Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Prev Med. 2020 Mar;132:105953. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2019.105953. Epub 2020 Jan 3.

Cost-effectiveness studies of HPV self-sampling: A systematic review.

Author information

1
Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Box 359933, 325 9th Ave, Seattle, WA 98104, USA. Electronic address: cmcmtx@uw.edu.
2
Department of Global Health, University of Washington, Box 359931, 325 9th Ave, Seattle, WA 98104, USA. Electronic address: rbarnaba@uw.edu.
3
Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute,1730 Minor Ave, Suite 1600, Seattle, WA 98101, USA. Electronic address: Diana.S.Buist@kp.org.
4
Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd, Dallas, TX 75390, USA. Electronic address: jasmin.tiro@utsouthwestern.edu.
5
Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Box 359933, 325 9th Ave, Seattle, WA 98104, USA; Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute,1730 Minor Ave, Suite 1600, Seattle, WA 98101, USA. Electronic address: rlw@uw.edu.

Abstract

HPV self-sampling (HPV-SS) can increase cervical cancer screening participation by addressing barriers in high- and low- and middle-income settings. Successful implementation of HPV-SS programs will depend on understanding potential costs and health effects. Our objectives were to summarize the methods and results of published HPV-SS cost and cost-effectiveness studies, present implications of these results for HPV-SS program implementation, and identify knowledge gaps. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. One reviewer searched online databases for articles published through June 12, 2019, identified eligible studies, and extracted data; a second reviewer checked extracted data for accuracy. Eligible studies used an economic model to compare HPV-SS outreach strategies to standard-of-care tests. Of 16 eligible studies, 14 reported HPV-SS could be a cost-effective strategy. Studies differed in model type, HPV-SS delivery methods, triage strategies for positive results, and target populations. Most (9/16) modeled HPV-SS in European screening programs, 6/16 targeted women who were underscreened for cervical cancer, and 5/16 modeled HPV-SS in low- and middle-income countries. The most commonly identified driver of HPV-SS cost-effectiveness was the level of increase in cervical cancer screening attendance. Lower HPV-SS material and testing costs, higher sensitivity to detect cervical precancer, and longer duration of underscreening among HPV-SS users were also associated with increased cost-effectiveness. Future HPV-SS models in high-income settings should explore the effect of widespread vaccination and new triage strategies such as partial HPV genotyping. Knowledge gaps remain about the cost-effectiveness of HPV-SS in low- and middle-income settings.

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of competing interest Colin Malone: No competing financial interests exist. Ruanne V. Barnabas: No competing financial interests exist. Diana S.M. Buist: No competing financial interests exist. Jasmin A. Tiro: No competing financial interests exist. Rachel L. Winer: No competing financial interests exist.

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center