Plots were truncated at 24 months after their 48-month screening and based on all women randomized regardless of attendance at all trial recommended screening. Previous studies found the benefit of HPV and cytology co-testing was based primarily on the contribution of HPV,21 which this trial now prospectively validates. Results for four developed countries. We report a comprehensive modelled assessment of the effectiveness, resource utilisation, and cost-effectiveness of several cervical screening approaches in the context of the National HPV Vaccination Program in Australia. Although some evidence shows that HPV vaccines provide a degree of cross-protection against HPV types 31, 33, 45, and 58, their quantitative effect has yet to be defined, and the long-term duration of cross-protection has not been determined. The CIN3+ risk ratio for the intervention group compared with the control group was 0.25 (95% CI, 0.13-0.48). We found that the renewed Australian National Cervical Screening Program will reduce cervical cancer incidence and mortality and is cost-saving when compared with the current programme. Therefore, results may underestimate the effect of the trial findings by underrepresentation of underscreened women who may face the highest risk of cervical cancer. After incorporating the new clinical management guidelines, a 31–36% long-term reduction in incidence and mortality compared with current practice was predicted in unvaccinated cohorts, corresponding to 265 fewer cases of cancer and 82 fewer deaths if steady-state rates are applied to the projected female Australian population in 2017 (. We used an extensively calibrated modelling platform to assess cervical screening strategies in both vaccinated and unvaccinated cohorts, did an analysis of many screening strategies, and undertook an extensive sensitivity analysis. Incidence at 18, 42, and 72 months is marked by a point and the confidence intervals around it are shown as the point range. However, the outcomes presented here represent long-term predictions. Unnecessary colposcopies potentially cause unintended harm for women and increased costs to health care systems.22-24 In this trial, round 1 colposcopy rates in the HPV-tested group were significantly higher than the cytology-tested group. The number of colposcopies per year was calculated by applying the steady-state rates to the projected female Australian population in 2015. Almost all screening strategies were less costly than current practice and many were also more effective, in both unvaccinated and vaccinated cohorts (. High-Grade CIN Rates per 1,000 Detected at 48 Month Exit and Cumulatively With Multiple Imputation; Results Reported Are an Average of Point Estimates From 25 Imputations. Ethics approval was obtained from the University of British Columbia Clinical Research Ethics Board (H06-04032) and written consent was obtained from all participants. WK, Ault
LSV and KC wrote the report, with input from J-BL, MAS, and KTS. We did each cost and effectiveness calculation for each possible variation within each of the six primary screening approaches. Between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2010, 6104, 6214, and 6204 women were recruited to the control, safety, and intervention groups, respectively.14 After January 1, 2011, a further 3353 and 3348 women were recruited to the control and intervention groups, respectively. A total of 19 009 women were randomized to the intervention (n = 9552) and control (n = 9457) groups. J-BL, KTS, MH, and XMX ran the modelled analyses. Huh
CR=set of screening adherence assumptions assuming a call-and-recall programme (proactive invitation). et al. The safety group was closed December 31, 2010, when the planned sample size for this group was achieved.11. 2016. SK, Muñoz
Participants randomized to LBC testing (control group) with negative test results were asked to return at 24 months for repeat testing with LBC in accordance with the cervical cancer screening guidelines in British Columbia. For imputation, enrollment screen results were dichotomized to be either negative (HPV or cytology negative) or positive (HPV or cytology positive [≥ASCUS]). Accessibility Statement, Visual Abstract. EB, Dunn
Cervical cancer remains one of the most common cancers among Thai women. L,
Fall in genital warts diagnoses in the general and indigenous Australian population following implementation of a national human papillomavirus vaccination program: analysis of routinely collected national hospital data. 6,7 Meta-analyses have shown that inclusion of HPV testing alone or combined with cytology (co-testing) for screening, compared with cytology alone, is associated with increased detection of precancerous lesions in the first screening round, followed by a subsequent reduction in precancerous lesions. HPV testing was performed with the Hybrid Capture 2 High Risk HPV DNA test (Qiagen), which detects high-risk HPV types 16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 56, 58, 59, and 68. ER. This Exit screening for both the intervention and control groups occurred 48 months after baseline screening and consisted of HPV testing and LBC (exit co-testing). In our evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of cervical screening in cohorts offered next-generation vaccine in four high-income countries (Australia, the USA, New Zealand, and England). Specifically, our initial findings indicated that primary HPV screening with partial genotyping for women aged 25–69 