Clinical evaluation and budget impact analysis of cervical cancer screening using cobas 4800 HPV screening technology in the public sector of South Africa

PLoS One. 2019 Sep 11;14(9):e0221495. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0221495. eCollection 2019.

Abstract

Cytology remains the mainstay of cervical cancer screening in South Africa (SA), however false negative rates are 25-50%. In contrast, human papillomavirus (HPV) screening techniques have higher sensitivity for cervical cancer precursors. The cobas® 4800 HPV test detects pooled high-risk HPV types and individual genotypes HPV 16 and 18. Using a mathematical budget impact model, the study objective was to evaluate the clinical and budget impact of replacing primary liquid-based cytology (LBC) with primary HPV-based screening strategies. In SA, current LBC screening practice recommends one test every ten years, followed by large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ) if indicated. HPV testing can be performed from an LBC sample, where no additional consultations nor samples are required. In the budget impact model, LBC screening for 2 cycles (one test every ten years) was compared to cobas® 4800 HPV test for 2 cycles (one test every 5 years). The model inputs were gathered from literature and primary data sources. Indicative prices for LBC and cobas® 4800 HPV test were R189 and R457, respectively. Model results indicate that best outcomes for detection of disease were seen using cobas® 4800 HPV test. Forty-eight percent of cervical cancer cases were detected compared to 28% using LBC, and 50% of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2 and CIN3 cases, compared to 25% with LBC. The budget impact analysis predicted that the cost per detected case of CIN2 or higher would be R 56,835 and R46,980 for the cobas® 4800 HPV and LBC scenarios, respectively. This equates to an incremental cost per detected case of CIN2 or higher of R9 855. From this model we conclude that a primary HPV screening strategy will have a significant clinical impact on disease burden in South Africa.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Cost-Benefit Analysis
  • Cytodiagnosis / economics
  • DNA, Viral
  • Early Detection of Cancer / economics*
  • Female
  • Human papillomavirus 16 / genetics
  • Human papillomavirus 16 / isolation & purification*
  • Human papillomavirus 18 / genetics
  • Human papillomavirus 18 / isolation & purification*
  • Humans
  • Models, Economic
  • Papillomavirus Infections / diagnosis*
  • Papillomavirus Infections / economics
  • Prevalence
  • Public Sector
  • Reagent Kits, Diagnostic / economics
  • Sensitivity and Specificity
  • South Africa / epidemiology
  • Uterine Cervical Dysplasia / economics
  • Uterine Cervical Dysplasia / virology*
  • Uterine Cervical Neoplasms / economics
  • Uterine Cervical Neoplasms / virology*

Substances

  • DNA, Viral
  • Reagent Kits, Diagnostic

Grants and funding

While the study was sponsored by Roche Diagnostics in South Africa, it had no additional role in the study design, data collection and analysis. The funder was involved in the decision to publish and did review the manuscript after finalisation. The responsible parties from the funder are not part of the author list. The specific roles of the authors listed are articulated in the ‘author contributions’ section. TCD Outcomes Research was the appointed external service provider to perform the economic analysis, including study design, modelling, data collection, analysis, writing of the manuscript. The funder provided support in the form of a research grant for TCD Outcomes Research but did not have any additional role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The specific roles of these authors are articulated in the ‘author contributions’ section.