The cost of managing genital warts in the UK

Assessing the cost-effectiveness of HPV vaccination strategies for adolescent girls and boys in the UK

BACKGROUND

Human papillomavirus (HPV) is the most widespread sexually transmitted infection worldwide. It causes several health consequences, in particular accounting for the majority of cervical cancer cases in women. In the United Kingdom, a vaccination campaign targeting 12-year-old girls started in 2008; this campaign has been successful, with high uptake and reduced HPV prevalence observed in vaccinated cohorts. Recently, attention has focused on vaccinating both sexes, due to HPV-related diseases in males (particularly for high-risk men who have sex with men) and an equity argument over equalising levels of protection.

METHODS

We constructed an epidemiological model for HPV transmission in the UK, accounting for nine of the most common HPV strains. We complemented this with an economic model to determine the likely health outcomes (healthcare costs and quality-adjusted life years) for individuals from the epidemiological model. We then tested vaccination with the three HPV vaccines currently available, vaccinating either girls alone or both sexes. For each strategy we calculated the threshold price per vaccine dose, i.e. the maximum amount paid for the added health benefits of vaccination to be worth the cost of each vaccine dose. We calculated results at 3.5% discounting, and also 1.5%, to consider the long-term health effects of HPV infection.

RESULTS

At 3.5% discounting, continuing to vaccinate girls remains highly cost-effective compared to halting vaccination, with threshold dose prices of £56-£108. Vaccination of girls and boys is less cost-effective (£25-£53). Compared to vaccinating girls only, adding boys to the programme is not cost-effective, with negative threshold prices (-£6 to -£3) due to the costs of administration. All threshold prices increase when using 1.5% discounting, and adding boys becomes cost-effective (£36-£47). These results are contingent on the UK's high vaccine uptake; for lower uptake rates, adding boys (at the same uptake rate) becomes more cost effective.

CONCLUSIONS

Vaccinating girls is extremely cost-effective compared with no vaccination, vaccinating both sexes is less so. Adding boys to an already successful girls-only programme has a low cost-effectiveness, as males have high protection through herd immunity. If future health effects are weighted more heavily, threshold prices increase and vaccination becomes cost-effective.

Systematic review and evidence synthesis of non-cervical human papillomavirus-related disease health system costs and quality of life estimates

BACKGROUND

Many economic evaluations of human papillomavirus vaccination should ideally consider multiple disease outcomes, including anogenital warts, respiratory papillomatosis and non-cervical cancers (eg, anal, oropharyngeal, penile, vulvar and vaginal cancers). However, published economic evaluations largely relied on estimates from single studies or informal rapid literature reviews.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of articles up to June 2016 to identify costs and utility estimates admissible for an economic evaluation from a single-payer healthcare provider's perspective. Meta-analyses were performed for studies that used same utility elicitation tools for similar diseases. Costs were adjusted to 2016/2017 US$.

RESULTS

Sixty-one papers (35 costs; 24 utilities; 2 costs and utilities) were selected from 10 742 initial records. Cost per case ranges were US$124-US$883 (anogenital warts), US$6912-US$52 579 (head and neck cancers), US$12 936-US$51 571 (anal cancer), US$17 524-34 258 (vaginal cancer), US$14 686-US$28 502 (vulvar cancer) and US$9975-US$27 629 (penile cancer). The total cost for 14 adult patients with recurrent respiratory papillomatosis was US$137 601 (one paper).Utility per warts episode ranged from 0.651 to 1 (12 papers, various utility elicitation methods), with pooled mean EQ-5D and EQ-VAS of 0.86 (95% CI 0.85 to 0.87) and 0.74 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.75), respectively. Fifteen papers reported utilities in head and neck cancers with range 0.29 (95% CI 0.0 to 0.76) to 0.94 (95% CI 0.3 to 1.0). Mean utility reported ranged from 0.5 (95% CI 0.4 to 0.61) to 0.65 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.75) (anal cancer), 0.59 (95% CI 0.54 to 0.64) (vaginal cancer), 0.65 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.70) (vulvar cancer) and 0.79 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.84) (penile cancer).

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in values reported from each paper reflect variations in cancer site, disease stages, study population, treatment modality/setting and utility elicitation methods used. As patient management changes over time, corresponding effects on both costs and utility need to be considered to ensure health economic assumptions are up-to-date and closely reflect the case mix of patients.

Time to consider a targeted HPV vaccination programme for male military recruits

Human papillomaviruses (HPV) are the most common type of sexually transmitted infection in men but also related to high-risk cancers. This article considers the epidemiology of HPV in the male military population, the UK vaccination programme and the current UK Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation recommendations. Military men may not benefit from HPV herd immunity and may have a different risk profile; vaccination may in turn reduce the operational burden of HPV-related disease within this population. Military men may benefit from a targeted vaccination programme, and the paper calls for urgent consideration of approaches that could protect them from acquiring HPV.

Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of interventions for the treatment of anogenital warts: systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Typically occurring on the external genitalia, anogenital warts (AGWs) are benign epithelial skin lesions caused by human papillomavirus infection. AGWs are usually painless but can be unsightly and physically uncomfortable, and affected people might experience psychological distress. The evidence base on the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of treatments for AGWs is limited.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the evidence on the clinical effectiveness of medical and surgical treatments for AGWs and to develop an economic model to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the treatments.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases (MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library databases and Web of Science) were searched from inception (or January 2000 for Web of Science) to September 2014. Bibliographies of relevant systematic reviews were hand-searched to identify potentially relevant studies. The World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for ongoing and planned studies.

REVIEW METHODS

A systematic review of the clinical effectiveness literature was carried out according to standard methods and a mixed-treatment comparison (MTC) undertaken. The model implemented for each outcome was that with the lowest deviance information criterion. A de novo economic model was developed to assess cost-effectiveness from the perspective of the UK NHS. The model structure was informed through a systematic review of the economic literature and in consultation with clinical experts. Effectiveness data were obtained from the MTC. Costs were obtained from the literature and standard UK sources.

RESULTS

Of 4232 titles and abstracts screened for inclusion in the review of clinical effectiveness, 60 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating 19 interventions were included. Analysis by MTC indicated that ablative techniques were typically more effective than topical interventions at completely clearing AGWs at the end of treatment. Podophyllotoxin 0.5% solution (Condyline(®), Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Ltd; Warticon(®) solution, Stiefel Laboratories Ltd) was found to be the most effective topical treatment evaluated. Networks for other outcomes included fewer treatments, which restrict conclusions on the comparative effectiveness of interventions. In total, 84 treatment strategies were assessed using the economic model. Podophyllotoxin 0.5% solution first line followed by carbon dioxide (CO2) laser therapy second line if AGWs did not clear was most likely to be considered a cost-effective use of resources at a willingness to pay of £20,000-30,000 per additional quality-adjusted life-year gained. The result was robust to most sensitivity analyses conducted.

LIMITATIONS

Limited reporting in identified studies of baseline characteristics for the enrolled population generates uncertainty around the comparability of the study populations and therefore the generalisability of the results to clinical practice. Subgroup analyses were planned based on type, number and size of AGWs, all of which are factors thought to influence treatment effect. Lack of data on clinical effectiveness based on these characteristics precluded analysis of the differential effects of treatments in the subgroups of interest. Despite identification of 60 studies, most comparisons in the MTC are informed by only one RCT. Additionally, lack of head-to-head RCTs comparing key treatments, together with minimal reporting of results in some studies, precluded comprehensive analysis of all treatments for AGWs.

CONCLUSIONS

The results generated by the MTC are in agreement with consensus opinion that ablative techniques are clinically more effective at completely clearing AGWs after treatment. However, the evidence base informing the MTC is limited. A head-to-head RCT that evaluates the comparative effectiveness of interventions used in clinical practice would help to discern the potential advantages and disadvantages of the individual treatments. The results of the economic analysis suggest that podophyllotoxin 0.5% solution is likely to represent a cost-effective first-line treatment option. More expensive effective treatments, such as CO2 laser therapy or surgery, may represent cost-effective second-line treatment options. No treatment and podophyllin are unlikely to be considered cost-effective treatment options. There is uncertainty around the cost-effectiveness of treatment with imiquimod, trichloroacetic acid and cryotherapy.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013005457.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Green tea extract for external anogenital warts

Catephen (Kora Corporation Ltd) is a herbal medicinal product consisting predominantly of catechins (sinecatechins) extracted from Camellia sinensis (L.) O. Kuntze folium (green tea leaf) formulated as a topical preparation for the treatment of external genital and perianal warts (condylomata acuminata).(1) Marketing authorisation for an ointment containing 0.1g of green tea extract per gram (10%) was granted by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) under the mutual recognition procedure in February 2015.(2) Here, we consider the evidence for Catephen ointment in the management of external genital and perianal warts and its place within current management strategies.

The costs of managing genital warts in the UK by devolved nation: England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland

Genital warts, 90% of which are caused by human papillomavirus types 6 and 11, are a significant problem in the UK. The cost of managing genital warts was previously estimated at £52.4 million for 2010. The objective of this study was to estimate the cost of genital warts management up to 2012 in the UK and by jurisdiction. Population statistics and the number of reported genital warts cases in genito-urinary medicine clinics were obtained and extrapolated to 2012. Cases of genital warts treated in primary care were estimated from The Health Improvement Network database. The number of visits and therapy required were estimated by genito-urinary medicine experts. Costs were obtained from the appropriate national tariffs. The model estimated there were 220,875 genital warts cases in the UK in 2012, costing £58.44 million (£265/patient). It estimated 157,793 cases in England costing £41.74 million; 7468 cases in Scotland costing £1.90 million; 7095 cases in Wales costing £1.87 million; and 3621 cases in Northern Ireland costing £948,000. The full National Health Service costs for the management of genital warts have never previously been estimated separately for each jurisdiction. Findings reveal a significant economic burden, which is important to quantify when understanding the value of quadrivalent human papilloma virus vaccination.

