With a $2 per woman budget constraint, the maximum vaccination and screening coverage is reached under the optimal mix of strategies for all sensitivity analyses performed, and hence the maximum CC reduction is reached with both the 3-dose and the 2-dose vaccination schedule scenarios and under all sensitivity analyses.
The scenarios varied by available budget, maximum screening and vaccination coverage, and overall reachable population.
Those scenarios varied by available budget and by constraints on the maximum screening and vaccination coverage to be reached and the overall reachable population.
We have developed a model that would identify the optimal mix of CC prevention strategies (screening and or vaccination) to minimize the number of CC cases for different scenarios defined by constraints on budget, maximum screening and vaccination coverage, and overall reachable population.
In Figures 6 and 7, which present a scenario with a vaccination coverage constraint of 50% and a screening coverage constraint of 20%, the maximum prevention coverage would result in an expenditure of $1.18 3-dosee vaccination schedule) to $0.88 2-dosee vaccination schedule) per woman per year, and an associated 35% reduction in CC cases.
In Figures 4 and 5, representing a scenario with a vaccination coverage constraint of 95% and once in a lifetime screening coverage constraint of 40%, the maximum coverage of prevention strategies would result in an expenditure of $2.02 3-dosee vaccination schedule) to $1.44 2-dosee vaccination schedule) per woman, with an associated 66% reduction of incident CC cases.
District-level cancer screening coverage data (in proportions) and UK census data have been collected and linked.
At vaccination coverage rates of 40 50%, screening coverage would need to exceed 80%, but at vaccination coverage of 70%, screening coverage of 40 50% would suffice.
Regional screening coverage rate and population risk factors were reviewed.
Cervical cancer screening coverage remains insufficient in most countries.
