Pathways to a cancer-free future: A protocol for modelled evaluations to maximize the future impact of interventions on cervical cancer in Australia
Introduction
Cervical cancer typically arises after many years of persistent infection of cervical cells with oncogenic human papillomaviruses (HPV) [1]. In the pre-vaccination era, nearly all sexually active women were exposed to HPV infection but most infections are transient or controlled by the immune system. A fraction of women will develop overt, persistent oncogenic HPV infection, a high percentage of which will then progress to precancer [2,3]. A high-percentage of precancer will become invasive cancer if not detected and treated in a timely fashion [4]. Thus, a substantial number of women will develop cervical cancer if they do not receive primary (prophylactic HPV vaccination) and/or secondary (screening for and diagnosis and treatment of precancer) prevention.
In a changing landscape in cervical cancer prevention, diagnosis and treatment, focusing research efforts and resources in areas that can make the biggest impact on its outcomes is a challenge. In Australia, changes have occurred and are continuing to occur in vaccination and screening practices, as outlined below. It is in this context that “Pathways to a cancer-free future” (‘Pathways’) was conceived. Pathways is a multi-stage program of work that spans the cancer control spectrum, from prevention to treatment and survivorship. Its aims are to synthesise evidence from the literature and thereby generate evidence from targeted modelled evaluations of cancer control interventions that can guide and underpin future research investment and policy implementation. Pathways will initially be applied to five major cancers in Australia (cervical, lung, bowel, prostate, and breast cancer). The aim of the current article is to outline the design and objectives of Pathways-Cervix and summarise the protocol for modelled evaluations.
Section snippets
Cytology based screening
Australia has among the lowest reported cervical cancer age-standardised (world) incidence (5.5 cases per 100,000 women) and mortality rates (1.6 cases per 100,000 women) [5] due to prevention of cervical cancer through its National Cervical Screening Program (NCSP). The NCSP was established in 1991 and, prior to December 2017, recommended 2-yearly cervical screening with conventional cytology for sexually active women aged between 18 and 20 years and 69 years. The proportion of eligible women
Study design
Pathways has three stages, schematically presented in Fig. 1. Stage 1 is to identify possible further changes in prevention, diagnosis and treatment, and then to use modelling to evaluate the changes in health outcomes they might achieve and their potential cost-effectiveness from an Australian health services perspective. Stage 2 is a consultative phase, where national and international experts, organisations, government, and community representatives, will critically assess the findings of
Ethics and dissemination
The Pathways-Cervix protocol for modelled evaluations has been reviewed and approved by the SAC. No human subjects are involved in this protocol and therefore Human Research Ethics Committee was not required. No deviations from the protocol will be conducted without prior review and approval of the relevant working party leads from the SAC. The findings of the evaluations will be reported in a series of papers in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international scientific
Discussion
The interventions to be evaluated as part of Pathways-Cervix were identified by the SAC as priority interventions. The SAC identified two different evaluation types. The first type examines maximum impact in a particular area by examining a number of aspects in an idealised way which provides an early indication of the most important priority areas. The second type involve a more detailed cost-effectiveness analysis using data from other interventions as carried out in our previous work in
Conflict of interest statement
JMLB reports unrestricted investigator initiated grants from MSD (papillomatosis typing study) and Seqirus (cervical cancer typing study) outside the submitted work. IF reports income from the sale of the vaccines as inventor of the technology underlying the HPV vaccines referred to in the paper; this is paid to him as part of his salary from the University of Queensland. SMG reports grants from Merck Investigator initiated research grants [RRP, HPV antibody outcome YFHI], grants from
Author contribution
KC conceived the overall Pathways programme. SH, SY and HH conducted literature scoping under the guidance of KC and KB who manages the programme. KC, MAS, KTS, JBL, MH, JK and AK produced the initial list of potential modelled evaluations. BKA, MS, JMLB, RK, AB, LR, SH, JC, DB, IF, SMG, RG, IH, PEC, PG, MA and KC as members of the Scientific Advisory Committee selected the priority evaluations and provided guidance for further work. LSV drafted the manuscript with input from KC, MAS, KT and
Acknowledgement
This work was supported by Cancer Council NSW.
