ArticlePreventive medicine reports2021
A health economic model to estimate the costs and benefits of an mRNA vs DNA high-risk HPV assay in a hypothetical HPV primary screening algorithm in Ontario, Canada.
Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparison of different mRNA testing technologies with HPV DNA testing for predicting ASCUS triage and post-cone excision outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Systematic reviews · 2026Pooled it
- RNA extended interventional nucleic acid longitudinal study: Clinical performance of Aptima messenger RNA HPV testing in cervical cancer screening with a 9-year follow-up.Cancer cytopathology · 2024Article
- Molecular markers predicting the progression and prognosis of human papillomavirus-induced cervical lesions to cervical cancer.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study models the impact of using two different types of high-risk (HR) human papillomavirus (HPV) tests: mRNA (Aptima) and DNA (Hybrid Capture 2) as part of a hypothetical primary HPV screening program in Ontario, Canada. Outcomes were the costs of the screening program, and number of colposcopies, HPV tests and cytology tests. Results were estimated for one cohort going through the screening algorithm. A decision tree model was adapted from a published UK study, with inputs drawn from published Canadian data for the probabilities through the model, costs, demographic, and screening data from Ontario. Sensitivity and scenario analyses explored uncertainty in the model inputs and assumptions. Results indicated that screening using an mRNA test could yield cost savings of CAD $4,007,266 (95% credibility interval [CI]: -7,866,251 - 8,035) compared to using a DNA test, with 10,639 (95% CI: 10,170 - 11,094) fewer women undergoing unnecessary colposcopies, and reductions in unnecessary HR-HPV and cytology tests. The HR-HPV test comprised the largest percentage of the costs saved, and the probability of being HPV positive in the first year had the biggest impact on results. These results indicate that the choice of HR-HPV test is important when implementing a primary HPV screening program to avoid unnecessary resource use and cost, which will benefit both women and healthcare providers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.