Cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening with primary HPV testing for unvaccinated women in Sweden

Sara Fogelberg, Mark S Clements, Kine Pedersen, Stephen Sy, Pär Sparén, Jane J Kim and Emily A Burger

PLOS ONE, 2020, vol. 15, issue 9, 1-15

Abstract: Background: Sweden revised their cervical cancer screening program in 2017 to include cytology-based screening for women aged 23–29 years and primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for women aged 30–64 years; however, alternative strategies may be preferred. To inform cervical cancer prevention policies for unvaccinated women, we evaluated the cost-effectiveness of alternative screening strategies, including the current Swedish guidelines. Methods: We adapted a mathematical simulation model of HPV and cervical cancer to the Swedish context using primary epidemiologic data. We compared the cost-effectiveness of alternative screening strategies that varied by the age to start screening, the age to switch from cytology to HPV testing, HPV strategies not preceded by cytology, screening frequency, and management of HPV-positive/cytology-negative women. Results: We found that the current Swedish guidelines were more costly and less effective than alternative primary HPV-based strategies. All cost-efficient strategies involved primary HPV testing not preceded by cytology for younger women. Given a cost-effectiveness threshold of €85,619 per quality-adjusted life year gained, the optimal strategy involved 5-yearly primary HPV-based screening for women aged 23–50 years and 10-yearly HPV-based screening for women older than age 50 years. Conclusions: Primary screening based on HPV alone may be considered for unvaccinated women for those countries with similar HPV burdens.

Date: 2020
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0239611 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 39611&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0239611

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0239611

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().