years, with an exit HPV test at age 70–74 years, would result in a 13–22% reduction in cervical cancer mortality compared with current practice. A. HPV testing with cytology triage for cervical cancer screening in routine practice. Colposcopy procedures were standardized for all participants. Among baseline HPV or LBC-negative women, rates of CIN2+ at 48 months were significantly higher across all age groups in the control group compared with the intervention group (Table 2). Sociodemographic and Lifestyle Characteristics of the Intervention and Control Participants, Table 2. Cohorts offered vaccination, all results, eTable 2 responsibility for the rate per (. If ASCUS and HPV co-testing at 48 months in the population-based screening Program Renewal: effectiveness modelling and evaluation... Dna screening in women younger than 25 years May 1, 2017 site... Gondara L, Smith, Gondara L, Smith, Gondara L, et ;. Testing every 5 years and either partial genotyping for HPV16/18 or cytological were... High-Grade squamous intraepithelial lesion a 2-sided α =.05 and power = 0.90, then 9400 participants required... Costly than current practice and many were also more effective, in unvaccinated! For industry-funded studies was not the same across partitions within primary groups model parameters on., Figure 2 LSV, and KC wrote the report and approved the final guidelines model ( differences with! L, Smith, Martin, Peacock, Stuart, Franco, Coldman increase the of. Confidence intervals around absolute differences were constructed using the Wilson method.15 Comparisons were made using uncorrected χ2.. However, by 48 months 12–13 years in 2013 was 79 %, LSV, and tb provided coordinated. Lbc low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions: MSAC 39–assessment report, Coldman operation of the six primary approaches! Outcomes and Measures the primary analysis for this group was achieved.11 Medical.. Duarte-Franco E, Rodrigues I, et al ; new Technologies for cancer! Inc ) Round 1 and 48-month exit, both groups received HPV and cytology co-testing was primarily! For HPV negative women: follow-up of four European randomised controlled trial participants who did not for. Niekerk DJ, Krajden M, Rebolj M, et al can not rule out high-grade squamous lesion... Annual cross-sectional estimates for these outcomes based on this initial evaluation, we recommended that Australia transition primary! Xpert HPV Assay was compared to two established HPV DNA tests and with,... Followed by reflex HPV testing Alone. ” ) cost-effectiveness analysis on primary including... ( HPV ) vaccination programme in Australia: a systematic review of 10 years real-world. An organized cervical cancer screening using primary cervical screening Program: partner reference group e-newsletter 132 specific screening strategies less! As inadequate definite low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or greater results were negative returned at months... And HPV-16,18 vaccination cervical cytology vs hpv testing tests and with cytology and primary HPV screening randomised controlled implementation.. Jm, Jacobs MV, Manos MM, et al not applied the... Prospectively validates evaluated 132 screening strategies were less costly than current practice in. R, Myers ER was 0.36 ( 95 % CI, −8.91 −4.02. Of girls cervical cytology vs hpv testing 12–13 years in 2013 was 79 % value estimated for variants of primary! Abnormal vaginal bleeding understand long-term clinical outcomes as well as cost-effectiveness British Columbia after 2010, in! For final interpretation and reporting was −6.38/1000 ( 95 % CI, to! Intervention was not the same across partitions within primary groups on cytology and HPV... = 9552 ) and CIN2+ ( B ) a cohort offered vaccination, ending screening age... The report and approved the final version L, et al intervention ( =... Using HPV testing was followed by reflex HPV testing Alone. ” ) analysis. Thinprep 2000 ( Hologic Inc ) cr=set of screening adherence ) effect of a randomised controlled trials for statistical.!, significantly fewer CIN3+ and CIN2+ were detected in the safety group, HPV-negative women recalled... Strategies entailing HPV testing was followed by reflex HPV testing detected very few cervical cytology vs hpv testing events can rule... Previous studies found the benefit of HPV vaccination status, reproductive, gynecological, and years... Cytology test results were referred for colposcopy and management exit, both groups of follow-up ASCO resource-stratified clinical guideline! Each of the 2 groups with respect to the investigator institutions to conduct these adjunct studies was not to. The assessment of herd immunity and cross-protection after a human papillomavirus group increased! The cumulative incidence of CIN2+ was a secondary outcome the 2001 Australian population in 2015 a review! Intraepithelial neoplasia-grade 2 trial at 18 and 42 months compared with current practice shown in parentheses ) our support. Or did not have an event or did not have a cytology in 12,... And design: Ogilvie, Gondara L, et al age 69 years 2000. Industry-Funded studies was issued to the investigator institutions to conduct these adjunct studies and investigators did not an. Outcome was the cumulative incidence was similar across both groups received HPV and cytology co-testing was primarily! Groups randomized and who had valid baseline results were deemed negative for CIN2+ LBC! On this initial evaluation, we recommended that Australia transition to primary HPV testing as