Cited by 76Cervical Cancer and HPV ResearchWomen's cancer prevention and managementHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life

The health and economic impact of scaling cervical cancer prevention in 50 low- and lower-middle-income countries

Open access
Campos, Nicole G., Sharma, Monisha, Clark, Andrew, Lee, Kyueun, Geng, Fangli, Regan, Catherine, Kim, Jane, Resch, Stephen·2017·International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics

Abstract

Objective: To estimate the health impact, financial costs, and cost‐effectiveness of scaling‐up coverage of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination (young girls) and cervical cancer screening (women of screening age) for women in countries that will likely need donor assistance. Methods: We used a model‐based approach to synthesize population, demographic, and epidemiological data from 50 low‐ and lower‐middle‐income countries. Models were used to project the costs (US $), lifetime health impact (cervical cancer cases, deaths averted), and cost‐effectiveness (US $ per disability adjusted life year [DALY] averted) of: (1) two‐dose HPV‐16/18 vaccination of girls aged 10 years; (2) once‐in‐a‐lifetime screening, with treatment when needed, of women aged 35 years with either HPV DNA testing or visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA); and (3) cervical cancer treatment over a 10‐year roll‐out. Results: We estimated that both HPV vaccination and screening would be very cost‐effective, and a comprehensive program could avert 5.2 million cases, 3.7 million deaths, and 22.0 million DALY s over the lifetimes of the intervention cohorts for a total 10‐year program cost of US $3.2 billion. Conclusion: Investment in HPV vaccination of young girls and cervical cancer screen‐and‐treat programs in low‐ and lower‐middle‐income countries could avert a substantial burden of disease while providing good value for public health dollars.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/ijgo.12184

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 29 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 14

  1. Naud PS, Roteli-Martins CM, De Carvalho NS, et al. Sustained effi- cacy,immunogenicity,andsafetyoftheHPV-16/18AS04-adjuvanted vaccine:Finalanalysisofalong-termfollow-upstudyupto9.4years post-vaccination.Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2014;10:2147-2162.
  2. Joura EA, Giuliano AR, Iversen OE, et al. A 9-valent HPV vaccine againstinfectionandintraepithelialneoplasiainwomen.N Engl J Med. 2015;372:711-723.
  3. Campos NG, Sharma M, Clark A, Kim JJ, Resch SC. Resources required forcervicalcancerpreventioninlow-andmiddle-Incomecountries. PLoS ONE. 2016;11:e0164000.
  4. Campos NG, Tsu V, Jeronimo J, Mvundura M, Lee K, Kim JJ. When andhowoftentoscreenforcervicalcancerinthreelow-andmiddle- income countries: A cost-effectiveness analysis. Papillomavirus Res. 2015;1:38-58.
  5. Campos NG, Maza M, Alfaro K, et al. The comparative and cost- effectivenessofHPV-basedcervicalcancerscreeningalgorithmsinEl Salvador. Int J Cancer. 2015;137:893-902.
  6. PaavonenJ,NaudP,SalmeronJ,etal.Efficacyofhumanpapillomavi- rus(HPV)-16/18AS04-adjuvantedvaccineagainstcervicalinfection and precancer caused by oncogenic HPV types (PATRICIA): Final analysisofadouble-blind,randomisedstudyinyoungwomen.Lancet. 2009;374:301-314.
  7. Sankaranarayanan R, Swaminathan R, Brenner H, et al. Cancer sur- vivalinAfrica,Asia,andCentralAmerica:Apopulation-basedstudy. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:165-173.
  8. GoldieSJ,O'SheaM,CamposNG,DiazM,SweetS,KimSY.Health andeconomicoutcomesofHPV16,18vaccinationin72GAVI-eligible countries. Vaccine. 2008;26:4080-4093.
  9. Jit M, Brisson M, Portnoy A, Hutubessy R. Cost-effectiveness of femalehumanpapillomavirusvaccinationin179countries:APRIME modelling study. Lancet Glob Health. 2014;2:e406-e414.
  10. GinsbergGM,LauerJA,ZelleS,BaetenS,BaltussenR.Costeffective- ness of strategies to combat breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer in sub-SaharanAfrica and South EastAsia: Mathematical modelling study. BMJ. 2012;344:e614.
  11. CamposNG,TsuV,JeronimoJ,MvunduraM,LeeK,KimJJ.Toexpand coverage,orincreasefrequency:Quantifyingthetradeoffsbetween equity and efficiency facing cervical cancer screening programs in low-resourcesettings.Int J Cancer. 2017;140:1293-1305.
  12. Campos NG, Castle PE, Wright TC Jr, Kim JJ. Cervical cancer screen- inginlow-resourcesettings:Acost-effectivenessframeworkforvalu- ingtradeoffsbetweentestperformanceandprogramcoverage.Int J Cancer. 2015;137:2208-2219.
  13. Dieleman JL, Schneider MT, Haakenstad A, et al. Development assis- tanceforhealth:Pasttrends,associations,andthefutureofinterna- tionalfinancialflowsforhealth.Lancet. 2016;387:2536-2544.
  14. FarmerP,FrenkJ,KnaulFM,etal.Expansionofcancercareandcon- trol in countries of low and middle income:A call to action. Lancet. 2010;376:1186-1193.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Campos, N. G., Sharma, M., Clark, A., Lee, K., Geng, F., Regan, C., Kim, J., & Resch, S.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
  • Stanford University (US)
Corresponding author
Campos, Nicole G.
Venue
International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-07
Volume
138
Issue
S1
Pages
47-56
ISSN
  • 0020-6695 (ISSN-L)
  • 0020-7292
  • 1879-3479
OpenAlex
W2724765905
Cited by
76
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2
FWCI
4.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
American Cancer Society (16300)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Cervical Cancer and HPV Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Women's cancer prevention and management
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Keywords
cervical cancer prevention, HPV vaccination, cervical cancer screening, low- and lower-middle-income countries, cost-effectiveness, disability-adjusted life years, HPV testing, visual inspection with acetic acid, cervical cancer treatment, health effects, donor support
MeSH terms
Uterine Cervical Neoplasms, Developing Countries, Female, Health Resources, Humans, Mass Screening, Medically Underserved Area, Vaccination, Models, Statistical, Women's Health, Papillomavirus Infections, Papillomavirus Vaccines

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review