Optimising a national screen-and-treat cervical cancer strategy in Uganda: a microsimulation cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis.
10 affiliations
- 1RAND School of Public Policy, Santa Monica, California, USA.
- 2Health Division, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California, USA.
- 3Health Division, RAND Corporation, Washington, DC, USA.
- 4Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
- 5Department of Gynaecologic Oncology, Uganda Cancer Institute, Kampala, Uganda.
- 6Mulago Specialised Women and Neonatal Hospital, Kampala, Uganda.
- 7School of Medicine, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.
- 8School of Public Health, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.
- 9Non-Communicable Diseases Control Programme, Republic of Uganda Ministry of Health, Kampala, Central Region, Uganda.
- 10Department of Psychiatry, Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Abstract
Background
Cervical cancer is the leading cause of cancer mortality for women in Uganda, yet fewer than a third of Ugandan women have ever been screened. Screen-and-treat programmes using visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) are a key prevention strategy. Current guidelines recommend screening for women aged 25-49 every 3 years. However, there is limited evidence comparing the trade-offs between health gains, costs and implementation feasibility across alternative programme designs at scale.Methods
We conducted a cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis of 30 VIA screen-and-treat cervical cancer policies using a microsimulation parameterised to represent Ugandan women aged 25-49 over a 15-year time horizon. Policies varied across three implementation dimensions: (1) screening frequency, (2) screening uptake among eligible women and (3) treatment follow-through for precancerous lesions. We estimated population-level costs, deaths averted, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).Results
We found that, depending on screening frequency, uptake and treatment follow-through, between 13% and 50% of deaths could be averted compared with the base case (current levels). The 15-year total costs ranged from $32.9 million to $158.6 million, or $5 to $23 per eligible woman. Both incremental costs and deaths averted increased at a diminishing rate as screening intensified. Policy scenarios with lower levels of treatment were dominated by those with higher treatment follow-through, regardless of screening uptake. ICERs ranged from $88 to $313 per QALY gained, and $2219 to $6881 per death averted.Conclusion
The most effective and efficient policy scenarios were not simply those with the highest levels of screening or treatment, but those that optimally configured all three programme levers simultaneously. The findings revealed interactive effects of screening frequency, uptake and treatment follow-through on costs and health outcomes. These results equip Ugandan policymakers with context-specific evidence to prioritise screening policies that balance health impact, cost and implementation capacity.
Related
- Optimising HPV Vaccination for Cervical Cancer Prevention in Women Living with HIV: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Across 13 African Countries
- Universal cervical length screening and vaginal progesterone: Distinguishing strategy effectiveness from treatment efficacy
- The cost-effectiveness of vitamin D supplementation for the prevention of type 2 diabetes in the United States: a microsimulation modelling study
- Optimising ovarian cancer care: An embedded mixed methods evaluation of a national nurse-led telehealth program.
- The Role of Self-Collection in Optimising Cervical Screening for People With Intellectual Disability: A Multi Perspective Qualitative Study.
BibTeX
@article{rukundoayeh2026optimising,
title = {{Optimising a national screen-and-treat cervical cancer strategy in Uganda: a microsimulation cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis.}},
author = {Temusa Rukundo-Ayeh and Ryan K McBain and Petra W Rasmussen and Carolyn Nakisige and Jolly Beyeza-Kashesya and Rhoda K Wanyenze and Gerald Mutungi and Laura M Bogart and Glenn J Wagner},
journal = {BMJ public health},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1136/bmjph-2026-005684},
url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42968783},
note = {CC BY-NC},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Optimising a national screen-and-treat cervical cancer strategy in Uganda: a microsimulation cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis.
AU - Temusa Rukundo-Ayeh
AU - Ryan K McBain
AU - Petra W Rasmussen
AU - Carolyn Nakisige
AU - Jolly Beyeza-Kashesya
AU - Rhoda K Wanyenze
AU - Gerald Mutungi
AU - Laura M Bogart
AU - Glenn J Wagner
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/30
JO - BMJ public health
DO - 10.1136/bmjph-2026-005684
UR - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42968783
AB - Background Cervical cancer is the leading cause of cancer mortality for women in Uganda, yet fewer than a third of Ugandan women have ever been screened. Screen-and-treat programmes using visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) are a key prevention strategy. Current guidelines recommend screening for women aged 25-49 every 3 years. However, there is limited evidence comparing the trade-offs between health gains, costs and implementation feasibility across alternative programme designs at scale.Methods We conducted a cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis of 30 VIA screen-and-treat cervical cancer policies using a microsimulation parameterised to represent Ugandan women aged 25-49 over a 15-year time horizon. Policies varied across three implementation dimensions: (1) screening frequency, (2) screening uptake among eligible women and (3) treatment follow-through for precancerous lesions. We estimated population-level costs, deaths averted, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).Results We found that, depending on screening frequency, uptake and treatment follow-through, between 13% and 50% of deaths could be averted compared with the base case (current levels). The 15-year total costs ranged from $32.9 million to $158.6 million, or $5 to $23 per eligible woman. Both incremental costs and deaths averted increased at a diminishing rate as screening intensified. Policy scenarios with lower levels of treatment were dominated by those with higher treatment follow-through, regardless of screening uptake. ICERs ranged from $88 to $313 per QALY gained, and $2219 to $6881 per death averted.Conclusion The most effective and efficient policy scenarios were not simply those with the highest levels of screening or treatment, but those that optimally configured all three programme levers simultaneously. The findings revealed interactive effects of screening frequency, uptake and treatment follow-through on costs and health outcomes. These results equip Ugandan policymakers with context-specific evidence to prioritise screening policies that balance health impact, cost and implementation capacity.
SN - 2753-4294
ER -