FC 13-04OPTIMAL IMPROVEMENTS TO CERVICAL CANCER PREVENTION: EXAMPLE FROM AUSTRALIA

32. Economics and modelling
M. Smith 1, M. Hall 2, J.B. Lew 2, J. Brotherton 3, R. Skinner 4, R. Guy 5, K. Simms 2, K. Canfell 1.
1Cancer Research Division, Cancer Council NSW, Sydney Australia School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney Australia (Australia), 2Cancer Research Division, Cancer Council NSW, Sydney Australia (Australia), 3National HPV Vaccination Register, Victoria Cytology Service, Melbourne Australia (Australia), 4Adolescent Medicine Unit, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Sydney Australia (Australia), 5Kirby Institute, UNSW, Sydney Australia (Australia)

Background / Objectives

There are now a variety of tools for cervical cancer prevention.  HPV vaccination and screening programs are in place in several settings, however coverage is often sub-optimal.  Improving participation is important, but improving vaccine uptake will involve different approaches to those required to increase screening participation or adherence to recommended follow-up.  To assist in prioritizing and resourcing efforts, here we explore the impact of different potential improvements to participation in cervical cancer prevention programs, and which improvements would have the greatest impact.


Methods

Using a well-established model of HPV transmission, vaccination, natural history and screening, we assessed the relative impact of several improvements to HPV vaccination and screening participation, using Australia as an example.  These improvements included: i) increasing HPV vaccine coverage in females (from current 78%); ii) increasing HPV vaccine coverage in females and males (current male coverage 72%); iii) reducing the proportion of women never screened; iv) increasing screening participation at the recommended interval; v) improving attendance for follow-up by women under surveillance following a previous abnormal screening test.  The impact of improvements in screening participation were assessed separately for cohorts offered vaccination and for unvaccinated cohorts.


Results

Conclusion

The findings of this analysis will provide important information about how to prioritise efforts in increasing participation in cervical cancer prevention programs.


References