Use of modeling to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of cancer screening programs

Quantifying the potential benefits of early detection for pancreatic cancer through a counterfactual simulation modeling analysis

The benefits of cancer early detection depend on various factors, including cancer type, screening method performance, stage at diagnosis, and subsequent treatment. Although numerous studies have evaluated the effectiveness of screening interventions for identifying cancer at earlier stages, there is no quantitative analysis that studies the optimal early detection time interval that results in the greatest mortality benefit; such data could serve as a target and benchmark for cancer early detection strategies. In this study, we focus on pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), a cancer known for its lack of early symptoms. Consequently, it is most often detected at late stages when the 5-year survival rate is only 3%. We developed a PDAC population model that simulates an individual patient's age and stage at diagnosis, while replicating overall US cancer incidence and mortality rates. The model includes "cancer sojourn time," serving as a proxy for the speed of cancer progression, with shorter times indicating rapid progression and longer times indicating slower progression. In our PDAC model, our hypothesis was that earlier cancer detection, potentially through a hypothetical screening intervention in the counterfactual analysis, would yield reduced mortality as compared to a no-screening group. We found that the benefits of early detection, such as increased life-years gained, are greater when the sojourn time is shorter, reaching their maximum when identification is made 4-6 years prior to clinical diagnosis (e.g., when a symptomatic diagnosis is made). However, when early detection occurs even earlier, for example 6-10 years prior to clinical diagnosis, the benefits significantly diminish for shorter sojourn time cancers, and level off for longer sojourn time cancers. Our study clarifies the potential benefits of PDAC early detection that explicitly incorporates individual patient heterogeneity in cancer progression and identifies quantitative benchmarks for future interventions.

A Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Colorectal Cancer Screening in Europe: Have Studies Included Optimal Screening Intensities?

OBJECTIVE

To assess the range of strategies analysed in European cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with respect to the screening intervals, age ranges and test cut-offs used to define positivity, to examine how this might influence what strategies are found to be optimal, and compare them with the current screening policies with a focus on the screening interval.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus for peer-reviewed, model-based CEAs of CRC screening. We included studies on average-risk European populations using the guaiac faecal occult blood test (gFOBT) or faecal immunochemical test (FIT). We adapted Drummond's ten-point checklist to appraise study quality.

RESULTS

We included 39 studies that met the inclusion criteria. Biennial screening was the most frequently used interval which was analysed in 37 studies. Annual screening was assessed in 13 studies, all of which found it optimally cost-effective. Despite this, 25 of 26 European stool-based programmes use biennial screening. Many CEAs did not vary the age range, but the 14 that did generally found broader ranges optimal. Only 11 studies considered alternative FIT cut-offs, 9 of which found lower cut-offs superior. Conflicts between current policy and CEA evidence are less clear regarding age ranges and cut-offs.

CONCLUSIONS

The existing CEA evidence indicates that the widely adopted biennial frequency of stool-based testing in Europe is suboptimal. It is likely that many more lives could be saved throughout Europe if programmes could be offered with more intensive annual screening.

A Simple Cost-Effectiveness Model of Screening: An Open-Source Teaching and Research Tool Coded in R

Applied cost-effectiveness analysis models are an important tool for assessing health and economic effects of healthcare interventions but are not best suited for illustrating methods. Our objective is to provide a simple, open-source model for the simulation of disease-screening cost-effectiveness for teaching and research purposes. We introduce our model and provide an initial application to examine changes to the efficiency frontier as input parameters vary and to demonstrate face validity. We described a vectorised, discrete-event simulation of screening in R with an Excel interface to define parameters and inspect principal results. An R Shiny app permits dynamic interpretation of simulation outputs. An example with 8161 screening strategies illustrates the cost and effectiveness of varying the disease sojourn time, treatment effectiveness, and test performance characteristics and costs on screening policies. Many of our findings are intuitive and straightforward, such as a reduction in screening costs leading to decreased overall costs and improved cost-effectiveness. Others are less obvious and depend on whether we consider gross outcomes or those net to no screening. For instance, enhanced treatment of symptomatic disease increases gross effectiveness, but reduces the net effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of screening. A lengthening of the preclinical sojourn time has ambiguous effects relative to no screening, as cost-effectiveness improves for some strategies but deteriorates for others. Our simple model offers an accessible platform for methods research and teaching. We hope it will serve as a public good and promote an intuitive understanding of the cost-effectiveness of screening.

