Skip to main content

Table 2 Parameters used in the model analysis

From: Cost-effectiveness of the screen-and-treat strategies using HPV test linked to thermal ablation for cervical cancer prevention in China: a modeling study

Parameter

CIN1

Base case (95%CI)

CIN2

Base case (95%CI)

CIN3

Base case (95%CI)

Distribution

Source

Efficacy of screening strategies

 Self-HPV without triage

    

[9]

  Sensitivity

0.70(0.61–0.77)

0.84(0.76–0.89)

0.85(0.75–0.91)

Beta

  Specificity

0.83(0.82–0.84)

0.82(0.81–0.83)

0.81(0.80–0.82)

Beta

 Self-HPV16/18 triage

    

  Sensitivity

0.41(0.32–0.52)

0.67(0.57–0.75)

0.72(0.61–0.82)

Beta

  Specificity

0.97(0.96–0.97)

0.96(0.96–0.97)

0.95(0.95–0.96)

Beta

 Self-HPV7 types triage

    

  Sensitivity

0.60(0.51–0.68)

0.80(0.72–0.87)

0.81(0.70–0.88)

Beta

  Specificity

0.89(0.88–0.90)

0.88(0.88–0.89)

0.88(0.87–0.88)

Beta

 Physician-HPV without triage

    

[31, 32]

  Sensitivity

0.76(0.53–0.90)

0.84(0.62–0.94)

0.90(0.74–0.97)

Beta

  Specificity

0.82(0.80–0.83)

0.81(0.80–0.83)

0.81(0.79–0.82)

Beta

 Physician-HPV16/18 triage

    

  Sensitivity

0.59(0.36–0.78)

0.53(0.32–0.73)

0.76(0.56–0.88)

Beta

  Specificity

0.96(0.95–0.97)

0.95(0.94–0.96)

0.95(0.94–0.96)

Beta

 Physician-HPV7 types triage

    

  Sensitivity

0.65(0.41–0.83)

0.84(0.62–0.94)

0.86(0.69–0.95)

Beta

  Specificity

0.88(0.86–0.89)

0.87(0.86–0.89)

0.86(0.85–0.88)

Beta

 Physician-HPV with genotype triage

    

[31, 32]

  Sensitivity

0.81(0.57–0.93)

0.98(0.89–1.00)

0.97(0.83–0.99)

Beta

  Specificity

0.59(0.54–0.64)

0.57(0.52–0.62)

0.54(0.49–0.59)

Beta

 Physician-HPV with cytology triage

    

  Sensitivity

0.50(0.28–0.72)

0.84(0.62–0.94)

0.82(0.64–0.92)

Beta

  Specificity

0.66(0.61–0.71)

0.66(0.61–0.70)

0.63(0.58–0.68)

Beta

Participation variables

Base case (Range)

  

 Participation of physician-sampling

0.70(0.25–1.00)

Beta

Assumed

 RR (self-sampling participation vs physician-sampling)

1.28(0.90–1.82)

Ln (RR) is normal

[28]

 Loss to follow-up (per visit)

0.15(0.00–0.50)

Beta

[29]

Treatment efficacy

 Thermal ablation for HPV positive

0.804(0.734–0.859)

Beta

[10]

 Thermal ablation for CIN 1

0.903(0.805–0.955)

Beta

[10]

 Thermal ablation for CIN 2/3

0.762(0.615–0.865)

Beta

[10]

 LEEP for HPV positive

/

  

 LEEP for CIN 2/3

0.947(0.931–0.963)

Beta

[33]

Eligibility for thermal ablation

 HPV positive, without CIN

0.456(0.342–0.570)

Beta

[9, 30]

 CIN 1

0.510(0.383–0.638)

Beta

 CIN 2

0.534(0.400–0.667)

Beta

 CIN 3

0.449(0.337–0.561)

Beta

Precancer management for current strategies

Urban area

  Follow up and management for CIN 1

0.905(0.815–0.996)

Beta

[4, 12]

  Treatment of CIN2/3

0.953(0.858–1.000)

Beta

[4, 12]

Rural area

  Follow up and management for CIN 1

0.841(0.757–0.925)

Beta

[4, 12]

  Treatment of CIN2/3

0.895(0.805–0.984)

Beta

[4, 12]

Treatment costs (2020 US$)

 TA

11.43(± 25%)

Gamma

Micro-costing approach

 LEEP

155.63(± 25%)

Gamma

[36]

Costs of cervical cancer treatment (2020 US$)

 Urban area

  CC FIGOI-IIa treatment

7974.19(± 25%)

Gamma

[4, 36,37,38]

  CC FIGO IIb-IV treatment

14,051.52(± 25%)

Gamma

[4, 36,37,38]

 Rural area

  CC FIGOI-IIa treatment

5329.05(± 25%)

Gamma

[4, 36,37,38]

  CC FIGO IIb-IV treatment

8819.70(± 25%)

Gamma

[4, 36,37,38]

Follow up cost after treatment (2020 US$)

Urban area

  TA for self-sampling strategy (HPV positive)

33.73(± 25%)

Gamma

[10], Micro-costing approach

  TA for self-sampling strategy (CIN1 +)

49.27(± 25%)

Gamma

  TA for physician-sampling strategy (HPV positive)

47.67(± 25%)

Gamma

  TA for physician-sampling strategy (CIN1 +)

64.80(± 25%)

Gamma

  LEEP (CIN2 or CIN3)

106.92(± 25%)

Gamma

Rural area

  TA for self-sampling strategy (HPV positive)

29.90 (± 25%)

Gamma

[10], Micro-costing approach

  TA for self-sampling strategy (CIN1 +)

45.23 (± 25%)

Gamma

  TA for physician-sampling strategy (HPV positive)

39.17(± 25%)

Gamma

  TA for physician-sampling strategy (CIN1 +)

55.57(± 25%)

Gamma

  LEEP (CIN2 or CIN3)

97.73 (± 25%)

Gamma

Utility

 Utility before thermal ablation

0.986(0.978–0.994)

Normal

[39, 40]

 Utility after thermal ablation

    

   ≤ CIN1

0.989(0.983–0.996)

Normal

  CIN2 + 

0.965(0.930–0.999)

Normal

 Utility before LEEP

0.984(0.977–0.992)

Normal

 Utility after LEEP

0.956(0.938–0.974)

Normal

  1. More details about the related parameters have been represented in the Additional file 1, pp 12-24
  2. HPV Human papillomavirus, TA Thermal ablation, CIN Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, RR Relative risk (risk ratio) comparing self-collection with provider collection of samples for cervical cancer screening, LEEP Loop electrosurgical excision procedure, FIGO International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetric