Faculty, Staff and Student Publications

Language

English

Publication Date

1-2-2026

Journal

JAMA Network Open

DOI

10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.52220

PMID

41490106

PMCID

PMC12771244

PubMedCentral® Posted Date

1-5-2026

PubMedCentral® Full Text Version

Post-print

Abstract

Importance: Anal cancer screening is recommended for high-risk populations, particularly sexual and gender minority (SGM) individuals. However, the cost-effectiveness of home-based self-sampling in increasing anal cancer screening uptake has not yet been evaluated in the US.

Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of home-based anal self-sampling compared with clinic-based screening among SGM individuals.

Design, setting, and participants: This economic evaluation used data from a 2-group randomized clinical trial conducted in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, from January 2020 to August 2022, enrolling SGM individuals aged 25 years or older. Participants were randomized to home-based self-sampling or clinic-based screening. Costs for home-based screening were obtained from the trial, and clinic-based costs were sourced from the Medicare reimbursement schedule. Travel and time costs were derived on the basis of participant self-reports. The analysis was performed between February and October 2025.

Intervention: Participants in the home-based screening group received self-sampling supplies and instructions, and those in the clinic-based screening group were instructed to visit a clinic for anal cancer screening.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), measured as the additional cost needed to increase screening participation by one person. The 95% CIs for the ICERs were estimated using a bootstrap method with 1000 iterations. Net benefit regression and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were used to assess the likelihood of cost-effectiveness across different willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds.

Results: The study included 240 SGM individuals (227 with gender identity as a man [95%]; median [IQR] age, 46 [33 to 57] years), of whom 65 (27%) had HIV. The cost per participant was $64.18 for home-based screening and $60.40 for clinic-based screening from a societal perspective, and $61.91 for home-based screening and $42.06 for clinic-based screening from a health care payer perspective. Home-based screening was associated with increased screening participation vs clinic-based screening (107 participants [89.2%] vs 89 participants [74.2%]). The ICER per additional screened participant was $25.19 (95% CI, -$27.66 to $104.60) for the societal perspective and $132.36 (95% CI, $74.54 to $402.20) for the health care payer perspective. Home-based screening had a 49.6% probability of being cost-effective at a WTP of $25, 99.99% at a WTP of $100 (societal perspective), and 90.9% at a WTP of $200 (health care payer perspective). The ICERs for home-based screening compared with clinic-based screening were highly sensitive to screening participation rates.

Conclusions and relevance: The findings of this economic analysis suggest that home-based anal cancer screening is a cost-effective approach to increasing screening participation among SGM individuals. Home-based screening may serve as a valuable and efficient tool for expanding screening rates.

Keywords

Humans, Anus Neoplasms, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Male, Early Detection of Cancer, Female, Middle Aged, Adult, Wisconsin, Sexual and Gender Minorities, Mass Screening, Precancerous Conditions, Self Care

Published Open-Access

yes

Download

Included in

Public Health Commons

Share

COinS
 
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.