and NHS Economic Evaluation Database was conducted for studies published between January 2000 and September 2022. Studies were eligible if they analysed the cost-effectiveness of any interventions to improve participation in cervical cancer screening among underserved women of any age eligible to participate in cervical cancer screening in European countries, in any language. Study characteristics and cost-effectiveness results were summarised. Study quality was assessed using the Drummond Checklist, and methodological choices were further compared.

RESULTS

The searches yielded 962 unique studies, with 17 of these (from twelve European countries) meeting the eligibility criteria for data extraction. All studies focused on underscreened women as an overarching group, with no identified studies focusing on specific subgroups of underserved women. Generally, self-HPV testing and reminder interventions were shown to be cost-effective to increase the uptake rates. There was also research showing that addressing access issues and adopting different screening modalities could be economically attractive in some settings, but the current evidence is insufficient due to the limited number of studies.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review has revealed a gap in the literature on the cost-effectiveness of interventions to improve uptake rates of cervical cancer screening through tailored provision for specific groups of underserved women.

Research can be integrated into public health policy-making: global lessons for and from Spanish economic evaluations

WHO promotes the use of research in policy-making to drive improvements in health, including in achieving Sustainable Development Goals such as tobacco control. The European Union’s new €95 billion Horizon Europe research framework programme parallels these aims, and also includes commitments to fund economic evaluations. However, researchers often express frustration at the perceived lack of attention to scientific evidence during policy-making. For example, some researchers claim that evidence regarding the return on investment from optimal implementation of evidence-based policies is frequently overlooked. An increasingly large body of literature acknowledges inevitable barriers to research use, but also analyses facilitators encouraging such use. This opinion piece describes how some research is integrated into policy-making. It highlights two recent reviews. One examines impact assessments of 36 multi-project research programmes and identifies three characteristics of projects more likely to influence policy-making. These include a focus on healthcare system needs, engagement of stakeholders, and research conducted for organizations supported by structures to receive and use evidence. The second review suggests that such characteristics are likely to occur as part of a comprehensive national health research system strategy, especially one integrated into the healthcare system. We also describe two policy-informing economic evaluations conducted in Spain. These examined the most cost-effective package of evidence-based tobacco control interventions and the cost-effectiveness of different strategies to increase screening coverage for cervical cancer. Both projects focused on issues of healthcare concern and involved considerable stakeholder engagement. The Spanish examples reinforce some lessons from the global literature and, therefore, could help demonstrate to authorities in Spain the value of developing comprehensive health research systems, possibly following the interfaces and receptor model. The aim of this would be to integrate needs assessment and stakeholder engagement with structures spanning the research and health systems. In such structures, economic evaluation evidence could be collated, analysed by experts in relation to healthcare needs, and fed into both policy-making as appropriate, and future research calls. The increasingly large local and global evidence base on research utilization could inform detailed implementation of this approach once accepted as politically desirable. Given the COVID-19 pandemic, increasing the cost-effectiveness of healthcare systems and return on investment of public health interventions becomes even more important.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of a lung cancer screening programme in Spain

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the implementation of national lung cancer (LC) screening programme (SP) in a high-risk population from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System (NHS).

METHODS

A cost-effectiveness analysis for a LC SP was carried out on a lifetime horizon. A Markov model was designed that assumed two scenarios, one with the implementation of the SP and another one without it. Effectiveness and cost of LC management, diagnosis and screening were included in the different health states. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate its robustness. A discount rate was set at 3% both for effectiveness and cost.

RESULTS

In the base-case, an increase of 4.80 quality-adjusted life years (QALY) per patient was obtained, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €2345/QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed the national LC SP to be cost-effective in 80% of cases (probability=0.8) for a willingness-to-pay threshold equivalent to the gross domestic product per capita in Spain, which was set at €25 854/QALY in 2018 based on the per capita income of Spain. The sensitivity analysis indicates that the obtained results are robust in terms of changes in the presentation rates and costs, and the cost-effectiveness thresholds.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis suggests that the implementation of a LC SP in the high-risk Spanish population would be a cost-effective strategy for the Spanish NHS.

Comparative cost analysis of cervical cancer screening programme based on molecular detection of HPV in Spain

Background

HPV cervical cancer screening (CCS) must use validated HPV tests based on the molecular detection of either viral mRNA (Aptima HPV Assay—AHPV) or DNA. AHPV has demonstrated the same cross-sectional and longitudinal sensitivity for the detection of HSIL/CIN2+ lesions but with greater specificity than HPV-DNA tests. The study aimed to estimate the total costs of a CCS with a primary HPV test based on the detection of mRNA compared to DNA in women aged 35–65 years for the National Health System.

