Base case results*
| ICER (US$/YLS) | Relative cervical cancer risk reduction† | Absolute lifetime cervical cancer risk | |
| No screening | – | – | 4.2% (3.8%–4.7%) |
| HPV-ST 1x | 130 (110–150) | 15.0% (13.3%–16.6%) | 3.5% (3.2%–4.0%) |
| VIA 1x | DOM | 7.2% (6.3%–8.2%) | 3.9% (3.5%–4.3%) |
| HPV-VIA 1x | DOM | 7.6% (6.7%–8.7%) | 3.9% (3.5%–4.3%) |
| HPV-ST 3x | 240 (210–280) | 33.0% (30.6%–35.5%) | 2.8% (2.4%–3.1%) |
| VIA 3x | DOM | 16.9% (15.4%–18.8%) | 3.5% (3.1%–3.9%) |
| HPV-VIA 3x | DOM | 18.4% (16.7%–20.5%) | 3.4% (3.0%–3.8%) |
| HPV-ST 5x | 470 (410–550) | 42.8% (39.8%–45.6%) | 2.4% (2.1%–2.7%) |
| VIA 5x | DOM | 24.2% (22.0%–26.4%) | 3.2% (2.8%–3.5%) |
| HPV-VIA 5x | DOM | 26.1% (23.9%–28.5%) | 3.1% (2.7%–3.4%) |
The base case analysis compares all three screening strategies at all three screening frequencies. 1x: screening at age 39 years; 3x=screening at ages 30, 40 and 50 years; 5x=screening at ages 30, 35, 40, 45 and 50 years; DOM: more costly and less effective or having a higher ICER than equally or more effective strategies; ICER: expressed in 2014 US$ per YLS.
*Values indicate the mean results across the top 50 best fitting parameter sets. The minimum and maximum values across these 50 parameter sets are shown in parentheses.
†Relative reduction in lifetime risk of cervical cancer is compared with no screening.
DOM, dominated strategy; HPV, human papillomavirus; HPV-ST, community-based HPV self-collection with clinic-based cryotherapy of eligible HPV+ women; HPV-VIA, community-based HPV self-collection with clinic-based VIA triage and immediate treatment of eligible VIA+ women; ICER, incremental cost- effectiveness ratio; ST, screen-and-treat strategy; VIA, visual inspection with acetic acid; VIA, clinic-based VIA with immediate treatment of eligible VIA+ women; YLS, years of life saved.