Early direct and indirect impact of quadrivalent HPV (4HPV) vaccine on genital warts: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Since 2007, many countries have implemented national human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programs with the quadrivalent HPV (4HPV) vaccine that has been shown to be efficacious in clinical trials involving 25,000 subjects. Two vaccine serotypes, HPV16 and 18, are responsible for cervical cancer and other HPV-related cancers, but the impact of the 4HPV vaccine on these cancers cannot be seen immediately as there is a considerable lag between infection with HPV and cancer development. The other two serotypes, HPV6 and 11, are responsible for genital warts (GWs), which develop within a few months after infection, making GWs an early clinical endpoint for the assessment of the impact of 4HPV vaccination.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search in PubMed to identify all published studies on 4HPV vaccination, including those that assessed the impact of 4HPV vaccination programs on the incidence of GWs at a population level around the world.

RESULTS

A total of 354 records were identified in the PubMed search. After screening and obtaining full papers for 56 publications, 16 publications presenting data on the impact or effectiveness of 4HPV vaccination on GWs were identified. These reported data on the impact or effectiveness of 4HPV in six countries [Australia (n = 6), New Zealand (n = 2), United States (n = 3), Denmark (n = 2), Germany (n = 1), and Sweden (n = 2)]. In Australia, no GWs were diagnosed in women aged <21 years who reported being vaccinated. A 92.6% reduction in GWs incidence was reported for all women in this age group, where the vaccine uptake rate (VUR) was 70% for 3 doses. The highest reductions were reported in countries with high VURs, mostly through school-based vaccination programs, although high VURs were obtained with some non-school-based programs.

CONCLUSION

The results are coherent with the GWs incidence reduction reported in clinical trials and are an early indicator of what can be expected for the long-term clinical impact on vaccine-type HPV-related cancers.

Efficacy of the HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine against low-risk HPV types (PATRICIA randomized trial): an unexpected observation

Background. Public Health England has reported a decrease of up to 20.8% in new diagnoses of external genital warts (GWs) among women aged <19 years since the national vaccination program with the human papillomavirus (HPV)-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine began in 2008. A post hoc analysis of the phase III PATRICIA (PApilloma TRIal against Cancer In young Adults) trial (NCT00122681) was performed to ascertain whether protection against low-risk HPV types was apparent.

Methods. Vaccine efficacy (VE) at 48 months was assessed against 6-month persistent infection (6MPI) with low-risk HPV types in the total vaccinated cohort (TVC) and in the TVC naive (for 25 HPV types tested) populations.

Results. In the TVC naive cohort, VE against 6MPI (95% confidence interval) was 34.5% (11.3 to 51.8) for HPV-6/11, 34.9% (9.1 to 53.7) for HPV-6, 30.3% (−45.0 to 67.5) for HPV-11, and 49.5% (21.0 to 68.3) for HPV-74.

Conclusions. The HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine appears to have moderate efficacy against persistent infections with a number of low-risk HPV types (HPV-6/11/74), which are responsible for the majority of external GWs, and recently, antibody and cell-mediated immune response to HPV-6/11 have been observed. These findings may help to explain the decrease in external GW diagnoses seen in England.

Detection of specific HPV subtypes responsible for the pathogenesis of condylomata acuminata

BACKGROUND

The low-risk human papillomavirus types 6 and 11 are responsible for approximately 90% of anogenital wart cases, with approximately 190,000 new and recurrent cases reported in the UK in 2010. The UK has recently selected the quadrivalent HPV vaccine, which conveys protection against both HPV6 and HPV 11, as part of its immunisation programme for 2012 and it is expected that this will reduce disease burden in the UK. The aims of the study were to evaluate current strategies used for the monitoring of HPV infection in genital warts and to assess the suitability of laser-capture microdissection (LCM) as a technique to improve the understanding of the natural history of HPV types associated with genital wart lesions.

METHODS

DNA and RNA were extracted from whole wart, surface swabs and LCM sections from 23 patients. HPV types present were determined using the Linear Array HPV Genotyping Test (Roche), with HPV DNA viral load and mRNA expression investigated using qPCR and qRT-PCR, respectively.

RESULTS

Results indicated that swabbing the surface of warts does not accurately reflect potential causative HPV types present within a wart lesion, multiple HPV types being present on the surface of the wart that are absent in the lower layers of tissue isolated by LCM. Although it was shown that HPV DNA viral load does not directly correlate with HPV mRNA load, the presence of both DNA and mRNA from a single HPV type suggested a causative role in lesion development in 8/12 (66.6%) of patients analysed, with dual infections seen in 4/12 (33.3%) cases. HPV 6 and HPV 11 were present in more than 90% of the lesions examined.

CONCLUSIONS

Surface swabbing of warts does not necessarily reflect the causative HPV types. HPV type specific DNA and mRNA loads do not correlate. HPV 6 and 11 were likely to be causally involved in over 90% of the lesions. Dual infections were also found, and further studies are required to determine the biological and clinical nature of dual/multiple infections and to establish the relationship of multiple HPV types within a single lesion.