Methods

A decision-tree-based model to estimate the cost of the CCS until the first colposcopy was designed based on Spanish CCS guidelines. The total cost (€, 2019) for CCS with AHPV or DNA tests (HC2 and Cobas) was calculated, including HPV test, liquid-based cytology (LBC) and colposcopy, for a population of 7,263,529 women aged 35–65 years (assuming 70% coverage). Clinical inputs derived from a literature review were validated by a multidisciplinary expert panel. Data from head-to-head studies between different HPV tests were selected.

Results

The use of AHPV showed reduction of 290,541 (− 35%) and 355,913 (− 40%) LBC compared to HC2 or Cobas, respectively. Furthermore, AHPV avoided 151,699 (− 47%) colposcopies versus HC2 and 151,165 (− 47%) versus Cobas. The total cost of CCS was € 282,747,877 with AHPV, € 322,587,588 with HC2 and € 324,614,490 with Cobas. Therefore, AHPV savings € − 39,839,711 versus HC2 and € − 41,866,613 versus Cobas.

Conclusions

Assuming that 70% of women from 35 to 65 years attend the CCS programme, the cost of screening up to the first colposcopy using AHPV would provide cost savings of up to € 41.9 million versus DNA tests in Spain.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12905-021-01310-8.

Impact of postal correspondence letters on participation in cancer screening: a rapid review

The purpose of this rapid review was to identify and synthesize evidence on the impact of postal correspondence letters on participation in cancer screening and to determine whether impact varied by cancer site or inclusion of the participant's physician's name within the letter (i.e., physician-linked). PubMed and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for English-language systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up until October 2019. One reviewer completed citation screening and data extraction with 30% verification by a second reviewer. Systematic reviews and RCTs were appraised using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2 and Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tools, respectively, by one reviewer with complete verification by a second reviewer. Findings from systematic reviews and RCTs were examined separately and presented narratively. Six systematic reviews and 18 RCTs of generally low quality were included. Evidence generally demonstrated a positive impact of a letter as compared to no letter or usual practice on screening participation. This finding was consistent for breast cancer and cervical screening participation but inconsistent for colorectal cancer screening participation. Studies comparing physician-linked letters to no letters or usual practice reported similar effect estimates as those examining letters in general. Limited and inconsistent evidence was identified on the impact of physician-linked letters as compared to non-physician-linked letters on screening participation. Evidence identified in this rapid review, and other contextual and implementation considerations, may be useful for jurisdictions considering how to promote cancer screening participation.

Cost-effectiveness of a stepwise intervention to promote adherence to cervical cancer screening

BACKGROUND

Cervical cancer screening is effective in reducing mortality, but adherence is generally low. We aimed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of a stepwise intervention to promote adherence to cervical cancer screening in Portugal.

METHODS

We developed a decision tree model to compare the cost-effectiveness of four competing interventions to increase adherence to cervical cancer screening: (i) a written letter (standard-of-care); (ii) automated short message service text messages (SMS)/phone calls/reminders; (iii) automated SMS/phone calls/reminders + manual phone calls; (iv) automated SMS/phone calls/reminders + manual phone calls + face-to-face interviews. The main outcome measure was cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) measured over a 5-year time horizon. Costs were calculated from the societal and provider perspectives.

RESULTS

From the societal perspective, the optimal strategy was automated SMS/phone calls/reminders, below a threshold of €8171 per QALY; above this and below €180 878 per QALY, the most cost-effective strategy was automated SMS/phone calls/reminders + manual phone calls and above this value automated SMS/phone calls/reminders + manual phone calls + face-to-face interviews. From the provider perspective, the ranking of the three strategies in terms of cost-effectiveness was the same, for thresholds of €2756 and €175 463 per QALY, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of one time the national gross domestic product (€22 398/QALY), automated SMS/phone calls/reminders + manual phone calls is a cost-effective strategy to promote adherence to cervical cancer screening, both from the societal and provider perspectives.

The Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Cervical Cancer Screening Using a Systematic Invitation System in Lithuania

In Lithuania, cytological screening of cervical cancer (CC) is largely opportunistic. Absence of standardized systematic invitation practice might be the reason for low participation rates. The study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of systematic invitation approach in CC screening programme from the perspective of a healthcare provider. A decision tree was used to compare an opportunistic invitation by a family doctor, a personal postal invitation letter with appointment time and place, and a personal postal invitation letter with appointment time and place with one reminder letter. Cost-effectiveness was defined as an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per one additionally screened woman and per one additional abnormal Pap smear test detected. The ICER of one personal postal invitation letter was €9.67 per one additionally screened woman and €55.21 per one additional abnormal Pap smear test detected in comparison with the current screening practice. The ICER of a personal invitation letter with an additional reminder letter compared to one invitation letter was €13.47 and €86.88 respectively. Conclusions: A personal invitation letter approach is more effective in increasing the participation rate in CC screening and the number of detected abnormal Pap smears; however, it incurs additional expenses compared with current invitation practice.

Economic evaluations of public health implementation-interventions: a systematic review and guideline for practice

OBJECTIVES

Implementation interventions applied in public health are about using proven strategies to influence the uptake of evidence-based prevention and health promotion initiatives. The decision to invest in implementation has an opportunity cost, which can be overlooked. The purpose of this study was to assess the extent to which economic evaluations have been applied to implementation interventions in public health.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a systematic review of empirical studies examining the costs and consequences, cost-effectiveness or cost-benefit of strategies directed towards enhancing the implementation of public health interventions and policies in developed countries.

METHODS

The following databases were searched for English language publications reporting both effect measures and costs, from 1990 to current: MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, EconLit, EPPI-Centre database of health promotion research, Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, Informit and Scopus.

RESULTS

The search strategy returned 3229 records after duplicate removal, from which we included 14 economic evaluations. All the included evaluations were conducted and published after 2000. Twelve of the 14 evaluations were based on controlled trials and two reported hypothetical modelled scenarios. The methodologic rigour and compliance with reporting guidelines for economic evaluations was highly varied and not related to the publication date.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings offer the first insight into the application and methodologic rigour of economic evaluations of implementation strategies supporting public health policies and interventions. To usefully inform public health policy and investment decisions, there needs to be greater application of economic evaluation to understand the cost-effectiveness of alternative implementation efforts. This review highlights the great paucity and mixed quality of the evidence on this topic and offers guidance by way of a checklist to improve the quality and reporting of future evaluations.

Estimating the epidemiological impact and cost-effectiveness profile of a nonavalent HPV vaccine in Spain

Human papillomavirus (HPV) is one of the main causes of infection-related cancer. The bivalent vaccine (2vHPV) (16/18) and quadrivalent (6/11/16/18) HPV vaccine (4vHPV) have been included in the Spanish vaccination calendar since 2007. The new nonavalent HPV vaccine (9vHPV), approved in Europe in 2015, includes nine HPV types 6/11/16/18/31/33/45/52/58 and has been available in Spain since May 2017. Our study aims to estimate the epidemiological impact and the cost-effectiveness of a girls-only and a gender-neutral vaccination program with 9vHPV compared to the current vaccination program in Spain. A dynamic transmission model simulating the natural history of HPV infections was calibrated to the Spanish setting and applied to estimate costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) associated with vaccination strategies using a payer perspective and a 100-year time horizon. A girls-only vaccination strategy at age 12 years with 9vHPV was found to be a cost-effective strategy compared with 4vHPV (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €7,718 per QALY). Compared with girls-only vaccination with 4vHPV, gender-neutral vaccination with 9vHPV was associated with further reductions of up to 28.5% in the incidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2/3 and 17.1% in the incidence of cervical cancer, as well as with a 14.0% reduction in cervical cancer mortality. Furthermore, a gender-neutral vaccination program with 9vHPV could potentially be cost-effective considering some parameters as head and neck protection or discount rates, leading to a reduction in the burden of HPV-related diseases in both sexes in the Spanish population.

Cervical Cancer Screening Programs in Europe: The Transition Towards HPV Vaccination and Population-Based HPV Testing

Cervical cancer is the fourth most frequently occurring cancer in women around the world and can affect them during their reproductive years. Since the development of the Papanicolaou (Pap) test, screening has been essential in identifying cervical cancer at a treatable stage. With the identification of the human papillomavirus (HPV) as the causative agent of essentially all cervical cancer cases, HPV molecular screening tests and HPV vaccines for primary prevention against the virus have been developed. Accordingly, comparative studies were designed to assess the performance of cervical cancer screening methods in order to devise the best screening strategy possible. This review critically assesses the current cervical cancer screening methods as well as the implementation of HPV vaccination in Europe. The most recent European Guidelines and recommendations for organized population-based programs with HPV testing as the primary screening method are also presented. Lastly, the current landscape of cervical cancer screening programs is assessed for both European Union member states and some associated countries, in regard to the transition towards population-based screening programs with primary HPV testing.

Incidence and mortality due to cervical cancer in 4 south European countries

Objective:

To describe variation in incidence and mortality rates of cervical cancer (CC), between 4 Southern European countries that share similar cultural characteristics.

Methods:

Data on CC incidence and mortality reported in Portugal, Spain, Italy, and Greece for the year 2012 were obtained through the International Agency of Research on Cancer. Expected numbers of incident cases and deaths were obtained based on age-specific rates in European region. Standardized incidence rate (SIR) and standardized mortality rate (SMR) and respective 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were computed for each country by age group (15–39, 40–54, 55–64, and ≥65 years old).

