Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39302149›Full record

ArticleJournal of global health2024

Early evaluation of a screen-and-treat strategy using high-risk HPV testing for Uganda: Implications for screening coverage and treatment.

Marat Sultanov, Jurjen van der Schans, Jaap Ar Koot, Marcel Jw Greuter, Janine de Zeeuw, Carolyn Nakisige, Jogchum J Beltman, Marlieke de Fouw, Jelle Stekelenburg, Geertruida H de Bock

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of global health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Marat SultanovGlobal Health Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
Jurjen van der SchansGlobal Health Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
Jaap Ar KootGlobal Health Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
Marcel Jw GreuterDepartment of Radiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
Janine de ZeeuwGlobal Health Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
Carolyn NakisigeUganda Cancer Institute, Kampala, Uganda.
Jogchum J BeltmanDepartment of Gynecology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden University, Leiden, Netherlands.
Marlieke de FouwDepartment of Gynecology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden University, Leiden, Netherlands.
Jelle StekelenburgGlobal Health Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
Geertruida H de BockDepartment of Epidemiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Uganda has a high burden of cervical cancer and its current coverage of screening based on visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) is low. High-risk HPV (hrHPV) testing is recommended by the World Health Organization as part of the global elimination strategy for cervical cancer. In this context, country-specific health economic evaluations can inform national-level decisions regarding implementation. We evaluated the recommended hrHPV screen-and-treat strategy to determine the minimum required levels of coverage and treatment adherence, as well as the maximum price level per test, for the strategy to be cost-effective in Uganda. Methods: We conducted a headroom analysis to estimate potential room for spending on implementing the hrHPV screen-and-treat strategy at different levels of coverage and treatment adherence (from 10% to 100%) at each screening round, and at different price levels of the hrHPV test. We compared the strategy with the existing VIA-based screen-and-treat policy in Uganda. We calculated headroom as the product of number of life years gained by the strategy and the willingness-to-pay threshold, minus the incremental costs incurred by the strategy. Positive headroom was interpreted as an indication of cost-effectiveness. Results: Compared with VIA-based screening with low 5% coverage, the hrHPV screen-and-treat strategy required at least 30% coverage and adherence for positive mean headroom, and compared with 30% VIA-based screening coverage, the minimum levels were 60%. At 60% coverage and adherence, the maximum acceptable price per hrHPV test was found to be between 15 and 30 international dollars. Conclusions: The hrHPV-based screen-and-treat strategy could be cost-effective in Uganda if the screening coverage and treatment adherence are at least 30% in each screening round, and if the price per test is set below 30 international dollars. The minimum required levels of screening coverage and adherence to treatment provide potential starting points for decision-makers in planning the rollout of hrHPV testing. The headroom estimates can guide the planning costs of screening infrastructure and campaigns to achieve the required coverage and treatment adherence in Uganda.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisEarly Detection of CancerPapillomavirus InfectionsUterine Cervical NeoplasmsAdultFemaleHumansMass ScreeningUganda

Identifiers

PMID39302149
PMCPMC11414519

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.