References (40)
- et al.
Human papillomavirus and cervical cancer
Lancet
(2007 Sep 8) - et al.
Assessment of herd immunity and cross-protection after a human papillomavirus vaccination programme in Australia: a repeat cross-sectional study
Lancet Infect. Dis.
(2014) - et al.
Efficacy of HPV-based screening for prevention of invasive cervical cancer: follow-up of four European randomised controlled trials
Lancet
(2014) - et al.
Evidence regarding human papillomavirus testing in secondary prevention of cervical cancer
Vaccine
(2012) - et al.
Gardasil-9: a global survey of projected efficacy
Antivir. Res.
(2016) - et al.
Cost-effectiveness of the next generation nonavalent human papillomavirus vaccine in the context of primary human papillomavirus screening in Australia: a comparative modelling analysis
Lancet Public Health
(2016) - et al.
Evaluation of primary HPV-DNA testing in relation to visual inspection methods for cervical cancer screening in rural China: an epidemiologic and cost-effectiveness modelling study
BMC Cancer
(2011) - et al.
Prevention of cervical cancer in rural China: evaluation of HPV vaccination and primary HPV screening strategies
Vaccine
(2011) - et al.
Short term persistence of human papillomavirus and risk of cervical precancer and cancer: population based cohort study
BMJ
(2009) - et al.
Long-term absolute risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse following human papillomavirus infection: role of persistence
J. Natl. Cancer Inst.
(2010)
Natural history of cervical neoplasia and risk of invasive cancer in women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3: a retrospective cohort study
Lancet Oncol.
Section of Cancer Surveillance 2015
Cervical screening in Australia 2014–2015
Impact of the Australian National Cervical Screening Program in women of different ages
Med. J. Aust.
Coverage data. National (Australia) HPV 3 dose vaccination coverage for adolescents turning 15 years of age
Very low prevalence of vaccine human papillomavirus types among 18- to 35-year old Australian women 9 years following implementation of vaccination
J. Infect. Dis.
Long term predictive values of cytology and human papillomavirus testing in cervical cancer screening: joint European cohort study
BMJ
Reassurance against future risk of precancer and cancer conferred by a negative human papillomavirus test
J. Natl. Cancer Inst.
National Cervical Screening Program, AIHW, Medical Services Advisory Committee recommendations
National Cervical Screening Program Renewal: effectiveness modelling and economic evaluation in the Australian setting (assessment report)—MSAC application number 1276
Cited by (12)
Spotlight on the role of human papillomavirus vaccines
2021, Gynecologic OncologyCitation Excerpt :Secondary prevention (ie, screening program) has to be implemented even in setting with high coverage of vaccination for women not vaccinated, and properly remodeled for vaccinated women, reducing the overall costs for the health care system [33]. It has been hypothesized that in vaccinated women, the first screening test could be performed at 30 years of age, using an HPV test with genotyping: women that are positive to 16/18 genotype are deserving directly colposcopic examination for high probability to discover cervical lesions, while women positive to HR-HPV genotypes other than 16/18 will have a cytological triage, sending to colposcopy only women with abnormal cytological findings [34–39]. The adoption of vaccination in high-income Countries would be lower much more (the already low) morbidity and mortality rates of cervical cancer.
Towards the global elimination of cervical cancer
2019, Papillomavirus ResearchCitation Excerpt :However, coverage has been partially restored in Ireland after a well-coordinated campaign to address the issues. Longer term, countries should consider investments into ongoing information campaigns to provide parents with the evidence on vaccine safety; ongoing work is considering the cost-effectiveness of such proactive investment [8]. Scaling up cervical screening in low and lower-middle income countries, even to achieve coverage of the majority of women once or twice a lifetime, has historically been very challenging.
Could HPV testing on self-collected samples be routinely used in an organized cervical screening program? A modeled analysis
2021, Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and PreventionDiagnostic value of miR-153 and miR-203 in patients with cervical cancer and their correlation with human papillomavirus infection
2021, American Journal of Translational ResearchPerforming only one colposcopic punch biopsy rather than two or more: what happens at 12 months follow-up?
2021, Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology