Table 1.
Demographic variables and health status of our population.
Fig 1.
Examples of p16/ki-67 dual stained cells.
Table 2.
Costs of the lab-tests and diagnostic methods for HPV screening.
Fig 2.
First strategy: Cytology as primary screening test.
Triage with a) HPV test with 16/18 genotyping and b) p16/ki-67 dual stain. Cytology, LBC; Costs in Euros (€), direct medical costs (screening tests, colposcopy with biopsy and office visit) per woman screened; costs for annual follow-ups and treatments for CIN were not included. *Colposcopy with biopsy.
Fig 3.
Second strategy: HPV test as primary screening test with 16/18 genotyping.
Triage with a) Cytology b) p16/ki-67dual stain. Cytology, LBC; Costs in Euros (€), direct medical costs (screening tests, colposcopy with biopsy and office visit) per woman screened; costs for annual follow-ups and treatments for CIN were not included. *Colposcopy with biopsy.
Fig 4.
Third strategy: Co-testing as primary screening.
Triage with p16/ki-67 dual stain. Cytology, LBC; Costs in Euros (€), direct medical costs (screening tests, colposcopy with biopsy and office visit) per woman screened; costs for annual follow-ups and treatments for CIN were not included. *Colposcopy with biopsy.
Fig 5.
HR-HPV genotypes distribution in the study population.
The bars represent a single or multiple type infection, whilst in multiple types the case is classified according to the highest risk type for its constituents.
Table 3.
Odds ratio for CIN2+ histological diagnosis for each HR-HPV genotype.
Table 4.
Correlation of HPV 16/18, p16/ki-67, colposcopy and combination of HPV 16/18/ p16/ki-67 with biopsy results in our population study.
Table 5.
Diagnostic ability of HR-HPV test, colposcopy & p16/ki-67 for the detection of CIN2+.
Fig 6.
Evaluation of the two methods, HR-HPV test and p16/ki-67 by ROC curve analysis.
Table 6.
Total direct medical costs, from a healthcare perspective, of the three screening strategies.