Cost-effectiveness of Prostate Cancer Screening Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging or Standard Biopsy Based on the STHLM3-MRI Study

Importance

The combination of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for prostate cancer detection has rarely been evaluated in a screening context. The STHLM3-MRI screening-by-invitation study (NCT03377881) has reported the benefits of using MRI with subsequent combined targeted and standard biopsies compared with using standard biopsies alone.

Objective

To investigate the cost-effectiveness of prostate cancer screening using MRI with combined targeted and standard biopsies compared with standard biopsies alone among men aged 55 to 69 years in Sweden, based on evidence from the STHLM3-MRI study.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This economic evaluation study was conducted from a lifetime health care perspective using a microsimulation model to evaluate no screening and screening strategies among adult men in Sweden. Men aged 55 to 69 years in Sweden were simulated for no screening and screening strategies. Input parameters were obtained from the STHLM3-MRI study and recent reviews. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed in May 2022.

Interventions

No screening, quadrennial PSA screening using standard biopsies alone, and MRI-based screening using combined targeted and standard biopsies.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The number of tests, incidence, deaths, costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated.

Results

A total 603 men were randomized to the standard arm, 165 of these participants (27.4%) did not undergo standard biopsy; 929 men were randomized to the experimental arm, 111 (11.9%) of whom did undergo MRI or any biopsy. Compared with no screening, the screening strategies were associated with reduced lifetime prostate cancer-related deaths by 6% to 9%. Screening with MRI and the combined biopsies resulted in an ICER of US $53 736, which is classified as a moderate cost per QALY gained in Sweden. Relative to screening with standard biopsies alone, MRI-based screening reduced the number of both lifetime biopsies and overdiagnosis by approximately 50% and had a high probability of being cost-effective than the traditional PSA screening.

Conclusions and Relevance

For prostate cancer screening, this economic evaluation study found that PSA testing followed by MRI with subsequent combined targeted and standard biopsies had a high probability to be more cost-effective compared with the traditional screening pathway using PSA and standard biopsy. MRI-based screening may be considered for early detection of prostate cancer in Sweden.

Cancer screening at the level of state programs: review, recommendations and management

An overview of existing cancer screening programs, their organization system, and the main implementation parameters is presented. The methods of primary screening that have been shown to be effective in reducing mortality from certain cancers, as well as the reasons for the lack of screening programs in relation to some of them, are listed. The existing screening programs and their main characteristics are considered, and examples of using economic analysis to change screening programs are given. It is noted that in countries even with a large coverage, for example, in the United States and Germany, there is no single national register of screening, and the invitation system does not have a population-based nature. Although the large coverage and development of health systems in these countries allows for the positive effects of opportunistic screening, its effectiveness is lower than in countries with organized programs, and the costs are higher.

Interpreting cost-effectiveness ratios in a cost-effectiveness analysis of risk-tailored prostate screening: A critique of Callender et al

Callender et al. recently published a model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of a risk-tailored approach to prostate cancer screening. It considers the costs and effects of prostate cancer screening offered to all men aged 55-69 without any risk selection and, alternatively, over a range of risk-tailored strategies in which screen eligibility is determined by a varying threshold of disease risk. The analysis finds that the strategy of screening men once they reach a 10-year absolute risk of disease of 5% or more is cost-effective in a UK context. I believe there are several problems with the study, mostly stemming from an incorrect interpretation of the cost-effectiveness estimates. I show that one reinterpretation of their results indicates that screening is much less cost-effective than the original analysis suggests, indicating that screening should be restricted to a much smaller group of higher risk men. More broadly, I explain the challenges of attempting to meaningfully reinterpret the originally published results due to the simulation of non-mutually exclusive intervention strategies. Finally, I consider the relevance of considering sufficient alternative screening intensities. This critique highlights the need for appropriate interpretation of cost-effectiveness results for policymakers, especially as risk stratification within screening becomes increasingly feasible.

Interpreting cost-effectiveness ratios in a cost-effectiveness analysis of risk-tailored prostate screening: A critique of Callender et al

Callender et al. recently published a model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of a risk-tailored approach to prostate cancer screening. It considers the costs and effects of prostate cancer screening offered to all men aged 55-69 without any risk selection and, alternatively, over a range of risk-tailored strategies in which screen eligibility is determined by a varying threshold of disease risk. The analysis finds that the strategy of screening men once they reach a 10-year absolute risk of disease of 5% or more is cost-effective in a UK context. I believe there are several problems with the study, mostly stemming from an incorrect interpretation of the cost-effectiveness estimates. I show that one reinterpretation of their results indicates that screening is much less cost-effective than the original analysis suggests, indicating that screening should be restricted to a much smaller group of higher risk men. More broadly, I explain the challenges of attempting to meaningfully reinterpret the originally published results due to the simulation of non-mutually exclusive intervention strategies. Finally, I consider the relevance of considering sufficient alternative screening intensities. This critique highlights the need for appropriate interpretation of cost-effectiveness results for policymakers, especially as risk stratification within screening becomes increasingly feasible.

