Cargando…

Organised screening for cervical cancer in France: a cost-effectiveness assessment

OBJECTIVE: According to the third cancer plan, organised screening (OS) of cervical cancer (CC) among women aged 25–65 years should be implemented in France in the forthcoming years. The most efficient way to implement OS in the French healthcare system is yet to be determined. METHODS: A microsimul...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Barré, Stéphanie, Massetti, Marc, Leleu, Henri, De Bels, Frédéric
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5640017/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28988162
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014626
_version_ 1783270970846347264
author Barré, Stéphanie
Massetti, Marc
Leleu, Henri
De Bels, Frédéric
author_facet Barré, Stéphanie
Massetti, Marc
Leleu, Henri
De Bels, Frédéric
author_sort Barré, Stéphanie
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: According to the third cancer plan, organised screening (OS) of cervical cancer (CC) among women aged 25–65 years should be implemented in France in the forthcoming years. The most efficient way to implement OS in the French healthcare system is yet to be determined. METHODS: A microsimulation model was developed adopting a collective ‘all payers’ perspective. A closed cohort of women eligible for CC screening and representative in terms of age and participation in individual screening (IndScr) by annual Papanicolaou (Pap) testing every 3 years was modelled on a lifetime horizon. Different OS strategies, additive to IndScr with a 61.9% participation rate based on mailed invitations to non-participant women to perform OS were assessed. Similar modalities were applied to OS and IndScr participants. Strategies implied different screening tests (Papanicolaou (Pap) test, human papillomavirus (HPV) test and p16/Ki67 double staining) and OS periodicity. RESULTS: Compared with IndScr only, all OS strategies were associated with decreased cancer incidence/mortality (from 14.2%/13.5% to 22.9%/25.8%). Most strategies generated extra costs ranging from €37.9 to €1607 per eligible woman. HPV testing every 10 and 5 years were cost saving. HPV tests every 10 and 5 years were the most efficient strategies, generating more survival at lower costs than Pap-based strategies. Compared to IndScr only, an HPV test every 10 years was cost saving. The most effective strategies were p16/Ki67 as primary or HPV positive confirmation tests, with respective incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of €6 541 250 and €101 391 per life year. Pap-based strategies generated intermediary results. CONCLUSION: OS strategies based on the HPV test appear highly efficient. However, our results rely on the assumption that women and practitioners comply with the recommended OS periodicities (3, 5, 10 years). Implementing these OS modalities will require major adaptations to the current CC screening organisation. Pap test-based strategies might be simpler to setup while preparing an appropriate implementation of more efficient OS screening modalities.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5640017
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56400172017-10-19 Organised screening for cervical cancer in France: a cost-effectiveness assessment Barré, Stéphanie Massetti, Marc Leleu, Henri De Bels, Frédéric BMJ Open Health Economics OBJECTIVE: According to the third cancer plan, organised screening (OS) of cervical cancer (CC) among women aged 25–65 years should be implemented in France in the forthcoming years. The most efficient way to implement OS in the French healthcare system is yet to be determined. METHODS: A microsimulation model was developed adopting a collective ‘all payers’ perspective. A closed cohort of women eligible for CC screening and representative in terms of age and participation in individual screening (IndScr) by annual Papanicolaou (Pap) testing every 3 years was modelled on a lifetime horizon. Different OS strategies, additive to IndScr with a 61.9% participation rate based on mailed invitations to non-participant women to perform OS were assessed. Similar modalities were applied to OS and IndScr participants. Strategies implied different screening tests (Papanicolaou (Pap) test, human papillomavirus (HPV) test and p16/Ki67 double staining) and OS periodicity. RESULTS: Compared with IndScr only, all OS strategies were associated with decreased cancer incidence/mortality (from 14.2%/13.5% to 22.9%/25.8%). Most strategies generated extra costs ranging from €37.9 to €1607 per eligible woman. HPV testing every 10 and 5 years were cost saving. HPV tests every 10 and 5 years were the most efficient strategies, generating more survival at lower costs than Pap-based strategies. Compared to IndScr only, an HPV test every 10 years was cost saving. The most effective strategies were p16/Ki67 as primary or HPV positive confirmation tests, with respective incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of €6 541 250 and €101 391 per life year. Pap-based strategies generated intermediary results. CONCLUSION: OS strategies based on the HPV test appear highly efficient. However, our results rely on the assumption that women and practitioners comply with the recommended OS periodicities (3, 5, 10 years). Implementing these OS modalities will require major adaptations to the current CC screening organisation. Pap test-based strategies might be simpler to setup while preparing an appropriate implementation of more efficient OS screening modalities. BMJ Publishing Group 2017-10-06 /pmc/articles/PMC5640017/ /pubmed/28988162 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014626 Text en © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted. This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
spellingShingle Health Economics
Barré, Stéphanie
Massetti, Marc
Leleu, Henri
De Bels, Frédéric
Organised screening for cervical cancer in France: a cost-effectiveness assessment
title Organised screening for cervical cancer in France: a cost-effectiveness assessment
title_full Organised screening for cervical cancer in France: a cost-effectiveness assessment
title_fullStr Organised screening for cervical cancer in France: a cost-effectiveness assessment
title_full_unstemmed Organised screening for cervical cancer in France: a cost-effectiveness assessment
title_short Organised screening for cervical cancer in France: a cost-effectiveness assessment
title_sort organised screening for cervical cancer in france: a cost-effectiveness assessment
topic Health Economics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5640017/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28988162
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014626
work_keys_str_mv AT barrestephanie organisedscreeningforcervicalcancerinfranceacosteffectivenessassessment
AT massettimarc organisedscreeningforcervicalcancerinfranceacosteffectivenessassessment
AT leleuhenri organisedscreeningforcervicalcancerinfranceacosteffectivenessassessment
AT debelsfrederic organisedscreeningforcervicalcancerinfranceacosteffectivenessassessment