Modelling the economic value of cross- and sustained-protection in vaccines against cervical cancer

References

• Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, et al. Global cancer statistics, 2002. CA Cancer J Clin 2005; 55: 74–108
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arbyn M, Raifu AO, Autier P, et al. Burden of cervical cancer in Europe: estimates for 2004. Ann Oncol 2007; 18: 1708–1715
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al-Daraji WI, Smith JH. Infection and cervical neoplasia: facts and fiction. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 2009; 2: 48–64
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bray F, Loos AH, McCarron P, et al. Trends in cervical squamous cell carcinoma incidence in 13 European countries: changing risk and the effects of screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005; 14: 677–686
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith JS, Lindsay L, Hoots B, et al. Human papillomavirus type distribution in invasive cervical cancer and high-grade cervical lesions: a meta-analysis update. Int J Cancer 2007; 121: 621–632
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bouvard V, Baan R, Straif K, et al. A review of human carcinogens – Part B: biological agents. Lancet Oncol 2009; 10: 321–322
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greer CE, Wheeler CM, Ladner MB, et al. Human papillomavirus (HPV) type distribution and serological response to HPV type 6 virus-like particles in patients with genital warts. J Clin Microbiol 1995; 33: 2058–2063
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. Human papillomaviruses. Volume 90, 2007. Lyon: World Health Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer. IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans.
   Google Scholar
• Keam SJ, Harper DM. Human papillomavirus types 16 and 18 vaccine (recombinant, AS04 adjuvanted, adsorbed) [Cervarix trade mark]. Drugs 2008; 68: 359–372
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siddiqui MA, Perry CM. Human papillomavirus quadrivalent (types 6, 11, 16, 18) recombinant vaccine (Gardasil®). Drugs 2006; 66: 1263–1271
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Villa LL, Costa RL, Petta CA, et al. High sustained efficacy of a prophylactic quadrivalent human papillomavirus types 6/11/16/18 L1 virus-like particle vaccine through 5 years of follow-up. Br J Cancer 2006; 95: 1459–1466
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Munoz N, Kjaer SK, Sigurdsson K, et al. Impact of human papillomavirus (HPV)-6/11/16/18 vaccine on all HPV-associated genital diseases in young women. J Natl Cancer Inst 2010; 102: 325–339
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paavonen J, Naud P, Salmerón J, et al. Efficacy of human papillomavirus (HPV)-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine against cervical infection and precancer caused by oncogenic HPV types (PATRICIA): final analysis of a double-blind, randomised study in young women. Lancet 2009; 374: 301–314
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giannini SL, Hanon E, Moris P, et al. Enhanced humoral and memory B cellular immunity using HPV16/18 L1 VLP vaccine formulated with the MPL/aluminium salt combination (AS04) compared to aluminium salt only. Vaccine 2006; 24: 5937–5949
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Einstein MH, Baron M, Levin MJ, et al. Comparison of the immunogenicity and safety of Cervarix(TM) and Gardasil(R) human papillomavirus (HPV) cervical cancer vaccines in healthy women aged 18–45 years. Hum Vaccin 2009; 5: 702–716
   Google Scholar
• Song F, Loke YK, Walsh T, et al. Methodological problems in the use of indirect comparisons for evaluating healthcare interventions: survey of published systematic reviews. BMJ 2009; 338: b1147
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown DR, Kjaer SK, Sigurdsson K, et al. The impact of quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV; Types 6, 11, 16, and 18) L1 virus-like particle vaccine on infection and disease due to oncogenic nonvaccine HPV types in generally HPV-naive women aged 16–26 years. J Infect Dis 2009; 199: 926–935
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jenkins D. A review of cross-protection against oncogenic HPV by an HPV‐16/18 AS04-adjuvanted cervical cancer vaccine: importance of virological and clinical endpoints and implications for mass vaccination in cervical cancer prevention. Gynecologic Oncology 2008; 110: S18–25
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skinner R, Apter D, Chow SN, et al. Cross-protection efficacy of Cervarix(tm) against oncogenic HPV types beyond HPV-16/18. (Abstract n O-29.01 presented at the 25th International Papillomavirus Conference, May 8–14, Malmö, Sweden), 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Cuzick J, Castanon A, Sasieni P. Predicted impact of vaccination against human papillomavirus 16/18 on cancer incidence and cervical abnormalities in women aged 20–29 in the UK. Br J Cancer 2010; 102: 933–939
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jit M, Choi YH, Edmunds WJ. Economic evaluation of human papillomavirus vaccination in the United Kingdom. BMJ 2008; 337: a769
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim JJ, Goldie SJ. Health and economic implications of HPV vaccination in the United States. N Engl J Med 2008; 359: 821–832
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu PH, Hu FC, Lee PI, et al. Cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus vaccination for prevention of cervical cancer in Taiwan. BMC Health Serv Res 2010; 10: 11
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suárez E, Smith JS, Bosch FX, et al. Cost-effectiveness of vaccination against cervical cancer: a multi-regional analysis assessing the impact of vaccine characteristics and alternative vaccination scenarios. Vaccine 2008; 26: F29–45
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pharmacoeconomic guidelines around the world. http://www.ispor.org/PEguidelines/index.asp. 2008. Accessed: 11–2008.
