Shankar Prinja

Cost of Treatment for Cervical Cancer in India

Cervical cancer is a major public health problem in India leading to high economic burden, which is disproportionately borne by the patients as out-of-pocket expenditure (OOPE). Several publicly financed health insurance schemes (PFHIs) in India cover the treatment for cervical cancer. However, the provider payment rates for health benefit packages (HBP) under these PFHIs are not based on scientific evidence. We undertook this study to estimate the cost of services provided for treatment of cervical cancer and  cost of the package of care for cervical cancer in India. The study was undertaken at a large public tertiary hospital in North India. The health system cost was assessed using a mixed micro-costing approach. The data were collected for all the resources utilized during service delivery for cervical cancer patients. To evaluate the OOPE, randomly selected 248 patients were interviewed following the cost of illness approach. Logistic regression was used to assess the factors associated with catastrophic health expenditure (CHE). Health system cost for different cervical cancer treatment modalities i.e. radiotherapy, brachytherapy, chemotherapy and surgery, ranges from INR 19,494 to 41,388 (USD 291 - 617). Furthermore, patients spent INR 4,042 to 23,453 ( USD 60 - 350) as OOPE. Nearly 62% patients incurred CHE, and 30% reported distress financing. The odds of CHE (OR: 25.39, p-value: <0.001) and distress financing (OR: 15.37, p-value: 0.001) were significantly higher in poorest-income quintile. The HBP cost varies from INR 45,364 to 64,422 (USD 676 - 960) for brachytherapy and radiotherapy respectively. Cervical cancer treatment leads to high OOPE in India, which imposes financial hardship, especially for the poorest. The coverage of risk pooling mechanisms like PHFIs should be enhanced. The findings of our study should be used to set the reimbursement rates of providing cervical cancer treatment under PFHI schemes.

Cost effectiveness of strategies for cervical cancer prevention in India

The establishment of link between high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and occurrence of cervical cancer has resulted in development of various HPV related control strategies for the prevention of cervical cancer. The objective of the present study was to assess the cost effectiveness of various screening strategies for cervical cancer and human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccination in India. A Markov model based on societal perspective was designed to estimate the lifetime costs and consequences of screening (with either visual inspect with acetic acid (VIA), Papanicolaou test or HPV DNA test at various time intervals) in a hypothetical cohort of 30-65 years age women or vaccination among adolescent girls. Diagnostic accuracy of the screening strategies, efficacy of HPV vaccination and data on transition probabilities was based on the results of the existing meta-analyses. Primary data was collected for assessing per person cost of screening, cost of treating cervical cancer and quality of life. We found that introduction of different screening strategies leads to reduction in lifetime occurrence of cervical cancer cases caused by HPV 16/18 from 20% to 61%, and cervical cancer deaths from 28% to 70%, as compared to no screening. Among various screening strategies, screening with both VIA 5 yearly and VIA 10 yearly came out to be cost effective at 1-time per capita GDP, with VIA every 5 years providing greater health benefits as compared to VIA 10 years. Hence, screening with VIA 5 years at an incremental cost of US$ 829 (INR 54,881) per QALY gained is the recommended strategy for India. Further, with regards to HPV vaccination, it leads to 60% reduction in cancer cases and mortality caused by HPV 16/18 as compared to no vaccination. Moreover, when this vaccinated cohort of adolescent girls is also screened later in their life (with VIA every 10 years and VIA 5 years), it leads to 69%-76% reduction in cancer cases and 71%-81% reduction in cancer deaths. As compared to no vaccination and no screening, both HPV vaccination alone and vaccination plus screening (with VIA every 5 yearly and VIA 10 yearly) appears to be cost effective with ICERs in the range of US$ 86 (INR 5,693) to US$ 476 (INR 31,511) per QALY gained. In the long run, when the cohort of adolescent girls, who were immunized for HPV, reach the age of 30 years, the screening frequency using VIA should be determined based on the coverage of HPV vaccination in that cohort.

Impact of COVID-19 on Outcomes for Patients With Cervical Cancer in India

PURPOSE The COVID-19 pandemic has placed unprecedented demands on the health system. This led to delays in the initiation and completion of cancer treatment. We assessed the long-term health consequences because of the delay in diagnosis and treatment for cervical cancer due to COVID-19 in India. METHODS We used a Markov-model–based analysis assessing the lifetime health outcomes of the cohort of women population at risk from cervical cancer in India. The decrease in survival for those with the treatment interruption was calculated based on the number of days the treatment was extended beyond the standard duration. Furthermore, to model the impact of late diagnosis and delayed treatment initiation, the patients were assumed to have upstaged during the delay period, as per natural progression of disease. RESULTS We estimate 2.52% (n = 795) to 3.80% (n = 2,160) lifetime increase in the deaths caused by cervical cancer with treatment restrictions ranging from 9 weeks to 6 months, respectively, as compared to no delay. On the contrary, 88-238 deaths because of COVID-19 disease are estimated to be saved during this restriction period among the patients with cervical cancer. Overall, the excess mortality because of cervical cancer led to 18,159-53,626 life-years being lost and an increase of 16,808-50,035 disability-adjusted life-years. CONCLUSION Delays in diagnosis and treatment are likely to lead to more cervical cancer deaths as compared to COVID-19 mortality averted among the patients with cervical cancer. Health systems must reorganize in terms of priority setting for provision of care, starting with prioritizing the treatment of patients with early-stage cervical cancer, increasing use of teleconsultation, and strengthening the role of primary care physicians in provision of cancer care.

Cost Effectiveness of Bevacizumab Plus Chemotherapy for the Treatment of Advanced and Metastatic Cervical Cancer in India—A Model-Based Economic Analysis

PURPOSE Patients with advanced and metastatic cervical cancer have a poor prognosis with a 1-year survival rate of 10%-15%. Recently, an antiangiogenic humanized monoclonal antibody bevacizumab has shown to improve the survival of these patients. This study was designed to assess the cost effectiveness of incorporating bevacizumab with standard chemotherapy for the treatment of patients with advanced and metastatic cervical cancer in India. METHODS Using a disaggregated societal perspective and lifetime horizon, a Markov model was developed for estimating the costs and health outcomes in a hypothetical cohort of 1,000 patients with advanced and metastatic cervical cancer treated with either standard chemotherapy alone or in combination with bevacizumab. Effectiveness data for each of the treatment regimen were assessed using estimates from Gynecologic Oncology Group 240 trial. Data on disease-specific mortality in metastatic cervical cancer, health system cost, and out-of-pocket expenditure were derived from Indian literature. Multivariable probabilistic sensitivity analysis was undertaken to account for parameter uncertainty. RESULTS Over the lifetime of one patient with advanced and metastatic cervical cancer, bevacizumab along with standard chemotherapy results in a gain of 0.275 (0.052-0.469) life-years (LY) and 0.129 (0.032-0.218) quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), at an additional cost of $3,816 US dollars (USD; 2,513-5,571) compared with standard chemotherapy alone. This resulted in an incremental cost of $19,080 USD (7,230-52,434) per LY gained and $34,744 USD (15,782-94,914) per QALY gained with the use of bevacizumab plus standard chemotherapy. CONCLUSION Addition of bevacizumab to the standard chemotherapy is not cost effective for the treatment of advanced and metastatic cervical cancer in India at a threshold of 1-time per-capita gross domestic product.