Cost-Effectiveness of Breast Cancer Screening in Spain

1996 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 146-150 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pedro Plans ◽  
Laura Casademont ◽  
Luis Salleras
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Breast Cancer Screening ◽  
Screening Program ◽  
Participation Rate ◽  
Breast Cancers ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽  
Program Costs ◽  
The Cost

AbstractIn the last several years, the development of an effective breast cancer screening procedure has increased the possibility of the early detection of this cancer. We investigated the cost-effectiveness of a breast cancer screening program to screen 100,000 women 50–64 years of age in Catalonia (Spain). The cost-effectiveness ratio was measured in terms of the cost per cancer detected comparing program costs to the estimated number of cancers detected. We assumed a participation rate, sensitivity, and specificity of 70%, 92%, and 94%, respectively, and that 0.36 breast cancers could be detected per 100 women screened. We estimated a total cost of $2.1 million with $1.4 million for the mammographic stage and $0.7 million for the detection of the true positive mammographic results. The cost per woman screened was $30. We estimated that 252 cases of breast cancer could be detected with the program. The cost-effectiveness ratio obtained in this study was $8,424 per cancer detected. Sensitivity analysis has shown that cost-effectiveness results are sensitive to the variations in the following variables: specificity, cancer detection rate, and screening costs. In planning preventive programs, breast cancer screening should be considered one of the priorities.

scholarly journals The cost-effectiveness of adding tomosynthesis to mammography-based breast cancer screening: an economic analysis

CMAJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. E443-E450
Author(s):  
Sonya Cressman ◽  
Colin Mar ◽  
Janette Sam ◽  
Lisa Kan ◽  
Caroline Lohrisch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Economic Analysis ◽  
Breast Cancer Screening ◽  
The Cost

scholarly journals Modeling the Cost-Effectiveness of Alternative Upper Age Limits for Breast Cancer Screening in England and Wales

2016 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 404-412 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachid Rafia ◽  
Alan Brennan ◽  
Jason Madan ◽  
Karen Collins ◽  
Malcolm W.R. Reed ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Breast Cancer Screening ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
Age Limits ◽  
The Cost

Simulated Lifetime Costs of Three Types of Employer-Based, Periodic, Breast Cancer Screening Programs for Working-Age Women

1994 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert I. Griffiths ◽  
Claudia B. Griffiths ◽  
Neil R. Powe
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Breast Cancer Screening ◽  
Screening Program ◽  
Lifetime Cost ◽  
Decision Analysis Model ◽  
Screening Programs ◽  
Mean Lifetime ◽  
Lifetime Costs ◽  
The Cost

Purpose. To estimate the lifetime cost of three types of employer-sponsored breast cancer screening programs and to identify factors influencing cost. Design. A computerized decision analysis model was constructed to compare lifetime costs of providing breast cancer screening in each of three screening programs: on-site within an employer, mobile unit visiting the employer, and off-site. Subjects. Three hypothetical cohorts of 10,000 female employees 38 years of age at time of first screening. Intervention. A cohort was enrolled in each screening program and received screening from age 38 through age 64. Employees continued to receive benefits related to breast cancer until age 100 or death. Measures. Costs in the model included those for screening, workup for a suspicious mammogram, treatment for breast cancer, short-term losses in employee productivity, and disability due to breast cancer. Approach. The model was used to estimate the mean lifetime cost per employee, to the employer, of the On-Site program. This cost was compared to the cost of the other programs. Results. Mean lifetime cost per employee was $5,485 for the On-Site screening program. This cost was significantly (P<.0001) lower than in the Off-Site program (by $311) or the Mobile program (by $212). The baseline results for the On-Site program were quite sensitive to the cost of screening, the sensitivity and specificity of screening, age at initiation of screening, and the underlying incidence of breast cancer in the population. Conclusion. Employers and other entities should consider these factors such as location and content in selecting the most efficient and effective breast cancer screening program.

scholarly journals Cost effectiveness analysis of a polygenic risk tailored breast cancer screening programme in Singapore

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerry Zeng Yang Wong ◽  
Jia Hui Chai ◽  
Yen Shing Yeoh ◽  
Nur Khaliesah Mohamed Riza ◽  
Jenny Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Breast Cancer Screening ◽  
Screening Programme ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Polygenic Risk ◽  
Breast Cancer Screening Programme ◽  
Cancer Screening Programme ◽  
The Cost

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.

scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness of MR-Mammography in Breast Cancer Screening of Women With Extremely Dense Breasts After Two Rounds of Screening

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabian Tollens ◽  
Pascal A. T. Baltzer ◽  
Matthias Dietzel ◽  
Moritz L. Schnitzer ◽  
Wolfgang G. Kunz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Breast Cancer Screening ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
Mr Mammography ◽  
Markov Modelling ◽  
The Cost ◽  
The Impact

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