Cargando…

HPV testing for cervical cancer screening appears more cost-effective than Papanicolau cytology in Mexico

OBJECTIVE: To determine the incremental costs and effects of different HPV testing strategies, when compared to Papanicolau cytology (Pap), for cervical cancer screening in Mexico. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) examined the specific costs and health outcomes associated with (1) no scr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Flores, Yvonne N., Bishai, David M., Lőrincz, Attila, Shah, Keerti V., Lazcano-Ponce, Eduardo, Hernández, Mauricio, Granados-García, Víctor, Pérez, Ruth, Salmerón, Jorge
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Netherlands 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3025113/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21170578
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10552-010-9694-3
_version_ 1782196872955297792
author Flores, Yvonne N.
Bishai, David M.
Lőrincz, Attila
Shah, Keerti V.
Lazcano-Ponce, Eduardo
Hernández, Mauricio
Granados-García, Víctor
Pérez, Ruth
Salmerón, Jorge
author_facet Flores, Yvonne N.
Bishai, David M.
Lőrincz, Attila
Shah, Keerti V.
Lazcano-Ponce, Eduardo
Hernández, Mauricio
Granados-García, Víctor
Pérez, Ruth
Salmerón, Jorge
author_sort Flores, Yvonne N.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To determine the incremental costs and effects of different HPV testing strategies, when compared to Papanicolau cytology (Pap), for cervical cancer screening in Mexico. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) examined the specific costs and health outcomes associated with (1) no screening; (2) only the Pap test; (3) only self-administered HPV; (4) only clinician administered HPV; and (5) clinician administered HPV plus the Pap test. The costs of self- and clinician-HPV testing, as well as with the Pap test, were identified and quantified. Costs were reported in 2008 US dollars. The health outcome associated with these screening strategies was defined as the number of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia or cervical cancer cases detected. This CEA was performed using the perspective of the Mexican Institute of Social Security (IMSS) in Morelos, Mexico. RESULTS: Screening women between the ages of 30–80 for cervical cancer using clinical-HPV testing or the combination of clinical-HPV testing, and the Pap is always more cost-effective than using the Pap test alone. CONCLUSIONS: This CEA indicates that HPV testing could be a cost-effective screening alternative for a large health delivery organization such as IMSS. These results may help policy-makers implement HPV testing as part of the IMSS cervical cancer screening program.
format Text
id pubmed-3025113
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher Springer Netherlands
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-30251132011-02-22 HPV testing for cervical cancer screening appears more cost-effective than Papanicolau cytology in Mexico Flores, Yvonne N. Bishai, David M. Lőrincz, Attila Shah, Keerti V. Lazcano-Ponce, Eduardo Hernández, Mauricio Granados-García, Víctor Pérez, Ruth Salmerón, Jorge Cancer Causes Control Original Paper OBJECTIVE: To determine the incremental costs and effects of different HPV testing strategies, when compared to Papanicolau cytology (Pap), for cervical cancer screening in Mexico. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) examined the specific costs and health outcomes associated with (1) no screening; (2) only the Pap test; (3) only self-administered HPV; (4) only clinician administered HPV; and (5) clinician administered HPV plus the Pap test. The costs of self- and clinician-HPV testing, as well as with the Pap test, were identified and quantified. Costs were reported in 2008 US dollars. The health outcome associated with these screening strategies was defined as the number of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia or cervical cancer cases detected. This CEA was performed using the perspective of the Mexican Institute of Social Security (IMSS) in Morelos, Mexico. RESULTS: Screening women between the ages of 30–80 for cervical cancer using clinical-HPV testing or the combination of clinical-HPV testing, and the Pap is always more cost-effective than using the Pap test alone. CONCLUSIONS: This CEA indicates that HPV testing could be a cost-effective screening alternative for a large health delivery organization such as IMSS. These results may help policy-makers implement HPV testing as part of the IMSS cervical cancer screening program. Springer Netherlands 2010-12-18 2011 /pmc/articles/PMC3025113/ /pubmed/21170578 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10552-010-9694-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2010 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
spellingShingle Original Paper
Flores, Yvonne N.
Bishai, David M.
Lőrincz, Attila
Shah, Keerti V.
Lazcano-Ponce, Eduardo
Hernández, Mauricio
Granados-García, Víctor
Pérez, Ruth
Salmerón, Jorge
HPV testing for cervical cancer screening appears more cost-effective than Papanicolau cytology in Mexico
title HPV testing for cervical cancer screening appears more cost-effective than Papanicolau cytology in Mexico
title_full HPV testing for cervical cancer screening appears more cost-effective than Papanicolau cytology in Mexico
title_fullStr HPV testing for cervical cancer screening appears more cost-effective than Papanicolau cytology in Mexico
title_full_unstemmed HPV testing for cervical cancer screening appears more cost-effective than Papanicolau cytology in Mexico
title_short HPV testing for cervical cancer screening appears more cost-effective than Papanicolau cytology in Mexico
title_sort hpv testing for cervical cancer screening appears more cost-effective than papanicolau cytology in mexico
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3025113/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21170578
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10552-010-9694-3
work_keys_str_mv AT floresyvonnen hpvtestingforcervicalcancerscreeningappearsmorecosteffectivethanpapanicolaucytologyinmexico
AT bishaidavidm hpvtestingforcervicalcancerscreeningappearsmorecosteffectivethanpapanicolaucytologyinmexico
AT lorinczattila hpvtestingforcervicalcancerscreeningappearsmorecosteffectivethanpapanicolaucytologyinmexico
AT shahkeertiv hpvtestingforcervicalcancerscreeningappearsmorecosteffectivethanpapanicolaucytologyinmexico
AT lazcanoponceeduardo hpvtestingforcervicalcancerscreeningappearsmorecosteffectivethanpapanicolaucytologyinmexico
AT hernandezmauricio hpvtestingforcervicalcancerscreeningappearsmorecosteffectivethanpapanicolaucytologyinmexico
AT granadosgarciavictor hpvtestingforcervicalcancerscreeningappearsmorecosteffectivethanpapanicolaucytologyinmexico
AT perezruth hpvtestingforcervicalcancerscreeningappearsmorecosteffectivethanpapanicolaucytologyinmexico
AT salmeronjorge hpvtestingforcervicalcancerscreeningappearsmorecosteffectivethanpapanicolaucytologyinmexico