Cost-effectiveness of CT screening in the National Lung Screening Trial.

BACKGROUND The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) showed that screening with low-dose computed tomography (CT) as compared with chest radiography reduced lung-cancer mortality. We examined the cost-effectiveness of screening with low-dose CT in the NLST. METHODS We estimated mean life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs per person, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for three alternative strategies: screening with low-dose CT, screening with radiography, and no screening. Estimations of life-years were based on the number of observed deaths that occurred during the trial and the projected survival of persons who were alive at the end of the trial. Quality adjustments were derived from a subgroup of participants who were selected to complete quality-of-life surveys. Costs were based on utilization rates and Medicare reimbursements. We also performed analyses of subgroups defined according to age, sex, smoking history, and risk of lung cancer and performed sensitivity analyses based on several assumptions. RESULTS As compared with no screening, screening with low-dose CT cost an additional $1,631 per person (95% confidence interval [CI], 1,557 to 1,709) and provided an additional 0.0316 life-years per person (95% CI, 0.0154 to 0.0478) and 0.0201 QALYs per person (95% CI, 0.0088 to 0.0314). The corresponding ICERs were $52,000 per life-year gained (95% CI, 34,000 to 106,000) and $81,000 per QALY gained (95% CI, 52,000 to 186,000). However, the ICERs varied widely in subgroup and sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS We estimated that screening for lung cancer with low-dose CT would cost $81,000 per QALY gained, but we also determined that modest changes in our assumptions would greatly alter this figure. The determination of whether screening outside the trial will be cost-effective will depend on how screening is implemented. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute; NLST ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00047385.).

[1]  Yiding Jiang,et al.  An actuarial analysis shows that offering lung cancer screening as an insurance benefit would save lives at relatively low cost. , 2012, Health affairs.

[2]  A. Jemal,et al.  Cancer statistics, 2012 , 2012, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[3]  A A Stinnett Adjusting for bias in C/E ratio estimates. , 1996, Health economics.

[4]  Joshua T. Cohen,et al.  Updating cost-effectiveness--the curious resilience of the $50,000-per-QALY threshold. , 2014, The New England journal of medicine.

[5]  H. Sox Better evidence about screening for lung cancer. , 2011, The New England journal of medicine.

[6]  E. Arias United States life tables, 2009. , 2014, National vital statistics reports : from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics System.

[7]  C. Earle,et al.  Potential cost-effectiveness of one-time screening for lung cancer (LC) in a high risk cohort. , 2000, Lung cancer.

[8]  J. Gohagan,et al.  Screening by chest radiograph and lung cancer mortality: the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) randomized trial. , 2011, JAMA.

[9]  H. D. de Koning,et al.  Short-term health-related quality of life consequences in a lung cancer CT screening trial (NELSON) , 2009, British Journal of Cancer.

[10]  C. Henschke,et al.  The cost-effectiveness of low-dose CT screening for lung cancer: preliminary results of baseline screening. , 2003, Chest.

[11]  H. Welch,et al.  Overdiagnosis in cancer. , 2010, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[12]  B. Kramer,et al.  The National Lung Screening Trial: Results stratified by demographics, smoking history, and lung cancer histology , 2013, Cancer.

[13]  D. Berry,et al.  Benefits and harms of CT screening for lung cancer: a systematic review. , 2012, JAMA.

[14]  A H Briggs,et al.  Pulling cost-effectiveness analysis up by its bootstraps: a non-parametric approach to confidence interval estimation. , 1997, Health economics.

[15]  M. Weinstein,et al.  The role of cost-effectiveness analysis in health and medicine. Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. , 1996, JAMA.

[16]  M. Roizen Reduced Lung-Cancer Mortality with Low-Dose Computed Tomographic Screening , 2012 .

[17]  D. Aberle,et al.  Results of initial low-dose computed tomographic screening for lung cancer. , 2013, The New England journal of medicine.

[18]  I. Gareen,et al.  Identifying and collecting pertinent medical records for centralized abstraction in a multi-center randomized clinical trial: the model used by the American College of Radiology arm of the National Lung Screening Trial. , 2013, Contemporary clinical trials.

[19]  H. D. de Koning,et al.  The impact of a lung cancer computed tomography screening result on smoking abstinence , 2010, European Respiratory Journal.

[20]  M. Mcgrath Cost Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. , 1998 .

[21]  Colleen Bouzan,et al.  Cost-Effectiveness of Computed Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer in the United States , 2011, Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer.

[22]  Timothy R Church,et al.  Selection criteria for lung-cancer screening. , 2013, The New England journal of medicine.

[23]  J. Brazier,et al.  The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. , 2002, Journal of health economics.

[24]  James Waterman Glover United States Life Tables , 2013 .

[25]  R. Willke,et al.  Good research practices for cost-effectiveness analysis alongside clinical trials: the ISPOR RCT-CEA Task Force report. , 2005, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[26]  Milton C. Weinstein,et al.  The role of cost-effectiveness analysis in health and medicine. Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. , 1996 .

[27]  E. Pisano,et al.  Consequences of false-positive screening mammograms. , 2014, JAMA internal medicine.

[28]  Massimo Bellomi,et al.  Estimating Overdiagnosis in Low-Dose Computed Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer , 2012, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[29]  C. Gatsonis,et al.  Reduced Lung-Cancer Mortality with Low-Dose Computed Tomographic Screening , 2012 .

[30]  William Hazelton,et al.  Benefits and Harms of Computed Tomography Lung Cancer Screening Strategies: A Comparative Modeling Study for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force , 2014, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[31]  John Eng,et al.  Lung cancer screening with helical computed tomography in older adult smokers: a decision and cost-effectiveness analysis. , 2003, JAMA.

[32]  C. Gatsonis,et al.  Impact of lung cancer screening results on participant health-related quality of life and state anxiety in the National Lung Screening Trial , 2014, Cancer.

[33]  O. Miettinen,et al.  Survival of Patients with Stage I Lung Cancer Detected on CT Screening , 2008 .

[34]  V. Moyer Screening for Lung Cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement , 2014, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[35]  Andrew Dalton,et al.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of screening for lung cancer with low dose spiral CT (computed tomography) in the Australian setting. , 2005, Lung cancer.

[36]  D. Lynch,et al.  The National Lung Screening Trial: overview and study design. , 2011, Radiology.

[37]  C. Berg,et al.  Targeting of low-dose CT screening according to the risk of lung-cancer death. , 2013, The New England journal of medicine.