Results:

The number of incident cases of and deaths due to CC observed in Greece, Italy, and Spain were significantly lower than expected, whichever the age group. In Portugal such pattern was, however, only found for incident cases among women aged up to 54 years. The number of incident cases observed in Portugal did not differ from that expected among women aged 55 to 64 (SIR = 90.8; 95% CI: 76.8–106.7) and aged 65 or more years (SIR = 110.0; 95% CI: 95.9–125.0). Also, the number of deaths observed in Portugal did not differ from that expected among women aged 15 to 39 (SMR = 70.0; 95% CI: 43.3–100.8), 40 to 54 (SMR = 93.6; 95% CI: 74.9–115.4), and 55 to 64 years (SMR = 93.6; 95% CI: 73.4–117.7) but was significantly higher than that expected among women aged 65 or more years (SMR = 126.7; 95% CI: 110.1–144.4).

Conclusions:

There is variability in CC incidence and mortality between 4 South European countries. To understand the reasons underlying such variability could improve approach to preventive care.

Cost-effectiveness of strategies to increase cervical screening uptake at first invitation (STRATEGIC)

Objective To assess the cost-effectiveness of strategies to increase cervical cancer screening uptake at first invitation (STRATEGIC trial). Methods We performed an economic analysis alongside the STRATEGIC trial, comparing each of seven novel interventions for improving cervical screening uptake with control general practices in Greater Manchester and Grampian (United Kingdom). A template was developed to measure the intervention costs. Trial estimates of screening uptake were combined with data from the literature to estimate healthcare costs of each intervention. The added lifetime costs and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) of attending cervical screening were estimated by a systematic literature review, with relevant results pooled and weighted by study quality. Trial results and estimated lifetime costs and benefits of screening were then combined in a decision analytic model, giving an incremental cost per QALY gained for each intervention. Uncertainty was addressed in probabilistic and univariate sensitivity analyses. Results Intervention costs per screening round per woman attending varied from about £1.20 (2014 UK) for the nurse navigator intervention to £62 for the unrequested HPV self-sampler kit. The meta-analysis revealed a lifetime discounted benefit from screening of 0.043 QALYs per woman attending, at an additional lifetime discounted cost of £234. The incremental cost per QALY gained in all interventions was below £13,000. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses suggested that only unrequested self-sampling and timed appointments have a high probability of being cost-effective. Conclusions Unrequested self-sampling and timed appointments are likely to be cost-effective interventions. Further research is required on the duration of effects and on implementing combinations of interventions.

Increasing Cervical Cancer Screening Coverage: A Randomised, Community-Based Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Opportunistic cervical cancer screening can lead to suboptimal screening coverage. Coverage could be increased after a personalised invitation to the target population. We present a community randomized intervention study with three strategies aiming to increase screening coverage.

METHODS

The CRICERVA study is a community-based clinical trial to improve coverage of population-based screening in the Cerdanyola SAP area in Barcelona.A total of 32,858 women residing in the study area, aged 30 to 70 years were evaluated. A total of 15,965 women were identified as having no registration of a cervical cytology in the last 3.5 years within the Public Health data base system. Eligible women were assigned to one of four community randomized intervention groups (IGs): (1) (IG1 N = 4197) personalised invitation letter, (2) (IG2 N = 3601) personalised invitation letter + informative leaflet, (3) (IG3 N = 6088) personalised invitation letter + informative leaflet + personalised phone call and (4) (Control N = 2079) based on spontaneous demand of cervical cancer screening as officially recommended. To evaluate screening coverage, we used heterogeneity tests to compare impact of the interventions and mixed logistic regression models to assess the age effect. We refer a "rescue" visit as the screening visit resulting from the study invitation.

RESULTS

Among the 13,886 women in the IGs, 2,862 were evaluated as having an adequate screening history after the initial contact; 4,263 were lost to follow-up and 5,341 were identified as having insufficient screening and thus being eligible for a rescue visit. All intervention strategies significantly increased participation to screening compared to the control group. Coverage after the intervention reached 84.1% while the control group reached 64.8%. The final impact of our study was an increase of 20% in the three IGs and of 9% in the control group (p<0.001). Within the intervention arms, age was an important determinant of rescue visits showing a statistical interaction with the coverage attained in the IGs. Within the intervention groups, final screening coverage was significantly higher in IG3 (84.4%) (p<0.001). However, the differences were more substantial in the age groups 50-59 and those 60+. The highest impact of the IG3 intervention was observed among women 60+ y.o with 32.0% of them being rescued for screening. The lowest impact of the interventions was in younger women.

CONCLUSIONS

The study confirms that using individual contact methods and assigning a fixed screening date notably increases participation in screening. The response to the invitation is strongly dependent on age.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01373723.