Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Lung Cancer Screening in the United States: A Comparative Modeling Study

The Annual Cost of Cancer Screening in the United States

BACKGROUND

Cancer has substantial health, quality-of-life, and economic impacts. Screening may decrease cancer mortality and treatment costs, but the cost of screening in the United States is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the annual cost of initial cancer screening (that is, screening without follow-up costs) in the United States in 2021.

DESIGN

Model using national health care survey and cost resources data.

SETTING

U.S. health care systems and institutions.

PARTICIPANTS

People eligible for breast, cervical, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancer screening with available data.

MEASUREMENTS

The number of people screened and associated health care system costs by insurance status in 2021 dollars.

RESULTS

Total health care system costs for initial cancer screenings in the United States in 2021 were estimated at $43 billion. Approximately 88.3% of costs were attributable to private insurance; 8.5% to Medicare; and 3.2% to Medicaid, other government programs, and uninsured persons. Screening for colorectal cancer represented approximately 64% of the total cost; screening colonoscopy represented about 55% of the total. Facility costs (amounts paid to facilities where testing occurred) were major drivers of the total estimated costs of screening.

LIMITATIONS

All data on receipt of cancer screening are based on self-report from national health care surveys. Estimates do not include costs of follow-up for positive or abnormal screening results. Variations in costs based on geography and provider or health care organization are not fully captured.

CONCLUSION

The $43 billion estimated annual cost for initial cancer screening in the United States in 2021 is less than the reported annual cost of cancer treatment in the United States in the first 12 months after diagnosis. Identification of cancer screening costs and their drivers is critical to help inform policy and develop programmatic priorities, particularly for enhancing access to recommended cancer screening services.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

None.

Willingness to participate in combination screening for lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and cardiovascular disease in four European countries

OBJECTIVES

Lung cancer screening (LCS), using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT), can be more efficient by simultaneously screening for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and cardiovascular disease (CVD), the Big-3 diseases. This study aimed to determine the willingness to participate in (combinations of) Big-3 screening in four European countries and the relative importance of amendable participation barriers.

METHODS

An online cross-sectional survey aimed at (former) smokers aged 50-75 years elicited the willingness of individuals to participate in Big-3 screening and used analytical hierarchy processing (AHP) to determine the importance of participation barriers.

RESULTS

Respondents were from France (n = 391), Germany (n = 338), Italy (n = 399), and the Netherlands (n = 342), and consisted of 51.2% men. The willingness to participate in screening was marginally influenced by the diseases screened for (maximum difference of 3.1%, for Big-3 screening (73.4%) vs. lung cancer and COPD screening (70.3%)) and by country (maximum difference of 3.7%, between France (68.5%) and the Netherlands (72.3%)). The largest effect on willingness to participate was personal perceived risk of lung cancer. The most important barriers were the missed cases during screening (weight 0.19) and frequency of screening (weight 0.14), while diseases screened for (weight 0.11) ranked low.

CONCLUSIONS

The difference in willingness to participate in LCS showed marginal increase with inclusion of more diseases and limited variation between countries. A marginal increase in participation might result in a marginal additional benefit of Big-3 screening. The amendable participation barriers are similar to previous studies, and the new criterion, diseases screened for, is relatively unimportant.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

Adding diseases to combination screening modestly improves participation, driven by personal perceived risk. These findings guide program design and campaigns for lung cancer and Big-3 screening. Benefits of Big-3 screening lie in long-term health and economic impact, not participation increase.

KEY POINTS

• It is unknown whether or how combination screening might affect participation. • The addition of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and cardiovascular disease to lung cancer screening resulted in a marginal increase in willingness to participate. • The primary determinant influencing individuals' engagement in such programs is their personal perceived risk of the disease.

Screening for liver fibrosis: lessons from colorectal and lung cancer screening

Many countries have incorporated population screening programmes for cancer, such as colorectal and lung cancer, into their health-care systems. Cirrhosis is more prevalent than colorectal cancer and has a comparable age-standardized mortality rate to lung cancer. Despite this fact, there are no screening programmes in place for early detection of liver fibrosis, the precursor of cirrhosis. In this Perspective, we use insights from colorectal and lung cancer screening to explore the benefits, challenges, implementation strategies and pathways for future liver fibrosis screening initiatives. Several non-invasive methods and referral pathways for early identification of liver fibrosis exist, but in addition to accurate detection, screening programmes must also be cost-effective and demonstrate benefit through a reduction in liver-related mortality. Randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm this. Future randomized screening trials should evaluate not only the screening tests, but also interventions used to halt disease progression in individuals identified through screening.

The Benefits and Harms of Lung Cancer Screening in Individuals With Comorbidities

Introduction

Individuals with a history of smoking and a high risk of lung cancer often have a high prevalence of smoking-related comorbidities. The presence of these comorbidities might alter the benefit-to-harm ratio of lung cancer screening by influencing the risk of complications, quality of life, and competing risks of death. Nevertheless, individuals with chronic diseases are underrepresented in screening clinical trials. In this study, we use microsimulation modeling to determine the impact of chronic diseases on lung cancer benefits and harms.

Methods

We extended a validated lung cancer screening microsimulation model that comprehensively recapitulates an individual's lung cancer development, progression, detection, follow-up, treatment, and survival. We parameterized the model to reflect the impact of chronic diseases on complications from invasive testing, quality of life, and mortality in individuals in five-year age categories between the ages of 50 and 80 years. Outcomes included life-years (LY) gained per 100,000 in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes mellitus, heart disease, and history of stroke compared with screening-eligible individuals without comorbidities.

Results

Among individuals between the ages of 50 and 54 years, we found that the presence of a comorbidity altered the LY gained from screening per 100,000 individuals depending on the comorbidity: 4296 LY with no comorbidities; 3462 LY, 3260 LY, 3031 LY, and 3257 LY with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart disease, diabetes mellitus, and stroke, respectively. We observed greater reductions in LY gained in individuals with two comorbidities; we observed similar patterns for individuals between the ages of 55 and 59 years, 60 and 64 years, 65 and 69 years, 70 and 74 years, and 75 and 80 years.

Conclusions

Comorbidities reduce LY gained from screening per 100,000 compared with no comorbidities, and our results can be used by clinicians when discussing the benefits and harms of screening in their patients with comorbidities.

Cost-Effectiveness of Cardiac Rehabilitation in Older Adults With Coronary Heart Disease

PURPOSE

While cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is recommended and effective following acute cardiac events, it remains underutilized, particularly in older adults. A study of 601 099 Medicare beneficiaries ≥65 yr hospitalized for coronary heart disease compared 5-yr mortality in users and nonusers of CR. Using instrumental variables (IV), CR improved mortality by 8.0% ( P < .001). A validation analysis based on 70 040 propensity-based (PB) matched pairs gave a similar gain (8.3%, P < .0001). The present cost-effectiveness analysis builds on these mortality results.

METHODS

Using the framework of the Second Panel on Cost-Effectiveness Analysis, we calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) gained due to CR. We accessed the costs from this cohort, inflated to 2022 prices, and assessed the relationship of quality-adjusted life years (QALY) to life years from a systematic review. We estimated the ICER of CR by modeling lifetime costs and QALY from national life tables using IV and PB.

RESULTS

Using IV, CR added 1.344 QALY (95% CI, 0.543-2.144) and $40 472 in costs over the remaining lifetimes of participants. The ICER was $30 188 (95% CI, $18 175-$74 484)/QALY over their lifetimes. Using the PB analysis, the corresponding lifetime values were 2.018 (95% CI, 1.001-3.035) QALY, $66 590, and an ICER of $32 996 (95% CI, $21 942-$66 494)/QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

Cardiac rehabilitation was highly cost-effective using guidelines established by the World Health Organization and the US Department of Health and Human Services. The favorable clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of CR, along with low use by Medicare beneficiaries, support the need to increase CR use.

Cost-effectiveness of risk-based low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer in Switzerland

Throughout Europe, computed tomography (CT) screening for lung cancer is in a phase of clinical implementation or reimbursement evaluation. To efficiently select individuals for screening, the use of lung cancer risk models has been suggested, but their incremental (cost-)effectiveness relative to eligibility based on pack-year criteria has not been thoroughly evaluated for a European setting. We evaluate the cost-effectiveness of pack-year and risk-based screening (PLCOm2012 model-based) strategies for Switzerland, which aided in informing the recommendations of the Swiss Cancer Screening Committee (CSC). We use the MISCAN (MIcrosimulation SCreening ANalysis)-Lung model to estimate benefits and harms of screening among individuals born 1940 to 1979 in Switzerland. We evaluate 1512 strategies, differing in the age ranges employed for screening, the screening interval and the strictness of the smoking requirements. We estimate risk-based strategies to be more cost-effective than pack-year-based screening strategies. The most efficient strategy compliant with CSC recommendations is biennial screening for ever-smokers aged 55 to 80 with a 1.6% PLCOm2012 risk. Relative to no screening this strategy is estimated to reduce lung cancer mortality by 11.0%, with estimated costs per Quality-Adjusted Life-Year (QALY) gained of €19 341, and a €1.990 billion 15-year budget impact. Biennial screening ages 55 to 80 for those with 20 pack-years shows a lower mortality reduction (10.5%) and higher cost per QALY gained (€20 869). Despite model uncertainties, our estimates suggest there may be cost-effective screening policies for Switzerland. Risk-based biennial screening ages 55 to 80 for those with ≥1.6% PLCOm2012 risk conforms to CSC recommendations and is estimated to be more efficient than pack-year-based alternatives.

Effectiveness of a single low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer: A population-based perspective cohort study in China

The purpose of this perspective cohort study was to evaluate the effectiveness of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening for lung cancer in China. This study was conducted under the China Urban Cancer Screening Program (CanSPUC). The analysis was based on participants aged 40 to 74 years from 2012 to 2019. A total of 255 569 eligible participants were recruited in the study. Among the 58 136 participants at high risk of lung cancer, 20 346 (35.00%) had a single LDCT scan (defined as the screened group) and 37 790 (65.00%) not (defined as the non-screened group). Overall, 1162 participants were diagnosed with lung cancer at median follow-up time of 5.25 years. The screened group had the highest cumulative incidence of lung cancer and the non-screened group had the highest cumulative lung cancer mortality and all-cause cumulative mortality. We performed inverse probability weighting (IPW) to account for potential imbalances, and Cox proportional hazards model to estimate the weighted association between mortality and LDCT scans. After IPW adjusted with baseline characteristics, the lung cancer incidence density was significantly increased (37.0% increase) (HR1.37 [95%CI 1.12-1.69]), lung cancer mortality was decreased (31.0% decrease) (HR0.69 [95%CI 0.49-0.97]), and the all-cause mortality was significantly decreased (23.0% lower) (HR0.77 [95% CI 0.68-0.87]) in the screened group. In summary, a single LDCT for lung cancer screening will reduce the mortality of lung cancer and all-cause mortality in China.

Personalizing age of gastric cancer screening based on comorbidity in China: Model estimates of benefits, affordability and cost-effectiveness optimization

The benefits of gastric cancer screening are related to age and comorbidity status, but reliable estimates are lacking in China. This study aimed to estimate the benefits and affordability of the gastric cancer screening strategy by level of comorbidity to inform decisions to screening age. We assessed six current gastric cancer screening strategies in China using a microsimulation model with different starting and stopping ages and comorbidity profiles, for a total of 378 strategies. 1,000,000 individuals were simulated in the model and followed the alternative strategies. Primary outcomes included gastric cancer incidence, the number of endoscopy and complications, life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Future costs and QALYs are discounted by 5% per year. Sensitivity analyses were used to evaluate model uncertainty. Strategies with longer screening durations were associated with higher benefits of life-year gained and gastric cancer deaths averted, but were also accompanied by a large number of endoscopy screening, and complication events. Using the threshold of US$18,575 per QALY gained, at the no, moderate, and severe comorbidity level, the leading cost-effectiveness strategies were the new gastric cancer screening scoring system strategy (NGCS) screening from age 40 years to 60 years (40-60), 40-55-NGCS, and 40-55-NGCS strategy, respectively. The results are robust in sensitivity analyses. Our study illustrates the importance of considering comorbidity conditions and age when determining the starting and stopping screening age for gastric cancer and informs the discussion on personalizing decisions. The trade-off between benefits and harms can also be referenced when necessary.

Assessing the impact of increasing lung screening eligibility by relaxing the maximum years-since-quit threshold: A simulation modeling study

BACKGROUND

In 2021, the US Preventive Services Task Force expanded its lung screening recommendation to include persons aged 50-80 years who had ever smoked and had at least 20 pack-years of exposure and less than 15 years since quitting (YSQ). However, studies have suggested that screening persons who formerly smoked with longer YSQ could be beneficial.

METHODS

The authors used two validated lung cancer models to assess the benefits and harms of screening using various YSQ thresholds (10, 15, 20, 25, 30, and no YSQ) and the age at which screening was stopped. The impact of enforcing the YSQ criterion only at entry, but not at exit, also was evaluated. Outcomes included the number of screens, the percentage ever screened, screening benefits (lung cancer deaths averted, life-years gained), and harms (false-positive tests, overdiagnosed cases, radiation-induced lung cancer deaths). Sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the effect of restricting screening to those who had at least 5 years of life expectancy.

RESULTS

As the YSQ criterion was relaxed, the number of screens and the benefits and harms of screening increased. Raising the age at which to stop screening age resulted in additional benefits but with more overdiagnosis, as expected, because screening among those older than 80 years increased. Limiting screening to those who had at least 5 years of life expectancy would maintain most of the benefits while considerably reducing the harms.

CONCLUSIONS

Expanding screening to persons who formerly smoked and have greater than 15 YSQ would result in considerable increases in deaths averted and life-years gained. Although additional harms would occur, these could be moderated by ensuring that screening is restricted to only those with reasonable life expectancy.

Lung Cancer Screening in Brazil Comparing the 2013 and 2021 USPSTF Guidelines

Importance

It is estimated that, from 2023 to 2025, lung cancer (LC) will be the second most frequent cancer in Brazil, but the country does not have an LC screening (LCS) policy.

Objective

To compare the number of individuals eligible for screening, 5-year preventable LC deaths, and years of life gained (YLG) if LC death is averted by LCS, considering 3 eligibility strategies by sociodemographic characteristics.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This comparative effectiveness research study assessed 3 LCS criteria by applying a modified version of the LC-Death Risk Assessment Tool (LCDRAT) and the LC-Risk Assessment Tool (LCRAT). Data are from the 2019 Brazilian National Household Survey. Participants included ever-smokers aged 50 to 80 years. Data analysis was performed from February to May 2023.

Exposures

Exposures included ever-smokers aged 50 to 80 years, US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) 2013 guidelines (ever-smokers aged 55 to 80 years with ≥30 pack-years and <15 years since cessation), and USPSTF 2021 guidelines (ever-smokers aged 50 to 80 years with 20 pack-years and <15 years since cessation).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcomes were the numbers of individuals eligible for LCS, the 5-year preventable deaths attributable to LC, and the number of YLGs if death due to LC was averted by LCS.

Results

In Brazil, the eligible population for LCS was 27 280 920 ever-smokers aged 50 to 80 years (13 387 552 female [49.1%]; 13 249 531 [48.6%] aged 50-60 years; 394 994 Asian or Indigenous [1.4%]; 3 111 676 Black [11.4%]; 10 942 640 Pardo [40.1%]; 12 830 904 White [47.0%]; 12 428 536 [45.6%] with an incomplete middle school education; and 12 860 132 [47.1%] living in the Southeast region); 5 144 322 individuals met the USPSTF 2013 criteria for LCS (2 090 636 female [40.6%]; 2 290 219 [44.5%] aged 61-70 years; 66 430 Asian or Indigenous [1.3%]; 491 527 Black [9.6%]; 2 073 836 Pardo [40.3%]; 2 512 529 [48.8%] White; 2 436 221 [47.4%] with an incomplete middle school education; and 2 577 300 [50.1%] living in the Southeast region), and 8 380 279 individuals met the USPSTF 2021 LCS criteria (3 507 760 female [41.9%]; 4 352 740 [51.9%] aged 50-60 years; 119 925 Asian or Indigenous [1.4%]; 839 171 Black [10.0%]; 3 330 497 Pardo [39.7%]; 4 090 687 [48.8%] White; 4 022 784 [48.0%] with an incomplete middle school education; and 4 162 070 [49.7%] living in the Southeast region). The number needed to screen to prevent 1 death was 177 individuals according to the USPSTF 2013 criteria and 242 individuals according to the USPSTF 2021 criteria. The YLG was 23 for all ever-smokers, 19 for the USPSTF 2013 criteria, and 21 for the USPSTF 2021 criteria. Being Black, having less than a high school education, and living in the North and Northeast regions were associated with increased 5-year risk of LC death.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this comparative effectiveness study, USPSTF 2021 criteria were better than USPSTF 2013 in reducing disparities in LC death rates. Nonetheless, the risk of LC death remained unequal, and these results underscore the importance of identifying an appropriate approach for high-risk populations for LCS, considering the local epidemiological context.

Historical Perspective on Lung Cancer Screening

Lung cancer represents a large burden on society with a staggering incidence and mortality rate that has steadily increased until recently. The impetus to design an effective screening program for the deadliest cancer in the United States and worldwide began in 1950. It has taken more than 50 years of numerous clinical trials and continued persistence to arrive at the development of modern-day screening program. As the program continues to grow, it is important for clinicians to understand its evolution, track outcomes, and continually assess the impact and bias of screening on the medical, social, and economic systems.

Development and Validation of the US Diabetes, Obesity, Cardiovascular Disease Microsimulation (DOC-M) Model: Health Disparity and Economic Impact Model

BACKGROUND

Few simulation models have incorporated the interplay of diabetes, obesity, and cardiovascular disease (CVD); their upstream lifestyle and biological risk factors; and their downstream effects on health disparities and economic consequences.

METHODS

We developed and validated a US Diabetes, Obesity, Cardiovascular Disease Microsimulation (DOC-M) model that incorporates demographic, clinical, and lifestyle risk factors to jointly predict overall and racial-ethnic groups-specific obesity, diabetes, CVD, and cause-specific mortality for the US adult population aged 40 to 79 y at baseline. An individualized health care cost prediction model was further developed and integrated. This model incorporates nationally representative data on baseline demographics, lifestyle, health, and cause-specific mortality; dynamic changes in modifiable risk factors over time; and parameter uncertainty using probabilistic distributions. Validation analyses included assessment of 1) population-level risk calibration and 2) individual-level risk discrimination. To illustrate the application of the DOC-M model, we evaluated the long-term cost-effectiveness of a national produce prescription program.

RESULTS

Comparing the 15-y model-predicted population risk of primary outcomes among the 2001-2002 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) cohort with the observed prevalence from age-matched cross-sectional 2003-2016 NHANES cohorts, calibration performance was strong based on observed-to-expected ratio and calibration plot analysis. In most cases, Brier scores fell below 0.0004, indicating a low overall prediction error. Using the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis cohorts, the c-statistics for assessing individual-level risk discrimination were 0.85 to 0.88 for diabetes, 0.93 to 0.95 for obesity, 0.74 to 0.76 for CVD history, and 0.78 to 0.81 for all-cause mortality, both overall and in three racial-ethnic groups. Open-source code for the model was posted at https://github.com/food-price/DOC-M-Model-Development-and-Validation.

CONCLUSIONS

The validated DOC-M model can be used to examine health, equity, and the economic impact of health policies and interventions on behavioral and clinical risk factors for obesity, diabetes, and CVD.

HIGHLIGHTS

We developed a novel microsimula'tion model for obesity, diabetes, and CVD, which intersect together and - critically for prevention and treatment interventions - share common lifestyle, biologic, and demographic risk factors.Validation analyses, including assessment of (1) population-level risk calibration and (2) individual-level risk discrimination, showed strong performance across the overall population and three major racial-ethnic groups for 6 outcomes (obesity, diabetes, CVD, and all-cause mortality, CVD- and DM-cause mortality)This paper provides a thorough explanation and documentation of the development and validation process of a novel microsimulation model, along with the open-source code (https://github.com/food-price/ DOCM_validation) for public use, to serve as a guide for future simulation model assessments, validation, and implementation.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Pharmacist Adherence Interventions in People Living with HIV/AIDS in Pakistan

Background: Evidence has shown the positive impact of pharmacist involvement on the adherence and health outcomes of people living with HIV/AIDS. However, whether such intervention provides value for money remains unclear. This study aims to fill this gap by assessing the cost-effectiveness of pharmacist interventions in HIV care in Pakistan. Methods: A Markov decision analytic model was constructed, considering clinical inputs, utility data, and cost data obtained from a randomized controlled trial and an HIV cohort of Pakistani origin. The analysis was conducted from a healthcare perspective, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated and presented for the year 2023. Additionally, a series of sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the results. Results: Pharmacist intervention resulted in higher quality-adjusted life years (4.05 vs. 2.93) and likewise higher annual intervention costs than usual care (1979 USD vs. 429 USD) (532,894 PKR vs. 115,518 PKR). This yielded the ICER of 1383 USD/quality-adjusted life years (QALY) (372,406 PKR/QALY), which is well below the willingness-to-pay threshold of 1658 USD (446,456 PKR/QALY) recommended by the World Health Organization Choosing Interventions that are Cost-Effective. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis reported that more than 68% of iterations were below the lower limit of threshold. Sensitivity analysis reported intervention cost is the most important parameter influencing the ICER the most. Conclusion: The study suggests that involving pharmacists in HIV care could be a cost-effective approach. These findings could help shape healthcare policies and plans, possibly making pharmacist interventions a regular part of care for people with HIV in Pakistan.

Artificial Intelligence in Lung Cancer Screening: The Future Is Now

Lung cancer has one of the worst morbidity and fatality rates of any malignant tumour. Most lung cancers are discovered in the middle and late stages of the disease, when treatment choices are limited, and patients' survival rate is low. The aim of lung cancer screening is the identification of lung malignancies in the early stage of the disease, when more options for effective treatments are available, to improve the patients' outcomes. The desire to improve the efficacy and efficiency of clinical care continues to drive multiple innovations into practice for better patient management, and in this context, artificial intelligence (AI) plays a key role. AI may have a role in each process of the lung cancer screening workflow. First, in the acquisition of low-dose computed tomography for screening programs, AI-based reconstruction allows a further dose reduction, while still maintaining an optimal image quality. AI can help the personalization of screening programs through risk stratification based on the collection and analysis of a huge amount of imaging and clinical data. A computer-aided detection (CAD) system provides automatic detection of potential lung nodules with high sensitivity, working as a concurrent or second reader and reducing the time needed for image interpretation. Once a nodule has been detected, it should be characterized as benign or malignant. Two AI-based approaches are available to perform this task: the first one is represented by automatic segmentation with a consequent assessment of the lesion size, volume, and densitometric features; the second consists of segmentation first, followed by radiomic features extraction to characterize the whole abnormalities providing the so-called "virtual biopsy". This narrative review aims to provide an overview of all possible AI applications in lung cancer screening.

A Machine Learning-Based Model to Predict In-Hospital Mortality of Lung Cancer Patients: A Population-Based Study of 523,959 Cases

Background: Stratify new lung cancer patients based on the risk of in-hospital mortality rate after diagnosis. Methods: 522,941 lung cancer cases with available data on the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) were analyzed for the predicted probability based on six fundamental variables including age, gender, tumor size, T, N, and AJCC stages. The patients were randomly assigned to the training (n = 115,145) and validation datasets (n = 13,017). The remaining cohort with missing values (n = 394,779) was then combined with the primary lung tumour datasets (n = 1018) from The Cancer Genome Atlas, Lung Adenocarcinoma and Lung Squamous Cell Carcinoma projects (TCGA-LUAD & TCGA-LUSC) for external validation and sensitivity analysis. Results: Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analyses showed high discriminatory power in the training and internal validation cohorts (Area under the curve [AUC] of 0.78 (95%CI = 0.78-0.79) and 0.78 (95%CI = 0.77-0.79), respectively), whereas that of the model on external validation data was 0.759 (95%CI = 0.757-0.761). We developed a static nomogram, a web app, and a risk table based on a logistic regression model using algorithm-selected variables. Conclusions: Our model can stratify lung cancer patients into high- and low-risk of in-hospital mortality to assist clinical further planning.

Systematic Review of Lung Cancer Screening: Advancements and Strategies for Implementation

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths in Europe, with low survival rates primarily due to late-stage diagnosis. Early detection can significantly improve survival rates, but lung cancer screening is not currently implemented in Italy. Many countries have implemented lung cancer screening programs for high-risk populations, with studies showing a reduction in mortality. This review aimed to identify key areas for establishing a lung cancer screening program in Italy. A literature search was conducted in October 2022, using the PubMed and Scopus databases. Items of interest included updated evidence, approaches used in other countries, enrollment and eligibility criteria, models, cost-effectiveness studies, and smoking cessation programs. A literature search yielded 61 scientific papers, highlighting the effectiveness of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening in reducing mortality among high-risk populations. The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) in the United States demonstrated a 20% reduction in lung cancer mortality with LDCT, and other trials confirmed its potential to reduce mortality by up to 39% and detect early-stage cancers. However, false-positive results and associated harm were concerns. Economic evaluations generally supported the cost-effectiveness of LDCT screening, especially when combined with smoking cessation interventions for individuals aged 55 to 75 with a significant smoking history. Implementing a screening program in Italy requires the careful consideration of optimal strategies, population selection, result management, and the integration of smoking cessation. Resource limitations and tailored interventions for subpopulations with low-risk perception and non-adherence rates should be addressed with multidisciplinary expertise.

Lung cancer screening beliefs in Armenia

Introduction

In Armenia, an upper-middle income country, 93% of deaths are from non-communicable diseases and over half of the male population smokes. Armenia has more than double the global lung cancer incidence. Over 80% of lung cancer is diagnosed at stages III or IV. However, there is a significant mortality benefit in detecting early-stage lung cancer via screening with low-dose computed tomography.

Methods

This study employed a rigorously-translated, previously-validated survey based on the Expanded Health Belief Model to understand how Armenian male smokers' beliefs would affect lung cancer screening participation.

Results

Survey responses highlighted key health beliefs that would mediate screening participation. Most respondents felt they were at risk for lung cancer, but over 50% also believed their cancer risk was equivalent to (or less than) non-smokers' risk. Respondents also overwhelmingly agreed a scan could help detect cancer earlier, but fewer agreed early detection could reduce cancer mortality. Important barriers included absence of symptoms and costs of screening and treatment.

Discussion

Overall, the potential to reduce lung cancer-related deaths in Armenia is high, but there are a number of central health beliefs and barriers that would limit screening uptake and effectiveness. Improved health education, careful consideration of socioeconomic screening barriers, and appropriate screening recommendations may be useful in overcoming these beliefs.

Using the Past to Understand the Future of U.S. and Global Smoking Disparities: A Birth Cohort Perspective

U.S. smoking-related disparities persist, but data evaluating how smoking patterns across diverse populations have changed by birth cohort are lacking. Worldwide, smoking continues to exact harm, especially to low- and middle-income nations with less historical data for smoking analyses. The Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) Lung Working Group previously generated smoking histories for the whole U.S. population using an age, period, and birth cohort (APC) methodological framework. These inputs have been used in numerous models to simulate future patterns of smoking and to evaluate the potential impact of policies. However, the absence of detailed model-ready inputs on smoking behaviors for diverse U.S. populations has been a barrier to research evaluating future trends in smoking-related disparities or the projected impacts of policies across sociodemographic groups. This supplement issue provides new estimates of smoking behaviors with detailed historical data by race/ethnicity, educational attainment, family income, and for each of the 50 U.S. states and Washington, DC. All-cause mortality relative risks associated with smoking by race/ethnicity and educational attainment are also available for the first time. Finally, the supplement issue presents comprehensive smoking histories for Brazil, demonstrating the application of this methodology to resource-limited settings. Collectively, these data aim to offer insight into future U.S. and global smoking disparities and accelerate research on tobacco control policies that advance health equity. This effort will allow tobacco simulation models to account comprehensively for population diversity, thereby enabling researchers to develop more sophisticated analyses of tobacco use and control interventions.

Population-Based Screening Using Low-Dose Chest Computed Tomography: A Systematic Review of Health Economic Evaluations

BACKGROUND

Chest low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) is a promising technology for population-based screening because it is non-invasive, relatively inexpensive, associated with low radiation and highly sensitive to lung cancer. To improve the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening, simultaneous screening for other diseases could be considered. This systematic review was conducted to analyse studies that published evidence on the cost-effectiveness of chest LDCT screening programs for different diseases.

METHODS

Scopus and PubMed were searched for English publications (1 January 2011-22 July 2022) using search terms related to screening, computed tomography and cost-effectiveness. An additional search specifically searched for the cost-effectiveness of screening for lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or cardiovascular disease. Included publications should present a full health economic evaluation of population screening with chest LDCT. The extracted data included the disease screened for, model type, country context of screening, inclusion of comorbidities or incidental findings, incremental costs, incremental effects and the resulting cost-effectiveness ratio amongst others. Reporting quality was assessed using the 2022 Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist.

RESULTS

The search yielded 1799 unique papers, of which 43 were included. Most papers focused on lung cancer screening (n = 40), and three were on coronary calcium scoring. Microsimulation was the most commonly applied modelling type (n = 16), followed by life table analysis (n = 10) and Markov cohort models (n = 10). Studies reflected the healthcare context of the US (n = 15), Canada (n = 4), the UK (n = 3) and 13 other countries. The reported incremental cost-effectiveness ratio ranged from US$10,000 to US$90,000/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) for lung cancer screening compared to no screening and was US$15,900/QALY-US$45,300/QALY for coronary calcium scoring compared to no screening.

DISCUSSION

Almost all health economic evaluations of LDCT screening focused on lung cancer. Literature regarding the health economic benefits of simultaneous LDCT screening for multiple diseases is absent. Most studies suggest LDCT screening is cost-effective for current and former smokers aged 55-74 with a minimum of 30 pack-years of smoking history. Consequently, more evidence on LDCT is needed to support further cost-effectiveness analyses. Preferably evidence on simultaneous screening for multiple diseases is needed, but alternatively, on single-disease screening.

REGISTRATION OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

Prospective Register of Ongoing Systematic Reviews registration CRD42021290228 can be accessed https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=290228 .

Birth Cohort‒Specific Smoking Patterns by Family Income in the U.S

INTRODUCTION

In the U.S., low-income individuals generally smoke more than high-income individuals. However, detailed information about how smoking patterns differ by income, especially differences by birth cohort, is lacking.

METHODS

Using the National Health Interview Survey 1983-2018 data, individual family income was calculated as a ratio of the federal poverty level. Missing income data from 1983 to 1996 were imputed using sequential regression multivariate imputation. Age‒period‒cohort models with constrained natural splines were used to estimate annual probabilities of smoking initiation and cessation and smoking prevalence and intensity by gender and birth cohort (1900-2000) for 5 income groups: <100%, 100%-199%, 200%-299%, 300%-399%, and ≥400% of the federal poverty level. Analysis was conducted in 2020-2021.

RESULTS

Across all income groups, smoking prevalence and initiation probabilities are decreasing by birth cohort, whereas cessation probabilities are increasing. However, relative differences between low- and high-income groups are increasing markedly, such that there were greater declines in prevalence among those in high-income groups in more recent cohorts. Smoking initiation probabilities are lowest in the ≥400% federal poverty level group for males across birth cohorts, whereas for females, this income group has the highest initiation probabilities in older cohorts but the lowest in recent cohorts. People living below the federal poverty level have the lowest cessation probabilities across cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Smoking prevalence has been decreasing in all income groups; however, disparities in smoking by family income are widening in recent birth cohorts. Future studies evaluating smoking disparities should account for cohort differences. Intervention strategies should focus on reducing initiation and improving quit success among low-income groups.

Shall We Screen Lung Cancer With Low-Dose Computed Tomography? Cost-Effectiveness in Hungary

OBJECTIVES

Clinical data and cost-effectiveness analyses from several countries support the use of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) to screen patients with high risk of lung cancer (LC). This study aimed to explore the economic value of screening LC with LDCT in Hungary.

METHODS

Cohorts of screened and nonscreened subjects were simulated in a decision analytic model over their lifetime. Five steps in the patient trajectory were distinguished: no LC, nondiagnosed LC, screening, diagnosed LC, and post-treatment. Patient pathways were populated based on the Hungarian pilot study of screening, the Nederlands-Leuvens Longkanker Screenings Onderzoek (NELSON) LC screening trial, and local incidence and prevalence data. Healthcare costs were obtained from the National Health Insurance Fund. Utility data were obtained from international sources and adjusted to local tariffs. Scenarios according to screening frequency, age bands (50-74, 55-74 years), and smoking status were analyzed.

RESULTS

Annual LDCT-based screening compared with no screening for 55- to 74-year-old current smokers showed 0.031 quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gains for an additional €137, which yields €5707 per QALY. Biennial screening for the same target population showed that purchasing 1 QALY would cost €10 203. The least cost-effective case was biennial screening of the general population aged 50 to 74 years, which yielded €37 931 per QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

Screening LC with LDCT for a high-risk population could be cost-effective in Hungary. For the introduction of screening with LDCT, targeting the most vulnerable groups while having a long-term approach on costs and benefits is essential.

Risk Model-Based Lung Cancer Screening : A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

BACKGROUND

In their 2021 lung cancer screening recommendation update, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) evaluated strategies that select people based on their personal lung cancer risk (risk model-based strategies), highlighting the need for further research on the benefits and harms of risk model-based screening.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate and compare the cost-effectiveness of risk model-based lung cancer screening strategies versus the USPSTF recommendation and to explore optimal risk thresholds.

DESIGN

Comparative modeling analysis.

DATA SOURCES

National Lung Screening Trial; Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program; U.S. Smoking History Generator.

TARGET POPULATION

1960 U.S. birth cohort.

TIME HORIZON

45 years.

PERSPECTIVE

U.S. health care sector.

INTERVENTION

Annual low-dose computed tomography in risk model-based strategies that start screening at age 50 or 55 years, stop screening at age 80 years, with 6-year risk thresholds between 0.5% and 2.2% using the PLCOm2012 model.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and cost-effectiveness efficiency frontier connecting strategies with the highest health benefit at a given cost.

RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS

Risk model-based screening strategies were more cost-effective than the USPSTF recommendation and exclusively comprised the cost-effectiveness efficiency frontier. Among the strategies on the efficiency frontier, those with a 6-year risk threshold of 1.2% or greater were cost-effective with an ICER less than $100 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Specifically, the strategy with a 1.2% risk threshold had an ICER of $94 659 (model range, $72 639 to $156 774), yielding more QALYs for less cost than the USPSTF recommendation, while having a similar level of screening coverage (person ever-screened 21.7% vs. USPSTF's 22.6%).

RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSES

Risk model-based strategies were robustly more cost-effective than the 2021 USPSTF recommendation under varying modeling assumptions.

LIMITATION

Risk models were restricted to age, sex, and smoking-related risk predictors.

CONCLUSION

Risk model-based screening is more cost-effective than the USPSTF recommendation, thus warranting further consideration.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Cancer Institute (NCI).

The NCC mathematical modeling framework for decision-making of six major cancers

Objective

Mathematical modeling and simulation is a useful research method to inform decision-making. This article aims to describe the National Cancer Center (NCC) modeling framework and how well it reproduces observed empirical data for six major cancers.

Methods

We developed the NCC modeling framework for six major cancers in China (lung, liver, stomach, colorectal, esophageal, and breast), which simulates the life-histories represented by states among normal, precancerous lesion, stage-specific invasive cancer, and death for six cancers separately. Each NCC simulation model could be illustrated as an integrated framework of 3 modules: a demography module, natural history module, and screening module. Combined with costs and health utilities data, the models could have many detailed outputs for informing decisions, including the harm of screening (e.g., false positives, complications, and overdiagnosis), healthcare costs, and benefits (quality-adjusted life years gained, cancer incidence and mortality, and investment returns). We calibrated the models to Chinese population-based observations on cancer incidence, mortality, and stage distribution. All models are validated by comparing model simulated results to data observed from nationwide cancer registration and a large prospective cohort study.

Results

The simulated results from the calibrated models consistently match the epidemiological patterns in six major cancer incidence, mortality, and stage distributions in China. Model projected age-specific cancer incidence and mortality were close to the observed data in the national cancer registration. The NCC modeling framework reproduced the cumulative cancer cases and deaths observed in the prospective cohort study at 7.0 and 10.8 years of follow-up. Model estimated net survival rates also consistent with population-based statistics.

Conclusion

The NCC modeling framework's ability to reproduce the observed population-level cancer statistics and the cancer cases in a prospective cohort study suggests its results are reliable to inform decision-making related to six major cancers in China.

Lung cancer screening

Randomised controlled trials, including the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) and the NELSON trial, have shown reduced mortality with lung cancer screening with low-dose CT compared with chest radiography or no screening. Although research has provided clarity on key issues of lung cancer screening, uncertainty remains about aspects that might be critical to optimise clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. This Review brings together current evidence on lung cancer screening, including an overview of clinical trials, considerations regarding the identification of individuals who benefit from lung cancer screening, management of screen-detected findings, smoking cessation interventions, cost-effectiveness, the role of artificial intelligence and biomarkers, and current challenges, solutions, and opportunities surrounding the implementation of lung cancer screening programmes from an international perspective. Further research into risk models for patient selection, personalised screening intervals, novel biomarkers, integrated cardiovascular disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease assessments, smoking cessation interventions, and artificial intelligence for lung nodule detection and risk stratification are key opportunities to increase the efficiency of lung cancer screening and ensure equity of access.

Potential Impact of Criteria Modifications on Race and Sex Disparities in Eligibility for Lung Cancer Screening

INTRODUCTION

Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening reduces lung cancer mortality, but current eligibility criteria underestimate risk in women and racial minorities. We evaluated the impact of screening criteria modifications on LDCT eligibility and lung cancer detection.

METHODS

Using data from a Lung Nodule Program, we compared persons eligible for LDCT by the following: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) 2013 criteria (55-80 y, ≥30 pack-years of smoking, and ≤15 y since cessation); USPSTF2021 criteria (50-80 y, ≥20 pack-years of smoking, and ≤15 y since cessation); quit duration expanded to less than or equal to 25 years (USPSTF2021-QD25); reducing the pack-years of smoking to more than or equal to 10 years (USPSTF2021-PY10); and both (USPSTF2021-QD25-PY10). We compare across groups using the chi-square test or analysis of variance.

RESULTS

The 17,421 individuals analyzed were of 56% female sex, 69% white, 28% black; 13% met USPSTF2013 criteria; 17% USPSTF2021; 18% USPSTF2021-QD25; 19% USPSTF2021-PY10; and 21% USPSTF2021-QD25-PY10. Additional eligible individuals by USPSTF2021 (n = 682) and USPSTF2021-QD25-PY10 (n = 1402) were 27% and 29% black, both significantly higher than USPSTF2013 (17%, p < 0.0001). These additional eligible individuals were 55% (USPSTF2021) and 55% (USPSTF2021-QD25-PY10) of female sex, compared with 48% by USPSTF2013 (p < 0.05). Of 1243 persons (7.1%) with lung cancer, 22% were screening eligible by USPSTF13. USPSTF2021-QD25-PY10 increased the total number of persons with lung cancer by 37%. These additional individuals with lung cancer were of 57% female sex (versus 48% with USPSTF2013, p = 0.0476) and 24% black (versus 20% with USPSTF2013, p = 0.3367).

CONCLUSIONS

Expansion of LDCT screening eligibility criteria to allow longer quit duration and fewer pack-years of exposure enriches the screening-eligible population for women and black persons.

Cost-effectiveness of first-line immunotherapies for advanced non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Researchers have not simultaneously compared the cost-effectiveness of six immunotherapies with chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness across different programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) levels.

METHODS

A Markov model with lifetime horizon was created for seven regimens: pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (pembro-chemo), nivolumab plus ipilimumab (nivo-ipi), nivolumab, ipilimumab plus chemotherapy (nivo-ipi-chemo), atezolizumab plus chemotherapy (atezo-chemo), atezolizumab, bevacizumab plus chemotherapy (atezo-beva-chemo), single-agent pembrolizumab, and chemotherapy alone. Input parameters were derived from trial data, a network meta-analysis, and other literature. We conducted the analysis from the perspective of US health care sector.

RESULTS

For all patients without considering PD-L1 expression, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of pembro-chemo versus chemotherapy was $183,299 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). The preferred regimens based on ICERs differed by PD-L1 levels. For patients with PD-L1 ≥50%, pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy and pembro-chemo versus pembrolizumab resulted in ICERs of $96,189 and $198,913 per QALY, respectively. The other strategies were dominated. For patients with PD-L1 of 1%-49%, the ICER of pembro-chemo comparing to chemotherapy was $218,159 per QALY. The other regimens were dominated by pembro-chemo. For patients with PD-L1 <1%, nivo-ipi versus chemotherapy and nivo-ipi-chemo versus nivo-ipi resulted in ICERs of $161,277 and $881,975 per QALY, and the other regimens were dominated strategies. At the willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per QALY, pembrolizumab had 87% and pembro-chemo had 1% probabilities being cost-effective in patients with PD-L1 ≥50% and 1%-49%, respectively. Nivo-ipi had a 34% probability being cost-effective in patients with PD-L1 <1%.

CONCLUSIONS

The PD-L1 level should be incorporated into treatment decision-making. Our findings suggest that first-line pembrolizumab, pembro-chemo, and nivo-ipi are the preferred strategies for patients with PD-L1 ≥50%, 1%-49%, and <1%, respectively.

Lung cancer screening in primary care

ABSTRACT

This article reviews the evidence supporting low-dose CT to screen for lung cancer, and the risks, costs, and challenges of implementing broad-based screening for eligible patients. Increased familiarity with lung cancer screening guidelines by primary care and specialty clinicians presents an opportunity to improve lung cancer screening rates and to save lives from the most common cause of cancer death in the United States.

Economic analysis of financial incentives for smoking cessation during pregnancy and postpartum

Higgins and colleagues' recently-completed randomized controlled trial and pooled data with 4 related trials of smoking cessation in pregnant women in Vermont (USA) showed that abstinence-contingent financial incentives (FI) increased abstinence over control conditions from early pregnancy through 24-weeks postpartum. Control conditions were best practices (BP) alone in the recent trial and payments provided independent of smoking status (noncontingently) in the others. This paper reports economic analyses of abstinence-contingent FI. Merging trial results with maternal and infant healthcare costs from all Vermont Medicaid deliveries in 2019, we computed incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and compared them to established thresholds. The healthcare sector cost (±standard error) of adding FI to BP averaged $634.76 ± $531.61 per participant. Based on this trial, the increased probability per BP + FI participant of smoking abstinence at 24-weeks postpartum was 3.17%, the cost per additional abstinent woman was $20,043, the incremental health gain was 0.0270 ± 0.0412 QALYs, the ICER was $23,511/QALY gained, and the probabilities that BP + FI was very cost-effective (ICER≤$65,910) and cost-effective (ICER≤$100,000) were 67.9% and 71.0%, respectively. Based on the pooled trials, the corresponding values were even more favorable-8.89%, $7138, 0.0758 ± 0.0178 QALYs, $8371/QALY, 98.6% and 99.3%, respectively. Each dollar invested in abstinence-contingent FI over control smoking-cessation programs yielded $4.20 in economic benefits in the recent trial and $11.90 in the pooled trials (very favorable benefit-cost ratios). Medicaid and commercial insurers may wish to consider covering financial incentives for smoking abstinence as a cost-effective service for pregnant beneficiaries who smoke. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02210832.

Minimum Volume Standards for Surgical Care of Early-Stage Lung Cancer: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

BACKGROUND

Multiple stakeholders have advocated for minimum volume standards for complex surgical procedures. The Leapfrog Group recommends that patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receive surgical resection at hospitals that perform at least 40 lung resections annually. However, the cost-effectiveness of this paradigm is unknown.

METHODS

A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed on 90-day and 5-year horizons for patients with clinical stage I NSCLC undergoing surgical resection at hospitals stratified by Leapfrog standard. Model inputs were derived from either the literature or a propensity score-matched cohort using the National Cancer Database. For the 5-year horizon, we simulated using a Markov model with 1-year cycle. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated to evaluate cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

For the 90-day horizon, resection at a Leapfrog hospital was more costly ($25 567 vs $25 530) but had greater utility (0.185 vs 0.181 quality-adjusted life-years), resulting in an ICER of 10 506. Similarly, for the 5-year horizon, resection at a Leapfrog hospital was more costly ($26 600 vs $26 495) but more effective (3.216 vs 3.122 quality-adjusted life-years), resulting in an ICER of 1108. When the costs for long-distance travel, lodging, and loss of productivity for caregivers were factored in, the ICER was 20 499 during the 5-year horizon for resection at Leapfrog hospitals. Using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000, resection at a Leapfrog hospital remained cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

Receiving surgery for clinical stage I NSCLC at hospitals that meet Leapfrog volume standards is cost-effective. Payers and policymakers should consider supporting patient and caregiver travel to higher volume institutions for lung cancer surgery.

EarlyCDT Lung blood test for risk classification of solid pulmonary nodules: systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

EarlyCDT Lung (Oncimmune Holdings plc, Nottingham, UK) is a blood test to assess malignancy risk in people with solid pulmonary nodules. It measures the presence of seven lung cancer-associated autoantibodies. Elevated levels of these autoantibodies may indicate malignant disease. The results of the test might be used to modify the risk of malignancy estimated by existing risk calculators, including the Brock and Herder models.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives were to determine the diagnostic accuracy, clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of EarlyCDT Lung; and to develop a conceptual model and identify evidence requirements for a robust cost-effectiveness analysis.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE (including Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily and Ovid MEDLINE), EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Science Citation Index, EconLit, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Health Technology Assessment database, NHS Economic Evaluation Database ( NHS EED ) and the international Health Technology Assessment database were searched on 8 March 2021.

REVIEW METHODS

A systematic review was performed of evidence on EarlyCDT Lung, including diagnostic accuracy, clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Study quality was assessed with the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies-2 tool. Evidence on other components of the pulmonary nodule diagnostic pathway (computerised tomography surveillance, Brock risk, Herder risk, positron emission tomography-computerised tomography and biopsy) was also reviewed. When feasible, bivariate meta-analyses of diagnostic accuracy were performed. Clinical outcomes were synthesised narratively. A simulation study investigated the clinical impact of using EarlyCDT Lung. Additional reviews of cost-effectiveness studies evaluated (1) other diagnostic strategies for lung cancer and (2) screening approaches for lung cancer. A conceptual model was developed.

RESULTS

A total of 47 clinical publications on EarlyCDT Lung were identified, but only five cohorts (695 patients) reported diagnostic accuracy data on patients with pulmonary nodules. All cohorts were small or at high risk of bias. EarlyCDT Lung on its own was found to have poor diagnostic accuracy, with a summary sensitivity of 20.2% (95% confidence interval 10.5% to 35.5%) and specificity of 92.2% (95% confidence interval 86.2% to 95.8%). This sensitivity was substantially lower than that estimated by the manufacturer (41.3%). No evidence on the clinical impact of EarlyCDT Lung was identified. The simulation study suggested that EarlyCDT Lung might potentially have some benefit when considering intermediate risk nodules (10-70% risk) after Herder risk analysis. Two cost-effectiveness studies on EarlyCDT Lung for pulmonary nodules were identified; none was considered suitable to inform the current decision problem. The conceptualisation process identified three core components for a future cost-effectiveness assessment of EarlyCDT Lung: (1) the features of the subpopulations and relevant heterogeneity, (2) the way EarlyCDT Lung test results affect subsequent clinical management decisions and (3) how changes in these decisions can affect outcomes. All reviewed studies linked earlier diagnosis to stage progression and stage shift to final outcomes, but evidence on these components was sparse.

LIMITATIONS

The evidence on EarlyCDT Lung among patients with pulmonary nodules was very limited, preventing meta-analyses and economic analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence on EarlyCDT Lung among patients with pulmonary nodules is insufficient to draw any firm conclusions as to its diagnostic accuracy or clinical or economic value.

FUTURE WORK

Prospective cohort studies, in which EarlyCDT Lung is used among patients with identified pulmonary nodules, are required to support a future assessment of the clinical and economic value of this test. Studies should investigate the diagnostic accuracy and clinical impact of EarlyCDT Lung in combination with Brock and Herder risk assessments. A well-designed cost-effectiveness study is also required, integrating emerging relevant evidence with the recommendations in this report.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42021242248.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 49. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Lung Cancer Screening Using Low-Dose Computed Tomography: A Systematic Review Assessing Strategy Comparison and Risk Stratification

OBJECTIVES

Our first study objective was to assess the range of lung cancer screening intervals compared within cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) and to examine the implications for the strategies identified as optimally cost effective; the second objective was to examine if and how risk subgroup-specific policies were considered.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase and Web of Science were searched for model-based CEAs of LDCT lung screening. The retrieved studies were assessed to examine if the analyses considered sufficient strategy variation to permit incremental estimation of cost effectiveness. Regarding risk selection, we examined if analyses considered alternative risk strata in separate analyses or as alternative risk-based eligibility criteria for screening.

RESULTS

The search identified 33 eligible CEAs, 23 of which only considered one screening frequency. Of the 10 analyses considering multiple screening intervals, only 4 included intervals longer than 2 years. Within the 10 studies considering multiple intervals, the optimal policy choice would differ in 5 if biennial intervals or longer had not been considered. Nineteen studies conducted risk subgroup analyses, 12 of which assumed that subgroup-specific policies were possible and 7 of which assumed that a common screening policy applies to all those screened.

CONCLUSIONS

The comparison of multiple strategies is recognised as good practice in CEA when seeking optimal policies. Studies that do include multiple intervals indicate that screening intervals longer than 1 year can be relevant. The omission of intervals of 2 years or longer from CEAs of LDCT screening could lead to the adoption of sub-optimal policies. There also is scope for greater consideration of risk-stratified policies which tailor screening intensity to estimated disease risk. Policy makers should take care when interpreting current evidence before implementing lung screening.

The Potential Value-Based Price of a Multi-Cancer Early Detection Genomic Blood Test to Complement Current Single Cancer Screening in the USA

BACKGROUND

Multi-cancer early detection (MCED) testing could increase detection of cancer at early stages, when survival outcomes are better and treatment costs are lower, but is expected to increase screening costs. This study modeled an MCED test for 19 solid cancers in a US population and estimated the potential value-based price (the maximum price to meet a given willingness to pay) of the MCED test plus current single cancer screening (usual care) compared to usual care alone from a third-party payer perspective over a lifetime horizon.

METHODS

A hybrid cohort-level state-transition and decision-tree model was developed to estimate the clinical and economic outcomes of annual MCED testing between age 50 and 79 years. The impact on time and stage of diagnosis was computed using an interception modeling approach, with the consequences of cancer modeled based on stage at diagnosis. The model parameters were mainly sourced from the literature, including a published case-control study to inform MCED test performance. All costs were inflated to 2021 US dollars.

RESULTS

Multi-cancer early detection testing shifted cancer diagnoses to earlier stages, with a 53% reduction in stage IV cancer diagnoses, resulting in longer overall survival compared with usual care. Addition of MCED decreased per cancer treatment costs by $5421 and resulted in a gain of 0.13 and 0.38 quality-adjusted life-years across all individuals in the screening program and those diagnosed with cancer, respectively. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, the potential value-based price of an MCED test was estimated at $1196. The projected survival of individuals diagnosed with cancer and the number of cancers detected at an earlier stage by MCED had the greatest impact on outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

An MCED test with high specificity would potentially improve long-term health outcomes and reduce cancer treatment costs, resulting in a value-based price of $1196 at a $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year willingness-to-pay threshold.

Association Between Primary Care Use Prior to Cancer Diagnosis and Subsequent Cancer Mortality in the Veterans Affairs Health System

IMPORTANCE

Primary care physicians (PCPs) are significant contributors of early cancer detection, yet few studies have investigated whether consistent primary care translates to improved downstream outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association of prediagnostic primary care use with metastatic disease at diagnosis and cancer-specific mortality (CSM).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cohort study used databases with primary care and referral linkage from multiple Veterans' Affairs centers from 2004 to 2017 and had a 68-month median follow-up. Analysis was completed between July 2021 and September 2022. Participants included veterans older than 39 years who had been diagnosed with 1 of 12 cancers. Inclusion criteria included known clinical staging, survival follow-up, cause of death, and receiving care at the Veterans Affairs health system (VA).

EXPOSURES

Prediagnostic PCP use, measured in the 5 years prior to diagnosis. PCP visits were binned into none (0 visits), some (1-4 visits), and annual (5 visits).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Metastatic disease at diagnosis, cancer-specific mortality (CSM) for entire cohort and stratified by tumor subtype.

RESULTS

Among 245 425 patients representing 12 tumor subtypes, mean age was 65.8 (9.3) years, and the cohort skewed male (97.6%), and White (76.1%), with higher levels of comorbidity (58.6% with Charlson Comorbidity Index scores ≥2). Compared with no prior visit, some PCP use was associated with 26% decreased odds of metastatic disease at diagnosis (odds ratio [OR], 0.74; 95% CI, 0.71-0.76; P < .001) and 12% reduced risk of CSM (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.86-0.89; P < .001). Annual PCP use was associated with 39% decreased odds of metastatic disease (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.59-0.63; P < .001) and 21% reduced risk of CSM (SHR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.77-0.81; P < .001). Among tumor subtypes, prostate cancer had the largest effect size for prior PCP use on metastatic disease at diagnosis (OR for annual use, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.30-0.35; P < .001) and CSM (SHRfor annual use, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.48-0.55; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cohort study, increased primary care use before cancer diagnosis was associated with significant decreases in metastatic disease at diagnosis and cancer-related death, with potentially the greatest difference from annual use. PCPs play a vital role in cancer prevention, and additional resources should be allocated to assist these physicians.

[Low-dose Spiral Computed Tomography in Lung Cancer Screening]

Lung cancer is one of the malignant tumors with the highest morbidity and mortality in the world. The low early diagnosis rate and poor prognosis of patients have caused serious social burden. Regular screening of high-risk population by low-dose spiral computed tomography (LDCT) can significantly improve the early diagnosis rate of lung cancer and bring new opportunities for the diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer. In recent years, LDCT lung cancer screening programs have been carried out in many countries around the world and achieved good results, but there are still some controversies in the selection of screening subjects, screening frequency, cost effectiveness and other aspects. In this paper, the key factors of LDCT lung cancer screening, screening effect, pulmonary nodule management and artificial intelligence contribution to the development of LDCT will be reviewed, and the application progress of LDCT in lung cancer screening will be discussed.
.

Strategies for Reducing False-Positive Screening Results for Intermediate-Size Nodules Evaluated Using Lung-RADS: A Secondary Analysis of National Lung Screening Trial Data

BACKGROUND. Lung-RADS version 1.1 (v1.1) classifies all solid nodules less than 6 mm as category 2. Lung-RADS v1.1 also classifies solid intermediate-size (6 to < 10 mm) nodules as category 2 if they are perifissural and have a triangular, polygonal, or ovoid shape (indicative of intrapulmonary lymph nodes). Additional category 2 criteria could reduce false-positive results of screening examinations. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of proposed strategies for reducing false-positive results for intermediate-size nodules on lung cancer screening CT evaluated using Lung-RADS v1.1. METHODS. This retrospective study entailed secondary analysis of National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) data. Of 1387 solid nodules measuring 6.0-9.5 mm on baseline screening CT examinations in the NLST, all 38 nodules in patients who developed cancer and a random sample of 200 nodules in patients who did not develop cancer were selected for further evaluation. Cancers were required to correspond with the baseline nodule on manual review. After exclusions, the sample included 223 patients (median age, 62 years; 143 men, 80 women; 196 benign nodules, 27 malignant nodules). Two thoracic radiologists independently reviewed baseline examinations to record nodule diameter and volume using semiautomated software and to determine whether nodules had perifissural location; other subpleural location; and triangular, polygonal, or ovoid shape. Different schemes for category 2 assignment were compared. RESULTS. Across readers, standard Lung-RADS v1.1 had sensitivity of 89-93% and specificity of 26-31%. A modification assigning nodules less than 10 mm with triangular, polygonal, or ovoid shape in other subpleural locations (vs only perifissural location) as category 2 had sensitivity of 85-93% and specificity of 47-51%. Lung-RADS v1.1 using volume cutoffs had sensitivity of 89-93% and specificity of 37% (both readers). The sensitivity of both modified Lung-RADS v1.1 and Lung-RADS v1.1 with volume cutoffs was not significantly different from standard Lung-RADS v1.1 (all p > .05). However, both schemes' specificity was significantly better than standard Lung-RADS v1.1 (all p < .05). Combining the two strategies yielded sensitivity of 85-93% and specificity of 58-59%. CONCLUSION. Classifying intermediate-size nodules with triangular, polygonal, or ovoid shape in any subpleural (not just perifissural) location as category 2 and using volume- rather than diameter-based measurements improves Lung-RADS specificity without decreased sensitivity. CLINICAL IMPACT. The findings can help reduce false-positive results, decreasing 6-month follow-up examinations for benign findings.

Evaluation of benefits and harms of adaptive screening schedules for lung cancer: A microsimulation study

BACKGROUND

Although lung cancer screening (LCS) has been proven effective in reducing lung cancer mortality, it is associated with some potential harms, such as false positives and invasive follow-up procedures. Determining the time to next screen based on individual risk could reduce harms while maintaining health gains. Here, we evaluate the benefits and harms of LCS strategies with adaptive schedules, and compare these with those from non-adaptive strategies.

METHODS

We extended the Lee and Zelen risk threshold method to select screening schedules based on individual's lung cancer risk and life expectancy (adaptive schedules). We compared the health benefits and harms of these adaptive schedules with regular (non-adaptive) schedules (annual, biennial and triennial) using a validated lung cancer microsimulation model. Outcomes include lung cancer deaths (LCD) averted, life years gained (LYG), discounted quality adjusted life years (QALYs) gained, and false positives per LCD averted. We also explored the impact of varying screening-related disutilities.

RESULTS

In comparison to standard regular screening recommendations, risk-dependent adaptive screening reduced screening harms while maintaining a similar level of health benefits. The net gains and the balance of benefits and harms from LCS with efficient adaptive schedules were improved compared to those from regular screening, especially when the screening-related disutilities are high.

CONCLUSIONS

Adaptive screening schedules can reduce the associated harms of screening while maintaining its associated lung cancer mortality reductions and years of life gained. Our study identifies individually tailored schedules that optimize the screening benefit/harm trade-offs.

Screening Tool to Identify Patients with Advanced Aortic Valve Stenosis

(1) Background: The clinical burden of aortic stenosis (AS) remains high in Western countries. Yet, there are no screening algorithms for this condition. We developed a risk prediction model to guide targeted screening for patients with AS. (2) Methods: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of all echocardiographic studies performed between 2013 and 2018 at a tertiary academic care center. We included reports of unique patients aged from 40 to 95 years. A logistic regression model was fitted for the risk of moderate and severe AS, with readily available demographics and comorbidity variables. Model performance was assessed by the C-index, and its calibration was judged by a calibration plot. (3) Results: Among the 38,788 reports yielded by inclusion criteria, there were 4200 (10.8%) patients with ≥moderate AS. The multivariable model demonstrated multiple variables to be associated with AS, including age, male gender, Caucasian race, Body Mass Index ≥ 30, and cardiovascular comorbidities and medications. C-statistics of the model was 0.77 and was well calibrated according to the calibration plot. An integer point system was developed to calculate the predicted risk of ≥moderate AS, which ranged from 0.0002 to 0.7711. The lower 20% of risk was approximately 0.15 (corresponds to a score of 252), while the upper 20% of risk was about 0.60 (corresponds to a score of 332 points). (4) Conclusions: We developed a risk prediction model to predict patients' risk of having ≥moderate AS based on demographic and clinical variables from a large population cohort. This tool may guide targeted screening for patients with advanced AS in the general population.

A History of Health Economics and Healthcare Delivery Research at the National Cancer Institute

With increased attention to the financing and structure of healthcare, dramatic increases in the cost of diagnosing and treating cancer, and corresponding disparities in access, the study of healthcare economics and delivery has become increasingly important. The Healthcare Delivery Research Program (HDRP) in the Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences at the National Cancer Institute (NCI) was formed in 2015 to provide a hub for cancer-related healthcare delivery and economics research. However, the roots of this program trace back much farther, at least to the formation of the NCI Division of Cancer Prevention and Control in 1983. The creation of a division focused on understanding and explaining trends in cancer morbidity and mortality was instrumental in setting the direction of cancer-related healthcare delivery and health economics research over the subsequent decades. In this commentary, we provide a brief history of health economics and healthcare delivery research at NCI, describing the organizational structure and highlighting key initiatives developed by the division, and also briefly discuss future directions. HDRP and its predecessors have supported the growth and evolution of these fields through the funding of grants and contracts; the development of data, tools, and other research resources; and thought leadership including stimulation of research on previously understudied topics. As the availability of new data, methods, and computing capacity to evaluate cancer-related healthcare delivery and economics expand, HDRP aims to continue to support this growth and evolution.

Low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening: Clinical evidence and implementation research

Lung cancer causes more deaths than breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer combined. Nevertheless, population-based lung cancer screening is still not considered standard practice in most countries worldwide. Early lung cancer detection leads to better survival outcomes: patients diagnosed with stage 1A lung cancer have a >75% 5-year survival rate, compared to <5% at stage 4. Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) thorax imaging for the secondary prevention of lung cancer has been studied at length, and has been shown to significantly reduce lung cancer mortality in high-risk populations. The US National Lung Screening Trial reported a 20% overall reduction in lung cancer mortality when comparing LDCT to chest X-ray, and the Nederlands-Leuvens Longkanker Screenings Onderzoek (NELSON) trial more recently reported a 24% reduction when comparing LDCT to no screening. Hence, the focus has now shifted to implementation research. Consequently, the 4-IN-THE-LUNG-RUN consortium based in five European countries, has set up a large-scale multicenter implementation trial. Successful implementation of and accessibility to LDCT lung cancer screening are dependent on many factors, not limited to population selection, recruitment strategy, computed tomography screening frequency, lung-nodule management, participant compliance, and cost effectiveness. This review provides an overview of current evidence for LDCT lung cancer screening, and draws attention to major factors that need to be addressed to successfully implement standardized, effective, and accessible screening throughout Europe. Evidence shows that through the appropriate use of risk-prediction models and a more personalized approach to screening, efficacy could be improved. Furthermore, extending the screening interval for low-risk individuals to reduce costs and associated harms is a possibility, and through the use of volumetric-based measurement and follow-up, false positive results can be greatly reduced. Finally, smoking cessation programs could be a valuable addition to screening programs and artificial intelligence could offer a solution to the added workload pressures radiologists are facing.

Cost-Effectiveness of a Telephone-Based Smoking Cessation Randomized Trial in the Lung Cancer Screening Setting

BACKGROUND

There are limited data on the cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions in lung cancer screening settings. We conducted an economic analysis embedded in a national randomized trial of 2 telephone counseling cessation interventions.

METHODS

We used a societal perspective to compare the short-term cost per 6-month bio-verified quit and long-term cost-effectiveness of the interventions. Trial data were used to micro-cost intervention delivery, and the data were extended to a lifetime horizon using an established Cancer Intervention Surveillance and Modeling Network lung cancer model. We modeled the impact of screening accompanied by 8 weeks vs 3 weeks of telephone counseling (plus nicotine replacement) vs screening alone based on 2021 screening eligibility. Lifetime downstream costs (2021 dollars) and effects (life-years gained, quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs]) saved were discounted at 3%. Sensitivity analyses tested the effects of varying quit rates and costs; all analyses assumed nonrelapse after quitting.

RESULTS

The costs for delivery of the 8-week vs 3-week protocol were $380.23 vs $144.93 per person, and quit rates were 7.14% vs 5.96%, respectively. The least costly strategy was a 3-week counseling approach. An 8-week (vs 3-week) counseling approach increased costs but gained QALYs for an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $4029 per QALY. Screening alone cost more and saved fewer QALYs than either counseling strategy. Conclusions were robust in sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Telephone-based cessation interventions with nicotine replacement are considered cost-effective in the lung screening setting. Integrating smoking cessation interventions with lung screening programs has the potential to maximize long-term health benefits at reasonable costs.

Variation in Model-Based Economic Evaluations of Low-Dose Computed Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer: A Methodological Review

OBJECTIVES

There is significant heterogeneity in the results of published model-based economic evaluations of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening for lung cancer. We sought to understand and demonstrate how these models differ.

METHODS

An expansion and update of a previous systematic review (N = 19). Databases (including MEDLINE and Embase) were searched. Studies were included if strategies involving (single or multiple) LDCT screening were compared with no screening or other imaging modalities, in a population at risk of lung cancer. More detailed data extraction of studies from the previous review was conducted. Studies were critically appraised using the Consensus Health Economic Criteria list.

RESULTS

A total of 16 new studies met the inclusion criteria, giving a total of 35 studies. There are geographic and temporal differences and differences in screening intervals and eligible populations. Studies varied in the types of models used, for example, decision tree, Markov, and microsimulation models. Most conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis (using life-years gained) or cost-utility analysis. The potential for overdiagnosis was considered in many models, unlike with other potential consequences of screening. Some studies report considering lead-time bias, but fewer mention length bias. Generally, the more recent studies, involving more complex modeling, tended to meet more of the critical appraisal criteria, with notable exceptions.

CONCLUSIONS

There are many differences across the economic evaluations contributing to variation in estimates of the cost-effectiveness of LDCT screening for lung cancer. Several methodological factors and evidence needs have been highlighted that will require consideration in future economic evaluations to achieve better agreement.

Cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening by low-dose CT in China: a micro-simulation study

Background

The effectiveness of lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) has been established. The current study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening with LDCT in a general population in China.

Methods

A previously validated micro-simulation model was used to simulate a cohort of men and women on a lifetime horizon in the presence and absence of LDCT screening. The modeling data were collected from numerous national and international sources. Simulated screening scenarios included different combinations of screening intervals and start and stop ages. Additional costs (valued in Chinese Yuan, CNY; 1 USD = 6.8976 CNY, 1 EUR = 7.8755 CNY in 2020), life-years gained (LYG) and mortality reduction due to screening were also determined. The costs and life-years were discounted by 3%. All results were scaled to 1,000 individuals. The average cost-effectiveness ratio (ACER) was calculated. A willingness-to-pay threshold of CNY 217.3k / LYG was considered. A healthcare system perspective was adopted.

Results

Compared to no screening, lung cancer screening by LDCT in a general Chinese population yielded 21.0 - 36.7 LYG in men and 9.2 - 16.6 LYG in women across the scenarios. For men, biennial LDCT screening yielded an ACER of CNY 171.4k - 306.3k / LYG relative to no screening. Biennial screening performed between 55 and 75 years of age was optimal at the defined threshold; it resulted in CNY 174.6k / LYG and a lung cancer mortality reduction of 9.1%, and this scenario had a 75% probability of being cost-effective. For women, the ACER ranged from CNY 364.2k to 1193.3k / LYG.

Conclusions

In China, lung cancer screening with LDCT in the general population including never smokers could be cost-effective for men with 75% probability, but not for women. The optimal strategy for men would be performing biennial screening between 55 and 75 years of age.

Factors Influencing the False Positive Rate in CT Lung Cancer Screening

PURPOSE

To identify factors influencing the likelihood of a false positive lung cancer screening (LCS) computed tomography (CT), which may lead to increased costs and patient anxiety.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this retrospective study, we examined all LCS CTs performed across our healthcare network from 2014 to 2018, recording Lung-RADS category and diagnosis of lung cancer. A false positive was defined by Lung-RADS 3-4X and no diagnosis of lung cancer within 1 year. Patient demographics and smoking history, presence of emphysema, diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, radiologist years of experience and annual volume, income level by patient zip code, and screening institution were evaluated in a multivariate logistic regression model for false positive exams.

RESULTS

A total of 5835 LCS CTs were included from 3735 patients. Lung cancer was diagnosed in 142 cases (2%). Of the LCS CTs, 905 (16%) were positive by Lung-RADS, and 766 (13%) represented false positives. Logistic regression analysis showed that screening institution (odds ratios [OR] 0.91 - 2.43), baseline scan (OR 1.43), radiologist experience (OR 0.59), patient age (OR 2.08), diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR 1.34), presence of emphysema (OR 1.32), and income level (OR 0.43) were significant predictors of false positives.

CONCLUSION

A number of patient-specific and site/radiologist-specific factors influence the false positive rate in CT LCS. In particular, radiologists with less experience had a higher false positive rate. Screening programs may wish to develop quality assurance programs to compare the false positive rates of their radiologists to national benchmarks.

An Evolutionary Algorithm to Personalize Stool-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening

BACKGROUND

Fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) is an established method for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Measured FIT-concentrations are associated with both present and future risk of CRC, and may be used for personalized screening. However, evaluation of personalized screening is computationally challenging. In this study, a broadly applicable algorithm is presented to efficiently optimize personalized screening policies that prescribe screening intervals and FIT-cutoffs, based on age and FIT-history.

METHODS

We present a mathematical framework for personalized screening policies and a bi-objective evolutionary algorithm that identifies policies with minimal costs and maximal health benefits. The algorithm is combined with an established microsimulation model (MISCAN-Colon), to accurately estimate the costs and benefits of generated policies, without restrictive Markov assumptions. The performance of the algorithm is demonstrated in three experiments.

RESULTS

In Experiment 1, a relatively small benchmark problem, the optimal policies were known. The algorithm approached the maximum feasible benefits with a relative difference of 0.007%. Experiment 2 optimized both intervals and cutoffs, Experiment 3 optimized cutoffs only. Optimal policies in both experiments are unknown. Compared to policies recently evaluated for the USPSTF, personalized screening increased health benefits up to 14 and 4.3%, for Experiments 2 and 3, respectively, without adding costs. Generated policies have several features concordant with current screening recommendations.

DISCUSSION

The method presented in this paper is flexible and capable of optimizing personalized screening policies evaluated with computationally-intensive but established simulation models. It can be used to inform screening policies for CRC or other diseases. For CRC, more debate is needed on what features a policy needs to exhibit to make it suitable for implementation in practice.

Cost-Effectiveness of Lung Cancer Screening using Low-dose Computed Tomography in China: Policy Guidance Based on Start Age and Interval (Preprint)

Background

Lung cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer and the leading cause of cancer-related death in China. The effectiveness of screening for lung cancer has been reported to reduce lung cancer–specific and overall mortality, although the cost-effectiveness, optimal start age, and screening interval remain unclear.

Objective

This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening among heavy smokers in China by incorporating start age and screening interval.

Methods

A Markov state-transition model was used to assess the cost-effectiveness of a lung cancer screening program in China. The evaluated screening strategies were based on a screening start age of 50-74 years and a screening interval of once or annually. Transition probabilities were obtained from the literature and validated, while cost parameters were derived from databases of local medical insurance bureaus. A societal perspective was adopted. The outputs of the model included costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and lung cancer–specific mortality, with future costs and outcomes discounted by 5%. A currency exchange rate of 1 CNY=0.1557 USD is applicable. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated for different screening strategies relative to nonscreening.

Results

The proposed model suggested that screening led to a gain of 0.001-0.042 QALYs per person as compared with the findings in the nonscreening cohort. Meanwhile, one-time and annual screenings were associated with reductions in lung cancer–related mortality of 0.004%-1.171% and 6.189%-15.819%, respectively. The ICER ranged from 119,974.08 to 614,167.75 CNY per QALY gained relative to nonscreening. Using the World Health Organization threshold of 212,676 CNY per QALY gained, annual screening from a start age of 55 years and one-time screening from the age of 65 years can be considered as cost-effective in China. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted.

Conclusions

This economic evaluation revealed that a population-based lung cancer screening program in China for heavy smokers using low-dose computed tomography was cost-effective for annual screening of smokers aged 55-74 years and one-time screening of those aged 65-74 years. Moreover, annual lung cancer screening should be promoted in China to realize the benefits of a guideline-recommended screening program.