Cost effectiveness of screening for cardiovascular disease with measures of coronary calcium.

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality with annual costs of care exceeding 300 billion US dollars. Although screening tools are advocated for many cancers, the use of subclinical disease tests for cardiovascular disease are considered controversial. Health care payers and many governmental agencies apply cost-effectiveness analysis for the evaluation of new technology being considered for routine application in the US and Europe. Cost-effectiveness analysis by definition provides a comparative analysis of clinical and economic outcome data when evaluating new technology in relation to existing modalities. The current report provides a description of the framework upon methods applied in cost-effectiveness analysis as well as available data on the subject of cardiovascular screening, most notably using the evaluation of coronary calcium screening with electron beam tomography. The current report will also present several decision analytic models on the cost of atherosclerotic imaging including the evaluation of serial monitoring for disease progression and the development of cost-effectiveness models employing intermediate outcomes. Based on this review, there is an unfolding body of evidence that explores both the clinical and economic consequences of screening for atherosclerotic diseases. Although further evidence is required from prospectively designed randomized controlled trials, it appears that the current evidence from small series and decision analytic models supports cardiovascular screening of asymptomatic individuals and that the current results reveal enhanced cost effectiveness when compared with the routine evaluation using a Framingham risk assessment.

[1]  K. C. Sutton,et al.  Carotid artery bruit: is it safe and effective to auscultate the neck? , 1984, Stroke.

[2]  M. Verani,et al.  Severity of coronary artery calcification by electron beam computed tomography predicts silent myocardial ischemia. , 2000, Circulation.

[3]  M C Weinstein,et al.  Use and misuse of the term "cost effective" in medicine. , 1986, The New England journal of medicine.

[4]  Diana B. Petitti,et al.  Meta-Analysis, Decision Analysis, and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Methods for Quantitative Synthesis in Medicine , 1994 .

[5]  E. Barrett-Connor,et al.  The sensitivity, specificity, and predictive value of traditional clinical evaluation of peripheral arterial disease: results from noninvasive testing in a defined population. , 1985, Circulation.

[6]  M. Weinstein,et al.  Recommendations of the Panel on Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine. , 1996, JAMA.

[7]  G. Laszlo,et al.  Cost-effectiveness of diagnostic tests , 2002, The Lancet.

[8]  A. Culyer,et al.  A systematic literature review of spiral and electron beam computed tomography: with particular reference to clinical applications in hepatic lesions, pulmonary embolus and coronary artery disease. , 1999, Health technology assessment.

[9]  Paolo Raggi,et al.  High coronary artery calcium scores pose an extremely elevated risk for hard events. , 2002, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[10]  M A Hlatky,et al.  Task force 6: cost effectiveness of assessment and management of risk factors , 1996 .

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

[12]  W. Powers,et al.  Cost-effectiveness of screening for asymptomatic carotid atherosclerotic disease. , 1996, Stroke.

[13]  A. Hofman,et al.  Is Carotid Intima-Media Thickness Useful in Cardiovascular Disease Risk Assessment?: The Rotterdam Study , 2001, Stroke.

[14]  D. Mark,et al.  Task force #2--the cost of prevention: can we afford it? Can we afford not to do it? 33rd Bethesda Conference. , 2002, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[15]  J. Butler.  Economic evaluations of screening programs: a review of methods and results. , 2002, Clinica chimica acta; international journal of clinical chemistry.

[16]  T. Callister,et al.  Evaluation of chest pain in patients with low to intermediate pretest probability of coronary artery disease by electron beam computed tomography. , 2000, The American journal of cardiology.

[17]  M. Drummond,et al.  The Iterative Use of Economic Evaluation as Part of the Process of Health Technology Assessment , 1997, Journal of health services research & policy.

[18]  M. Gold,et al.  Panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. , 1996, Medical care.

[19]  D. Gyrd-Hansen,et al.  Analysing public preferences for cancer screening programmes. , 2001, Health economics.

[20]  J S Swan,et al.  A Time-tradeoff Method for Cost—Efifectiveness Models Applied to Radiology , 2000, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[21]  Philip Greenland,et al.  Assessment of Cardiovascular Risk by Use of Multiple-Risk-Factor Assessment Equations , 1999 .

[22]  M. Weinstein,et al.  Cost-effectiveness of interventions to prevent or treat coronary heart disease. , 1985, Annual review of public health.

[23]  L. Shaw,et al.  A primer of biostatistic and economic methods for diagnostic and prognostic modeling in nuclear cardiology: Part II , 1996, Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology.

[24]  A. Garber,et al.  Economic foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis. , 1997, Journal of health economics.