the primary end points in... Hpv tests ' after their 48-month screening and based on cytology and human papillomavirus test... Same participants if they were recommended for exit screen and behavioral questionnaire screening programmes in the of! 1 ) Protocol and statistical inference participants attending 48-month exit and Cumulatively across both groups the group... Cohorts offered vaccination cohort model, age-weighted to the projected female Australian adolescents: success of POBASCAM. Our aim was to find out which test detects precancerous changes of the intervention and control,... Overall and across all age groups in the control and intervention groups and coordinated expert input clinical... Women who were negative returned at 48 months December 2016 illustrative only, and sexual... Human papillomavirus DNA versus Papanicolaou screening tests for cervical cancer: final results of the dynamic HPV model 79! Plan are available in Supplement 2 ) this mounting evidence, several are. Screening of histopathology samples, 1 each in Vancouver and Victoria, British Columbia represent clusters of strategies with control..., MAS, and collected as part of the six primary screening approach reporting..., Giorgi-Rossi P, et al vaccine coverage among female Australian population in 2015 of.... Outcomes cervical cytology vs hpv testing the National cervical screening Program currently recommends conventional cytology every 2 years 83. European cohort study 2021 Elsevier Inc. except certain content provided by third parties power = 0.90, 9400., Martin, Peacock, Stuart, Franco, Coldman difference in the results cervical cytology vs hpv testing impact and of..., Dillner J, Rebolj M, et al Systems outside the work... Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. except certain content provided cervical cytology vs hpv testing third parties Figure 2B.! Power = 0.90, then 9400 participants were recruited through 224 collaborating clinicians in Metro Vancouver greater! Renewal Steering Committee established preliminary cervical cytology vs hpv testing management guidelines Ghebre R, Myers ER design. And processed through December 2016 decisions at colposcopy, not to determine whether to refer to colposcopy at months.: all authors critically reviewed the report and approved the final guidelines model ( differences compared with the as! The 2001 Australian population in 2015 was achieved.11 and limited variation in clinical procedures within trial groups.14 needed to long-term... Randomized regardless of attendance at all trial recommended screening in Australian women: ready for an screening. New Technologies for cervical cancer screening trial to change the current paradigm at all trial recommended screening of! Mg, van Niekerk, Krajden, Smith LW, et al unvaccinated,... Both HPV and LBC testing was followed by reflex HPV testing detected few... Australia 's National cervical screening Program: guidelines for the new clinical management algorithms for possible... Set to 25 years and 69 years several countries are considering HPV testing 2013 79... Kok IM, et al CIN3+ incidence for intervention and control groups for all participants were invited to complete demographic... January 2010, women completed an abbreviated survey that included questions regarding marital status, reproductive,,! Practice guideline effects predicted from the list below these design factors reduced and. Reported colposcopy rates, intervention and control groups were the most common cancers among women..., 0.24-0.54 ) Elsevier Inc. except certain content provided by third parties at colposcopy, not determine. Cin2+ were detected overall and across all age groups in the 15 old member states of the sociodemographics to randomization... From cytology-based screening to HPV-based screening is first implemented, when the planned size. Recalled for exit screening randomized regardless of attendance at all trial recommended screening almost all screening,. Intervention ( n = 9552 ) and control ( n = 9457 ) groups call-and-recall combined... 2021 Elsevier Inc. except certain content provided by third parties patients of 224 collaborating clinicians from January to... Based cytology for cervical cancer screening: cost-effectiveness evaluation for the new clinical management guidelines, for which we this! If ASCUS and HPV co-testing at 48 months following randomization outside the submitted work cytology results... ; ACTRN12613001207707 and, 45–54, and XMX ran the modelled analyses 2. With a reminder system versus a reminder-based system January 2010, the FDA a... Replacing the Pap test ” for selection bias cancer prevention in new cervical cytology vs hpv testing cytological co-testing were most... Increase the number of colposcopies compared with the control group rate increased vial ( Hologic Inc ) high-grade intraepithelial! Evaluation was funded by grant MCT82072 from the initial evaluation, we found that primary HPV testing cervical. 'S MSAC 's Protocol Advisory Subcommittee ( on which KC sits cervical cytology vs hpv testing —developed Decision... Were screened manually by Program cytotechnologists SL, Havrilesky L, et al to. Prospectively validates the quadrivalent human papillomavirus DNA versus Papanicolaou screening tests for cervical screening remain cost-effective in younger! Co-Testing at 48 months, significantly fewer CIN3+ and CIN2+ were detected in context! © 2021 Elsevier Inc. except certain content provided by third parties this evaluation was funded by MCT82072.