|
1
|
Guerreiro T, Aguiar P, Araújo A. Current Evidence for a Lung Cancer Screening Program. PORTUGUESE JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH 2024; 42:133-158. [PMID: 39469231 PMCID: PMC11498919 DOI: 10.1159/000538434] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/01/2023] [Accepted: 03/01/2024] [Indexed: 10/30/2024] Open
Abstract
Background Lung cancer screening is still in an early phase compared to other cancer screening programs, despite its high lethality particularly when diagnosed late. Achieving early diagnosis is crucial to obtain optimal outcomes. Summary In this review, we will address the current evidence on lung cancer screening through low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) and its impact on mortality reduction, existing screening recommendations, patient eligibility criteria, screening frequency and duration, benefits and harms, cost-effectiveness and some insights on lung cancer screening implementation and adoption. Additionally, new non-imaging, noninvasive biomarkers with high diagnostic potential are also briefly highlighted. Key Messages LDCT screening in a prespecified population based on age and smoking history proved to reduce lung cancer mortality. Optimization of the target population and management of LDCT pitfalls can further improve lung cancer screening efficiency and cost-effectiveness. Novel screening technologies and biomarkers being studied can potentially be game-changers in lung cancer screening and diagnosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Teresa Guerreiro
- NOVA National School of Public Health, NOVA University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Pedro Aguiar
- NOVA National School of Public Health, NOVA University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal
- Public Health Research Center, NOVA University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - António Araújo
- CHUPorto - University Hospitalar Center of Porto, Porto, Portugal
- UMIB - Unit for Multidisciplinary Research in Biomedicine, ICBAS - School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
| |
Collapse
|
|
2
|
Sorscher S. Inadequate Uptake of USPSTF-Recommended Low Dose CT Lung Cancer Screening. J Prim Care Community Health 2024; 15:21501319241235011. [PMID: 38400557 PMCID: PMC10894545 DOI: 10.1177/21501319241235011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/16/2024] [Revised: 02/05/2024] [Accepted: 02/07/2024] [Indexed: 02/25/2024] Open
Abstract
In 2023, Journal of Primary Care and Community Health published the results of 4 outstanding studies in which investigators aimed to explore and improve clinician and eligible individuals' knowledge of the rationale for lung cancer screening (LCS). Their results highlighted the underutilization of LCS, particularly for certain high risk populations, and the continued disparities in screening seen between groups of eligible individuals. Here, key findings from those 2023 Journal of Primary Care and Community Health reports, along with salient findings of other recent LCS reports, are discussed. The bases for the United States Preventive Task Force (USPSTF) LCS recommendations, barriers primary care providers face, the perspective of eligible individuals, importance of shared decision-making (SDM) and disparities between groups in LCS are reviewed along with potential strategies to ensure that more eligible individuals are offered LCS.
Collapse
|
|
3
|
Kamalanathan A, Muthu B, Kuniyil Kaleena P. Artificial Intelligence (AI) Game Changer in Cancer Biology. MARVELS OF ARTIFICIAL AND COMPUTATIONAL INTELLIGENCE IN LIFE SCIENCES 2023:62-87. [DOI: 10.2174/9789815136807123010009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/07/2025]
Abstract
Healthcare is one of many industries where the most modern technologies,
such as artificial intelligence and machine learning, have shown a wide range of
applications. Cancer, one of the most prevalent non-communicable diseases in modern
times, accounts for a sizable portion of worldwide mortality. Investigations are
continuously being conducted to find ways to reduce cancer mortality and morbidity.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is currently being used in cancer research, with promising
results. Two main features play a vital role in improving cancer prognosis: early
detection and proper diagnosis using imaging and molecular techniques. AI's use as a
tool in these sectors has demonstrated its capacity to precisely detect and diagnose,
which is one of AI's many applications in cancer research. The purpose of this chapter
is to review the literature and find AI applications in a range of cancers that are
commonly seen.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ashok Kamalanathan
- Department of Microbiology and Biotechnology, Faculty of Arts and Science, Bharath Institute
of Higher Education and Research (BIHER), Chennai- 600 073, Tamil Nadu, India
| | - Babu Muthu
- Department of Microbiology and Biotechnology, Faculty of Arts and Science, Bharath Institute
of Higher Education and Research (BIHER), Chennai- 600 073, Tamil Nadu, India
| | | |
Collapse
|
|
4
|
Nabatchian F, Davoudi M, Ashtiani M, Davoudi N, Afrisham R. Hydroalcoholic Extract of Achillea Wilhelmsii Decreases the Expressions
of Hippo Signaling Pathway-Associated Oncogenes in the A549 Lung
Cancer Cell Line. CURRENT CHEMICAL BIOLOGY 2023; 17:140-146. [DOI: 10.2174/2212796817666230214100146] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/28/2022] [Revised: 11/19/2022] [Accepted: 12/29/2022] [Indexed: 05/17/2025]
Abstract
Background:
Achillea wilhelmsii used in traditional Iranian medicine to treat a variety of
disorders, has been proven to contribute to some signaling pathways in cancers. Evidence suggests
that the Hippo pathway, which regulates organ size, is altered in a few conditions like lung cancer. In
this regard, this study aimed to evaluate the effect of the hydroalcoholic extract of this plant on the viability
and mRNA expression of some Hippo signaling pathway-associated oncogenes and suppressors
in A549 lung cancer cell lines.
Methods:
Hydroalcoholic extract was prepared using a Soxhlet extractor and its antiproliferative activity
was studied by MTT assay. Then, the mRNA expressions of "large tumour suppressor kinases 1
and 2" (LATS1 and LATS2), "Yes1 Associated Transcriptional Regulator" (YAP1), and "Transcriptional
co‑activator with PDZ‑binding motif" (TAZ) were measured using real-time PCR.
Results:
According to MTT, the viability was decreased significantly after 24 h treatment with A. wilhelmsii
at the concentrations of 800-1000 μg/ml and after 48 h treatment at the concentration of 400-
1000 μg/ml. While the mRNA levels of LATS1, TAZ, and YAP1 decreased significantly compared to
untreated cells at the concentration of 200 μg/ml after 48 h treatment. However, the mRNA expression
of LATS2 did not change.
Conclusion:
Our findings showed that hydroalcoholic extract of A. wilhelmsii inhibited the viability of
lung cancer cells as well as it could decrease the expression of both oncogenes in the Hippo pathway.
However, it had suppressing effects on LATS1, which should be considered in further studies.
conclusion:
Hydroalcoholic extract of A. wilhelmsii might inhibit proliferation of lung cancer cells as well as it could decrease the expression of both oncogenes in them. However, it had suppressing effects on LATS1, which should be considered in further studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fariba Nabatchian
- Department of Medical Laboratory Sciences, School of Allied Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran,
Iran
| | - Maryam Davoudi
- Department of Medical Laboratory Sciences, School of Allied Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran,
Iran
| | - Mojtaba Ashtiani
- Department of Medical Laboratory Sciences, School of Allied Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran,
Iran
| | - Negin Davoudi
- Department of Pharmacy, School of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Reza Afrisham
- Department of Medical Laboratory Sciences, School of Allied Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran,
Iran
| |
Collapse
|
|
5
|
Behr CM, Oude Wolcherink MJ, IJzerman MJ, Vliegenthart R, Koffijberg H. Population-Based Screening Using Low-Dose Chest Computed Tomography: A Systematic Review of Health Economic Evaluations. PHARMACOECONOMICS 2023; 41:395-411. [PMID: 36670332 PMCID: PMC10020316 DOI: 10.1007/s40273-022-01238-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 12/27/2022] [Indexed: 05/10/2023]
Abstract
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 .
