Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39342578›Full record

ArticleAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP2024

Economic Evaluation of Cervical Cancer Screening by HPV DNA, VIA, and Pap smear Methods in Indonesia.

Firdaus Hafidz, Ajeng Viska Icanervilia, Muhammad Fikru Rizal, Putri Listiani, Hermawati Setyaningsih, Maria Lastri Sasanti, Fitriana Murriya Ekawati, Jarir At Atthobari, Tofan Widya Utami, Addin Trirahmanto and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

16 authors.

Firdaus HafidzDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health, and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.ORCID 0000-0002-1787-4930
Ajeng Viska IcanerviliaDepartment of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health, and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.ORCID 0000-0003-2906-8423
Muhammad Fikru RizalDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health, and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.ORCID 0000-0002-0064-3255
Putri ListianiClinical Epidemiology and Biostatistic Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health, and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.
Hermawati SetyaningsihClinical Epidemiology and Biostatistic Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health, and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.
Maria Lastri SasantiClinical Epidemiology and Biostatistic Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health, and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.
Fitriana Murriya EkawatiDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health, and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.ORCID 0000-0002-3622-0510
Jarir At AtthobariDepartment of Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health, and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.ORCID 0000-0002-7035-4846
Tofan Widya UtamiIndonesian Health Technology Assesment Committee, Ministry of Health Republic of Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia.
Addin TrirahmantoIndonesian Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Jakarta, Indonesia.ORCID 0000-0002-2014-3784
Brahmana Askandar TjokroprawiroIndonesian Health Technology Assesment Committee, Ministry of Health Republic of Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia.ORCID 0000-0003-1658-3477
Ali Budi HarsonoIndonesian Health Technology Assesment Committee, Ministry of Health Republic of Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia.ORCID 0000-0001-6342-321X
Lusiana Siti MasytohDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health, and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.ORCID 0000-0002-1428-9031
Windi HaryaniDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health, and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.
Yusuf SubektiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health, and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.
Mardiati NadjibThe Ministry of Health Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia.ORCID 0000-0001-8676-7525

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCervical cancer occurs 80% in developing country including Indonesia and take place in the first rank of incidence rate and third rank in mortality rate in Asian Pacific. Natural history of cervical cancer gives a potential to get accurate screening method. Cervical cancer screening m in Indonesia use VIA and Pap smear method for women in age range 30 to 50 years old. Recently, HPV DNA test has been recommended in international and national policy as primary screening method for cervical cancer. This research aims to  asses cost-effectiveness and economic implications of specific cervical cancer screening modalities.

methodsCost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from societal perspective. Cost data was collected from four hospitals in Indonesia. Direct medical costs were derived from discussions with an expert panel and hospital billing data, aligning with current practice guidelines. Direct and indirect non-medical costs were estimated from patient interviews. Effectiveness data for the screening methods were extracted from a systematic review of existing literature. Markov model design was used for cost-effectiveness analysis. Budget impact analysis used healthcare perspective method from its billing for cervical cancer patients.

resultsCervical cancer screening costs are calculated using direct medical, non-medical, and indirect expenses. Regarding to cost-effective analysis by incremental cost-effective ratio (ICER), pap smear for every 3 and 5 years is more cost-effective than VIA. HPV DNA also has the potential to be cost-effective. The budget impact analysis investigates scenarios, with a focus on negotiation-based cost reductions for HPV DNA testing. Controlling HPV DNA tariffs at USD 8.76 proves cost-effective.

conclusionIn conclusion, pap smear is the most cost-effective modality, while HPV DNA has the potential to be cost-effective by reducing the unit cost. Despite favorable outcomes, challenges in implementation suggest a phased approach for resource equalization before full deployment.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisDNA, ViralEarly Detection of CancerPapanicolaou TestPapillomaviridaePapillomavirus InfectionsUterine Cervical NeoplasmsVaginal SmearsAdultFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansIndonesiaMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPrognosisDNA, ViralCervical cancercost-effective analysisHPV DNAScreening

Identifiers

PMID39342578
PMCPMC11700344

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.