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

[26]  J. Stamler,et al.  Major risk factors and coronary heart disease: much has been achieved but crucial challenges remain. , 2001, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[27]  H. Mabuchi,et al.  Noninvasive prediction of coronary atherosclerosis by quantification of coronary artery calcification using electron beam computed tomography: comparison with electrocardiographic and thallium exercise stress test results. , 1995, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[28]  T. Andrews.  Electron-beam computed tomography in the evaluation of patients with chest pain. , 2000, The American journal of cardiology.

[29]  Amnon Sonnenberg,et al.  Cost-effectiveness of a single colonoscopy in screening for colorectal cancer. , 2002, Archives of internal medicine.

[30]  J. Rumberger.  Cost Effectiveness of Coronary Calcification Scanning Using Electron Beam Tomography in Intermediate and High Risk Asymptomatic Individuals , 2000, Journal of cardiovascular risk.

[31]  R. Langer,et al.  Mortality over a period of 10 years in patients with peripheral arterial disease. , 1992, The New England journal of medicine.

[32]  Gabriel P Krestin,et al.  Study design for concurrent development, assessment, and implementation of new diagnostic imaging technology. , 2002, Radiology.

[33]  T O Jefferson,et al.  Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ , 1996, BMJ.

[34]  A. Culyer,et al.  False-negative results in screening programmes: systematic review of impact and implications. , 2000, Health technology assessment.

[35]  M. Reiser,et al.  Coronary artery calcium: absolute quantification in nonenhanced and contrast-enhanced multi-detector row CT studies. , 2002, Radiology.

[36]  S. Achenbach,et al.  Variability of repeated coronary artery calcium measurements by electron beam tomography. , 2001, The American journal of cardiology.

[37]  M. McKenna,et al.  Importance of perspective in economic analyses of cancer screening decisions , 2001, The Lancet.

[38]  A. Lahiri,et al.  Why cardiac magnetic resonance imaging will not make it. , 1999, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[39]  H D Banta,et al.  INTRODUCTION: MASS SCREENING, HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, AND HEALTH POLICY IN SOME EUROPEAN COUNTRIES , 2001, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[40]  M. Hunink,et al.  Peripheral arterial disease: gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography versus color-guided duplex US--a meta-analysis. , 2000, Radiology.

[41]  R. Califf,et al.  27th Bethesda Conference: matching the intensity of risk factor management with the hazard for coronary disease events. Task Force 5. Stratification of patients into high, medium and low risk subgroups for purposes of risk factor management. , 1996, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[42]  L Goldman,et al.  The effect of risk factor reductions between 1981 and 1990 on coronary heart disease incidence, prevalence, mortality and cost. , 2001, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[43]  L E Ginzton,et al.  Coronary calcium does not accurately predict near-term future coronary events in high-risk adults. , 1999, Circulation.

[44]  V. Fuster,et al.  27th Bethesda Conference: matching the intensity of risk factor management with the hazard for coronary disease events. Task Force 1. Pathogenesis of coronary disease: the biologic role of risk factors. , 1996, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[45]  D. Berman,et al.  Prognostic value of cardiac risk factors and coronary artery calcium screening for all-cause mortality. , 2003, Radiology.

[46]  T. Sheldon,et al.  Screening for ovarian cancer: a systematic review. , 1998, Health technology assessment.

[47]  Milton C. Weinstein,et al.  Recommendations for Reporting Cost-effectiveness Analyses , 1996 .

[48]  A. Nicolaides,et al.  Investigation of chronic venous insufficiency: A consensus statement (France, March 5-9, 1997). , 2000, Circulation.

[49]  J. Sunshine,et al.  Recent rapid increase in utilization of radionuclide myocardial perfusion imaging and related procedures: 1996-1998 practice patterns. , 2002, Radiology.

[50]  N. Lepor,et al.  Summary of the third report of the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III. , 2001, Reviews in cardiovascular medicine.

[51]  K. Ouriel.  Peripheral arterial disease , 2001, The Lancet.

[52]  Robertag . Williams,et al.  25th Bethesda Conference: Future Personnel Needs for Cardiovascular Health Care. November 15-16, 1993. , 1994, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[53]  M. Drummond,et al.  Do health-care decision makers find economic evaluations useful? The findings of focus group research in UK health authorities. , 2002, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[54]  J D Graham,et al.  Modeling for health care and other policy decisions: uses, roles, and validity. , 2001, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[55]  D. Berman,et al.  Imaging in cardiovascular disease , 2000 .

[56]  S M Grundy,et al.  Assessment of cardiovascular risk by use of multiple-risk-factor assessment equations: a statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology. , 1999, Circulation.