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carina M Behr
- Health Technology and Services Research, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | | | - Maarten J IJzerman
- Health Technology and Services Research, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
- Cancer Health Services Research, Centre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
- Erasmus School of Health Policy and Managament, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Rozemarijn Vliegenthart
- Department of Radiology, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Hendrik Koffijberg
- Health Technology and Services Research, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
|
6
|
Bidzińska J, Szurowska E. See Lung Cancer with an AI. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:1321. [PMID: 36831662 PMCID: PMC9954317 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15041321] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2023] [Revised: 02/13/2023] [Accepted: 02/17/2023] [Indexed: 02/22/2023] Open
Abstract
A lot has happened in the field of lung cancer screening in recent months. The ongoing discussion and documentation published by the scientific community and policymakers are of great importance to the entire European community and perhaps beyond. Lung cancer is the main worldwide killer. Low-dose computed tomography-based screening, together with smoking cessation, is the only tool to fight lung cancer, as it has already been proven in the United States of America but also European randomized controlled trials. Screening requires a lot of well-organized specialized work, but it can be supported by artificial intelligence (AI). Here we discuss whether and how to use AI for patients, radiologists, pulmonologists, thoracic surgeons, and all hospital staff supporting screening process benefits.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joanna Bidzińska
- Second Department of Radiology, Medical University of Gdansk, 80-210 Gdańsk, Poland
| | | |
Collapse
|
|
7
|
Duarte A, Corbett M, Melton H, Harden M, Palmer S, Soares M, Simmonds M. EarlyCDT Lung blood test for risk classification of solid pulmonary nodules: systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 2022; 26:1-184. [PMID: 36534989 PMCID: PMC9791464 DOI: 10.3310/ijfm4802] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ana Duarte
- Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York UK
| | - Mark Corbett
- Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York UK
| | - Hollie Melton
- Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York UK
| | - Melissa Harden
- Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York UK
| | - Stephen Palmer
- Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York UK
| | - Marta Soares
- Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York UK
| | - Mark Simmonds
- Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York UK
| |
Collapse
|
|
8
|
Fabbro M, Hahn K, Novaes O, Ó'Grálaigh M, O'Mahony JF. Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Lung Cancer Screening Using Low-Dose Computed Tomography: A Systematic Review Assessing Strategy Comparison and Risk Stratification. PHARMACOECONOMICS - OPEN 2022; 6:773-786. [PMID: 36040557 PMCID: PMC9596656 DOI: 10.1007/s41669-022-00346-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 05/23/2022] [Indexed: 06/15/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew Fabbro
- School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, 2-4 Foster Place, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Kirah Hahn
- School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, 2-4 Foster Place, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Olivia Novaes
- School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, 2-4 Foster Place, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Mícheál Ó'Grálaigh
- School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, 2-4 Foster Place, Dublin, Ireland
| | - James F O'Mahony
- School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, 2-4 Foster Place, Dublin, Ireland.
| |
Collapse
|
|
9
|
Grover H, King W, Bhattarai N, Moloney E, Sharp L, Fuller L. Systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of screening for lung cancer with low dose computed tomography. Lung Cancer 2022; 170:20-33. [DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2022.05.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/21/2021] [Revised: 03/23/2022] [Accepted: 05/10/2022] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
|
|
10
|
Peters JL, Snowsill TM, Griffin E, Robinson S, Hyde CJ. Variation in Model-Based Economic Evaluations of Low-Dose Computed Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer: A Methodological Review. VALUE IN HEALTH : THE JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR PHARMACOECONOMICS AND OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2022; 25:656-665. [PMID: 35365310 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2021.11.1352] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/19/2021] [Revised: 10/24/2021] [Accepted: 11/01/2021] [Indexed: 06/14/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jaime L Peters
- Exeter Test Group, University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, England, UK.
| | - Tristan M Snowsill
- Health Economics Group, University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, England, UK
| | | | - Sophie Robinson
- PenTAG, University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, England, UK
| | - Chris J Hyde
- Exeter Test Group, University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, England, UK
| |
Collapse
|
|
11
|
Hsu HS, Chiang XH, Hsu HH, Chen JS, Hsu CP. Low-dose computed tomography screening, follow-up, and management of lung nodules – An expert consensus statement from Taiwan. FORMOSAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY 2022. [DOI: 10.4103/fjs.fjs_114_22] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/04/2022] Open
|
|
12
|
Cadham CJ, Cao P, Jayasekera J, Taylor KL, Levy DT, Jeon J, Elkin EB, Foley KL, Joseph A, Kong CY, Minnix JA, Rigotti NA, Toll BA, Zeliadt SB, Meza R, Mandelblatt J. Cost-Effectiveness of Smoking Cessation Interventions in the Lung Cancer Screening Setting: A Simulation Study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2021; 113:1065-1073. [PMID: 33484569 PMCID: PMC8502465 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djab002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/19/2020] [Revised: 11/02/2020] [Accepted: 01/04/2021] [Indexed: 01/16/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Guidelines recommend offering cessation interventions to smokers eligible for lung cancer screening, but there is little data comparing specific cessation approaches in this setting. We compared the benefits and costs of different smoking cessation interventions to help screening programs select specific cessation approaches. METHODS We conducted a societal-perspective cost-effectiveness analysis using a Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network model simulating individuals born in 1960 over their lifetimes. Model inputs were derived from Medicare, national cancer registries, published studies, and micro-costing of cessation interventions. We modeled annual lung cancer screening following 2014 US Preventive Services Task Force guidelines plus cessation interventions offered to current smokers at first screen, including pharmacotherapy only or pharmacotherapy with electronic and/or web-based, telephone, individual, or group counseling. Outcomes included lung cancer cases and deaths, life-years saved, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) saved, costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. RESULTS Compared with screening alone, all cessation interventions decreased cases of and deaths from lung cancer. Compared incrementally, efficient cessation strategies included pharmacotherapy with either web-based cessation ($555 per QALY), telephone counseling ($7562 per QALY), or individual counseling ($35 531 per QALY). Cessation interventions continued to have costs per QALY well below accepted willingness to pay thresholds even with the lowest intervention effects and was more cost-effective in cohorts with higher smoking prevalence. CONCLUSION All smoking cessation interventions delivered with lung cancer screening are likely to provide benefits at reasonable costs. Because the differences between approaches were small, the choice of intervention should be guided by practical concerns such as staff training and availability.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher J Cadham
- Department of Oncology, Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Pianpian Cao
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Jinani Jayasekera