   Google Scholar
• Anonychuk AM, Bauch CT, Fikre Merid M, et al. A cost-utility analysis of cervical cancer vaccination in preadolescent Canadian females. BMC Public Health 2009;9:401-doi:10.1186/1471-2458-9-401.
   Google Scholar
• Colantonio L, Gómez JA, Demarteau N, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of a cervical cancer vaccine in five Latin American countries. Vaccine 2009; 27: 5519–5529
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Debicki D, Ferko N, Demarteau N, et al. Comparison of detailed and succinct cohort modelling approaches in a multi-regional evaluation of cervical cancer vaccination. Vaccine 2008; 26: F16–28
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garland SM, Hernandez-Avila M, Wheeler CM, et al. Quadrivalent vaccine against human papillomavirus to prevent anogenital diseases. N Engl J Med 2007; 356: 1928–1943
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harper DM, Franco EL, Wheeler CM, et al. Sustained efficacy up to 4.5 years of a bivalent L1 virus-like particle vaccine against human papillomavirus types 16 and 18: follow-up from a randomized control trial. Lancet 2006; 367: 1247–1255
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• David MP, Van Herck K, Hardt K, et al. Long-term persistence of anti-HPV‐16 and -18 antibodies induced by vaccination with the AS04-adjuvanted cervical cancer vaccine: modeling of sustained antibody responses. Gynecol Oncol 2009; 115: S1–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olsson SE, Villa LL, Costa RL, et al. Induction of immune memory following administration of a prophylactic quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) types 6/11/16/18 L1 virus-like particle (VLP) vaccine. Vaccine 2007; 25: 4931–4939
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weinstein MC, O'Brien B, Hornberger J, et al. Principles of good practice for decision analytic modeling in health-care evaluation: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Good Research Practices – Modeling Studies. Value Health 2003; 6: 9–17
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elbasha EH, Dasbach EJ, Insinga R. Model for assessing human papillomavirus vaccination strategies. Emerg Infect Dis 2007; 13: 28–41
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O'Neill W. Cervical cancer screening in Ireland. Eur J Cancer 2000; 36: 2233–2234
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone KM. Human papillomavirus infection and genital warts: update on epidemiology and treatment. Clin Infect Dis 1995; 20(Suppl 1): S91–97
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winer RL, Kiviat NB, Hughes JP, et al. Development and duration of human papillomavirus lesions, after initial infection. J Infect Dis 2005; 191: 731–738
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WHO guide for standardization of economic evaluations of immunization programmes: final version July 2008. Geneva: World Health Organization.
   Google Scholar
• Paavonen J, Jenkins D, Bosch FX, et al. Efficacy of a prophylactic adjuvanted bivalent L1 virus-like-particle vaccine against infection with human papillomavirus types 16 and 18 in young women: an interim analysis of a phase III double-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2007; 369: 2161–2170
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferko N, Postma M, Gallivan S, et al. Evolution of the health economics of cervical cancer vaccination. Vaccine 2008; 26: F3–15
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moscicki AB, Hills N, Shiboski S, et al. Risks for incident human papillomavirus infection and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion development in young females. JAMA 2001; 285: 2995–3002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The role of human papillomavirus vaccines in reducing the risk of cervical cancer in Ireland: a Health Technology Assessment, 2008. Cork, Ireland: Health Information and Quality Authority.
