scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of MRI compared to mammography for breast cancer screening in a high risk population

2009 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan G Moore ◽  
Pareen J Shenoy ◽  
Laura Fanucchi ◽  
John W Tumeh ◽  
Christopher R Flowers
2009 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 171-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charu Taneja ◽  
John Edelsberg ◽  
Derek Weycker ◽  
Amy Guo ◽  
Gerry Oster ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 146 (14) ◽  
pp. 1834-1840 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Kowada

AbstractGastric cancer is the third leading cause of cancer death worldwide. Gastric cancer screening using upper gastrointestinal series, endoscopy and serological testing has been performed in population-based (employee-based and community-based) and opportunistic cancer screening in Japan. There were 45 531 gastric cancer deaths in 2016, with the low screening and detection rates.Helicobacter pylori(H. pylori) screening followed by eradication treatment is recommended in high-risk population settings to reduce gastric cancer incidence. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness ofH. pyloriscreening followed by eradication treatment for a high-risk population in the occupational health setting. Decision trees and Markov models were developed for two strategies;H. pyloriantibody test (HPA) screening and no screening. Targeted populations were hypothetical cohorts of employees aged 20, 30, 40, 50 and 60 years using a company health payer perspective on a lifetime horizon. Per-person costs and effectiveness (quality-adjusted life-years) were calculated and compared. HPA screening yielded greater benefits at the lower cost than no screening. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses using Monte-Carlo simulation showed strong robustness of the results.H. pyloriscreening followed by eradication treatment is recommended to prevent gastric cancer for employees in Japan, on the basis of cost-effectiveness.


2020 ◽  
Vol 147 (11) ◽  
pp. 3059-3067
Author(s):  
Valérie D. V. Sankatsing ◽  
Nicolien T. Ravesteyn ◽  
Eveline A. M. Heijnsdijk ◽  
Mireille J. M. Broeders ◽  
Harry J. Koning

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6060-6060 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. G. Moore ◽  
J. Tumeh ◽  
C. R. Flowers

6060 Background: Breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a sensitive method of breast imaging virtually uninfluenced by breast density. Because of the improved sensitivity, breast MRI is increasingly being used for detection of breast cancer among high risk young women. However, the specificity of breast MRI is variable and costs are high. The purpose of this study was to determine if breast MRI is a cost-effective approach for the detection of breast cancer among young women at high risk. Methods: A Markov model was created to compare annual breast cancer screening over 25 years with either breast MRI or mammography among young women at high risk. Data from published studies provided probabilities for the model including sensitivity and specificity of each screening strategy. Costs were based on Medicare reimbursement rates for hospital and physician services while medication costs were obtained from the Federal Supply Scale. Utilities from the literature were applied to each health outcome in the model including a disutility for the temporary health state following breast biopsy for a false positive test result. The analysis was performed from the payer perspective with results reported in 2005 U.S. dollars. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses addressed uncertainty in all model parameters. Results: Breast MRI provided 23.287 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) at a cost of $30,317 while mammography provided 23.141 QALYs at a cost of $7,895 over 25 years of screening. The cost-effectiveness ratios for the two strategies were $1302 and $341, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of breast MRI compared to mammography was $131,376/QALY. In univariate analysis, breast MRI screening became <$50,000/QALY when the cost of the MRI was <$405. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, MRI screening produced a net benefit of +0.146 QALYs (95% central range: -0.825 QALYs to +1.378 QALYs). However, breast MRI screening was superior in <1%, <$50,000/QALY in 27%, >$50,000/QALY in 32%, and inferior in 41% of 10,000 probabilistic Monte Carlo simulations. Conclusions: Breast MRI provides a net benefit when compared to mammographic screening for high risk women, however, this approach does not appear to be cost-effective at this time. No significant financial relationships to disclose.


2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maitri Kalra ◽  
Yan Tong ◽  
David R. Jones ◽  
Tom Walsh ◽  
Michael A. Danso ◽  
...  

AbstractPatients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) who have residual disease after neoadjuvant therapy have a high risk of recurrence. We tested the impact of DNA-damaging chemotherapy alone or with PARP inhibition in this high-risk population. Patients with TNBC or deleterious BRCA mutation (TNBC/BRCAmut) who had >2 cm of invasive disease in the breast or persistent lymph node (LN) involvement after neoadjuvant therapy were assigned 1:1 to cisplatin alone or with rucaparib. Germline mutations were identified with BROCA analysis. The primary endpoint was 2-year disease-free survival (DFS) with 80% power to detect an HR 0.5. From Feb 2010 to May 2013, 128 patients were enrolled. Median tumor size at surgery was 1.9 cm (0–11.5 cm) with 1 (0–38) involved LN; median Residual Cancer Burden (RCB) score was 2.6. Six patients had known deleterious BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations at study entry, but BROCA identified deleterious mutations in 22% of patients with available samples. Toxicity was similar in both arms. Despite frequent dose reductions (21% of patients) and delays (43.8% of patients), 73% of patients completed planned cisplatin. Rucaparib exposure was limited with median concentration 275 (82–4694) ng/mL post-infusion on day 3. The addition of rucaparib to cisplatin did not increase 2-year DFS (54.2% cisplatin vs. 64.1% cisplatin + rucaparib; P = 0.29). In the high-risk post preoperative TNBC/BRCAmut setting, the addition of low-dose rucaparib did not improve 2-year DFS or increase the toxicity of cisplatin. Genetic testing was underutilized in this high-risk population.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document