- Department of Oncology, Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Kathryn L Taylor
- Department of Oncology, Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC, USA
| | - David T Levy
- Department of Oncology, Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Jihyoun Jeon
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Elena B Elkin
- Department of Health Policy and Management at Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, New York, NY, USA
| | - Kristie L Foley
- Department of Implementation Science, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
| | - Anne Joseph
- Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Chung Yin Kong
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA
| | - Jennifer A Minnix
- Department of Behavioral Science, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Nancy A Rigotti
- Department of Medicine and Mongan Institute, Tobacco Research and Treatment Center, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Benjamin A Toll
- Department of Public Health Sciences and Psychiatry, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA
| | - Steven B Zeliadt
- Department of Health Services, School of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
- Center of Innovation for Veteran-Centered and Value-Driven Care, VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Rafael Meza
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Jeanne Mandelblatt
- Department of Oncology, Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
13
|
Esmaeili MH, Seyednejad F, Mahboub-Ahari A, Ameri H, Abdollahzad H, Safaei N, Alinezhad F, Yousefi M. Cost-effectiveness analysis of lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography in an Iranian high-risk population. J Med Screen 2021; 28:494-501. [PMID: 34039102 DOI: 10.1177/09691413211018253] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The results of recent studies have shown that using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) for screening of lung cancer (LC) improves cancer outcomes. The objective of the current study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of LDCT in an Iranian high-risk population. METHODS A Markov cohort simulation model with four health states was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of LDCT from a healthcare system perspective in the people aged 55-74 who smoked 25 or more cigarettes per day for 10-30 years. Cost data were collected, reviewing 324 medical records of patients with LC, and utilities and transition probabilities were extracted from the literature. The Monte Carlo simulation method was applied to run the model. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis and one-way analysis were also performed. RESULTS LC screening in comparison to a no-screening strategy was costly and effective. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of screening versus no-screening was IRR (Iranian rials) 98,515,014.04 which falls below the Iranian threshold of three times GDP (gross domestic product) per capita. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the results of the economic analysis were robust to variations in the key inputs for both. CONCLUSIONS Using LDCT for screening of LC patients in a high-risk population is a cost-effective strategy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mansur Haji Esmaeili
- Department of Health Economics, School of Management and Medical Informatics, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
| | - Farshad Seyednejad
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Madani Hospital, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
| | - Alireza Mahboub-Ahari
- Department of Health Economics, School of Management and Medical Informatics, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
| | - Hosein Ameri
- Health Policy and Management Research Center, Department of Health Services Management, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran
| | - Hadi Abdollahzad
- Research Center for Environmental Determinants of Health, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Kermanshah, Iran
| | - Naser Safaei
- Madani Heart Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
| | - Farbod Alinezhad
- Students' Research Committee, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
| | - Mahmood Yousefi
- Department of Health Economics, School of Management and Medical Informatics, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
| |
Collapse
|
|
14
|
Novellis P, Cominesi SR, Rossetti F, Mondoni M, Gregorc V, Veronesi G. Lung cancer screening: who pays? Who receives? The European perspectives. Transl Lung Cancer Res 2021; 10:2395-2406. [PMID: 34164287 PMCID: PMC8182705 DOI: 10.21037/tlcr-20-677] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide, and its early detection is critical to achieving a curative treatment and to reducing mortality. Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) is a highly sensitive technique for detecting noninvasive small lung tumors in high-risk populations. We here analyze the current status of lung cancer screening (LCS) from a European point of view. With economic burden of health care in most European countries resting on the state, it is important to reduce costs of screening and improve its effectiveness. Current cost-effectiveness analyses on LCS have indicated a favorable economic profile. The most recently published analysis reported an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €3,297 per 1 life-year gained adjusted for the quality of life (QALY) and €2,944 per life-year gained, demonstrating a 90% probability of ICER being below €15,000 and a 98.1% probability of being below €25,000. Different risk models have been used to identify the target population; among these, the PLCOM2012 in particular allows for the selection of the population to be screened with high sensitivity. Risk models should also be employed to define screening intervals, which can reduce the general number of LDCT scans after the baseline round. Future perspectives of screening in a European scenario are related to the will of the policy makers to implement policy on a large scale and to improve the effectiveness of a broad screening of smoking-related disease, including cardiovascular prevention, by measuring coronary calcium score on LDCT. The employment of artificial intelligence (AI) in imaging interpretation, the use of liquid biopsies for the characterization of CT-detected undetermined nodules, and less invasive, personalized surgical treatments, will improve the effectiveness of LCS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pierluigi Novellis
- Division of Thoracic Surgery, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Francesca Rossetti
- Division of Thoracic Surgery, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Michele Mondoni
- Department of Health Sciences, University of Milan, Respiratory Unit, ASST Santi Paolo e Carlo, Milan, Italy
| | - Vanesa Gregorc
- Department of Medical Oncology, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Giulia Veronesi
- Division of Thoracic Surgery, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.,Faculty of Medicine and Surgery, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
|
15
|
Actuarial Analysis of Survival among Breast Cancer Patients in Lithuania. Healthcare (Basel) 2021; 9:healthcare9040383. [PMID: 33915700 PMCID: PMC8066802 DOI: 10.3390/healthcare9040383] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/25/2021] [Revised: 03/19/2021] [Accepted: 03/22/2021] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Breast cancer is the most common cause of mortality due to cancer for women both in Lithuania and worldwide. Chances of survival after diagnosis differ significantly depending on the stage of disease at the time of diagnosis. Extended term periods are required to estimate survival of, e.g., 15–20 years. Moreover, since mortality of the average population changes with time, estimates of survival of cancer patients derived after a long period of observation can become outdated and can be no longer used to estimate survival of patients who were diagnosed later. Therefore, it can be useful to construct analytic functions that describe survival probabilities. Shorter periods of observation can be enough for such construction. We used the data collected by the Lithuanian Cancer Registry for our analysis. We estimated the chances of survival for up to 5 years after patients were diagnosed with breast cancer in Lithuania. Then we found analytic survival functions which best fit the observed data. At the end of this paper, we provided some examples for applications and directions for further research. We used mainly the Kaplan–Meier method for our study.
Collapse
|
|
16
|
Sands J, Tammemägi MC, Couraud S, Baldwin DR, Borondy-Kitts A, Yankelevitz D, Lewis J, Grannis F, Kauczor HU, von Stackelberg O, Sequist L, Pastorino U, McKee B. Lung Screening Benefits and Challenges: A Review of The Data and Outline for Implementation. J Thorac Oncol 2021; 16:37-53. [PMID: 33188913 DOI: 10.1016/j.jtho.2020.10.127] [Citation(s) in RCA: 64] [Impact Index Per Article: 16.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/13/2020] [Revised: 09/18/2020] [Accepted: 10/04/2020] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide, accounting for almost a fifth of all cancer-related deaths. Annual computed tomographic lung cancer screening (CTLS) detects lung cancer at earlier stages and reduces lung cancer-related mortality among high-risk individuals. Many medical organizations, including the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, recommend annual CTLS in high-risk populations. However, fewer than 5% of individuals worldwide at high risk for lung cancer have undergone screening. In large part, this is owing to delayed implementation of CTLS in many countries throughout the world. Factors contributing to low uptake in countries with longstanding CTLS endorsement, such as the United States, include lack of patient and clinician awareness of current recommendations in favor of CTLS and clinician concerns about CTLS-related radiation exposure, false-positive results, overdiagnosis, and cost. This review of the literature serves to address these concerns by evaluating the potential risks and benefits of CTLS. Review of key components of a lung screening program, along with an updated shared decision aid, provides guidance for program development and optimization. Review of studies evaluating the population considered "high-risk" is included as this may affect future guidelines within the United States and other countries considering lung screening implementation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jacob Sands
- Department of Medical Oncology, Lowe Center for Thoracic Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
| | - Martin C Tammemägi
- Department of Health Sciences, Brock University, St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada
| | - Sebastien Couraud
- Acute Respiratory Disease and Thoracic Oncology Department, Lyon Sud Hospital, Hospices Civils de Lyon Cancer Institute; EMR-3738 Therapeutic Targeting in Oncology, Lyon Sud Medical Faculty, Lyon 1 University, Lyon, France
| | - David R Baldwin
- Respiratory Medicine Unit, David Evans Research Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, United Kingdom
| | - Andrea Borondy-Kitts
- Lung Cancer and Patient Advocate, Consultant Patient Outreach & Research Specialist, Lahey Hospital & Medical Center, Burlington, Massachusetts
| | - David Yankelevitz
- Department of Radiology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York
| | - Jennifer Lewis
- VA Tennessee Valley Healthcare System, Geriatric Research, Education and Clinical Center (GRECC), Nashville, Tennessee; Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee; Vanderbilt Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Fred Grannis
- City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, California
| | - Hans-Ulrich Kauczor
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Translational Lung Research Center, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Oyunbileg von Stackelberg
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Translational Lung Research Center, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Lecia Sequist
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Ugo Pastorino
- Thoracic Surgery Unit, Department of Research, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Brady McKee
- Division of Radiology, Lahey Hospital & Medical Center, Burlington, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
|
17
|
Chintanapakdee W, Mendoza DP, Zhang EW, Botwin A, Gilman MD, Gainor JF, Shepard JAO, Digumarthy SR. Detection of Extrapulmonary Malignancy During Lung Cancer Screening: 5-Year Analysis at a Tertiary Hospital. J Am Coll Radiol 2020; 17:1609-1620. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2020.09.032] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/23/2020] [Revised: 09/02/2020] [Accepted: 09/09/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
|
|
18
|
|
|
19
|
Vicente E, Modiri A, Kipritidis J, Hagan A, Yu K, Wibowo H, Yan Y, Owen DR, Matuszak MM, Mohindra P, Timmerman R, Sawant A. Functionally weighted airway sparing (FWAS): a functional avoidance method for preserving post-treatment ventilation in lung radiotherapy. Phys Med Biol 2020; 65:165010. [PMID: 32575096 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ab9f5d] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Recent changes to the guidelines for screening and early diagnosis of lung cancer have increased the interest in preserving post-radiotherapy lung function. Current investigational approaches are based on spatially mapping functional regions and generating regional avoidance plans that preferentially spare highly ventilated/perfused lung. A potentially critical, yet overlooked, aspect of functional avoidance is radiation injury to peripheral airways, which serve as gas conduits to and from functional lung regions. Dose redistribution based solely on regional function may cause irreparable damage to the 'supply chain'. To address this deficiency, we propose the functionally weighted airway sparing (FWAS) method. FWAS (i) maps the bronchial pathways to each functional sub-lobar lung volume; (ii) assigns a weighting factor to each airway based on the relative contribution of the sub-volume to overall lung function; and (iii) creates a treatment plan that aims to preserve these functional pathways. To evaluate it, we used four cases from a retrospective cohort of SAbR patients treated for lung cancer. Each patient's airways were auto-segmented from a diagnostic-quality breath-hold CT using a research virtual bronchoscopy software. A ventilation map was generated from the planning 4DCT to map regional lung function. For each terminal airway, as resolved by the segmentation software, the total ventilation within the sub-lobar volume supported by that airway was estimated and used as a function-based weighting factor. Upstream airways were weighted based on the cumulative volumetric ventilation supported by corresponding downstream airways. Using a previously developed model for airway radiosensitivity, dose constraints were determined for each airway corresponding to a <5% probability of airway collapse. Airway dose constraints, ventilation scores, and clinical dose constraints were input to a swarm optimization-based inverse planning engine to create a 3D conformal SAbR plan (CRT). The FWAS plans were compared to the patients' prescribed CRT clinical plans and the inverse-optimized clinical plans. Depending on the size and location of the tumour, the FWAS plan showed superior preservation of ventilation due to airflow preservation through open pathways (i.e. cumulative ventilation score from the sub-lobar volumes of open pathways). Improvements ranged between 3% and 23%, when comparing to the prescribed clinical plans, and between 3% and 35%, when comparing to the inverse-optimized clinical plans. The three plans satisfied clinical requirements for PTV coverage and OAR dose constraints. These initial results suggest that by sparing pathways to high-functioning lung subregions it is possible to reduce post-SAbR loss of respiratory function.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E Vicente
- University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States of America
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
20
|
Veronesi G, Baldwin DR, Henschke CI, Ghislandi S, Iavicoli S, Oudkerk M, De Koning HJ, Shemesh J, Field JK, Zulueta JJ, Horgan D, Fiestas Navarrete L, Infante MV, Novellis P, Murray RL, Peled N, Rampinelli C, Rocco G, Rzyman W, Scagliotti GV, Tammemagi MC, Bertolaccini L, Triphuridet N, Yip R, Rossi A, Senan S, Ferrante G, Brain K, van der Aalst C, Bonomo L, Consonni D, Van Meerbeeck JP, Maisonneuve P, Novello S, Devaraj A, Saghir Z, Pelosi G. Recommendations for Implementing Lung Cancer Screening with Low-Dose Computed Tomography in Europe. Cancers (Basel) 2020; 12:E1672. [PMID: 32599792 PMCID: PMC7352874 DOI: 10.3390/cancers12061672] [Citation(s) in RCA: 48] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/07/2020] [Revised: 06/15/2020] [Accepted: 06/17/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) was demonstrated in the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) to reduce mortality from the disease. European mortality data has recently become available from the Nelson randomised controlled trial, which confirmed lung cancer mortality reductions by 26% in men and 39-61% in women. Recent studies in Europe and the USA also showed positive results in screening workers exposed to asbestos. All European experts attending the "Initiative for European Lung Screening (IELS)"-a large international group of physicians and other experts concerned with lung cancer-agreed that LDCT-LCS should be implemented in Europe. However, the economic impact of LDCT-LCS and guidelines for its effective and safe implementation still need to be formulated. To this purpose, the IELS was asked to prepare recommendations to implement LCS and examine outstanding issues. A subgroup carried out a comprehensive literature review on LDCT-LCS and presented findings at a meeting held in Milan in November 2018. The present recommendations reflect that consensus was reached.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giulia Veronesi
- Faculty of Medicine and Surgery—Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, 20132 Milan, Italy;
- Division of Thoracic Surgery, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 20132 Milan, Italy;
| | - David R. Baldwin
- Department of Respiratory Medicine, David Evans Research Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham NG5 1PB, UK;
| | - Claudia I. Henschke
- Department of Radiology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA; (C.I.H.); (N.T.); (R.Y.)
| | - Simone Ghislandi
- Department of Social and Political Sciences, Bocconi University, 20136 Milan, Italy; (S.G.); (L.F.N.)
| | - Sergio Iavicoli
- Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Epidemiology and Hygiene, Italian Workers’ Compensation Authority (INAIL), 00078 Rome, Italy;
| | - Matthijs Oudkerk
- Center for Medical Imaging, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, 9712 CP Groningen, The Netherlands;
| | - Harry J. De Koning
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC—University Medical Centre Rotterdam, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands; (H.J.D.K.); (C.v.d.A.)
| | - Joseph Shemesh
- The Grace Ballas Cardiac Research Unit, Sheba Medical Center, Affiliated with the Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, 52621 Tel Aviv-Yafo, Israel;
| | - John K. Field
- Roy Castle Lung Cancer Research Programme, Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, The University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3BX, UK;
| | - Javier J. Zulueta
- Department of Pulmonology, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, 31008 Pamplona, Spain;
- Visiongate Inc., Phoenix, AZ 85044, USA
| | - Denis Horgan
- European Alliance for Personalised Medicine (EAPM), Avenue de l’Armée Legerlaan 10, 1040 Brussels, Belgium;
| | - Lucia Fiestas Navarrete
- Department of Social and Political Sciences, Bocconi University, 20136 Milan, Italy; (S.G.); (L.F.N.)
| | | | - Pierluigi Novellis
- Division of Thoracic Surgery, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 20132 Milan, Italy;
| | - Rachael L. Murray
- Division of Epidemiology and Public Health, UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies, Clinical Sciences Building, City Hospital, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG5 1PB, UK;
| | - Nir Peled
- The Legacy Heritage Oncology Center & Dr. Larry Norton Institute, Soroka Medical Center & Ben-Gurion University, 84101 Beer-Sheva, Israel;
| | - Cristiano Rampinelli
- Department of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy;
| | - Gaetano Rocco
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA;
| | - Witold Rzyman
- Department of Thoracic Surgery, Medical University of Gdańsk, 80-210 Gdańsk, Poland;
| | | | - Martin C. Tammemagi
- Department of Health Sciences, Brock University, 1812 Sir Isaac Brock Way, St Catharines, ON L2S 3A1, Canada;
| | - Luca Bertolaccini
- Division of Thoracic Surgery, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy;
| | - Natthaya Triphuridet
- Department of Radiology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA; (C.I.H.); (N.T.); (R.Y.)
- Faculty of Medicine and Public Health, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, HRH Princess Chulabhorn College of Medical Science, Bangkok 10210, Thailand
| | - Rowena Yip
- Department of Radiology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA; (C.I.H.); (N.T.); (R.Y.)
| | - Alexia Rossi
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, 20090 Pieve Emanuele (MI), Italy;
| | - Suresh Senan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, VU location, De Boelelaan 1117, Postbox 7057, 1007 MB Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
| | - Giuseppe Ferrante
- Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center IRCCS, 20089 Rozzano (MI), Italy;
| | - Kate Brain
- Division of Population Medicine, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff CF14 4YS, UK;
| | - Carlijn van der Aalst
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC—University Medical Centre Rotterdam, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands; (H.J.D.K.); (C.v.d.A.)
| | - Lorenzo Bonomo
- Department of Bioimaging and Radiological Sciences, Catholic University, 00168 Rome, Italy;
| | - Dario Consonni
- Epidemiology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, 20122 Milan, Italy;
| | - Jan P. Van Meerbeeck
- Thoracic Oncology, Antwerp University Hospital and Ghent University, 2650 Edegem, Belgium;
| | - Patrick Maisonneuve
- Division of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy;
| | - Silvia Novello
- Department of Oncology, University of Torino, 10124 Torino, Italy; (G.V.S.); (S.N.)
| | - Anand Devaraj
- Department of Radiology, Royal Brompton Hospital, London SW3 6NP, UK;
| | - Zaigham Saghir
- Department of Respiratory Medicine, Herlev-Gentofte University Hospital, 2900 Hellerup, Denmark;
| | - Giuseppe Pelosi
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy
- Inter-Hospital Pathology Division, IRCCS MultiMedica, 20138 Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
|
21
|
Recommendations for Implementing Lung Cancer Screening with Low-Dose Computed Tomography in Europe. Cancers (Basel) 2020; 12:0. [PMID: 32599792 PMCID: PMC7352874 DOI: 10.3390/cancers12060000] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) was demonstrated in the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) to reduce mortality from the disease. European mortality data has recently become available from the Nelson randomised controlled trial, which confirmed lung cancer mortality reductions by 26% in men and 39-61% in women. Recent studies in Europe and the USA also showed positive results in screening workers exposed to asbestos. All European experts attending the "Initiative for European Lung Screening (IELS)"-a large international group of physicians and other experts concerned with lung cancer-agreed that LDCT-LCS should be implemented in Europe. However, the economic impact of LDCT-LCS and guidelines for its effective and safe implementation still need to be formulated. To this purpose, the IELS was asked to prepare recommendations to implement LCS and examine outstanding issues. A subgroup carried out a comprehensive literature review on LDCT-LCS and presented findings at a meeting held in Milan in November 2018. The present recommendations reflect that consensus was reached.
Collapse
|
|
22
|
Computed tomography screening for lung cancer. Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2020; 68:660-664. [PMID: 32447627 DOI: 10.1007/s11748-020-01392-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/12/2020] [Accepted: 05/13/2020] [Indexed: 10/24/2022]
Abstract
Cigarette smoking is the attributable cause for 90% of lung cancers. To complement preventative strategies, the advent of lung cancer screening programs targeted at prior and active smokers has been explored to reduce the mortality and morbidity of this lethal malignancy. In this article, we discuss the results of major computed tomography-based lung cancer screening trials, cost-effectiveness of screening, guidelines from major societies and future directions of the field.