   Google Scholar
• Bory JP, Cucherousset J, Lorenzato M, et al. Recurrent human papillomavirus infection detected with the hybrid capture II assay selects women with normal cervical smears at risk for developing high grade cervical lesions: a longitudinal study of 3,091 women. Int J Cancer 2002; 102: 519–525
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clavel C, Masure M, Bory JP, et al. Human papillomavirus testing in primary screening for the detection of high-grade cervical lesions: a study of 7932 women. Br J Cancer 2001; 84: 1616–1623
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cuzick J, Szarewski A, Cubie H, et al. Management of women who test positive for high-risk types of human papillomavirus: the HART study. Lancet 2003; 362: 1871–1876
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dalstein V, Riethmuller D, Pretet JL, et al. Persistence and load of high-risk HPV are predictors for development of high-grade cervical lesions: a longitudinal French cohort study. Int J Cancer 2003; 106: 396–403
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franco EL, Villa LL, Sobrinho JP, et al. Epidemiology of acquisition and clearance of cervical human papillomavirus infection in women from a high-risk area for cervical cancer. J Infect Dis 1999; 180: 1415–1423
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ho GY, Bierman R, Beardsley L, et al. Natural history of cervicovaginal papillomavirus infection in young women. N Engl J Med 1998; 338: 423–428
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molano M, Van den BA, Plummer M, et al. Determinants of clearance of human papillomavirus infections in Colombian women with normal cytology: a population-based, 5-year follow-up study. Am J Epidemiol 2003; 158: 486–494
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nobbenhuis MA, Helmerhorst TJ, van den Brule AJ, et al. Cytological regression and clearance of high-risk human papillomavirus in women with an abnormal cervical smear. Lancet 2001; 358: 1782–1783
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlecht NF, Kulaga S, Robitaille J, et al. Persistent human papillomavirus infection as a predictor of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. JAMA 2001; 286: 3106–3114
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richardson H, Kelsall G, Tellier P, et al. The natural history of type-specific human papillomavirus infections in female university students. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2003; 12: 485–490
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monsonego J, Breugelmans JG, Bouee S, et al. [Anogenital warts incidence, medical management and costs in women consulting gynaecologists in France]. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 2007; 35: 107–113
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Expert opinion. 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Sexually transmitted infections 2006: Annual summary report, 2008. Dublin: The Health Protection Surveillance Centre.
   Google Scholar
• Giorgi Rossi P, Ricciardi A, Cohet C, et al. Epidemiology and costs of cervical cancer screening and cervical dysplasia in Italy. BMC Public Health 2009; 9: 71
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanders GD, Taira AV. Cost-effectiveness of a potential vaccine for human papillomavirus. Emerg Infect Dis 2003; 9: 37–48
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van De Velde N, Brisson M, Boily MC. Modeling human papillomavirus vaccine effectiveness: quantifying the impact of parameter uncertainty. Am J Epidemiol 2007; 165: 762–775
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Melnikow J, Nuovo J, Willan AR, et al. Natural history of cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 1998; 92: 727–735
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holowaty P, Miller AB, Rohan T, et al. Natural history of dysplasia of the uterine cervix. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999; 91: 252–258
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schlecht NF, Platt RW, Duarte-Franco E, et al. Human papillomavirus infection and time to progression and regression of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003; 95: 1336–13343
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Capri S, Bamfi F, Marocco A, et al. Capitolo 6: Impatto clinico ed economico della vaccinazione anti-HPV. Ital J Public Health 2007; 4: 55–81
   Google Scholar
• Bergeron C, Breugelmans JG, Bouee S, et al. Coût du depistage et de la prise en charge des lesions precancereuses du col uterin en France. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 2006; 34: 1036–1042
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Antilla A, Aoki D, Arbyn M, et al. Cervix cancer screening. IARC Handbooks of Cancer Prevention 10. IARC Press, Lyon 2005
   Google Scholar
• Coleman MP, Gatta G, Verdecchia A, et al. EUROCARE-3 summary: cancer survival in Europe at the end of the 20th century. Ann Oncol 2003; 14(Suppl 5): v128–149
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Exbrayat C. Col de l'utérus. In: Remontet L, Buemi A, Velten M, et al., eds. Evolution de L'incidence et de la Mortalité par Cancer en France de 1978 à 2000. Saint-Maurice Cédex: Institut de Veille Sanitaire - Departement Maladies Chroniques et Traumatismes, 2002:107–112.