Operational research techniques applied throughout cancer care services: a review

Cancer is a disease affecting increasing numbers of people. In the UK, the proportion of people affected by cancer is projected to increase from 1 in 3 in 1992, to nearly 1 in 2 by 2020. Health services to tackle cancer can be grouped broadly into prevention, diagnosis, staging, and treatment. We review examples of Operational Research (OR) papers addressing decisions encountered in each of these areas. In conclusion, we find many examples of OR research on screening strategies, as well as on treatment planning and scheduling. On the other hand, our search strategy uncovered comparatively few examples of OR models applied to reducing cancer risks, optimising diagnostic procedures, and staging. Improvements to cancer care services have been made as a result of successful OR modelling. There is potential for closer working with clinicians to enable the impact of other OR studies to be of greater benefit to cancer sufferers.

Can mechanical imaging increase the specificity of mammography screening?

Objectives

This study aimed to investigate the effects of adding adjunct mechanical imaging to mammography breast screening. We hypothesized that mechanical imaging could detect increased local pressure caused by both malignant and benign breast lesions and that a pressure threshold for malignancy could be established. The impact of this on breast screening was investigated with regard to reductions in recall and biopsy rates.

Methods

155 women recalled from breast screening were included in the study, which was approved by the regional ethical review board (dnr 2013/620). Mechanical imaging readings were acquired of the symptomatic breast. The relative mean pressure on the suspicious area (RMPA) was defined and a threshold for malignancy was established.

Results

Biopsy-proven invasive cancers had a median RMPA of 3.0 (interquartile range (IQR) = 3.7), significantly different from biopsy-proven benign at 1.3 (IQR = 1.0) and non-biopsied cases at 1.0 (IQR = 1.3) (P < 0.001). The lowest RMPA for invasive cancer was 1.4, with 23 biopsy-proven benign and 33 non-biopsied cases being below this limit. Had these women not been recalled, recall rates would have been reduced by 36% and biopsy rates by 32%.

Conclusions

If implemented in a screening situation, this may substantially lower the number of false positives.

Key Points

• Mechanical imaging is used as an adjunct to mammography in breast screening.

• A threshold pressure can be established for malignant breast cancer.

• Recalls and biopsies can be substantially reduced.

Annual Combined Mammography and Tomosynthesis Screening: Is It Really Cost-Effective?

OBJECTIVE

Examining the comparative effectiveness of adding tomosynthesis to mammography screening in the United States would help key stakeholders, including physicians and policy makers, guide shared decision-making and recommendations for routine breast cancer screening.

CONCLUSION

More robust data from U.S.-based longitudinal observational studies, clinical trials, or both are needed, along with the use of validated microsimulation models, before clinical- and cost-effectiveness of tomosynthesis screening versus mammography screening can be fully characterized.

Determining the cost-effectiveness of endoscopic surveillance for gastric cancer in patients with precancerous lesions

AIM

To identify the optimal strategy for gastric cancer (GC) prevention by evaluating the cost-effectiveness of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD)-based preventive strategies.

METHODS

We conducted a model-based cost-effectiveness analysis. Adopting a healthcare payer's perspective, Markov models simulated the clinical experience of the target population (Singaporean Chinese 50-69 years old) undergoing endoscopic screening, endoscopic surveillance and usual care of do-nothing. The screening strategy examined the cohort every alternate year whereas the surveillance strategy provided annual EGD only to people with precancerous lesions. For each strategy, discounted lifetime costs ($) and quality adjusted life years (QALY) were estimated and compared to generate incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted to identify influential parameters and quantify the impact of model uncertainties.

RESULTS

Annual EGD surveillance with an ICER of $34 200/QALY was deemed cost-effective for GC prevention within the Singapore healthcare system. To inform implementation, the models identified six influential factors and their respective thresholds, namely discount rate (<4.20%), age of starting surveillance (>51.6 years), proportion of program cost in delivering endoscopy (<65%), cost of follow-up EGD (<$484), utility of stage 1 GC patients (>0.72) and odds ratio of GC for high-risk subjects (>3.93). The likelihood that surveillance is the most cost-effective strategy is 69.5% accounting for model uncertainties.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic surveillance of gastric premalignancies can be a cost-effective strategy for GC prevention. Its implementation requires careful assessment on factors influencing the actual cost-effectiveness.

Dealing with Time in Health Economic Evaluation: Methodological Issues and Recommendations for Practice

Time is an important aspect of health economic evaluation, as the timing and duration of clinical events, healthcare interventions and their consequences all affect estimated costs and effects. These issues should be reflected in the design of health economic models. This article considers three important aspects of time in modelling: (1) which cohorts to simulate and how far into the future to extend the analysis; (2) the simulation of time, including the difference between discrete-time and continuous-time models, cycle lengths, and converting rates and probabilities; and (3) discounting future costs and effects to their present values. We provide a methodological overview of these issues and make recommendations to help inform both the conduct of cost-effectiveness analyses and the interpretation of their results. For choosing which cohorts to simulate and how many, we suggest analysts carefully assess potential reasons for variation in cost effectiveness between cohorts and the feasibility of subgroup-specific recommendations. For the simulation of time, we recommend using short cycles or continuous-time models to avoid biases and the need for half-cycle corrections, and provide advice on the correct conversion of transition probabilities in state transition models. Finally, for discounting, analysts should not only follow current guidance and report how discounting was conducted, especially in the case of differential discounting, but also seek to develop an understanding of its rationale. Our overall recommendations are that analysts explicitly state and justify their modelling choices regarding time and consider how alternative choices may impact on results.

The influence of disease risk on the optimal time interval between screens for the early detection of cancer: a mathematical approach

The intervals between screens for the early detection of diseases such as breast and colon cancer suggested by screening guidelines are typically based on the average population risk of disease. With the emergence of ever more biomarkers for cancer risk prediction and the development of personalized medicine, there is a need for risk-specific screening intervals. The interval between successive screens should be shorter with increasing cancer risk. A risk-dependent optimal interval is ideally derived from a cost-effectiveness analysis using a validated simulation model. However, this is time-consuming and costly. We propose a simplified mathematical approach for the exploratory analysis of the implications of risk level on optimal screening interval. We develop a mathematical model of the optimal screening interval for breast cancer screening. We verified the results by programming the simplified model in the MISCAN-Breast microsimulation model and comparing the results. We validated the results by comparing them with the results of a full, published MISCAN-Breast cost-effectiveness model for a number of different risk levels. The results of both the verification and validation were satisfactory. We conclude that the mathematical approach can indicate the impact of disease risk on the optimal screening interval.

Derivation of background mortality by smoking and obesity in cancer simulation models

BACKGROUND

Simulation models designed to evaluate cancer prevention strategies make assumptions on background mortality-the competing risk of death from causes other than the cancer being studied. Researchers often use the U.S. life tables and assume homogeneous other-cause mortality rates. However, this can lead to bias because common risk factors such as smoking and obesity also predispose individuals for deaths from other causes such as cardiovascular disease.

METHODS

We obtained calendar year-, age-, and sex-specific other-cause mortality rates by removing deaths due to a specific cancer from U.S. all-cause life tables. Prevalence across 12 risk factor groups (3 smoking [never, past, and current smoker] and 4 body mass index [BMI] categories [<25, 25-30, 30-35, 35+ kg/m(2)]) were estimated from national surveys (National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys [NHANES] 1971-2004). Using NHANES linked mortality data, we estimated hazard ratios for death by BMI/smoking using a Poisson regression model. Finally, we combined these results to create 12 sets of BMI and smoking-specific other-cause life tables for U.S. adults aged 40 years and older that can be used in simulation models of lung, colorectal, or breast cancer.

RESULTS

We found substantial differences in background mortality when accounting for BMI and smoking. Ignoring the heterogeneity in background mortality in cancer simulation models can lead to underestimation of competing risk of deaths for higher-risk individuals (e.g., male, 60-year old, white obese smokers) by as high as 45%.

CONCLUSION

Not properly accounting for competing risks of death may introduce bias when using simulation modeling to evaluate population health strategies for prevention, screening, or treatment. Further research is warranted on how these biases may affect cancer-screening strategies targeted at high-risk individuals.

Chapter 13: CISNET lung models: comparison of model assumptions and model structures

Sophisticated modeling techniques can be powerful tools to help us understand the effects of cancer control interventions on population trends in cancer incidence and mortality. Readers of journal articles are, however, rarely supplied with modeling details. Six modeling groups collaborated as part of the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) to investigate the contribution of U.S. tobacco-control efforts toward reducing lung cancer deaths over the period 1975-2000. The six models included in this monograph were developed independently and use distinct, complementary approaches toward modeling the natural history of lung cancer. The models used the same data for inputs, and agreed on the design of the analysis and the outcome measures. This article highlights aspects of the models that are most relevant to similarities of or differences between the results. Structured comparisons can increase the transparency of these complex models.

Comparative economic evaluation of data from the ACRIN National CT Colonography Trial with three cancer intervention and surveillance modeling network microsimulations

PURPOSE

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of computed tomographic (CT) colonography for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in average-risk asymptomatic subjects in the United States aged 50 years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Enrollees in the American College of Radiology Imaging Network National CT Colonography Trial provided informed consent, and approval was obtained from the institutional review board at each site. CT colonography performance estimates from the trial were incorporated into three Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network CRC microsimulations. Simulated survival and lifetime costs for screening 50-year-old subjects in the United States with CT colonography every 5 or 10 years were compared with those for guideline-concordant screening with colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy plus either sensitive unrehydrated fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) or fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), and no screening. Perfect and reduced screening adherence scenarios were considered. Incremental cost-effectiveness and net health benefits were estimated from the U.S. health care sector perspective, assuming a 3% discount rate.

RESULTS

CT colonography at 5- and 10-year screening intervals was more costly and less effective than FOBT plus flexible sigmoidoscopy in all three models in both 100% and 50% adherence scenarios. Colonoscopy also was more costly and less effective than FOBT plus flexible sigmoidoscopy, except in the CRC-SPIN model assuming 100% adherence (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio: $26,300 per life-year gained). CT colonography at 5- and 10-year screening intervals and colonoscopy were net beneficial compared with no screening in all model scenarios. The 5-year screening interval was net beneficial over the 10-year interval except in the MISCAN model when assuming 100% adherence and willingness to pay $50,000 per life-year gained.

CONCLUSION

All three models predict CT colonography to be more costly and less effective than non-CT colonographic screening but net beneficial compared with no screening given model assumptions.

Risk-specific optimal cancer screening schedules: an application to breast cancer early detection

The optimal schedules for breast cancer screening in terms of examination frequency and ages at examination are of practical interest. A decision-theoretic approach is explored to search for optimal cancer screening programs which should achieve maximum survival benefit while balancing the associated cost to the health care system. We propose a class of utility functions that account for costs associated with screening examinations and value of survival benefit under a non-stable disease model. We consider two different optimization criteria: optimize the number of screening examinations with equal screening intervals between exams but without a pre-fixed total cost; and optimize the ages at which screening should be given for a fixed total cost. We show that an optimal solution exists under each of the two frameworks. The proposed methods may consider women at different levels of risk for breast cancer so that the optimal screening strategies will be tailored according to a woman's risk of developing the disease. Results of a numerical study are presented and the proposed models are illustrated with various data inputs. We also use the data inputs from the Health Insurance Plan of New York (HIP) and Canadian National Breast Screening Study (CNBSS) to illustrate the proposed models and to compare the utility values between the optimal schedules and the actual schedules in the HIP and CNBSS trials. Here, the utility is defined as the difference in cure rates between cases found at screening examinations and cases found between screening examinations while accounting for the cost of examinations, under a given screening schedule.

The relevance of unrelated costs internal and external to the healthcare sector to the outcome of a cost-comparison analysis of secondary prevention: the case of general colorectal cancer screening in the German population

The potential of secondary prevention measures, such as cancer screening, to produce cost savings in the healthcare sector is a controversial issue in healthcare economics. Potential savings are calculated by comparing treatment costs with the cost of a prevention program. When survivors' subsequent unrelated health care costs are included in the calculation, however, the overall cost of disease prevention rises. What have not been studied to date are the secondary effects of fatal disease prevention measures on social security systems. From the perspective of a policy maker responsible for a social security system budget, it is not only future healthcare costs that are relevant for budgeting, but also changes in the contributions to, and expenditures from, statutory pension insurance and health insurance systems. An examination of the effect of longer life expectancies on these insurance systems can be justified by the fact that European social security systems are regulated by the state, and there is no clear separation between the financing of individual insurance systems due to cross-subsidisation. This paper looks at how the results of cost-comparison analyses vary depending on the inclusion or exclusion of future healthcare and non-healthcare costs, using the example of colorectal cancer screening in the German general population. In contrast to previous studies, not only are future unrelated medical costs considered, but also the effects on the social security system. If a German colorectal cancer screening program were implemented, and unrelated future medical care were excluded from the cost-benefit analysis, savings of up to 548 million euros per year would be expected. The screening program would, at the same time, generate costs in the healthcare sector as well as in the social security system of 2,037 million euros per year. Because the amount of future contributions and expenditures in the social security system depends on the age and gender of the recipients of the screening program (i.e. survivors of a typically fatal condition), the impact of age and gender on the results of a cost-comparison analysis of colorectal cancer screening are presented and discussed. Our study shows that colorectal cancer screening generates individual cost savings in the social security system up to a life expectancy of 60 years. Beyond that age, the balance between a recipient's social security contributions and insurance system expenditure is negative. The paper clarifies the relevance of healthcare costs not related to the prevented disease to the economic evaluation of prevention programs, particularly in the case of fatal diseases such as colorectal cancer. The results of the study imply that, from an economic perspective, the participation of at-risk individuals in disease prevention programs should be promoted.

Cost-effectiveness of 21 alternative cervical cancer screening strategies

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to assess the cost-effectiveness of 21 alternative cervical cancer screening (CCS) strategies.

METHODS

A cohort simulation model was developed to determine from a health systems perspective the cost-effectiveness of the 21 alternative CCS strategies that incorporated combinations of Papanicolaou's smear test (PAP), liquid-based cytology (LBC) or human papillomavirus deoxyribonucleic acid (HPV-DNA) testing. The model was calibrated to categorize total costs into four budgetary authorities: testing, physician, inpatient, and outpatient services. Within each category, alternative screening strategies were contrasted in terms of their cost impacts and the percent change calculated within each category. Epidemiologic data and costs were derived from administrative health databases. Estimates of test characteristics and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were derived from available literature.

RESULTS

Three-year screening with PAP and HPV-DNA triage testing for women older than 30 years of age (3-year PAP+HPV+PAP-age) is less costly and more effective saving $16,078 per additional QALY gained. Although there was an associated net cost decrease of 4.2% driven by a reduction in testing and physician costs of 22.1% and 18.6%, respectively, there is a cost increase of 0.8% and 27.7% in inpatient and outpatient services, respectively.

CONCLUSION

There is economic evidence to support adopting 3-year PAP+HPV+PAP-age. Budgetary resources can potentially be shifted from testing and physician services to fund the additional resource requirements for inpatient and outpatient services.

Comparing upper gastrointestinal X-ray and endoscopy for gastric cancer diagnosis in Korea

AIM: To compare the cost and accuracy of upper gastrointestinal (GI) X-ray and upper endoscopy for diagnosis of gastric cancer using data from the 2002-2004 Korean National Cancer Screening Program (NCSP).

METHODS: The study population included 1 503 646 participants in the 2002-2004 stomach cancer screening program who underwent upper GI X-ray or endoscopy. The accuracy of screening was defined as the probability of detecting gastric cancer. We calculated the probability by merging data from the NCSP and the Korea Central Cancer Registry. We estimated the direct costs of the medical examination and the tests for upper GI X-ray, upper endoscopy, and biopsy.

RESULTS: The probability of detecting gastric cancer via upper endoscopy was 2.9-fold higher than via upper GI X-ray. The unit costs of screening using upper GI X-ray and upper endoscopy were $32.67 and $34.89, respectively. In 2008, the estimated cost of identifying one case of gastric cancer was $53 094.64 using upper GI X-ray and $16 900.43 using upper endoscopy. The cost to detect one case of gastric cancer was the same for upper GI X-ray and upper endoscopy at a cost ratio of 1:3.7.

CONCLUSION: Upper endoscopy is slightly more costly to perform, but the cost to detect one case of gastric cancer is lower.

Cost of a 5-year lung cancer survivor: symptomatic tumour identification vs proactive computed tomography screening

Background:

Our objective was to analyse the cost effectiveness of computed tomography (CT) screening for lung cancer in terms of the cost per long-term survivor, which has not been evaluated to date.

Methods:

Estimations were computed based on data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries covering years 1999–2003. The design framework of our model allowed for the incorporation of multiple values taken from the epidemiological and clinical literature to be utilised for cost inputs, scope of patients screened, diagnostic staging, and survival percentages applied separately to two cohorts: age 40–79 and 60–79 years. This enabled the analysis of over 1400 scenarios, each containing a unique set of input values, for which the estimated cost per 5-year survivor (CP5YS) was compared between the symptom-detected and proactive screening approaches.

Results:

Estimated CP5YS were higher for the symptom-detected approach in all 729 scenarios analysed for the cohort ages 60–79 years, ranging from approximately $5800 to $116 700 increased cost per 5-year survivor (CP5YS). For the cohort ages 40–79 years, 75% of the 729 scenarios analysed showed increased CP5YS for the symptom-detected approach ranging from $5700 to $110 000 increased CP5YS. Total costs and total 5-year survivors were higher for the proactive screening method for all scenarios analysed across both cohorts with increases ranging from 50–256% and 98–309%, respectively.

Conclusion:

The predicted increase in long-term survival with CT screening and the potential for better utilisation of health-care dollars in terms of CP5YS, particularly when screening patients over the age of 60 years, are critically important considerations in directing effective future lung cancer management strategy.

Calibration methods used in cancer simulation models and suggested reporting guidelines

Increasingly, computer simulation models are used for economic and policy evaluation in cancer prevention and control. A model's predictions of key outcomes, such as screening effectiveness, depend on the values of unobservable natural history parameters. Calibration is the process of determining the values of unobservable parameters by constraining model output to replicate observed data. Because there are many approaches for model calibration and little consensus on best practices, we surveyed the literature to catalogue the use and reporting of these methods in cancer simulation models. We conducted a MEDLINE search (1980 through 2006) for articles on cancer-screening models and supplemented search results with articles from our personal reference databases. For each article, two authors independently abstracted pre-determined items using a standard form. Data items included cancer site, model type, methods used for determination of unobservable parameter values and description of any calibration protocol. All authors reached consensus on items of disagreement. Reviews and non-cancer models were excluded. Articles describing analytical models, which estimate parameters with statistical approaches (e.g. maximum likelihood) were catalogued separately. Models that included unobservable parameters were analysed and classified by whether calibration methods were reported and if so, the methods used. The review process yielded 154 articles that met our inclusion criteria and, of these, we concluded that 131 may have used calibration methods to determine model parameters. Although the term 'calibration' was not always used, descriptions of calibration or 'model fitting' were found in 50% (n = 66) of the articles, with an additional 16% (n = 21) providing a reference to methods. Calibration target data were identified in nearly all of these articles. Other methodological details, such as the goodness-of-fit metric, were discussed in 54% (n = 47 of 87) of the articles reporting calibration methods, while few details were provided on the algorithms used to search the parameter space. Our review shows that the use of cancer simulation modelling is increasing, although thorough descriptions of calibration procedures are rare in the published literature for these models. Calibration is a key component of model development and is central to the validity and credibility of subsequent analyses and inferences drawn from model predictions. To aid peer-review and facilitate discussion of modelling methods, we propose a standardized Calibration Reporting Checklist for model documentation.

Adopting helical CT screening for lung cancer: potential health consequences during a 15-year period

BACKGROUND

Simulation modeling can synthesize data from single-arm studies of lung cancer screening and tumor registries to investigate computed tomography (CT) screening. This study estimated changes in lung cancer outcomes through 2005, had chest CT screening been introduced in 1990.

METHODS

Hypothetical individuals with smoking histories representative of 6 US cohorts (white males and females aged 50, 60, and 70 years in 1990) were simulated in the Lung Cancer Policy Model, a comprehensive patient-level simulation model of lung cancer development, screening, and treatment. A no screening scenario corresponded to observed outcomes. We simulated 3 screening scenarios in current or former smokers with > or =20 pack-years as follows: 1-time screen in 1990; and annual, and twice-annually screenings beginning in 1990 and ending in 2005. Main outcomes were days of life between 1990 and 2005 and life expectancy in 1990 (estimated by simulating life histories past 2005).

RESULTS

All screening scenarios yielded reductions (compared with no screening) in lung cancer-specific mortality by 2005, with larger reductions predicted for more frequent screening. Compared with no screening, annual screening of ever-smokers with at least 20 pack-years of cigarette exposure provided ever-smokers with an additional 11 to 33 days of life by 2005, or an additional 3-10 weeks of (undiscounted) life expectancy. In sensitivity analyses, the largest effects on gains from annual screening were due to reductions in screening adherence and increased smoking cessation.

CONCLUSIONS

The adoption of CT screening, had it been available in 1990, might have resulted in a modest gain in life expectancy.

Estimating long-term effectiveness of lung cancer screening in the Mayo CT screening study

PURPOSE

To use individual-level data provided from the single-arm study of helical computed tomographic (CT) screening at the Mayo Clinic (Rochester, Minn) to estimate the long-term effectiveness of screening in Mayo study participants and to compare estimates from an existing lung cancer simulation model with estimates from a different modeling approach that used the same data.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was approved by institutional review boards and was HIPAA compliant. Deidentified individual-level data from participants (1520 current or former smokers aged 50-85 years) in the Mayo Clinic helical CT screening study were used to populate the Lung Cancer Policy Model, a comprehensive microsimulation model of lung cancer development, screening findings, treatment results, and long-term outcomes. The model predicted diagnosed cases of lung cancer and deaths per simulated study arm (five annual screening examinations vs no screening). Main outcome measures were predicted changes in lung cancer-specific and all-cause mortality as functions of follow-up time after simulated enrollment and randomization.

RESULTS

At 6-year follow-up, the screening arm had an estimated 37% relative increase in lung cancer detection, compared with the control arm. At 15-year follow-up, five annual screening examinations yielded a 9% relative increase in lung cancer detection. The relative reduction in cumulative lung cancer-specific mortality from five annual screening examinations was 28% at 6-year follow-up (15% at 15 years). The relative reduction in cumulative all-cause mortality from five annual screening examinations was 4% at 6-year follow-up (2% at 15 years).

CONCLUSION

Screening may reduce lung cancer-specific mortality but may offer a smaller reduction in overall mortality because of increased competing mortality risks associated with smoking.

Phase II study of a combination of irinotecan and S-1 in patients with advanced gastric cancer (OGSG0002)

BACKGROUND/AIMS

To investigate the efficacy and safety of the combination therapy of irinotecan (CPT-11) plus S-1 in patients with advanced gastric cancer at the dose recommended by a previous phase I study.

METHODS

A total of 23 patients received 80 mg/m(2) of CPT-11 on days 1 and 15, and S-1 at a dose level set on the basis of the body surface area (BSA): 40 (BSA <1.25 m(2)), 50 (BSA > or =1.25 to <1.5 m(2)) or 60 mg (BSA > or =1.5 m(2)) b.i.d. was given from days 1-21.

RESULTS

The overall response rate was 47.8% (11 of 23, 95% confidence interval, CI: 27.4-68.2%). The median time to progression (TTP) was 210 days (95% CI: 145-322 days) and the median survival time was 394 days (95% CI: 241-484 days). The incidence of grade 3 or 4 hematological and non-hematological toxicity was 17.4 and 8.7%. The most common hematological toxicity was anemia and the most common non-hematological toxicity was diarrhea.

CONCLUSION

The combination therapy of CPT-11 and S-1 provided prolonged TTP with low toxicity, and the results warrant a further phase III study to define the efficacy in improvement of survival in patients with advanced gastric cancer.

The role of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with resected pancreatic cancer: systematic review of randomized controlled trials and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In patients undergoing surgery for resectable pancreatic cancer prognosis still remains poor. The role of adjuvant treatment strategies (including chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy) following resection of pancreatic cancer remains controversial.

METHODS

A Medline-based literature search was undertaken to identify randomized controlled trials that evaluated adjuvant chemotherapy after complete macroscopic resection for cancer of the exocrine pancreas. Five trials of adjuvant chemotherapy were eligible and critically reviewed for this article. A meta-analysis (based on published data) was performed with survival (median survival time and 5-year survival rate) being the primary endpoint.

RESULTS

For the meta-analysis, 482 patients were allocated to the chemotherapy group and 469 patients to the control group. The meta-analysis estimate for prolongation of median survival time for patients in the chemotherapy group was 3 months (95% CI 0.3-5.7 months, p = 0.03). The difference in 5-year survival rate was estimated with 3.1% between the chemotherapy and the control group (95% CI -4.6 to 10.8%, p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Currently available data from randomized trials indicate that adjuvant chemotherapy after resection of pancreatic cancer may substantially prolong disease-free survival and cause a moderate increase in overall survival. In the current meta-analysis, a significant survival benefit was only seen with regard to median survival, but not for the 5-year survival rate. The optimal chemotherapy regimen in the adjuvant setting as well as individualized treatment strategies (also including modern chemoradiotherapy regimens) still remain to be defined.

Cost of cancer care: issues and implications

Medical technology is increasingly costly in most fields of clinical medicine. Oncology has not been spared from issues related to cost, in part resulting from the tremendous scientific progress that has lead to new tools for diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of our patients. The increasing cost of health care in general (and cancer care in particular) raises complex questions related to its effects on our economy and the citizens of our society. This article reviews the macroeconomic principles and individual behaviors that govern medical spending, and examines how cost disproportionately affects various populations. Our overall goal is to frame debate about health policy concerns that influence the clinical practice of oncology.