Cost-effectiveness of Extending Cervical Cancer Screening Intervals Among Women With Prior Normal Pap Tests
- 1 February 2006
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) in Obstetrics & Gynecology
- Vol. 107 (2, Part 1), 321-328
- https://doi.org/10.1097/01.aog.0000196500.50044.ce
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Annual cervical cancer screening in women with many prior normal Pap tests is common despite limited evidence on the cost-effectiveness of this strategy. We estimated the cost-effectiveness of screening women with 3 or more prior normal tests compared with screening those with no prior tests. METHODS: We used a validated cost-effectiveness model in conjunction with data on the prevalence of biopsy-proven cervical neoplasia in women enrolled in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program. Women were grouped according to age at the final Program Pap test (aged < 30, 30–44, 45–59, and 60–65 years) and by screening history (0, 1, 2, and 3+ consecutive prior normal Program tests) to estimate cost per life-year and quality-adjusted life-year associated with annual, biennial, and triennial screening. RESULTS: For women aged 30–44 years with no prior tests, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged from $20,533 for screening triennially (compared with no further screening) to $331,837 for screening annually (compared with biennially) per life-year saved. Among same-aged women with 3 or more prior normal Program tests, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for the same measures ranged from $60,029 to $709,067 per life-year saved. Inclusion of the most conservative utility estimates resulted in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios in excess of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year saved associated with annual screening of same-aged women with 3 or more prior normal tests compared with biennial screening. CONCLUSION: As the number of prior normal Pap tests increases, the costs per life-year saved increase substantially. Resources should be prioritized for screening those never or rarely screened women. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II-2Keywords
This publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit:
- Virologic Versus Cytologic Triage of Women With Equivocal Pap Smears: A Meta-analysis of the Accuracy To Detect High-Grade Intraepithelial NeoplasiaJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2004
- Risk of Cervical Cancer Associated with Extending the Interval between Cervical-Cancer ScreeningsNew England Journal of Medicine, 2003
- Cervical cytology screening practices among obstetrician–gynecologistsPublished by Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) ,2003
- ACOG Practice Bulletin Number 45, August 2003: Committee on Practice Bulletins-Gynecology. Cervical Cytology ScreeningObstetrics & Gynecology, 2003
- Results of a randomized trial on the management of cytology interpretations of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significanceAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2003
- Benefits and Costs of Using HPV Testing to Screen for Cervical CancerJAMA, 2002
- The 2001 Bethesda SystemTerminology for Reporting Results of Cervical CytologyJAMA, 2002
- Advancing Age and Cervical Cancer Screening and PrognosisJournal of the American Geriatrics Society, 2001
- Mathematical Model for the Natural History of Human Papillomavirus Infection and Cervical CarcinogenesisAmerican Journal of Epidemiology, 2000
- Accuracy of the Papanicolaou Test in Screening for and Follow-up of Cervical Cytologic AbnormalitiesAnnals of Internal Medicine, 2000