   Google Scholar
• Ferlay J, Bray F, Pisani P, et al. Globocan 2002: Cancer incidence, mortality and prevalence worldwide. IARC [IARC CancerBase No 5 v.2.0]. 2004. IARC Press. Accessed: 21-8-2008.
   Google Scholar
• Donnelly DW, Gavin AT, Comber H. A report of cancer incidence, mortality, treatment and survival in the North and South of Ireland: 1994–2004. Cork, Ireland: National Cancer Registry Ireland/Northern Ireland Cancer Registry, 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Fahey MT, Irwig L, Macaskill P. Meta-analysis of Pap test accuracy. Am J Epidemiol 1995; 141: 680–689
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergeron C, Cartier I, Guldner L, et al. Lésions précancéreuses et cancers du col de l'utérus diagnostiqués par le frottis cervical, Ile-de-France, enquête Crisap, 2002. Bulletin Epidémiologique Hebdomadaire, 2005; 5–8
   Google Scholar
• Fender M, Schott J, Baldauf JJ, et al. [EVE, a regional campaign for the screening of cervical cancer. Organization, 7-years results and perspectives]. Presse Med 2003; 32: 1545–1551
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rash B, Martin-Hirsch P, Schneider A, et al. Resource use and cost analysis of managing abnormal Pap smears: a retrospective study in five countries. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 2008; 19: 225–232
   Google Scholar
• Dee A, Howell F, O'Connor C, et al. Determining the cost of genital warts: a study from Ireland. Sex Transm Infect 2008; 85: 402–403
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bamfi F, Marocco A, Capri S, et al. Genital warts in Italy: a cost of illness analysis. (Abstract n° PIN37 presented at the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) 11th Annual European Congress, 8–11 November, Athens, Greece). Value Health 2008;11:A440.
   Google Scholar
• Arveux P, Benard S, Bouee S, et al. [Invasive cervical cancer treatment costs in France]. Bull Cancer 2007; 94: 219–224
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rash B, Van Kriekinge G, Standaert B. Comparing management patterns and associated costs for women with abnormal cervical cytology in 5 different countries. (Abstract n° PCN37 presented at ISPOR 9th Annual European Congress, Copenhagen (DK), October 28–31). Value in Health 2006;9:A287.
   Google Scholar
• Appendix 11: Human Papillomavirus. In: Stratton KR, Durch JS, Lawrence S, eds. Vaccines for the 21st Century: a Tool for Decision Making. Washington D.C.: National Academy Press, 2000:213–221.
   Google Scholar
• Gold MR, Franks P, McCoy KI, et al. Toward consistency in cost-utility analyses: using national measures to create condition-specific values. Med Care 1998; 36: 778–792
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldie SJ, Kohli M, Grima D, et al. Projected clinical benefits and cost-effectiveness of a human papillomavirus 16/18 vaccine. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004; 96: 604–615
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Insinga R, Glass A, Rush B. Health state transitions following an abnormal pap smear: implications for health utility assessment in cost-effectiveness analyses. (Abstract W-02 presented at 22nd International Papillomavirus Conference & Clinical Workshop 2005, April 30 – May 6, Vancouver, BC, Canada), 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Myers ER, Green S, Lipkus I. Patient preferences for health states related to HPV infection: visual analog scale versus time trade-off elicitation. (Abstract n° 542 presented at the Twenty-First International Papillomavirus Conference, México City, México. February 20–27), 2004.
   Google Scholar
• WHO/ICO (Institut Català d'Oncologia) information centre on HPV and cervical cancer. http://www.who.int/hpvcentre/statistics/dynamic/ico/DataQuerySelect.cfm. 2009. Accessed: 20-2-2009.
   Google Scholar
• Aubin F, Pretet JL, Jacquard AC, et al. Human papillomavirus genotype distribution in external acuminata condylomata: a Large French National Study (EDiTH IV). Clin Infect Dis 2008; 47: 610–615
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar