Investigator

Fernando Alarid-Escudero

Assistant Professor · Stanford University Stanford Health Policy, Department of Health Policy

FAFernando Alarid-E…
Papers(3)
Approaches to develop…State-level dispariti…Estimating the Natura…
Collaborators(10)
Karen CanfellHawre JalalInge M. C. M. de KokJennifer M YehKate T SimmsMarina WolfMegan A. SmithNina A BickellRan ZhaoRuanne V Barnabas
Institutions(9)
Stanford UniversityUniversity of SydneyBrown UniversityErasmus University Me…Harvard Medical SchoolCancer Council NSWUniversity Of Minneso…Icahn School Of Medic…Massachusetts General…

Papers

Approaches to developing de novo cancer population models to examine questions about cancer and race in bladder, gastric, and endometrial cancer and multiple myeloma: the Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network incubator program

Abstract Background We are developing 10 de novo population-level mathematical models in 4 malignancies (multiple myeloma and bladder, gastric, and uterine cancers). Each of these sites has documented disparities in outcome that are believed to be downstream effects of systemic racism. Methods Ten models are being independently developed as part of the Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network incubator program. These models simulate trends in cancer incidence, early diagnosis, treatment, and mortality for the general population and are stratified by racial subgroup. Model inputs are based on large population datasets, clinical trials, and observational studies. Some core parameters are shared, and other parameters are model specific. All models are microsimulation models that use self-reported race to stratify model inputs. They can simulate the distribution of relevant risk factors (eg, smoking, obesity) and insurance status (for multiple myeloma and uterine cancer) in US birth cohorts and population. Discussion The models aim to refine approaches in prevention, detection, and management of 4 cancers given uncertainties and constraints. They will help explore whether the observed racial disparities are explainable by inequities, assess the effects of existing and potential cancer prevention and control policies on health equity and disparities, and identify policies that balance efficiency and fairness in decreasing cancer mortality.

State-level disparities in cervical cancer prevention and outcomes in the United States: a modeling study

Abstract Background Despite human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines’ availability for over a decade, coverage across the United States varies. Although some states have tried to increase HPV vaccination coverage, most model-based analyses focus on national impacts. We evaluated hypothetical changes in HPV vaccination coverage at the national and state levels for California, New York, and Texas using a mathematical model. Methods We developed a new mathematical model of HPV transmission and cervical cancer, creating national- and state-level models, incorporating country- and state-specific vaccination coverage and cervical cancer incidence and mortality. We quantified the national- and state-level impact of increasing HPV vaccination coverage to 80% by 2025 or 2030 on cervical cancer outcomes and the time to elimination defined as less than 4 per 100 000 women. Results Increasing vaccination coverage to 80% in Texas over 10 years could reduce cervical cancer incidence by 50.9% (95% credible interval [CrI] = 46.6%-56.1%) by 2100, from 1.58 (CrI = 1.19-2.09) to 0.78 (CrI = 0.57-1.02) per 100 000 women. Similarly, New York could see a 27.3% (CrI = 23.9%-31.5%) reduction from 1.43 (CrI = 0.93-2.07) to 1.04 (CrI = 0.66-1.53) per 100 000 women, and California a 24.4% (CrI = 20.0%-30.0%) reduction from 1.01 (CrI = 0.66-1.44) to 0.76 (CrI = 0.50-1.09) per 100 000 women. Achieving 80% coverage in 5 years will provide slightly larger and sooner reductions. If the vaccination coverage levels in 2019 continue, cervical cancer elimination could occur nationally by 2051 (CrI = 2034-2064), but state timelines may vary by decades. Conclusion Targeting an HPV vaccination coverage of 80% by 2030 will disproportionately benefit states with low coverage and higher cervical cancer incidence. Geographically focused analyses can better inform priorities.

Estimating the Natural History of Cervical Carcinogenesis Using Simulation Models: A CISNET Comparative Analysis

Abstract Background The natural history of human papillomavirus (HPV)-induced cervical cancer (CC) is not directly observable, yet the age of HPV acquisition and duration of preclinical disease (dwell time) influences the effectiveness of alternative preventive policies. We performed a Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) comparative modeling analysis to characterize the age of acquisition of cancer-causing HPV infections and implied dwell times for distinct phases of cervical carcinogenesis. Methods Using four CISNET-cervical models with varying underlying structures but fit to common US epidemiological data, we estimated the age of acquisition of causal HPV infections and dwell times associated with three phases of cancer development: HPV, high-grade precancer, and cancer sojourn time. We stratified these estimates by HPV genotype under both natural history and CC screening scenarios, because screening prevents cancer development that affects the mix of detected cancers. Results The median time from HPV acquisition to cancer detection ranged from 17.5 to 26.0 years across the four models. Three models projected that 50% of unscreened women acquired their causal HPV infection between ages 19 and 23 years, whereas one model projected these infections occurred later (age 34 years). In the context of imperfect compliance with US screening guidelines, the median age of causal infection was 4.4–15.9 years later compared with model projections in the absence of screening. Conclusions These validated CISNET-CC models, which reflect some uncertainty in the development of CC, elucidate important drivers of HPV vaccination and CC screening policies and emphasize the value of comparative modeling when evaluating public health policies.

123Works
3Papers
21Collaborators

Positions

2022–

Assistant Professor

Stanford University Stanford Health Policy · Department of Health Policy

2020–

Assistant Professor

Center for Research and Teaching in Economics (CIDE) · Division of Public Administration

2016–

Students, Graduate School Fellow

University of Minnesota · Health Policy and Management

2017–

Professionals-in-Training, Post-Doctoral Associate

University of Minnesota · Health Policy and Management

2017–

Students, Research Assistant

University of Minnesota · Health Policy and Management

2014–

Students, Research Assistant

University of Minnesota · Health Policy and Management

Education

2017

PhD Health Services Research, Policy and Administration

University of Minnesota School of Public Health · Health Policy and Management

2009

MS Economics

Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas · Economics

2006

BSc Biomedical Engineer

Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana Iztapalapa · Biomedical Engineering

Country

US

Keywords
Decision analysisCost-effectiveness analysisHealth economicsHealth Decision SciencesHealth Policy