Options for change in the Australian cervical cancer screening program in context of HPV detection and vaccination

Introduction:
Cervical cancer screening has been implemented for over a decade in Australia and has significantly reduced the mortality and morbidity of the disease. The emergence of new technologies for cervical cancer, such as the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine and DNA testing has encouraged debate regarding the effective use of resources in cervical cancer prevention. The present study evaluates the cost-effectiveness, from a health sector perspective, of various screening strategies in the era of these new technologies.

Methods:
A stochastic epidemiological model using a discrete event and continuous algorithm was developed to describe the natural history of cervical cancer. By allowing one member of the cohort into the model at a time, this micro-simulation model encompasses the characteristics of heterogeneity and can track individual life histories. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the HPV vaccine a Markov model was built to simulate the effect on the incidence of HPV and subsequent cervical cancer. A number of proposed screening strategies were evaluated with the stochastic model for the application of HPV DNA testing, with changes in the screening interval and target population. Health outcomes were measured by Disability-Adjusted Life-Years (DALYs), adjusted for application within an evaluation setting (i.e. the mortality component of the DALY was adjusted by a disability weight when early mortality due to cervical cancer is avoided). Costs in complying with the Australian updated guidelines were assessed by pathway analysis to estimate the resources associated with cervical cancer and its pre-cancerous lesion treatment. Sensitivity analyses were performed to investigate the key parameters that influenced the cost-effectiveness results.

Results:
Current practice has already brought huge health gain by preventing more than 4,000 deaths and saving more than 86,000 life-years in a cohort of a million women. Any of the alternative screening strategies alter the total amount of health gain by a small margin compared to current practice. The results of incremental analyses of the alternative screening strategies compared to current practice suggest the adoption of the HPV DNA test as a primary screening tool every 3 years commencing at age 18, or the combined pap smear/HPV test every 3 years commencing at age 25, are more costly than current practice but with reasonable ICERs (AUD$1,810 per DALY and AUD$18,600 per DALY respectively). Delaying commencement of Pap test screening to age 25 is less costly than current practice, but involves considerable health loss. The sensitivity analysis shows, however, that the screening test accuracy has a significant impact on these conclusions. Threshold analysis indicates that a sensitivity ranging from 0.80 to 0.86 for the combined test in women younger than 30 is required to produce an acceptable incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

Conclusions:
The adoption of HPV and combined test with an extended screening interval is more costly but affordable, resulting in reasonable ICERs. They appear good value for money for the Australian health care system, but need more information on test accuracy to make an informed decision. Potential screening policy change under current Australian HPV Vaccination Program is current work in progress. A Markov model is built to simulate the effect on the incidence of HPV and subsequent cervical cancer. Adoption of HPV DNA test as a primary screening tool in the context of HPV vaccination is under evaluation.

Knowledge of human papillomavirus (HPV) and the HPV vaccine in a national sample of Australian men and women

Background: Human papillomavirus (HPV) knowledge has rarely been investigated in the context of a national vaccination program. The present study investigated HPV knowledge after the introduction of a national HPV vaccination program in Australia using a national sample of men and women. Methods: Questions assessing HPV knowledge were part of a broader national study of health and relationships administered via a computer-assisted telephone interview. These findings are from wave four of the study, conducted between 2007 and 2008. Knowledge questions about HPV included its association with cervical cancer, genital warts and abnormal Pap tests. Results: A total of 2634 women and 2556 men between the ages of 18 and 70 were interviewed. Overall, 62.8% (95% confidence interval (CI): 60.8–64.7%) of women and 38.3% (95% CI: 36.3–40.4%) of men had heard of HPV. Of these, 66.0% (95% CI: 64.1–67.9%) correctly answered that HPV is associated with cervical cancer, 50.2% (95% CI: 48.2–52.1%) answered that HPV is associated with abnormal Pap tests and 44.5% (95% CI:42.5–46.5%) answered that HPV causes warts. Predictors of good knowledge included being female, aged between 26 and 45, holding higher education levels and older age at first sex. Ever having a Pap test was also associated with awareness about HPV. Conclusion: One of the highest levels of knowledge about HPV in Australia to date is reported in the present study. Knowledge about the association between HPV and cervical cancer was particularly high, especially when compared with knowledge of the association with genital warts. This appears to be a consequence of the marketing of the HPV vaccine as a vaccination against cervical cancer.