1
|
Tollens F, Baltzer PA, Froelich MF, Kaiser CG. Economic evaluation of breast MRI in screening - a systematic review and basic approach to cost-effectiveness analyses. Front Oncol 2023; 13:1292268. [PMID: 38130995 PMCID: PMC10733447 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1292268] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/11/2023] [Accepted: 11/20/2023] [Indexed: 12/23/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Economic evaluations have become an accepted methodology for decision makers to allocate resources in healthcare systems. Particularly in screening, where short-term costs are associated with long-term benefits, and adverse effects of screening intermingle, cost-effectiveness analyses provide a means to estimate the economic value of screening. Purpose To introduce the methodology of economic evaluations and to review the existing evidence on cost-effectiveness of MR-based breast cancer screening. Materials and methods The various concepts and techniques of economic evaluations critical to the interpretation of cost-effectiveness analyses are briefly introduced. In a systematic review of the literature, economic evaluations from the years 2000-2022 are reviewed. Results Despite a considerable heterogeneity in the reported input variables, outcome categories and methodological approaches, cost-effectiveness analyses report favorably on the economic value of breast MRI screening for different risk groups, including both short- and long-term costs and outcomes. Conclusion Economic evaluations indicate a strongly favorable economic value of breast MRI screening for women at high risk and for women with dense breast tissue.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fabian Tollens
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Centre Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Pascal A.T. Baltzer
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Vienna General Hospital, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Matthias F. Froelich
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Centre Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Clemens G. Kaiser
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Centre Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Wijnen A, Seeber GH, Dietz G, Dijkstra B, Dekker JS, Vermeulen KM, Slager GEC, Hessel A, Lazovic D, Bulstra SK, Stevens M. Effectiveness of rehabilitation for working-age patients after a total hip arthroplasty: a comparison of usual care between the Netherlands and Germany. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2023; 24:525. [PMID: 37370054 DOI: 10.1186/s12891-023-06654-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/13/2023] [Accepted: 06/19/2023] [Indexed: 06/29/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Postoperative rehabilitation after primary total hip arthroplasty (p-THA) differs between the Netherlands and Germany. Aim is to compare clinical effectiveness and to get a first impression of cost effectiveness of Dutch versus German usual care after p-THA. METHODS A transnational prospective controlled observational trial. Clinical effectiveness was assessed with self-reported questionnaires and functional tests. Measurements were taken preoperatively and 4 weeks, 12 weeks, and 6 months postoperatively. For cost effectiveness, long-term economic aspects were assessed from a societal perspective. RESULTS 124 working-age patients finished the measurements. German usual care leads to a significantly larger proportion (65.6% versus 47.5%) of satisfied patients 12 weeks postoperatively and significantly better self-reported function and Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test (FTSST) results. German usual care is generally 45% more expensive than Dutch usual care, and 20% more expensive for working-age patients. A scenario analysis assumed that German patients work the same number of hours as the Dutch, and that productivity costs are the same. This analysis revealed German care is still more expensive but the difference decreased to 8%. CONCLUSIONS German rehabilitation is clinically advantageous yet more expensive, although comparisons are less straightforward as the socioeconomic context differs between the two countries. TRIAL REGISTRATION The study is registered in the German Registry of Clinical Trials (DRKS00011345, 18/11/2016).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Annet Wijnen
- Department of Orthopedics, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
- University Hospital for Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery Pius-Hospital, Medical Campus University of Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany
| | - Gesine H Seeber
- Department of Orthopedics, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
- University Hospital for Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery Pius-Hospital, Medical Campus University of Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany
| | - Günter Dietz
- Clinic for Orthopedic and Rheumatological Rehabilitation, Reha-Zentrum Am Meer Bad Zwischenahn, Bad Zwischenahn, Germany
- Praxis Für Orthopädie, Bad Zwischenahn, Germany
| | - Baukje Dijkstra
- Department of Orthopedics, Medical Center Leeuwarden, Leeuwarden, The Netherlands
| | - Johan S Dekker
- Department of Orthopedics, Ommelander Ziekenhuis Groningen, Scheemda, The Netherlands
| | - Karin M Vermeulen
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Geranda E C Slager
- Department of Physical Therapy, School of Health Care Studies, Hanze University of Applied Sciences, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Aike Hessel
- Deutsche Rentenversicherung Oldenburg, Bremen, Germany
| | - Djordje Lazovic
- University Hospital for Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery Pius-Hospital, Medical Campus University of Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany
| | - Sjoerd K Bulstra
- Department of Orthopedics, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Martin Stevens
- Department of Orthopedics, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Long-term effects of the interruption of the Dutch breast cancer screening program due to COVID-19: A modelling study. Prev Med 2023; 166:107376. [PMID: 36493865 PMCID: PMC9722618 DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2022.107376] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/13/2022] [Revised: 11/22/2022] [Accepted: 11/30/2022] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
Due to COVID-19, the Dutch breast cancer screening program was interrupted for three months with uncertain long-term effects. The aim of this study was to estimate the long-term impact of this interruption on delay in detection, tumour size of screen-detected breast cancers, and interval cancer rate. After validation, the micro-simulation model SiMRiSc was used to calculate the effects of interruption of the breast cancer screening program for three months and for hypothetical interruptions of six and twelve months. A scenario without interruption was used as reference. Outcomes considered were tumour size of screen-detected breast cancers and interval cancer rate. Women of 55-59 and 60-64 years old at time of interruption were considered. Uncertainties were estimated using a sensitivity analysis. The three-month interruption had no clinically relevant long-term effect on the tumour size of screen-detected breast cancers. A 19% increase in interval cancer rate was found between last screening before and first screening after interruption compared to no interruption. Hypothetical interruptions of six and twelve months resulted in larger increases in interval cancer rate of 38% and 78% between last screening before and first screening after interruption, respectively, and an increase in middle-sized tumours in first screening after interruption of 26% and 47%, respectively. In conclusion, the interruption of the Dutch screening program is not expected to result in a long-term delay in detection or clinically relevant change in tumour size of screen-detected cancers, but only affects the interval cancer rate between last screening before and first screening after interruption.
Collapse
|
4
|
Wang J, Greuter MJ, Zheng S, van Veldhuizen DW, Vermeulen KM, Wang Y, Lu W, de Bock GH. Assessment of the Benefits and Cost-Effectiveness of Population-Based Breast Cancer Screening in Urban China: A Model-Based Analysis. Int J Health Policy Manag 2022; 11:1658-1667. [PMID: 34273933 PMCID: PMC9808213 DOI: 10.34172/ijhpm.2021.62] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/08/2020] [Accepted: 05/30/2021] [Indexed: 01/12/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND To decrease the burden of breast cancer (BC), the Chinese government recently introduced biennial mammography screening for women aged 45-70 years. In this study, we assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of implementing this programme in urban China using a micro-simulation model. METHODS The 'Simulation Model on radiation Risk and breast cancer Screening' (SiMRiSc) was applied, with parameters updated based on available data for the Chinese population. The base scenario was biennial mammography screening for women aged 45-70 years, and this was compared to a reference population with no screening. Seven alternative scenarios were then simulated by varying the screening intervals and participant ages. This analysis was conducted from a societal perspective. The discounted incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was compared to a threshold of triple the gross domestic product (GDP) per life years gained (LYG), which was 30 785 USD/LYG. Univariate sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate model robustness. In addition, a budget impact analysis was performed by comparing biennial screening with no screening at a time horizon of 10 years. RESULTS Compared with no screening, the base scenario was cost-effective in urban China, giving a discounted average cost-effectiveness ratio (ACER) of 17 309 USD/LYG. The model was most sensitive to the cost of mammography per screen, followed by mean size of self-detected tumours, mammographic breast density and the cumulative lifetime risk of BC. The efficient frontier showed that at a threshold of 30 785 USD/LYG, the base scenario was the optimal scenario with a discounted ICER of 25 261 USD/LYG. Over 10 years, screening would incur a net cost of almost 38.1 million USD for a city with 1 million citizens. CONCLUSION Compared to no screening, biennial mammography screening for women aged from 45-70 is cost-effective in urban China.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jing Wang
- Department of Epidemiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Marcel J.W. Greuter
- Department of Radiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
- Robotics and Mechatronics (RaM) Group, Faculty of Electrical Engineering Mathematics and Computer Science, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - Senshuang Zheng
- Department of Epidemiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Daniëlle W.A. van Veldhuizen
- Department of Epidemiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Karin M. Vermeulen
- Department of Epidemiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Yuan Wang
- Department of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, School of Public Health, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China
- Collaborative Innovation Center of Chronic Disease Prevention and Control, School of Public Health, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China
| | - Wenli Lu
- Department of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, School of Public Health, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China
- Collaborative Innovation Center of Chronic Disease Prevention and Control, School of Public Health, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China
| | - Geertruida H. de Bock
- Department of Epidemiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Overdiagnosis of invasive breast cancer in population-based breast cancer screening: A short- and long-term perspective. Eur J Cancer 2022; 173:1-9. [PMID: 35839596 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2022.06.027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/10/2022] [Revised: 05/30/2022] [Accepted: 06/12/2022] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Overdiagnosis of invasive breast cancer (BC) is a contentious issue. OBJECTIVE The aim of this paper is to estimate the overdiagnosis rate of invasive BC in an organised BC screening program and to evaluate the impact of age and follow-up time. METHODS The micro-simulation model SiMRiSc was calibrated and validated for BC screening in Flanders, where women are screened biennially from age 50 to 69. Overdiagnosis rate was defined as the number of invasive BC that would not have been diagnosed in the absence of screening per 100,000 screened women during the screening period plus follow-up time (which was set at 5 years and varied from 2 to 15 years). Overdiagnosis rate was calculated overall and stratified by age. RESULTS The overall overdiagnosis rate for women screened biennially from 50 to 69 was 20.1 (95%CI: 16.9-23.2) per 100,000 women screened at 5-year follow-up from stopping screening. Overdiagnosis at 5-year follow-up time was 12.9 (95%CI: 4.6-21.1) and 74.2 (95%CI: 50.9-97.5) per 100,000 women screened for women who started screening at age 50 and 68, respectively. At 2- and 15-year follow-up time, overdiagnosis rate was 98.5 (95%CI: 75.8-121.3) and 13.4 (95%CI: 4.9-21.9), respectively, for women starting at age 50, and 297.0 (95%CI: 264.5-329.4) and 34.2 (95%CI: 17.5-50.8), respectively, for those starting at age 68. CONCLUSIONS Sufficient follow-up time (≥10 years) after screening stops is key to obtaining unbiased estimates of overdiagnosis. Overdiagnosis of invasive BC is a larger problem in older compared to younger women.
Collapse
|
6
|
Portnoy A, Pedersen K, Nygård M, Trogstad L, Kim JJ, Burger EA. Identifying a Single Optimal Integrated Cervical Cancer Prevention Policy in Norway: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. Med Decis Making 2022; 42:795-807. [PMID: 35255741 DOI: 10.1177/0272989x221082683] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Interventions targeting the same disease but at different points along the disease continuum (e.g., screening and vaccination to prevent cervical cancer [CC]) are often evaluated in isolation, which can affect cost-effectiveness profiles and policy conclusions. We evaluated nonavalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine (9vHPV) compared with bivalent HPV vaccine (2vHPV) alongside deintensified screening intervals for a vaccinated birth cohort to inform a single optimal integrated CC prevention policy. METHODS Using a multimodeling approach, we evaluated the health and economic impacts of alternative CC screening strategies for a Norwegian birth cohort eligible for HPV vaccination in 2021 assuming they received 1) 2vHPV or 2) 9vHPV. We conducted 1) a restricted analysis that evaluated the optimal HPV vaccine under current screening guidelines; and 2) a comprehensive analysis including alternative screening and vaccination strategy combinations. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and evaluated them according to different cost-effectiveness thresholds. RESULTS Assuming a cost-effectiveness threshold of $40,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained, we found that, while holding screening intensity fixed, switching the routine vaccination program in Norway from 2vHPV to 9vHPV would not be considered cost-effective (ICER of $132,700 per QALY gained). However, when allowing for varying intensities of CC screening, we found that switching to 9vHPV would be cost-effective compared with 2vHPV under an alternative threshold of $55,000 per QALY gained, if coupled with reductions in the number of lifetime screens. CONCLUSIONS Our analysis highlights the importance of evaluating the full potential policy landscape for country-level decision makers considering policy adoption, including nonindependent primary and secondary prevention efforts, to draw appropriate conclusions and avoid sub-optimal outcomes. HIGHLIGHTS Without evaluating the full potential policy landscape, including primary and secondary prevention efforts, country-level decision makers may not be able to draw appropriate policy conclusions, resulting in suboptimal outcomes.An applied example from cervical cancer prevention in Norway compared a restricted analysis of current screening guidelines to a comprehensive analysis including alternative screening and vaccination strategy combinations.We found that a switch from bivalent to nonavalent human papillomavirus vaccine would be considered cost-effective in Norway if coupled with reductions in the number of lifetime screens compared with the current screening strategy.A comprehensive analysis that considers how different types of interventions along the disease continuum affect each other will be critical for decision makers interpreting cost-effectiveness analysis results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Allison Portnoy
- Center for Health Decision Science, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Kine Pedersen
- Department of Health Management and Health Economics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Mari Nygård
- Department of Research, Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo, Norway
| | - Lill Trogstad
- The Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway
| | - Jane J Kim
- Center for Health Decision Science, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Emily A Burger
- Center for Health Decision Science, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.,Department of Health Management and Health Economics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Wang J, Greuter MJW, Vermeulen KM, Brokken FB, Dorrius MD, Lu W, de Bock GH. Cost-effectiveness of abbreviated-protocol MRI screening for women with mammographically dense breasts in a national breast cancer screening program. Breast 2021; 61:58-65. [PMID: 34915447 PMCID: PMC8683595 DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2021.12.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/25/2021] [Revised: 12/07/2021] [Accepted: 12/09/2021] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has shown the potential to improve the screening effectiveness among women with dense breasts. The introduction of fast abbreviated protocols (AP) makes MRI more feasible to be used in a general population. We aimed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of AP-MRI in women with dense breasts (heterogeneously/extremely dense) in a population-based screening program. Methods A previously validated model (SiMRiSc) was applied, with parameters updated for women with dense breasts. Breast density was assumed to decrease with increased age. The base scenarios included six biennial AP-MRI strategies, with biennial mammography from age 50–74 as reference. Fourteen alternative scenarios were performed by varying screening interval (triennial and quadrennial) and by applying a combined strategy of mammography and AP-MRI. A 3% discount rate for both costs and life years gained (LYG) was applied. Model robustness was evaluated using univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Results The six biennial AP-MRI strategies ranged from 132 to 562 LYG per 10,000 women, where more frequent application of AP-MRI was related to higher LYG. The optimal strategy was biennial AP-MRI screening from age 50–65 for only women with extremely dense breasts, producing an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of € 18,201/LYG. At a threshold of € 20,000/LYG, the probability that the optimal strategy was cost-effective was 79%. Conclusion Population-based biennial breast cancer screening with AP-MRI from age 50–65 for women with extremely dense breasts might be a cost-effective alternative to mammography, but is not an option for women with heterogeneously dense breasts. AP-MRI can be cost-effective for screening women with extremely dense breast. The more frequent the use of AP-MRI, the more life years will be gained. Biennial AP-MRI for women with extremely dense breast up to age 65 is optimal.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jing Wang
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Epidemiology, Groningen, the Netherlands.
| | - Marcel J W Greuter
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Radiology, Groningen, the Netherlands.
| | - Karin M Vermeulen
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Epidemiology, Groningen, the Netherlands.
| | - Frank B Brokken
- University of Groningen, Department of Computing Science, Groningen, the Netherlands.
| | - Monique D Dorrius
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Radiology, Groningen, the Netherlands.
| | - Wenli Lu
- Department of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China.
| | - Geertruida H de Bock
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Epidemiology, Groningen, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
No Association of Early-Onset Breast or Ovarian Cancer with Early-Onset Cancer in Relatives in BRCA1 or BRCA2 Mutation Families. Genes (Basel) 2021; 12:genes12071100. [PMID: 34356116 PMCID: PMC8305427 DOI: 10.3390/genes12071100] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/21/2021] [Revised: 06/24/2021] [Accepted: 07/14/2021] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
According to clinical guidelines, the occurrence of very early-onset breast cancer (VEO-BC) (diagnosed ≤ age 30 years) or VEO ovarian cancer (VEO-OC) (diagnosed ≤ age 40 years) in families with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation (BRCAm) prompts advancing the age of risk-reducing strategies in relatives. This study aimed to assess the relation between the occurrence of VEO-BC or VEO-OC in families with BRCAm and age at BC or OC diagnosis in relatives. We conducted a retrospective multicenter study of 448 consecutive families with BRCAm from 2003 to 2018. Mean age and 5-year–span distribution of age at BC or OC in relatives were compared in families with or without VEO-BC or VEO-OC. Conditional probability calculation and Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel chi-square tests were used to investigate early-onset cancer occurrence in relatives of VEO-BC and VEO-OC cases. Overall, 15% (19/245) of families with BRCA1m and 9% (19/203) with BRCA2m featured at least one case of VEO-BC; 8% (37/245) and 2% (2/203) featured at least one case of VEO-OC, respectively. The cumulative prevalence of VEO-BC was 5.1% (95% CI 3.6–6.6) and 2.5% (95% CI 1.4–3.6) for families with BRCA1m and BRCA2m, respectively. The distribution of age and mean age at BC diagnosis in relatives did not differ by occurrence of VEO-BC for families with BRCA1m or BRCA2m. Conditional probability calculations did not show an increase of early-onset BC in VEO-BC families with BRCA1m or BRCA2m. Conversely, the probability of VEO-BC was not increased in families with early-onset BC. VEO-BC or VEO-OC occurrence may not be related to young age at BC or OC onset in relatives in families with BRCAm. This finding—together with a relatively high VEO-BC risk for women with BRCAm—advocates for MRI breast screening from age 25 regardless of family history.
Collapse
|
9
|
Meier F, Harney A, Rhiem K, Neusser S, Neumann A, Braun M, Wasem J, Huster S, Dabrock P, Schmutzler RK. Risk-Adjusted Prevention. Perspectives on the Governance of Entitlements to Benefits in the Case of Genetic (Breast Cancer) Risks. Recent Results Cancer Res 2021; 218:47-66. [PMID: 34019162 DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-63749-1_5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
This article is a revised version of our proposal for the establishment of the legal concept of risk-adjusted prevention in the German healthcare system to regulate access to risk-reduction measures for persons at high and moderate genetic cancer risk (Meier et al. Risikoadaptierte Prävention'. Governance Perspective für Leistungsansprüche bei genetischen (Brustkrebs-)Risiken, Springer, Wiesbaden, 2018). The German context specifics are summarized to enable the source text to be used for other country-specific healthcare systems. Establishing such a legal concept is relevant to all universal and free healthcare systems similar to Germany's. Disease risks can be determined with increasing precision using bioinformatics and biostatistical innovations ('big data'), due to the identification of pathogenic germ line mutations in cancer risk genes as well as non-genetic factors and their interactions. These new technologies open up opportunities to adapt therapeutic and preventive measures to the individual risk profile of complex diseases in a way that was previously unknown, enabling not only adequate treatment but in the best case, prevention. Access to risk-reduction measures for carriers of genetic risks is generally not regulated in healthcare systems that guarantee universal and equal access to healthcare benefits. In many countries, including Austria, Denmark, the UK and the US, entitlement to benefits is essentially linked to the treatment of already manifest disease. Issues around claiming benefits for prophylactic measures involve not only evaluation of clinical options (genetic diagnostics, chemoprevention, risk-reduction surgery), but the financial cost and-from a social ethics perspective-the relationship between them. Section 1 of this chapter uses the specific example of hereditary breast cancer to show why from a medical, social-legal, health-economic and socio-ethical perspective, regulated entitlement to benefits is necessary for persons at high and moderate risk of cancer. Section 2 discusses the medical needs of persons with genetic cancer risks and goes on to develop the healthy sick model which is able to integrate the problems of the different disciplines into one scheme and to establish criteria for the legal acknowledgement of persons at high and moderate (breast cancer) risks. In the German context, the social-legal categories of classical therapeutic medicine do not adequately represent preventive measures as a regular service within the healthcare system. We propose risk-adjusted prevention as a new legal concept based on the heuristic healthy sick model. This category can serve as a legal framework for social law regulation in the case of persons with genetic cancer risks. Risk-adjusted prevention can be established in principle in any healthcare system. Criteria are also developed in relation to risk collectives and allocation (Sects. 3, 4, 5).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Friedhelm Meier
- Systematic Theology II (Ethics), University of Tübingen, Liebermeisterstraße 12, 72076, Tübingen, Germany.
| | - Anke Harney
- Medical Faculty, Institute for Social and Health Law, University of Bochum, Bochum, Germany
| | - Kerstin Rhiem
- Center for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer and Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Silke Neusser
- Institute for Healthcare Management and Research, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Anja Neumann
- Institute for Healthcare Management and Research, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Matthias Braun
- Systematic Theology II (Ethics), University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen-Nuremberg, Germany
| | - Jürgen Wasem
- Institute for Healthcare Management and Research, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Stefan Huster
- Medical Faculty, Institute for Social and Health Law, University of Bochum, Bochum, Germany
| | - Peter Dabrock
- Systematic Theology II (Ethics), University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen-Nuremberg, Germany
| | - Rita Katharina Schmutzler
- Center for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer and Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography in heavy smokers: a microsimulation modelling study. Eur J Cancer 2020; 135:121-129. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2020.05.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/02/2020] [Revised: 05/06/2020] [Accepted: 05/12/2020] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
|
11
|
Cost-effectiveness of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging to optimize surgery in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Eur J Radiol 2020; 129:109058. [PMID: 32563960 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2020.109058] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/04/2019] [Revised: 04/30/2020] [Accepted: 05/04/2020] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Complete surgical excision is the main factor for successful breast-conserving surgery in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may allow surgery optimization in this indication. From an economic standpoint, systematic preoperative MRI is associated with an extra cost, which may be offset by a decrease in the number of re-interventions. We performed an economic evaluation alongside IRCIS randomised controlled trial (NCT01112254) to determine whether systematic preoperative MRI in DCIS is a cost-effective strategy. METHODS 360 patients were included in IRCIS trial. Costs were assessed from the French national health insurance perspective. Resource use was prospectively collected during a 6-month period after randomisation. We estimated the mean cost per averted re-intervention. RESULTS Despite extra costs due to MRI and additional biopsies, difference in total costs between arms was not statistically significant (mean cost of €9980 in MRI arm and €9682 in no MRI arm, cost difference: €298 [CI95% : -470; 1063]). There was a non-significant decrease in the rate of re-hospitalisations for positive or close margins (20% in MRI arm versus 27% in No MRI arm, difference -7% [CI95% : -17; 3]). At a willingness to pay of €500 to avert a re-intervention, the probability that MRI strategy is cost-effective was 93%. CONCLUSION Systematic preoperative MRI in patients with DCIS of the breast may be a cost-effective strategy. However, the modest clinical benefit associated with such a strategy limits the interest for this procedure in routine practice given the current MRI techniques.
Collapse
|
12
|
Wang J, Phi XA, Greuter MJW, Daszczuk AM, Feenstra TL, Pijnappel RM, Vermeulen KM, Buls N, Houssami N, Lu W, de Bock GH. The cost-effectiveness of digital breast tomosynthesis in a population breast cancer screening program. Eur Radiol 2020; 30:5437-5445. [PMID: 32382844 PMCID: PMC7476964 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-020-06812-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/18/2019] [Revised: 02/17/2020] [Accepted: 03/13/2020] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To evaluate at which sensitivity digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) would become cost-effective compared to digital mammography (DM) in a population breast cancer screening program, given a constant estimate of specificity. METHODS In a microsimulation model, the cost-effectiveness of biennial screening for women aged 50-75 was simulated for three scenarios: DBT for women with dense breasts and DM for women with fatty breasts (scenario 1), DBT for the whole population (scenario 2) or maintaining DM screening (reference). For DM, sensitivity was varied depending on breast density from 65 to 87%, and for DBT from 65 to 100%. The specificity was set at 96.5% for both DM and DBT. Direct medical costs were considered, including screening, biopsy and treatment costs. Scenarios were considered to be cost-effective if the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was below €20,000 per life year gain (LYG). RESULTS For both scenarios, the ICER was more favourable at increasing DBT sensitivity. Compared with DM screening, 0.8-10.2% more LYGs were found when DBT sensitivity was at least 75% for scenario 1, and 4.7-18.7% when DBT sensitivity was at least 80% for scenario 2. At €96 per DBT, scenario 1 was cost-effective at a DBT sensitivity of at least 90%, and at least 95% for scenario 2. At €80 per DBT, these values decreased to 80% and 90%, respectively. CONCLUSION DBT is more likely to be a cost-effective alternative to mammography in women with dense breasts. Whether DBT could be cost-effective in a general population highly depends on DBT costs. KEY POINTS • DBT could be a cost-effective screening modality for women with dense breasts when its sensitivity is at least 90% at a maximum cost per screen of €96. • DBT has the potential to be cost-effective for screening all women when sensitivity is at least 90% at a maximum cost per screen of €80. • Whether DBT could be used as an alternative to mammography for screening all women is highly dependent on the cost of DBT per screen.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jing Wang
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
| | - Xuan-Anh Phi
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Marcel J W Greuter
- Department of Radiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Alicja M Daszczuk
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.,Department of Radiology, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Talitha L Feenstra
- Department of Radiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Ruud M Pijnappel
- Department of Radiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Karin M Vermeulen
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Nico Buls
- Department of Radiology, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Nehmat Houssami
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Wenli Lu
- Department of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China
| | - Geertruida H de Bock
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Furzer J, Tessier L, Hodgson D, Cotton C, Nathan PC, Gupta S, Pechlivanoglou P. Cost-Utility of Early Breast Cancer Surveillance in Survivors of Thoracic Radiation-Treated Adolescent Hodgkin Lymphoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 2020; 112:63-70. [PMID: 31070751 PMCID: PMC7825489 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djz037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/29/2018] [Revised: 01/24/2019] [Accepted: 03/22/2019] [Indexed: 01/16/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Adolescent women treated for Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) are at increased risk of breast cancer (BC). We evaluate the cost-utility of eight high-risk BC surveillance strategies for this population, including the Children's Oncology Group guideline of same-day annual mammography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) beginning at age 25 years. METHODS A discrete event simulation model was used to simulate the life histories of a cohort of 500 000 25-year-old women treated for HL at age 15 years. We estimated BC incidence and mortality, life expectancy, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), health-care costs, and the relative cost-utility (incremental cost-utility ratio [ICUR]) under the eight assessed surveillance strategies. One-way sensitivity analysis enabled modeling of uncertainty evaluation. A publicly funded health-care payer perspective was adopted. RESULTS Costs across the eight screening strategies ranged from $32 643 to $43 739, whereas QALYs ranged from 24.419 to 24.480. In an incremental cost-effectiveness analysis, annual mammography beginning at age 25 years was associated with an ICUR of $43 000/QALY gained, annual MRI beginning at age 25 years with a switch to annual mammography at age 50 years had an ICUR of $148 000/QALY, and annual MRI beginning at age 25 years had an ICUR of $227 222/QALY. Among all assessed surveillance strategies, the differences in life expectancy were small. CONCLUSIONS Current high-risk BC surveillance guidelines do not reflect the most cost-effective strategy in survivors of adolescent HL. The results suggest that groups at high risk of BC may require high-risk surveillance guidelines that reflect their specific risk profile.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jill Furzer
- Institute for Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Lauren Tessier
- Institute for Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - David Hodgson
- Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Pediatric Oncology Group of Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Cecilia Cotton
- Department of Statistics and Actuarial Sciences, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
| | - Paul C Nathan
- Institute for Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Division of Paediatric Haematology/Oncology, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Sumit Gupta
- Institute for Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Division of Paediatric Haematology/Oncology, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Petros Pechlivanoglou
- Institute for Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Division of Child Health Evaluative Sciences, Peter Gilgan Centre for Research and Learning, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Multireader Study on the Diagnostic Accuracy of Ultrafast Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Breast Cancer Screening. Invest Radiol 2019; 53:579-586. [PMID: 29944483 DOI: 10.1097/rli.0000000000000494] [Citation(s) in RCA: 58] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/06/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Breast cancer screening using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has limited accessibility due to high costs of breast MRI. Ultrafast dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI can be acquired within 2 minutes. We aimed to assess whether screening performance of breast radiologist using an ultrafast breast MRI-only screening protocol is as good as performance using a full multiparametric diagnostic MRI protocol (FDP). MATERIALS AND METHODS The institutional review board approved this study, and waived the need for informed consent. Between January 2012 and June 2014, 1791 consecutive breast cancer screening examinations from 954 women with a lifetime risk of more than 20% were prospectively collected. All women were scanned using a 3 T protocol interleaving ultrafast breast MRI acquisitions in a full multiparametric diagnostic MRI protocol consisting of standard dynamic contrast-enhanced sequences, diffusion-weighted imaging, and T2-weighted imaging. Subsequently, a case set was created including all biopsied screen-detected lesions in this period (31 malignant and 54 benign) and 116 randomly selected normal cases with more than 2 years of follow-up. Prior examinations were included when available. Seven dedicated breast radiologists read all 201 examinations and 153 available priors once using the FDP and once using ultrafast breast MRI only in 2 counterbalanced and crossed-over reading sessions. RESULTS For reading the FDP versus ultrafast breast MRI alone, sensitivity was 0.86 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81-0.90) versus 0.84 (95% CI, 0.78-0.88) (P = 0.50), specificity was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.74-0.79) versus 0.82 (95% CI, 0.79-0.84) (P = 0.002), positive predictive value was 0.40 (95% CI, 0.36-0.45) versus 0.45 (95% CI, 0.41-0.50) (P = 0.14), and area under the receiver operating characteristics curve was 0.89 (95% CI, 0.82-0.96) versus 0.89 (95% CI, 0.82-0.96) (P = 0.83). Ultrafast breast MRI reading was 22.8% faster than reading FDP (P < 0.001). Interreader agreement is significantly better for ultrafast breast MRI (κ = 0.730; 95% CI, 0.699-0.761) than for the FDP (κ = 0.665; 95% CI, 0.633-0.696). CONCLUSIONS Breast MRI screening using only an ultrafast breast MRI protocol is noninferior to screening with an FDP and may result in significantly higher screening specificity and shorter reading time.
Collapse
|
15
|
Doutriaux-Dumoulin I. Suivi des patientes porteuses d’une mutation des gènes BRCA1 et 2 : recommandations de l’InCa 2017. IMAGERIE DE LA FEMME 2018. [DOI: 10.1016/j.femme.2018.01.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/17/2022]
|
16
|
A modelling study to evaluate the costs and effects of lowering the starting age of population breast cancer screening. Maturitas 2018; 109:81-88. [DOI: 10.1016/j.maturitas.2017.12.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/13/2017] [Revised: 10/09/2017] [Accepted: 12/08/2017] [Indexed: 01/28/2023]
|
17
|
Petelin L, Trainer AH, Mitchell G, Liew D, James PA. Cost-effectiveness and comparative effectiveness of cancer risk management strategies in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers: a systematic review. Genet Med 2018; 20:1145-1156. [PMID: 29323669 DOI: 10.1038/gim.2017.255] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/18/2017] [Accepted: 12/05/2017] [Indexed: 02/01/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To review the evidence for the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cancer risk management interventions for BRCA carriers. METHODS Comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness analyses were identified by searching scientific and health economic databases. Eligible studies modeled the impact of a cancer risk management intervention in BRCA carriers on life expectancy (LE), cancer incidence, or quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), with or without costs. RESULTS Twenty-six economic evaluations and eight comparative effectiveness analyses were included. Combined risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy and prophylactic mastectomy resulted in the greatest LE and was cost-effective in most analyses. Despite leading to increased LE and QALYs, combined mammography and breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was less likely to be cost-effective than either mammography or MRI alone, particularly for women over 50 and BRCA2 carriers. Variation in patient compliance to risk management interventions was incorporated in 11/34 studies with the remaining analyses assuming 100% adherence. CONCLUSION Prophylactic surgery and intensive breast screening are effective and cost-effective in models of BRCA carrier risk management. Findings were based predominantly on assuming perfect adherence to recommendations without assessment of the health-care resource use and costs related to engaging patients and maximizing compliance, meaning the real-world impact on clinical outcomes and resource use remains unclear.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lara Petelin
- Familial Cancer Centre, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia. .,Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
| | - Alison H Trainer
- Familial Cancer Centre, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.,Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Gillian Mitchell
- Familial Cancer Centre, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.,Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Danny Liew
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.,Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Paul A James
- Familial Cancer Centre, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.,Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Meier F, Ried J, Harney A, Rhiem K, Neusser S, Neumann A, Wasem J, Schmutzler R, Huster S, Dabrock P. [Entitlement to prophylactic treatment in cases of genetic predisposition for breast cancer : Interdisciplinary perspectives]. Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz 2017; 60:1102-1108. [PMID: 28795204 DOI: 10.1007/s00103-017-2608-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
Abstract
Genetic tests can detect the predisposition to various diseases. The demand for gene diagnostics and corresponding prophylactic measures is increasing steadily. In the German healthcare system, however, legal uncertainties exist as to whether a mere risk of disease is reason enough to bear the costs for prophylactic measures. When medically effective prophylactic measures are available in certain cancer diseases, such as in hereditary breast cancer, the current practice of deciding in individual cases appears to be insufficient.The fact that persons with a high or very increased risk of breast cancer are precluded from a standard care procedure raises questions concerning ethical justification as well as medical plausibility. Moreover, it is remarkable that the statutory healthcare system treats persons at risk differently. In some cases there is a regulated way of reimbursement for preventive measures for persons at risk (factor V Leiden mutation) and in other cases there are only case-by-case decisions. Finally, in light of social regulations for persons at high and very increased risk this article considers the need of optimization regarding the risk communication in the decision-making process and the crucial question of budgetary impact for the German healthcare system.From a medical, ethical and legal perspective, a social regulation for persons at high and very increased risk of disease is inevitable and the consequences should be discussed in advance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Friedhelm Meier
- Lehrstuhl für Systematische Theologie II (Ethik), Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Kochstraße 6, 91054, Erlangen, Deutschland.
| | - Jens Ried
- Lehrstuhl für Systematische Theologie II (Ethik), Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Kochstraße 6, 91054, Erlangen, Deutschland
| | - Anke Harney
- Institut für Sozial- und Gesundheitsrecht, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Universitätsstr. 150, 44801, Bochum, Deutschland
| | - Kerstin Rhiem
- Zentrum Familiärer Brust- und Eierstockkrebs, Universitätsklinik zu Köln, Kerpener Str. 34, 50931, Köln, Deutschland
| | - Silke Neusser
- Alfried Krupp von Bohlen und Halbach Stiftungslehrstuhl für Medizinmanagement, Universität Duisburg-Essen, Thea-Leymann-Straße 9, 45127, Essen, Deutschland
| | - Anja Neumann
- Alfried Krupp von Bohlen und Halbach Stiftungslehrstuhl für Medizinmanagement, Universität Duisburg-Essen, Thea-Leymann-Straße 9, 45127, Essen, Deutschland
| | - Jürgen Wasem
- Alfried Krupp von Bohlen und Halbach Stiftungslehrstuhl für Medizinmanagement, Universität Duisburg-Essen, Thea-Leymann-Straße 9, 45127, Essen, Deutschland
| | - Rita Schmutzler
- Zentrum Familiärer Brust- und Eierstockkrebs, Universitätsklinik zu Köln, Kerpener Str. 34, 50931, Köln, Deutschland
| | - Stefan Huster
- Institut für Sozial- und Gesundheitsrecht, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Universitätsstr. 150, 44801, Bochum, Deutschland
| | - Peter Dabrock
- Lehrstuhl für Systematische Theologie II (Ethik), Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Kochstraße 6, 91054, Erlangen, Deutschland
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
|
20
|
O'Mahony JF, Naber SK, Normand C, Sharp L, O'Leary JJ, de Kok IMCM. Beware of Kinked Frontiers: A Systematic Review of the Choice of Comparator Strategies in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Human Papillomavirus Testing in Cervical Screening. VALUE IN HEALTH : THE JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR PHARMACOECONOMICS AND OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2015; 18:1138-1151. [PMID: 26686801 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2015.09.2939] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/01/2014] [Revised: 08/11/2015] [Accepted: 09/30/2015] [Indexed: 06/05/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To systematically review the choice of comparator strategies in cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) of human papillomavirus testing in cervical screening. METHODS The PubMed, Web of Knowledge, and Scopus databases were searched to identify eligible model-based CEAs of cervical screening programs using human papillomavirus testing. The eligible CEAs were reviewed to investigate what screening strategies were chosen for analysis and how this choice might have influenced estimates of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Selected examples from the reviewed studies are presented to illustrate how the omission of relevant comparators might influence estimates of screening cost-effectiveness. RESULTS The search identified 30 eligible CEAs. The omission of relevant comparator strategies appears likely in 18 studies. The ICER estimates in these cases are probably lower than would be estimated had more comparators been included. Five of the 30 studies restricted relevant comparator strategies to sensitivity analyses or other subanalyses not part of the principal base-case analysis. Such exclusion of relevant strategies from the base-case analysis can result in cost-ineffective strategies being identified as cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS Many of the CEAs reviewed appear to include insufficient comparator strategies. In particular, they omit strategies with relatively long screening intervals. Omitting relevant comparators matters particularly if it leads to the underestimation of ICERs for strategies around the cost-effectiveness threshold because these strategies are the most policy relevant from the CEA perspective. Consequently, such CEAs may not be providing the best possible policy guidance and lead to the mistaken adoption of cost-ineffective screening strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- James F O'Mahony
- Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
| | - Steffie K Naber
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus Medical Centre, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Charles Normand
- Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Linda Sharp
- Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - John J O'Leary
- Department of Histopathology, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland; Department of Pathology, Coombe Women's and Infants University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Inge M C M de Kok
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus Medical Centre, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Evans DG, Howell A. Can the breast screening appointment be used to provide risk assessment and prevention advice? Breast Cancer Res 2015; 17:84. [PMID: 26155950 PMCID: PMC4496847 DOI: 10.1186/s13058-015-0595-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Breast cancer risk is continuing to increase across all societies with rates in countries with traditionally lower risks catching up with the higher rates in the Western world. Although cure rates from breast cancer have continued to improve such that absolute numbers of breast cancer deaths have dropped in many countries despite rising incidence, only some of this can be ascribed to screening with mammography, and debates over the true value of population-based screening continue. As such, enthusiasm for risk-stratified screening is gaining momentum. Guidelines in a number of countries already suggest more frequent screening in certain higher-risk (particularly, familial) groups, but this could be extended to assessing risks across the population. A number of studies have assessed breast cancer risk by using risk algorithms such as the Gail model, Tyrer-Cuzick, and BOADICEA (Breast and Ovarian Analysis of Disease Incidence and Carrier Estimation Algorithm), but the real questions are when and where such an assessment should take place. Emerging evidence from the PROCAS (Predicting Risk Of Cancer At Screening) study is showing not only that it is feasible to undertake risk assessment at the population screening appointment but that this assessment could allow reduction of screening in lower-risk groups in many countries to 3-yearly screening by using mammographic density-adjusted breast cancer risk.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D Gareth Evans
- Genesis Breast Cancer Prevention Centre, University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Trust, Southmoor Road, Wythenshawe, Manchester, M23 9LT, UK. .,Genomic Medicine, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Central Manchester Foundation Trust, St. Mary's Hospital, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9WL, UK. .,Manchester Breast Centre, Manchester Cancer Research Centre, University of Manchester, Christie Hospital, Wilmslow Road, Withington, Manchester, M20 4BX, UK.
| | - Anthony Howell
- Genesis Breast Cancer Prevention Centre, University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Trust, Southmoor Road, Wythenshawe, Manchester, M23 9LT, UK.,Manchester Breast Centre, Manchester Cancer Research Centre, University of Manchester, Christie Hospital, Wilmslow Road, Withington, Manchester, M20 4BX, UK
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
The value of PET/CT with FES or FDG tracers in metastatic breast cancer: a computer simulation study in ER-positive patients. Br J Cancer 2015; 112:1617-25. [PMID: 25880006 PMCID: PMC4430721 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2015.138] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/09/2014] [Revised: 03/10/2015] [Accepted: 03/16/2015] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect on the number of performed biopsies and costs associated with implementing positron emission tomography (PET) and computed tomography (PET/CT) with 16α-[18F]fluoro-17β-oestradiol (FES) or 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG) as an upfront imaging test for diagnosing metastatic breast cancer (MBC) in comparison with the standard work-up in oestrogen receptor-positive women with symptoms. Methods: A published computer simulation model was adapted and validated. Three follow-up strategies were evaluated in a simulated cohort of women with primary breast cancer over a 5-year-time horizon: (1) the standard work-up, (2) upfront FES-PET/CT and (3) upfront FDG-PET/CT. The main outcome was the number of avoided biopsies to assess MBC. The costs for all three strategies were calculated based on the number of imaging tests and biopsies. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) to avoid a biopsy was calculated only based on the costs of initial imaging and staging tests. Results: The FES-PET/CT strategy decreased the number of biopsies by 39±9%, while upfront FDG-PET/CT increased the number of biopsies by 38±15% when compared with the standard work-up. Both PET/CT strategies reduced the number of imaging tests and false positives when compared with the standard work-up. The number of false negatives decreased only in the FES-PET/CT strategy. The ICER in the FES-PET/CT strategy per avoided biopsy was 12.1±3.4 thousand Euro. In the FDG-PET/CT strategy, the costs were higher and there were no avoided biopsies as compared with the standard work-up, hence this was an inferior strategy in terms of cost effectiveness. Conclusions: The number of performed biopsies was lower in the FES-PET/CT strategy at an ICER of 12.1±3.4 thousand Euro per biopsy avoided, whereas the application of the FDG-PET/CT did not reduce the number of biopsies and was more expensive. Whether the FES-PET/CT strategy has additional benefits for patients in terms of therapy management has to be evaluated in clinical studies.
Collapse
|
23
|
Phi XA, Houssami N, Obdeijn IM, Warner E, Sardanelli F, Leach MO, Riedl CC, Trop I, Tilanus-Linthorst MMA, Mandel R, Santoro F, Kwan-Lim G, Helbich TH, de Koning HJ, Van den Heuvel ER, de Bock GH. Magnetic resonance imaging improves breast screening sensitivity in BRCA mutation carriers age ≥ 50 years: evidence from an individual patient data meta-analysis. J Clin Oncol 2015; 33:349-56. [PMID: 25534390 DOI: 10.1200/jco.2014.56.6232] [Citation(s) in RCA: 55] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/29/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE There is no consensus on whether magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) should be included in breast screening protocols for women with BRCA1/2 mutations age ≥ 50 years. Therefore, we investigated the evidence on age-related screening accuracy in women with BRCA1/2 mutations using individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS IPD were pooled from six high-risk screening trials including women with BRCA1/2 mutations who had completed at least one screening round with both MRI and mammography. A generalized linear mixed model with repeated measurements and a random effect of studies estimated sensitivity and specificity of MRI, mammography, and the combination in all women and specifically in those age ≥ 50 years. RESULTS Pooled analysis showed that in women age ≥ 50 years, screening sensitivity was not different from that in women age < 50 years, whereas screening specificity was. In women age ≥ 50 years, combining MRI and mammography significantly increased screening sensitivity compared with mammography alone (94.1%; 95% CI, 77.7% to 98.7% v 38.1%; 95% CI, 22.4% to 56.7%; P < .001). The combination was not significantly more sensitive than MRI alone (94.1%; 95% CI, 77.7% to 98.7% v 84.4%; 95% CI, 61.8% to 94.8%; P = .28). Combining MRI and mammography in women age ≥ 50 years resulted in sensitivity similar to that in women age < 50 years (94.1%; 95% CI, 77.7% to 98.7% v 93.2%; 95% CI, 79.3% to 98%; P = .79). CONCLUSION Addition of MRI to mammography for screening BRCA1/2 mutation carriers age ≥ 50 years improves screening sensitivity by a magnitude similar to that observed in younger women. Limiting screening MRI in BRCA1/2 carriers age ≥ 50 years should be reconsidered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xuan-Anh Phi
- Xuan-Anh Phi, Edwin R. Van den Heuvel, and Geertruida H. de Bock, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen; Inge-Marie Obdeijn, Madeleine M.A. Tilanus-Linthorst, and Harry J. de Koning, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Nehmat Houssami, School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Ellen Warner and Rodica Mandel, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario; Isabelle Trop, Hospital of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Francesco Sardanelli, University of Milan School of Medicine, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Policlinico San Donato, Milan; Filippo Santoro, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy; Martin O. Leach and Gek Kwan-Lim, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; and Christopher C. Riedl and Thomas H. Helbich, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Nehmat Houssami
- Xuan-Anh Phi, Edwin R. Van den Heuvel, and Geertruida H. de Bock, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen; Inge-Marie Obdeijn, Madeleine M.A. Tilanus-Linthorst, and Harry J. de Koning, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Nehmat Houssami, School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Ellen Warner and Rodica Mandel, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario; Isabelle Trop, Hospital of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Francesco Sardanelli, University of Milan School of Medicine, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Policlinico San Donato, Milan; Filippo Santoro, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy; Martin O. Leach and Gek Kwan-Lim, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; and Christopher C. Riedl and Thomas H. Helbich, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Inge-Marie Obdeijn
- Xuan-Anh Phi, Edwin R. Van den Heuvel, and Geertruida H. de Bock, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen; Inge-Marie Obdeijn, Madeleine M.A. Tilanus-Linthorst, and Harry J. de Koning, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Nehmat Houssami, School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Ellen Warner and Rodica Mandel, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario; Isabelle Trop, Hospital of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Francesco Sardanelli, University of Milan School of Medicine, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Policlinico San Donato, Milan; Filippo Santoro, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy; Martin O. Leach and Gek Kwan-Lim, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; and Christopher C. Riedl and Thomas H. Helbich, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Ellen Warner
- Xuan-Anh Phi, Edwin R. Van den Heuvel, and Geertruida H. de Bock, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen; Inge-Marie Obdeijn, Madeleine M.A. Tilanus-Linthorst, and Harry J. de Koning, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Nehmat Houssami, School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Ellen Warner and Rodica Mandel, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario; Isabelle Trop, Hospital of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Francesco Sardanelli, University of Milan School of Medicine, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Policlinico San Donato, Milan; Filippo Santoro, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy; Martin O. Leach and Gek Kwan-Lim, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; and Christopher C. Riedl and Thomas H. Helbich, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Xuan-Anh Phi, Edwin R. Van den Heuvel, and Geertruida H. de Bock, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen; Inge-Marie Obdeijn, Madeleine M.A. Tilanus-Linthorst, and Harry J. de Koning, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Nehmat Houssami, School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Ellen Warner and Rodica Mandel, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario; Isabelle Trop, Hospital of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Francesco Sardanelli, University of Milan School of Medicine, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Policlinico San Donato, Milan; Filippo Santoro, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy; Martin O. Leach and Gek Kwan-Lim, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; and Christopher C. Riedl and Thomas H. Helbich, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Martin O Leach
- Xuan-Anh Phi, Edwin R. Van den Heuvel, and Geertruida H. de Bock, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen; Inge-Marie Obdeijn, Madeleine M.A. Tilanus-Linthorst, and Harry J. de Koning, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Nehmat Houssami, School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Ellen Warner and Rodica Mandel, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario; Isabelle Trop, Hospital of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Francesco Sardanelli, University of Milan School of Medicine, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Policlinico San Donato, Milan; Filippo Santoro, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy; Martin O. Leach and Gek Kwan-Lim, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; and Christopher C. Riedl and Thomas H. Helbich, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Christopher C Riedl
- Xuan-Anh Phi, Edwin R. Van den Heuvel, and Geertruida H. de Bock, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen; Inge-Marie Obdeijn, Madeleine M.A. Tilanus-Linthorst, and Harry J. de Koning, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Nehmat Houssami, School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Ellen Warner and Rodica Mandel, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario; Isabelle Trop, Hospital of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Francesco Sardanelli, University of Milan School of Medicine, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Policlinico San Donato, Milan; Filippo Santoro, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy; Martin O. Leach and Gek Kwan-Lim, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; and Christopher C. Riedl and Thomas H. Helbich, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Isabelle Trop
- Xuan-Anh Phi, Edwin R. Van den Heuvel, and Geertruida H. de Bock, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen; Inge-Marie Obdeijn, Madeleine M.A. Tilanus-Linthorst, and Harry J. de Koning, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Nehmat Houssami, School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Ellen Warner and Rodica Mandel, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario; Isabelle Trop, Hospital of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Francesco Sardanelli, University of Milan School of Medicine, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Policlinico San Donato, Milan; Filippo Santoro, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy; Martin O. Leach and Gek Kwan-Lim, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; and Christopher C. Riedl and Thomas H. Helbich, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Madeleine M A Tilanus-Linthorst
- Xuan-Anh Phi, Edwin R. Van den Heuvel, and Geertruida H. de Bock, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen; Inge-Marie Obdeijn, Madeleine M.A. Tilanus-Linthorst, and Harry J. de Koning, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Nehmat Houssami, School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Ellen Warner and Rodica Mandel, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario; Isabelle Trop, Hospital of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Francesco Sardanelli, University of Milan School of Medicine, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Policlinico San Donato, Milan; Filippo Santoro, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy; Martin O. Leach and Gek Kwan-Lim, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; and Christopher C. Riedl and Thomas H. Helbich, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Rodica Mandel
- Xuan-Anh Phi, Edwin R. Van den Heuvel, and Geertruida H. de Bock, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen; Inge-Marie Obdeijn, Madeleine M.A. Tilanus-Linthorst, and Harry J. de Koning, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Nehmat Houssami, School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Ellen Warner and Rodica Mandel, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario; Isabelle Trop, Hospital of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Francesco Sardanelli, University of Milan School of Medicine, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Policlinico San Donato, Milan; Filippo Santoro, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy; Martin O. Leach and Gek Kwan-Lim, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; and Christopher C. Riedl and Thomas H. Helbich, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Filippo Santoro
- Xuan-Anh Phi, Edwin R. Van den Heuvel, and Geertruida H. de Bock, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen; Inge-Marie Obdeijn, Madeleine M.A. Tilanus-Linthorst, and Harry J. de Koning, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Nehmat Houssami, School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Ellen Warner and Rodica Mandel, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario; Isabelle Trop, Hospital of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Francesco Sardanelli, University of Milan School of Medicine, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Policlinico San Donato, Milan; Filippo Santoro, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy; Martin O. Leach and Gek Kwan-Lim, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; and Christopher C. Riedl and Thomas H. Helbich, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Gek Kwan-Lim
- Xuan-Anh Phi, Edwin R. Van den Heuvel, and Geertruida H. de Bock, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen; Inge-Marie Obdeijn, Madeleine M.A. Tilanus-Linthorst, and Harry J. de Koning, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Nehmat Houssami, School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Ellen Warner and Rodica Mandel, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario; Isabelle Trop, Hospital of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Francesco Sardanelli, University of Milan School of Medicine, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Policlinico San Donato, Milan; Filippo Santoro, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy; Martin O. Leach and Gek Kwan-Lim, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; and Christopher C. Riedl and Thomas H. Helbich, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Thomas H Helbich
- Xuan-Anh Phi, Edwin R. Van den Heuvel, and Geertruida H. de Bock, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen; Inge-Marie Obdeijn, Madeleine M.A. Tilanus-Linthorst, and Harry J. de Koning, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Nehmat Houssami, School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Ellen Warner and Rodica Mandel, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario; Isabelle Trop, Hospital of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Francesco Sardanelli, University of Milan School of Medicine, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Policlinico San Donato, Milan; Filippo Santoro, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy; Martin O. Leach and Gek Kwan-Lim, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; and Christopher C. Riedl and Thomas H. Helbich, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Harry J de Koning
- Xuan-Anh Phi, Edwin R. Van den Heuvel, and Geertruida H. de Bock, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen; Inge-Marie Obdeijn, Madeleine M.A. Tilanus-Linthorst, and Harry J. de Koning, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Nehmat Houssami, School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Ellen Warner and Rodica Mandel, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario; Isabelle Trop, Hospital of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Francesco Sardanelli, University of Milan School of Medicine, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Policlinico San Donato, Milan; Filippo Santoro, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy; Martin O. Leach and Gek Kwan-Lim, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; and Christopher C. Riedl and Thomas H. Helbich, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Edwin R Van den Heuvel
- Xuan-Anh Phi, Edwin R. Van den Heuvel, and Geertruida H. de Bock, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen; Inge-Marie Obdeijn, Madeleine M.A. Tilanus-Linthorst, and Harry J. de Koning, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Nehmat Houssami, School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Ellen Warner and Rodica Mandel, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario; Isabelle Trop, Hospital of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Francesco Sardanelli, University of Milan School of Medicine, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Policlinico San Donato, Milan; Filippo Santoro, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy; Martin O. Leach and Gek Kwan-Lim, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; and Christopher C. Riedl and Thomas H. Helbich, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Geertruida H de Bock
- Xuan-Anh Phi, Edwin R. Van den Heuvel, and Geertruida H. de Bock, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen; Inge-Marie Obdeijn, Madeleine M.A. Tilanus-Linthorst, and Harry J. de Koning, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Nehmat Houssami, School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Ellen Warner and Rodica Mandel, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario; Isabelle Trop, Hospital of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Francesco Sardanelli, University of Milan School of Medicine, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Policlinico San Donato, Milan; Filippo Santoro, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy; Martin O. Leach and Gek Kwan-Lim, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; and Christopher C. Riedl and Thomas H. Helbich, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Levy-Lahad E, Lahad A, King MC. Precision medicine meets public health: population screening for BRCA1 and BRCA2. J Natl Cancer Inst 2014; 107:420. [PMID: 25550384 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/dju420] [Citation(s) in RCA: 50] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Ephrat Levy-Lahad
- Medical Genetics Institute, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel (ELL); Faculty of Medicine, Hebrew University Medical School, Jerusalem, Israel (ELL, AL); Department of Family Medicine, Clalit Health Services, Jerusalem, Israel (AL); Department of Medicine and Department of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA (MCK).
