scholarly journals Assessing the Cost-Effectiveness of Updated Breast Cancer Screening Guidelines for Average-Risk Women

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 185-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ya-Chen Tina Shih ◽  
Wenli Dong ◽  
Ying Xu ◽  
Yu Shen
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Talha Tahir ◽  
Melanie Mitsui Wong ◽  
Rabia Tahir ◽  
Michael Mitsui Wong

AbstractIntroductionMammography-based breast cancer screening is an important aspect of female breast cancer prevention within the Canadian healthcare system. The current literature on female breast cancer screening is largely focused on the health outcomes that result from screening. There is comparatively little data on the cost-effectiveness of the screening. Therefore, this paper sought to conduct a systematic review of the literature on the cost effectiveness of mammography-based breast cancer screening within female Canadian populations.Materials and methodsA systematic review was performed in the PubMed database to identify all studies published within the last 10 years that addressed breast cancer screening and evaluate cost-effectiveness in a Canadian population.ResultsThe search yielded five studies for inclusion, only three of which were applicable to average-risk Canadian women. The benefits of mortality reduction rose approximately linearly with costs, while costs were linearly dependent on the number of lifetime screens per woman. Moreover, triennial screening for average-risk women aged 50-69 years was found to be the most cost-effective in terms of cost per quality adjusted life year. The use of MRI in conjunction with mammography for women with the BRCA 1/2 mutation was found to be cost-effective while annual mammography-based screening for women with dense breasts was found to be cost-ineffective.ConclusionIn spite of the growing interest to enhance breast cancer screening programs, analyses of the cost-effectiveness of mammography-based screening within Canadian populations are scarcely reported and have heterogeneous methodologies. The existing data suggests that Canada’s current breast cancer screening policy to screen average-risk women aged 50-74, biennially or triennially is cost-effective. These findings could be of interest to health policy makers when making decisions regarding resource allocation; however, further studies in this field are required in order to make stronger recommendations regarding cost-effectiveness.


2017 ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth J. Siembida ◽  
Archana Radhakrishnan ◽  
Sarah A. Nowak ◽  
Andrew M. Parker ◽  
Craig Evan Pollack

Purpose Physician reminders have successfully increased rates of mammography. However, considering recent changes to breast cancer screening guidelines that disagree on the optimal age to start and stop mammography screening, we sought to examine the extent to which reminders have been deployed for breast cancer screening targeting younger and older patients. Methods A mailed survey was sent to a national sample of 2,000 primary care physicians between May and September 2016. Physicians were asked whether they received reminders to screen women in various age groups (40 to 44, 45 to 49, and ≥ 75 years), the organizational screening guidelines they trusted most, and whether they recommended routine breast cancer screening to average-risk women in the different age groups. Using regression models, we assessed the association between reminders and physician screening recommendations, controlling for physician and practice characteristics, and evaluated whether the association varied by the guidelines they trusted. Results A total of 871 physicians responded (adjusted response rate, 52.3%). Overall, 28.9% of physicians reported receiving reminders for patient ages 40 to 44 years, 32.5% for patient ages 45 to 49 years, and 16.5% for patient ages ≥ 75 years. Receiving reminders significantly increased the likelihood of physicians recommending mammography screening. In adjusted analyses, 84% (95% CI, 77% to 90%) of physicians who received reminders recommended screening for women ages ≥ 75 versus 65% (95% CI, 62% to 69%) of those who did not receive reminders. The associations between reminders and screening recommendations remained consistent regardless of which guidelines physicians reported trusting. Conclusion Reminders were significantly associated with increases in physician screening recommendations for mammography, underscoring the need for careful implementation in scenarios where guidelines are discordant.


CMAJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. E443-E450
Author(s):  
Sonya Cressman ◽  
Colin Mar ◽  
Janette Sam ◽  
Lisa Kan ◽  
Caroline Lohrisch ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 404-412 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachid Rafia ◽  
Alan Brennan ◽  
Jason Madan ◽  
Karen Collins ◽  
Malcolm W.R. Reed ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerry Zeng Yang Wong ◽  
Jia Hui Chai ◽  
Yen Shing Yeoh ◽  
Nur Khaliesah Mohamed Riza ◽  
Jenny Liu ◽  
...  

Abstract Background This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a breast cancer screening programme that incorporates genetic testing using breast cancer associated single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), against the current biennial mammogram-only screening programme to aid in its implementation into the current programme in Singapore. Methods A Markov model was used to compare the costs and health outcomes of the current screening programme, against a polygenic risk-tailored screening programme, which can advise a long-term screening strategy depending on the individual’s polygenic risk. The model took the perspective of the healthcare system, with a time horizon of 40 years, following women from the age of 35 to 74. Epidemiological and cost data were taken from Asian studies, and an annual discount rate of 3% was used. The model outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), calculated from the difference in costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Scenarios with varying risk thresholds for each polygenic risk group were examined. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to assess parameter uncertainty. Results The ICER for a polygenic risk-tailored breast cancer screening programme, compared with the current biennial mammogram-only screening programme, was − 3713.80 SGD/QALY, with incremental costs < 0 and incremental effects > 0. The scenario analysis of different polygenic risk cutoffs showed that the ICERs remain negative, with all ICERs falling within the south-east quadrant of the cost-effectiveness plane, indicating that tailored screening is more cost effective than mammogram-only screening, with lower costs and higher QALYs to be gained. This suggests that a polygenic risk-tailored breast cancer screening programme is cost effective, entailing lower cost than the current mammogram-only programme, while causing no additional harm to women. Conclusion Results from this cost-effectiveness analysis show that polygenic risk-tailored screening is cost effective with an ICER of − 3713.80 SGD/QALY. Tailored screening remains cost effective even across varying percentile cutoffs for each risk group. While the results look promising for incorporating polygenic risk into the current breast cancer screening programme, further studies should be conducted to address various limitations.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabian Tollens ◽  
Pascal A. T. Baltzer ◽  
Matthias Dietzel ◽  
Moritz L. Schnitzer ◽  
Wolfgang G. Kunz ◽  
...  

ObjectivesTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of MR-mammography (MRM) vs. x-ray based mammography (XM) in two-yearly screening women of intermediate risk for breast cancer in the light of recent literature.MethodsDecision analysis and Markov modelling were used to compare cumulative costs (in US-$) and outcomes (in QALYs) of MRM vs. XM over the model runtime of 20 years. The perspective of the U.S. healthcare system was selected. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated and related to a willingness to pay-threshold of $ 100,000 per QALY in order to evaluate the cost-effectiveness. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the impact of variations of the input parameters. In particular, variations of the rate of false positive findings beyond the first screening round and their impact on cost-effectiveness were assessed.ResultsBreast cancer screening with MRM resulted in increased costs and superior effectiveness. Cumulative average costs of $ 6,081 per woman and cumulative effects of 15.12 QALYs were determined for MRM, whereas screening with XM resulted in costs of $ 5,810 and 15.10 QALYs, resulting in an ICER of $ 13,493 per QALY gained. When the specificity of MRM in the second and subsequent screening rounds was varied from 92% to 99%, the ICER resulted in a range from $ 38,849 to $ 5,062 per QALY.ConclusionsBased on most recent data on the diagnostic performance beyond the first screening round, MRM may remain the economically preferable alternative in screening women of intermediate risk for breast cancer due to their dense breast tissue.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document