The cost-effectiveness of low-dose CT screening for lung cancer: preliminary results of baseline screening.

BACKGROUND Low-dose CT scan screening greatly improves the likelihood of detecting small nodules and, thus, of detecting lung cancer at a potentially more curable stage. METHODS To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a single baseline low-dose CT scan for lung cancer screening in high-risk individuals, data from the Early Lung Cancer Action Project (ELCAP) was incorporated into a decision analysis model comparing low-dose CT scan screening of high-risk individuals (ie, those > or = 60 years with at least 10 pack-years of cigarette smoking and no other malignancies) to observation without screening. Cost-effectiveness was expressed as the incremental cost per year of life saved. The analysis adopted the perspectives of the health-care system. The probability of the different outcomes following the decision either to screen or not to screen an individual at risk was based on data from ELCAP and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Registry or published data, respectively. The cost of the screening and treatment of patients with lung cancer was established based on data from the New York Presbyterian Hospital's financial system. The base-case analysis was conducted under the assumption of similar aggressiveness of screen-detected and incidentally discovered lung cancers and then was followed by multiple sensitivity analyses to relax these assumptions. RESULTS The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of a single baseline low-dose CT scan was 2,500 US dollars per year of life saved. The base-case analysis showed that screening would be expected to increase survival by 0.1 year at an incremental cost of approximately 230 US dollars. Only when the likelihood of overdiagnosis was > 50% did the cost effectiveness ratio exceed 50,000 US dollars per year of life saved. The cost-effectiveness ratios were also relatively insensitive to estimates of the potential lead-time bias. CONCLUSIONS A baseline low-dose CT scan for lung cancer screening is potentially highly cost-effective and compares favorably to the cost-effectiveness ratios of other screening programs.

[1]  J. Bailar Screening for lung cancer--where are we now? , 1984, The American review of respiratory disease.

[2]  Tomotaka Sobue,et al.  Survival for clinical stage I lung cancer not surgically treated. Comparison between screen‐detected and symptom‐detected cases , 1992, Cancer.

[3]  C. Mountain,et al.  Revisions in the International System for Staging Lung Cancer. , 1997, Chest.

[4]  Binsheng Zhao,et al.  Small pulmonary nodules: volumetrically determined growth rates based on CT evaluation. , 2000, Radiology.

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

[6]  Tammy O. Tengs,et al.  Five-hundred life-saving interventions and their cost-effectiveness. , 1995, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[7]  S. Moss,et al.  Lung cancer screening , 2000, Cancer.

[8]  F. Shepherd,et al.  Economic issues in lung cancer: a review. , 1998, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[9]  M Kimmel,et al.  Screening for lung cancer: The Mayo lung project revisited , 1993, Cancer.

[10]  J. Berthelot,et al.  Cost of combined modality interventions for stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. , 1997, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[11]  S Shapiro,et al.  Selection, follow-up, and analysis in the Health Insurance Plan Study: a randomized trial with breast cancer screening. , 1985, National Cancer Institute monograph.

[12]  W C Black,et al.  Advances in diagnostic imaging and overestimations of disease prevalence and the benefits of therapy. , 1993, The New England journal of medicine.

[13]  Joseph Berkson,et al.  Survival Curve for Cancer Patients Following Treatment , 1952 .

[14]  O S Miettinen,et al.  Early Lung Cancer Action Project , 2001, Cancer.

[15]  H. Kawabata,et al.  Early Lung Cancer Action Project , 1999, The Lancet.

[16]  Philip E. Buell,et al.  The importance of tumor size in prognosis for resected bronchogenic carcinoma , 1971, Journal of surgical oncology.

[17]  O. Miettinen,et al.  Early Lung Cancer Action Project: overall design and findings from baseline screening , 1999, The Lancet.

[18]  S. Shapiro,et al.  Evidence on screening for breast cancer from a randomized trial , 1977, Cancer.

[19]  M. Wolfson,et al.  Estimating the cost of lung cancer diagnosis and treatment in Canada: the POHEM model. , 1995, The Canadian journal of oncology.

[20]  J. Eisenberg,et al.  Clinical Economics: A Guide to the Economic Analysis of Clinical Practices , 1989 .

[21]  J R Beck,et al.  A convenient approximation of life expectancy (the "DEALE"). I. Validation of the method. , 1982, The American journal of medicine.

[22]  J R Beck,et al.  A convenient approximation of life expectancy (the "DEALE"). II. Use in medical decision-making. , 1982, The American journal of medicine.

[23]  Rajiv Gupta,et al.  Small pulmonary nodules: evaluation with repeat CT--preliminary experience. , 1999, Radiology.

[24]  C E Phelps,et al.  The value of diagnostic information to patients with suspected multiple sclerosis. Rochester-Toronto MRI Study Group. , 1994, Archives of neurology.