A cost-effectiveness analysis of adding a human papillomavirus vaccine to the Australian National Cervical Cancer Screening Program

Shalini Kulasingam, Luke Connelly, Elizabeth Conway, Jane S. Hocking, Evan Myers, David G. Regan, David Roder, Jayne Ross, Gerard Wain

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

89 Scopus citations

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)165-175
Number of pages11
JournalSexual Health
Volume4
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 2007

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A cost-effectiveness analysis of adding a human papillomavirus vaccine to the Australian National Cervical Cancer Screening Program'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this