The Cost-Effectiveness of Cervical Self-Sampling to Improve Routine Cervical Cancer Screening: The Importance of Respondent Screening History and Compliance

Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2017 Jan;26(1):95-103. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-16-0350. Epub 2016 Sep 13.

Abstract

Background: Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing allows women to self-collect cervico-vaginal cells at home (i.e., self-sampling). Using primary data from a randomized pilot study, we evaluated the long-term consequences and cost-effectiveness of using self-sampling to improve participation to routine cervical cancer screening in Norway.

Methods: We compared a strategy reflecting screening participation (using reminder letters) to strategies that involved mailing self-sampling device kits to women noncompliant to screening within a 5- or 10-year period under two scenarios: (A) self-sampling respondents had moderate under-screening histories, or (B) respondents to self-sampling had moderate and severe under-screening histories. Model outcomes included quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) and lifetime costs. The "most cost-effective" strategy was identified as the strategy just below $100,000 per QALY gained.

Results: Mailing self-sampling device kits to all women noncompliant to screening within a 5- or 10-year period can be more effective and less costly than the current reminder letter policy; however, the optimal self-sampling strategy was dependent on the profile of self-sampling respondents. For example, "10-yearly self-sampling" is preferred ($95,500 per QALY gained) if "5-yearly self-sampling" could only attract moderate under-screeners; however, "5-yearly self-sampling" is preferred if this strategy could additionally attract severe under-screeners.

Conclusions: Targeted self-sampling of noncompliers likely represents good value-for-money; however, the preferred strategy is contingent on the screening histories and compliance of respondents.

Impact: The magnitude of the health benefit and optimal self-sampling strategy is dependent on the profile and behavior of respondents. Health authorities should understand these factors prior to selecting and implementing a self-sampling policy. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 26(1); 95-103. ©2016 AACR.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
  • Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Cost-Benefit Analysis*
  • Early Detection of Cancer / economics*
  • Early Detection of Cancer / methods
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Mass Screening / economics
  • Mass Screening / methods
  • Middle Aged
  • Norway
  • Papillomavirus Infections / diagnosis*
  • Papillomavirus Infections / epidemiology
  • Patient Compliance / statistics & numerical data*
  • Pilot Projects
  • Program Evaluation
  • Quality Improvement
  • Quality-Adjusted Life Years
  • Self-Examination / economics
  • Self-Examination / methods*
  • Uterine Cervical Neoplasms / prevention & control*
  • Uterine Cervical Neoplasms / virology
  • Vaginal Smears / methods