Collapse
|
|
23
|
Veronesi G, Navone N, Novellis P, Dieci E, Toschi L, Velutti L, Solinas M, Vanni E, Alloisio M, Ghislandi S. Favorable incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for lung cancer screening in Italy. Lung Cancer 2020; 143:73-79. [PMID: 32234647 DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2020.03.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/10/2019] [Revised: 03/10/2020] [Accepted: 03/13/2020] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Lung cancer detection by low-dose computed tomographic screening reduces mortality. However, it is essential to assess cost-effectiveness. We present a cost-effectiveness analysis of screening in Italians at high risk of lung cancer, from the point of view of the Italian tax-payer. MATERIALS AND METHODS We used a decision model to estimate the cost-effectiveness of annual screening for 5 years in smokers (≥30 pack-years) of 55-79 years. Patients diagnosed in the COSMOS study were the screening arm; patients diagnosed and treated for lung cancer in the Lombardy Region, Italy, constituted the usual care arm. Treatment costs were extracted from our hospital database. Lung cancer survival in screened patients was adjusted for 2-year lead-time bias. Life-years and quality-adjusted life-years were estimated by stage at diagnosis, from which incremental cost-effectiveness ratios per life-year and quality-adjusted life-year gained were estimated. RESULTS Base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were 3297 and 2944 euro per quality-adjusted life-year and life-year gained, respectively. Deterministic sensitivity analysis indicated that these values were particularly sensitive to lung cancer prevalence, screening sensitivity and specificity, screening cost, and treatment costs for stage I and IV disease. From the probabilistic sensitivity analysis incremental cost-effectiveness ratios had a 98 % probability of being <25,000 euro (widely-accepted threshold) and a 55 % probability of being <5000 euro. CONCLUSIONS Low-dose computed tomographic screening is associated with an incremental cost of 2944 euro per life-year gained in high risk population, implying that screening can be introduced in Italy at contained cost, saving the lives of many lung cancer patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giulia Veronesi
- School of Medicine, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy; Division of Thoracic and General Surgery, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, Rozzano (Milan), Italy.
| | - Niccolò Navone
- CERGAS and Department of Social and Political Sciences, Bocconi University, Milan, Italy
| | - Pierluigi Novellis
- Division of Thoracic Surgery, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Elisa Dieci
- Division of Thoracic Surgery, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Luca Toschi
- Department of Oncology & Hematology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, Rozzano (Milan), Italy
| | - Laura Velutti
- Department of Oncology & Hematology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, Rozzano (Milan), Italy
| | - Michela Solinas
- Thoracic Surgery Unit, New Hospital of Legnano, ASST Ovest (Milan), Italy
| | - Elena Vanni
- Business Operating Officer, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, Rozzano (Milan), Italy; Department of Biomedical Science, Humanitas University, Rozzano (Milan), Italy
| | - Marco Alloisio
- Division of Thoracic and General Surgery, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, Rozzano (Milan), Italy; Department of Biomedical Science, Humanitas University, Rozzano (Milan), Italy
| | - Simone Ghislandi
- CERGAS and Department of Social and Political Sciences, Bocconi University, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
|
24
|
Outcomes and cost of lung cancer patients treated surgically or medically in Catalunya: cost-benefit implications for lung cancer screening programs. Eur J Cancer Prev 2020; 29:486-492. [PMID: 32039928 DOI: 10.1097/cej.0000000000000566] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
Lung cancer screening programs with computed tomography of the chest reduce mortality by more than 20%. Yet, they have not been implemented widely because of logistic and cost implications. Here, we sought to: (1) use real-life data to compare the outcomes and cost of lung cancer patients with treated medically or surgically in our region and (2) from this data, estimate the cost-benefit ratio of a lung cancer screening program (CRIBAR) soon to be deployed in our region (Catalunya, Spain). We accessed the Catalan Health Surveillance System (CHSS) and analysed data of all patients with a first diagnosis of lung cancer between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2016. Analysis was carried forward until 30 months (t = 30) after lung cancer diagnosis. Main results showed that: (1) surgically treated lung cancer patients have better survival and return earlier to regular home activities, use less healthcare related resources and cost less tax-payer money and (2) depending on incidence of lung cancer identified and treated in the program (1-2%), the return on investment for CRIBAR is expected to break even at 3-6 years, respectively, after its launch. Surgical treatment of lung cancer is cheaper and offers better outcomes. CRIBAR is estimated to be cost-effective soon after launch.
Collapse
|
|
25
|
Jensen MD, Siersma V, Rasmussen JF, Brodersen J. Direct and indirect healthcare costs of lung cancer CT screening in Denmark: a registry study. BMJ Open 2020; 10:e031768. [PMID: 31969362 PMCID: PMC7045232 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031768] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION A study based on the Danish Randomised Controlled Lung Cancer Screening Trial (DLCST) calculated the healthcare costs of lung cancer screening by comparing costs in an intervention group with a control group. Participants in both groups, however, experienced significantly increased negative psychosocial consequences after randomisation. Substantial participation bias has also been documented: The DLCST participants reported fewer negative psychosocial aspects and experienced better living conditions compared with the random sample. OBJECTIVE To comprehensively analyse the costs of lung cancer CT screening and to determine whether invitations to mass screening alter the utilisation of the healthcare system resulting in indirect costs. Healthcare utilisation and costs are analysed in the primary care sector (general practitioner psychologists, physiotherapists, other specialists, drugs) and the secondary care sector (emergency room contacts, outpatient visits, hospitalisation days, surgical procedures and non-surgical procedures). DESIGN To account for bias in the original trial, the costs and utilisation of healthcare by participants in DLCST were compared with a new reference group, selected in the period from randomisation (2004-2006) until 2014. SETTING Four Danish national registers. PARTICIPANTS DLCST included 4104 current or former heavy smokers, randomly assigned to the CT group or the control group. The new reference group comprised a random sample of 535 current or former heavy smokers in the general Danish population who were never invited to participate in a cancer screening test. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Total healthcare costs including costs and utilisation of healthcare in both the primary and the secondary care sector. RESULTS Compared with the reference group, the participants in both the CT group (offered annual CT screening, lung function test and smoking counselling) and the control group (offered annual lung function test and smoking counselling) had significantly increased total healthcare costs, calculated at 60% and 48% respectively. The increase in costs was caused by increased use of healthcare in both the primary and the secondary sectors. CONCLUSION CT screening leads to 60% increased total healthcare costs. Such increase would raise the expected annual healthcare cost per participant from EUR 2348 to EUR 3756. Cost analysis that only includes costs directly related to the CT scan and follow-up procedures most likely underestimates total costs. Our data show that the increased costs are not limited to the secondary sector. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT00496977.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Manja Dahl Jensen
