Table 1.
Parameters used in the model and ranges explored in probabilistic sensitivity analysis*.
Fig 1.
The cumulative risk of developing invasive cervical cancer after 20 years* by age and management subgroup.
The 20-year risk of cervical cancer in women with LSIL in the pre-renewed NCSP with a negative test in last 2 years (accepted risk for 12-month repeat recommendation under the pre-renewed NCSP) is shown as the horizontal line in each graph. *The risk was evaluated in unvaccinated cohorts. It was assumed that the risk in cohorts offered vaccination would be equal to or lower than in unvaccinated cohorts (due to the potential impact of vaccine cross-protection against OHR HPV types).
Fig 2.
The cumulative risk of CIN3+ at 24 months* by age and management subgroup.
The 24-month risk of CIN3+ in women with LSIL with a negative test in last 2 years (accepted risk for 12-month repeat recommendation under the pre-renewed NCSP) is shown as the horizontal line in each graph. *The risk was evaluated in unvaccinated cohorts. It was assumed that the risk in cohorts offered vaccination would be equal to or lower than in unvaccinated cohorts (due to potential the impact of vaccine cross-protection against OHR HPV types).
Fig 3.
Model predicted annual number* of cancer cases (a), cancer deaths (b), colposcopies(c) and precancer treatments d) for unvaccinated cohorts (diamond) and cohorts offered vaccination (squares) under three strategies–pre-renewed NCSP, primary HPV screening in which women testing OHR HPV and ASC-US/LSIL are referred for 12-month follow-up, and primary HPV screening in which this group is referred for immediate colposcopy.** *Case numbers derived by applying predicted age-specific rates to the projected Australian female population for 2017.[63] **Numbers in parentheses represent the difference in case numbers and percentage difference compared to the pre-renewed NCSP.
Table 2.
Numbers* of cervical cancer cases, deaths and colposcopies predicted in a year under a range of screening scenarios for unvaccinated cohorts and cohorts offered vaccination at age 12 years**.
Table 3.
The cost-effectiveness of immediate colposcopy compared to 12-month follow-up in women with OHR HPV and cytology ASC-US or LSIL.
Fig 4.
The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of immediate colposcopy compared to 12-month follow-up in women with OHR HPV and ASC-US/LSIL for parameters included in one-way sensitivity analysis–unvaccinated cohorts.
Fig 5.
The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of immediate colposcopy compared to 12-month follow-up in women with OHR HPV and ASC-US or LSIL for parameters included in one-way sensitivity analysis–cohorts offered vaccination.
Fig 6.
Model predicted annual number* of cancer cases (a), cancer deaths (b), colposcopies (c) and precancer treatments (d) for unvaccinated cohorts (diamond) and cohorts offered vaccination (squares) under three strategies–current practice, primary HPV screening in which women testing OHR HPV and ASC-US/LSIL are referred for 12-month follow-up, and primary HPV screening in which this group is referred for 12- and 24-month follow-up.** *Case numbers derived by applying predicted age-specific rates to the projected Australian female population for 2017.[63]** Numbers in parentheses represent the difference in case numbers and percentage difference compared to the pre-renewed NCSP.
Table 4.
The cost-effectiveness of 12- and 24-month HPV testing, compared to 12-month HPV testing only, in women with OHR HPV and cytology ASC-US/LSIL.