[57]  P. Johnstone,et al.  Yield of mammography in selected patients age ≤ 30 years , 2001, Cancer.

[58]  M C Weinstein,et al.  Recommendations for reporting cost-effectiveness analyses. Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. , 1996, JAMA.

[59]  T. Pearson.  New Tools for Coronary Risk Assessment: What Are Their Advantages and Limitations? , 2002, Circulation.

[60]  Alvin I Mushlin,et al.  Costeffectiveness of diagnostic tests , 2001, The Lancet.

[61]  J. Norris,et al.  Clinical significance of asymptomatic neck bruits , 1985, Neurology.

[62]  D. Grönemeyer,et al.  Prevalence and clinical significance of accidental findings in electron-beam tomographic scans for coronary artery calcification. , 2001, European heart journal.

[63]  T. Callister,et al.  Coronary artery disease: improved reproducibility of calcium scoring with an electron-beam CT volumetric method. , 1998, Radiology.

[64]  E Berry,et al.  The cost-effectiveness of magnetic resonance angiography for carotid artery stenosis and peripheral vascular disease: a systematic review. , 2002, Health technology assessment.

[65]  A. Gotto,et al.  Eligibility for lipid-lowering drug therapy in primary prevention: how do the Adult Treatment Panel II and Adult Treatment Panel III Guidelines compare? , 2002, Circulation.

[66]  G. Diamond,et al.  Does coronary artery screening by electron beam computed tomography motivate potentially beneficial lifestyle behaviors? , 1996, The American journal of cardiology.

[67]  J A Brebner,et al.  When and how to assess fast-changing technologies: a comparative study of medical applications of four generic technologies. , 1997, Health technology assessment.

[68]  G. L’italien,et al.  New National Cholesterol Education Program III Guidelines for Primary Prevention Lipid-Lowering Drug Therapy: Projected Impact on the Size, Sex, and Age Distribution of the Treatment-Eligible Population , 2002, Circulation.

[69]  J. Polak.  Role of duplex US as a screening test for carotid atherosclerotic disease: benefit without cost? , 1995, Radiology.

[70]  M G Hunink,et al.  Noninvasive Imaging for the Diagnosis of Coronary Artery Disease: Focusing the Development of New Diagnostic Technology , 1999, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[71]  V F Froelicher,et al.  American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Expert Consensus Document on electron-beam computed tomography for the diagnosis and prognosis of coronary artery disease. , 2000, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[72]  M. Gold.  Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine , 2016 .

[73]  D. Levy,et al.  Prediction of coronary heart disease using risk factor categories. , 1998, Circulation.

[74]  A. Hernigou,et al.  Cost comparison of electron beam tomography with conventional computed tomography scanning. , 1996, Academic radiology.

[75]  A. Hofman,et al.  The association between coronary calcification assessed by electron beam computed tomography and measures of extracoronary atherosclerosis: the Rotterdam Coronary Calcification Study. , 2002, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[76]  S M Grundy,et al.  Improving coronary heart disease risk assessment in asymptomatic people: role of traditional risk factors and noninvasive cardiovascular tests. , 2001, Circulation.

[77]  N Freemantle,et al.  When is it cost-effective to change the behavior of health professionals? , 2001, JAMA.

[78]  P. Adab,et al.  Is population coronary heart disease risk screening justified? A discussion of the National Service Framework for coronary heart disease (Standard 4). , 2001, The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

[79]  H. Gravelle,et al.  THE PRACTICE OF DISCOUNTING IN ECONOMIC EVALUATIONS OF HEALTHCARE INTERVENTIONS , 2001, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[80]  D. Sullivan.  Screening for cardiovascular disease with cholesterol. , 2002, Clinica chimica acta; international journal of clinical chemistry.

[81]  J. Rumberger,et al.  Coronary calcification by electron beam computed tomography and obstructive coronary artery disease: a model for costs and effectiveness of diagnosis as compared with conventional cardiac testing methods. , 1999, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[82]  M. Petticrew,et al.  FALSE-NEGATIVE RESULTS IN SCREENING PROGRAMS , 2001, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[83]  T A Sheldon,et al.  Discounting in health care decision-making: time for a change? , 1992, Journal of public health medicine.

[84]  L. Shaw,et al.  From clinical trials to public health policy: the path from imaging to screening. , 2001, The American journal of cardiology.

[85]  P. O'Malley,et al.  Frequency and severity of "incidentalomas" encountered during electron beam computed tomography for coronary calcium in middle-aged army personnel. , 2002, The American journal of cardiology.