A cost-effectiveness analysis of adding a human papillomavirus vaccine to the Australian National Cervical Cancer Screening Program
- 1 January 2007
- journal article
- research article
- Published by CSIRO Publishing in Sexual Health
- Vol. 4 (3) , 165-175
- https://doi.org/10.1071/sh07043
Abstract
Background: The cost-effectiveness of adding a human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine to the Australian National Cervical Screening Program compared to screening alone was examined. Methods: A Markov model of the natural history of HPV infection that incorporates screening and vaccination was developed. A vaccine that prevents 100% of HPV 16/18-associated disease, with a lifetime duration of efficacy and 80% coverage offered through a school program to girls aged 12 years, in conjunction with current screening was compared with screening alone using cost (in Australian dollars) per life-year (LY) saved and quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) saved. Sensitivity analyses included determining the cost-effectiveness of offering a catch-up vaccination program to 14–26-year-olds and accounting for the benefits of herd immunity. Results: Vaccination with screening compared with screening alone was associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $51 103 per LY and $18 735 per QALY, assuming a cost per vaccine dose of $115. Results were sensitive to assumptions about the duration of vaccine efficacy, including the need for a booster ($68 158 per LY and $24 988 per QALY) to produce lifetime immunity. Accounting for herd immunity resulted in a more attractive ICER ($36 343 per LY and $13 316 per QALY) for girls only. The cost per LY of vaccinating boys and girls was $92 052 and the cost per QALY was $33 644. The cost per LY of implementing a catch-up vaccination program ranged from $45 652 ($16 727 per QALY) for extending vaccination to 14-year-olds to $78 702 ($34 536 per QALY) for 26-year-olds. Conclusions: These results suggest that adding an HPV vaccine to Australia’s current screening regimen is a potentially cost-effective way to reduce cervical cancer and the clinical interventions that are currently associated with its prevention via screening alone.Keywords
This publication has 38 references indexed in Scilit:
- Model for Assessing Human Papillomavirus Vaccination StrategiesEmerging Infectious Diseases, 2007
- Overview of the European and North American studies on HPV testing in primary cervical cancer screeningInternational Journal of Cancer, 2006
- Human papillomavirus genotype prevalence in cervical biopsies from women diagnosed with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia or cervical cancer in Melbourne, AustraliaInternational Journal of Gynecologic Cancer, 2006
- Epidemiology of HPV 16 and Cervical Cancer in Finland and the Potential Impact of Vaccination: Mathematical Modelling AnalysesPLoS Medicine, 2006
- Cumulative 5‐year diagnoses of CIN2, CIN3 or cervical cancer after concurrent high‐risk HPV and cytology testing in a primary screening settingInternational Journal of Cancer, 2005
- Comparison of HPV type distribution in high-grade cervical lesions and cervical cancer: a meta-analysisBritish Journal of Cancer, 2003
- Epidemiologic Classification of Human Papillomavirus Types Associated with Cervical CancerNew England Journal of Medicine, 2003
- Human papillomavirus types in invasive cervical cancer worldwide: a meta-analysisBritish Journal of Cancer, 2003
- Prevalence and genotyping of HPV in cervical cancer among Australian womenInternational Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, 1999
- Intramuscular interferon‐β treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia II associated with human papillomavirus infectionActa Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 1994