| | - Amnon Lahad
- Medical Genetics Institute, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel (ELL); Faculty of Medicine, Hebrew University Medical School, Jerusalem, Israel (ELL, AL); Department of Family Medicine, Clalit Health Services, Jerusalem, Israel (AL); Department of Medicine and Department of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA (MCK)
| | - Mary-Claire King
- Medical Genetics Institute, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel (ELL); Faculty of Medicine, Hebrew University Medical School, Jerusalem, Israel (ELL, AL); Department of Family Medicine, Clalit Health Services, Jerusalem, Israel (AL); Department of Medicine and Department of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA (MCK)
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Ahern CH, Shih YCT, Dong W, Parmigiani G, Shen Y. Cost-effectiveness of alternative strategies for integrating MRI into breast cancer screening for women at high risk. Br J Cancer 2014; 111:1542-51. [PMID: 25137022 PMCID: PMC4200098 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2014.458] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/13/2014] [Revised: 07/09/2014] [Accepted: 07/21/2014] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is recommended for women at high risk for breast cancer. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of alternative screening strategies involving MRI. METHODS Using a microsimulation model, we generated life histories under different risk profiles, and assessed the impact of screening on quality-adjusted life-years, and lifetime costs, both discounted at 3%. We compared 12 screening strategies combining annual or biennial MRI with mammography and clinical breast examination (CBE) in intervals of 0.5, 1, or 2 years vs without, and reported incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). RESULTS Based on an ICER threshold of $100,000/QALY, the most cost-effective strategy for women at 25% lifetime risk was to stagger MRI and mammography plus CBE every year from age 30 to 74, yielding ICER $58,400 (compared to biennial MRI alone). At 50% lifetime risk and with 70% reduction in MRI cost, the recommended strategy was to stagger MRI and mammography plus CBE every 6 months (ICER=$84,400). At 75% lifetime risk, the recommended strategy is biennial MRI combined with mammography plus CBE every 6 months (ICER=$62,800). CONCLUSIONS The high costs of MRI and its lower specificity are limiting factors for annual screening schedule of MRI, except for women at sufficiently high risk.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C H Ahern
- Department of Medicine, Division of Biostatistics, The Dan L. Duncan Cancer Center at Baylor College of Medicine, One Baylor Plaza, BCM600, Houston TX 77030, USA
| | - Y-C T Shih
- Department of Medicine, Section of Hospital Medicine, The University of Chicago, 5841 S Maryland Avenue, MC 5000, Chicago IL 60637, USA
| | - W Dong
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, Unit 1411, Houston TX 77030, USA
| | - G Parmigiani
- Department of Biostatistics and Computational Biology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 450 Brookline Avenue, Boston MA 02115, USA
- Department of Biostatistics, Harvard School of Public Health, 677 Huntington Avenue, Boston MA 02115, USA
| | - Y Shen
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, Unit 1411, Houston TX 77030, USA
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Evans DG, Brentnall AR, Harvie M, Dawe S, Sergeant JC, Stavrinos P, Astley S, Wilson M, Ainsworth J, Cuzick J, Buchan I, Donnelly LS, Howell A. Breast cancer risk in young women in the national breast screening programme: implications for applying NICE guidelines for additional screening and chemoprevention. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 2014; 7:993-1001. [PMID: 25047362 DOI: 10.1158/1940-6207.capr-14-0037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
In the United Kingdom, women at moderate and high risk of breast cancer between the ages of 40 and 49 years are eligible for annual mammographic screening and preventive therapy with tamoxifen. Here, we estimate the numbers of women in a population eligible for this service and the proportion of breast cancers detected in this group compared with the whole population. Women <50 attending for mammographic screening in the National Health Service Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) completed a risk questionnaire. The proportion at moderate and high risk according to National Institute of Health Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines was estimated. An estimate was also made using a different model of risk estimation (Tyrer-Cuzick). The numbers of cancers detected in the moderate/high risk groups were compared with numbers detected in the whole population. Completed questionnaires were available for 4,360 women between ages 46 and 49 years. Thirty women [0.7%; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.5-1.0%] were at high risk and 130 (3.0%, 2.5-3.5%) were at moderate risk according to NICE guidelines. Thirty-seven cancers were detected by mammography in the whole group. Five of these were found in the moderate-/high-risk group giving a 3.2-fold increase in detection compared with the standard risk group. More women were assigned to the moderate- or high-risk group using the Tyrer-Cuzick model (N = 384), but the numbers of cancers in this group were not appreciably increased (N = 8). Systematic assessment of family history in primary care or through population-based screening will identify appreciable numbers of women in their forties, eligible for additional surveillance and chemoprevention.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D Gareth Evans
- Genesis Breast Cancer Prevention Centre, University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Trust, Wythenshawe, Manchester, United Kingdom. Genetic Medicine, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Central Manchester Foundation Trust, St. Mary's Hospital, Manchester, United Kingdom. Manchester Breast Centre, Manchester Cancer Research Centre, University of Manchester, Christie Hospital, Withington, Manchester, United Kingdom.
| | - Adam R Brentnall
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London
| | - Michelle Harvie
- Genesis Breast Cancer Prevention Centre, University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Trust, Wythenshawe, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Sarah Dawe
- Genesis Breast Cancer Prevention Centre, University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Trust, Wythenshawe, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Jamie C Sergeant
- Genesis Breast Cancer Prevention Centre, University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Trust, Wythenshawe, Manchester, United Kingdom. Centre for Imaging Sciences, Institute of Population Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom. NIHR Manchester Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Unit, Central Manchester NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Paula Stavrinos
- Genesis Breast Cancer Prevention Centre, University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Trust, Wythenshawe, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Susan Astley
- Genesis Breast Cancer Prevention Centre, University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Trust, Wythenshawe, Manchester, United Kingdom. Centre for Imaging Sciences, Institute of Population Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Mary Wilson
- Genesis Breast Cancer Prevention Centre, University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Trust, Wythenshawe, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - John Ainsworth
- Institute of Population Health, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Jack Cuzick
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London
| | - Iain Buchan
- Institute of Population Health, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Louise S Donnelly
- Genesis Breast Cancer Prevention Centre, University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Trust, Wythenshawe, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Anthony Howell
- Genesis Breast Cancer Prevention Centre, University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Trust, Wythenshawe, Manchester, United Kingdom. Manchester Breast Centre, Manchester Cancer Research Centre, University of Manchester, Christie Hospital, Withington, Manchester, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Doutriaux-Dumoulin I, Meingan P, Delnatte C. Dépistage et imagerie chez les femmes à haut risque génétique. Standards et développements. ONCOLOGIE 2014. [DOI: 10.1007/s10269-014-2450-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/24/2022]
|
28
|
Liedtke C, Thill M, Hanf V, Schütz F. AGO Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Early Breast Cancer: Update 2014. Breast Care (Basel) 2014; 9:189-200. [PMID: 25177261 PMCID: PMC4132219 DOI: 10.1159/000363591] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/28/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Cornelia Liedtke
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Germany
| | - Marc Thill
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Agaplesion Markus Krankenhaus, Frankfurt/M., Germany
| | - Volker Hanf
- Frauenklinik, Klinikum Fürth, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Germany
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
29
|
Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Sharp L. Cost-effectiveness of screening and treating Helicobacter pylori for gastric cancer prevention. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2013; 27:933-47. [PMID: 24182612 PMCID: PMC3880867 DOI: 10.1016/j.bpg.2013.09.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 50] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/12/2013] [Accepted: 09/17/2013] [Indexed: 01/31/2023]
Abstract
Gastric cancer is the second leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. A meta-analysis of seven randomized controlled trials concluded that Helicobacter pylori eradication reduces gastric cancer incidence by 35%. Current consensus is that H. pylori screening and treatment is cost-effective only in high-risk populations. This paper provides an up-to-date overview of the evidence for cost-effectiveness of H. pylori screening and treatment in different population settings and risk levels for H. pylori infection. Ten unique cost-effectiveness or cost-utility analyses were identified. All found that screening for H. pylori to prevent gastric cancer in the general population costs less than $50,000 per LYG. This finding was robust for differences in H. pylori prevalence, gender and ethnicity. Based on limited evidence, re-treatment (for treatment failure), repeated screening, limiting screening and treatment to those with the CagA phenotype, or universal treatment, does not appear to be cost-effective. However, most included studies failed to consider both the broader benefits as well as the adverse effects of widespread use of antibiotics for H. pylori.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus Medical Centre, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|