- The Research Unit for General Practice and Section of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Volkert Siersma
- The Research Unit for General Practice and Section of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Jakob Fraes Rasmussen
- The Research Unit for General Practice and Section of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - John Brodersen
- The Research Unit for General Practice and Section of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Primary Healthcare Research Unit, Zealand Region, Copenhagen, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
|
26
|
Smith KC, Losina E, Messier SP, Hunter DJ, Chen AT, Katz JN, Paltiel AD. Budget Impact of Funding an Intensive Diet and Exercise Program for Overweight and Obese Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis. ACR Open Rheumatol 2020; 2:26-36. [PMID: 31943972 PMCID: PMC6957917 DOI: 10.1002/acr2.11090] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/10/2019] [Accepted: 09/17/2019] [Indexed: 01/02/2023] Open
Abstract
Objective Diet and exercise (D+E) for knee osteoarthritis (OA) is effective and cost‐effective. However, cost‐effectiveness does not imply affordability; the impact of knee OA–specific D+E programs on insurer budgets is unknown. Methods We estimated changes in undiscounted medical expenditures (2016 US dollars) with and without a D+E program. We accounted for both additional program outlays and potential savings from reduced use of other knee OA treatments and from reduced incidence of comorbidities. We adopted the perspective of a representative commercial insurance plan covering 200 000 individuals aged 25 to 64 years and a representative Medicare Advantage plan covering 200 000 Medicare‐eligible individuals aged 65 years and older. We used the Osteoarthritis Policy Model, a validated microsimulation model of knee OA, to model D+E efficacy (measured by pain and weight reduction), adherence, and price based on the Intensive Diet and Exercise for Arthritis (IDEA) trial. In sensitivity analyses, we varied time horizon, D+E efficacy, and D+E price. Results Over 3 years, the D+E program increased spending by $752 200 ($0.10 per member per month [PMPM]) in the commercial plan and by $6.0 million ($0.84 PMPM) in the Medicare plan. Over 3 years, the D+E program reduced opioid use by 6% and 5% and reduced total knee replacements by 5% and 4% in the commercial and Medicare plans, respectively. Expenses were higher in the Medicare plan because it had more patients with knee OA than the commercial plan. Conclusion Although there is no established threshold to define affordability, a D+E program for knee OA would likely produce expenditures comparable with outlays for other health‐promotion interventions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karen C. Smith
- Orthopedic and Arthritis Center for Outcomes Research (OrACORe)Brigham and Women's HospitalBostonMassachusetts
| | - Elena Losina
- Orthopedic and Arthritis Center for Outcomes Research (OrACORe)Brigham and Women's HospitalBostonMassachusetts
- Harvard Medical SchoolBostonMassachusetts
| | - Stephen P. Messier
- J.B. Snow Biomechanics LaboratoryWake Forest UniversityWinston‐SalemNorth Carolina
| | | | - Angela T. Chen
- Orthopedic and Arthritis Center for Outcomes Research (OrACORe)Brigham and Women's HospitalBostonMassachusetts
| | - Jeffrey N. Katz
- Orthopedic and Arthritis Center for Outcomes Research (OrACORe)Brigham and Women's HospitalBostonMassachusetts
- Harvard Medical SchoolBostonMassachusetts
| | | |
Collapse
|
|
27
|
Criss SD, Cao P, Bastani M, Ten Haaf K, Chen Y, Sheehan DF, Blom EF, Toumazis I, Jeon J, de Koning HJ, Plevritis SK, Meza R, Kong CY. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Lung Cancer Screening in the United States: A Comparative Modeling Study. Ann Intern Med 2019; 171:796-804. [PMID: 31683314 DOI: 10.7326/m19-0322] [Citation(s) in RCA: 83] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Recommendations vary regarding the maximum age at which to stop lung cancer screening: 80 years according to the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), 77 years according to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), and 74 years according to the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST). OBJECTIVE To compare the cost-effectiveness of different stopping ages for lung cancer screening. DESIGN By using shared inputs for smoking behavior, costs, and quality of life, 4 independently developed microsimulation models evaluated the health and cost outcomes of annual lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT). DATA SOURCES The NLST; Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial; SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results) program; Nurses' Health Study and Health Professionals Follow-up Study; and U.S. Smoking History Generator. TARGET POPULATION Current, former, and never-smokers aged 45 years from the 1960 U.S. birth cohort. TIME HORIZON 45 years. PERSPECTIVE Health care sector. INTERVENTION Annual LDCT according to NLST, CMS, and USPSTF criteria. OUTCOME MEASURES Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) with a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS The 4 models showed that the NLST, CMS, and USPSTF screening strategies were cost-effective, with ICERs averaging $49 200, $68 600, and $96 700 per QALY, respectively. Increasing the age at which to stop screening resulted in a greater reduction in mortality but also led to higher costs and overdiagnosis rates. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that the NLST and CMS strategies had higher probabilities of being cost-effective (98% and 77%, respectively) than the USPSTF strategy (52%). LIMITATION Scenarios assumed 100% screening adherence, and models extrapolated beyond clinical trial data. CONCLUSION All 3 sets of lung cancer screening criteria represent cost-effective programs. Despite underlying uncertainty, the NLST and CMS screening strategies have high probabilities of being cost-effective. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE CISNET (Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network) Lung Group, National Cancer Institute.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Steven D Criss
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts (S.D.C., Y.C.)
| | - Pianpian Cao
- University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan (P.C., J.J., R.M.)
| | - Mehrad Bastani
- Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California (M.B., I.T., S.K.P.)
| | - Kevin Ten Haaf
- Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands (K.T., E.F.B., H.J.D.)
| | - Yufan Chen
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts (S.D.C., Y.C.)
| | - Deirdre F Sheehan
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, and Broad Institute, Cambridge, Massachusetts (D.F.S.)
| | - Erik F Blom
- Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands (K.T., E.F.B., H.J.D.)
| | - Iakovos Toumazis
- Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California (M.B., I.T., S.K.P.)
| | - Jihyoun Jeon
- University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan (P.C., J.J., R.M.)
| | - Harry J de Koning
- Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands (K.T., E.F.B., H.J.D.)
| | - Sylvia K Plevritis
- Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California (M.B., I.T., S.K.P.)
| | - Rafael Meza
- University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan (P.C., J.J., R.M.)
| | - Chung Yin Kong
- Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts (C.Y.K.)
| |
Collapse
|
|
28
|
Snowsill T, Yang H, Griffin E, Long L, Varley-Campbell J, Coelho H, Robinson S, Hyde C. Low-dose computed tomography for lung cancer screening in high-risk populations: a systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 2019; 22:1-276. [PMID: 30518460 DOI: 10.3310/hta22690] [Citation(s) in RCA: 59] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/27/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Diagnosis of lung cancer frequently occurs in its later stages. Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) could detect lung cancer early. OBJECTIVES To estimate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of LDCT lung cancer screening in high-risk populations. DATA SOURCES Bibliographic sources included MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and The Cochrane Library. METHODS Clinical effectiveness - a systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LDCT screening programmes with usual care (no screening) or other imaging screening programmes [such as chest X-ray (CXR)] was conducted. Bibliographic sources included MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and The Cochrane Library. Meta-analyses, including network meta-analyses, were performed. Cost-effectiveness - an independent economic model employing discrete event simulation and using a natural history model calibrated to results from a large RCT was developed. There were 12 different population eligibility criteria and four intervention frequencies [(1) single screen, (2) triple screen, (3) annual screening and (4) biennial screening] and a no-screening control arm. RESULTS Clinical effectiveness - 12 RCTs were included, four of which currently contribute evidence on mortality. Meta-analysis of these demonstrated that LDCT, with ≤ 9.80 years of follow-up, was associated with a non-statistically significant decrease in lung cancer mortality (pooled relative risk 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.74 to 1.19). The findings also showed that LDCT screening demonstrated a non-statistically significant increase in all-cause mortality. Given the considerable heterogeneity detected between studies for both outcomes, the results should be treated with caution. Network meta-analysis, including six RCTs, was performed to assess the relative clinical effectiveness of LDCT, CXR and usual care. The results showed that LDCT was ranked as the best screening strategy in terms of lung cancer mortality reduction. CXR had a 99.7% probability of being the worst intervention and usual care was ranked second. Cost-effectiveness - screening programmes are predicted to be more effective than no screening, reduce lung cancer mortality and result in more lung cancer diagnoses. Screening programmes also increase costs. Screening for lung cancer is unlikely to be cost-effective at a threshold of £20,000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), but may be cost-effective at a threshold of £30,000/QALY. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for a single screen in smokers aged 60-75 years with at least a 3% risk of lung cancer is £28,169 per QALY. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were conducted. Screening was only cost-effective at a threshold of £20,000/QALY in only a minority of analyses. LIMITATIONS Clinical effectiveness - the largest of the included RCTs compared LDCT with CXR screening rather than no screening. Cost-effectiveness - a representative cost to the NHS of lung cancer has not been recently estimated according to key variables such as stage at diagnosis. Certain costs associated with running a screening programme have not been included. CONCLUSIONS LDCT screening may be clinically effective in reducing lung cancer mortality, but there is considerable uncertainty. There is evidence that a single round of screening could be considered cost-effective at conventional thresholds, but there is significant uncertainty about the effect on costs and the magnitude of benefits. FUTURE WORK Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness estimates should be updated with the anticipated results from several ongoing RCTs [particularly the NEderlands Leuvens Longkanker Screenings ONderzoek (NELSON) screening trial]. STUDY REGISTRATION This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016048530. FUNDING The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tristan Snowsill
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - Huiqin Yang
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - Ed Griffin
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - Linda Long
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - Jo Varley-Campbell
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - Helen Coelho
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - Sophie Robinson
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - Chris Hyde
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK.,Exeter Test Group, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| |
Collapse
|
|
29
|
Pyenson BS, Bazell CM, Bellanich MJ, Caplen MA, Zulueta JJ. No Apparent Workup for most new Indeterminate Pulmonary Nodules in US Commercially-Insured Patients. JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS AND OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2019; 6:118-129. [PMID: 32685585 PMCID: PMC7299483 DOI: 10.36469/9674] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A recent study estimated that more than 1.5 million Americans have an indeterminate pulmonary nodule (IPN) identified on a chest computed tomography (CT) scan each year outside of lung cancer screening programs. However, the cost and pattern of subsequent IPN workup have not been described for real-world settings. OBJECTIVES To examine the pattern and cost of IPN workup in real-world practice using insurer administrative claims data for commercially-insured individuals. METHODS The primary source for this retrospective observational study was the MarketScan® 2013-2016 databases, which include information on 28 to 47 million insured lives. The newly diagnosed IPN study population consisted of members with an IPN diagnosis code on a claim in 2014 who did not have prior diagnosis of an IPN or lung cancer in 2013 and who had coverage from 2014 to 2016. Subsequent claims were examined for workups included in the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) guideline recommendations and the costs of workup were tabulated. RESULTS Of the 15 064 patients in the study population, only 5471 (36%) received any subsequent workup. The average and median costs of workup for these patients were $3270 and $2068, respectively. Spread across the commercially-insured population, the workup is estimated to cost between $1 and $2 per member per year. CONCLUSIONS The majority of commercially-insured members with newly identified IPNs do not appear to have any guideline-recommended workup, despite a low incremental cost of such workup services on a population basis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - Javier J Zulueta
- VisionGate 3D
- Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
|
30
|
Hofer F, Kauczor HU, Stargardt T. Cost-utility analysis of a potential lung cancer screening program for a high-risk population in Germany: A modelling approach. Lung Cancer 2018; 124:189-198. [PMID: 30268459 DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2018.07.036] [Citation(s) in RCA: 53] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/22/2018] [Revised: 07/19/2018] [Accepted: 07/23/2018] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in Germany. Although several randomized trials in Europe have evaluated the effectiveness of lung cancer screening programs, evidence on the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening is scarce. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a population-based lung cancer screening program from the perspective of a German payer. METHODS We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis from the public payer perspective for a high-risk population defined as heavy former and current smokers (≥20 cigarettes per day) between 55 and 75 years of age. The underlying model consisted of two Markov models. We differentiated between a population-based annual screening program and standard clinical care. Depending on stage at diagnosis, simulated patients were assigned to one of five treatment paths according to the German clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer. Costs, life years saved, and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) were used as outcomes. Values for input parameters were taken from the literature. The model was run for 60 cycles with a cycle length of three months. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS In the base case, annual lung cancer screening led to an increase in incremental costs (€ 1,153 per person) compared to standard clinical care. However, the screening approach was associated with an incremental gain in life years (0.06 per person) and QALYs (0.04 per person). Thus, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was € 19,302 per life year saved and € 30,291 per QALY. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis with 10,000 draws resulted in average ICERs of € 22,118 per life year and € 34,841 per QALY. CONCLUSION We provide evidence that lung cancer screening for a high-risk population may be more effective, but also more costly, than standard clinical care from the perspective of a German payer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Florian Hofer
- Hamburg Center for Health Economics (HCHE), University of Hamburg, Esplanade 36, 20354 Hamburg, Germany.
| | - Hans-Ulrich Kauczor
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Tom Stargardt
- Hamburg Center for Health Economics (HCHE), University of Hamburg, Esplanade 36, 20354 Hamburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
|
31
|
Trade-off between benefits, harms and economic efficiency of low-dose CT lung cancer screening: a microsimulation analysis of nodule management strategies in a population-based setting. BMC Med 2017; 15:162. [PMID: 28838313 PMCID: PMC5571665 DOI: 10.1186/s12916-017-0924-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2017] [Accepted: 08/07/2017] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND In lung cancer screening, a nodule management protocol describes nodule assessment and thresholds for nodule size and growth rate to identify patients who require immediate diagnostic evaluation or additional imaging exams. The Netherlands-Leuvens Screening Trial and the National Lung Screening Trial used different selection criteria and nodule management protocols. Several modelling studies have reported variations in screening outcomes and cost-effectiveness across selection criteria and screening intervals; however, the effect of variations in the nodule management protocol remains uncertain. This study evaluated the effects of the eligibility criteria and nodule management protocols on the benefits, harms and cost-effectiveness of lung screening scenarios in a population-based setting in Germany. METHODS We developed a modular microsimulation model: a biological module simulated individual histories of lung cancer development from carcinogenesis onset to death; a screening module simulated patient selection, screening-detection, nodule management protocols, diagnostic evaluation and screening outcomes. Benefits included mortality reduction, life years gained and averted lung cancer deaths. Harms were costs, false positives and overdiagnosis. The comparator was no screening. The evaluated 76 screening scenarios included variations in selection criteria and thresholds for nodule size and growth rate. RESULTS Five years of annual screening resulted in a 9.7-12.8% lung cancer mortality reduction in the screened population. The efficient scenarios included volumetric assessment of nodule size, a threshold for a volume of 300 mm3 and a threshold for a volume doubling time of 400 days. Assessment of volume doubling time is essential for reducing overdiagnosis and false positives. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of the efficient scenarios were 16,754-23,847 euro per life year gained and 155,287-285,630 euro per averted lung cancer death. CONCLUSIONS Lung cancer screening can be cost-effective in Germany. Along with the eligibility criteria, the nodule management protocol influences screening performance and cost-effectiveness. Definition of the thresholds for nodule size and nodule growth in the nodule management protocol should be considered in detail when defining optimal screening strategies.
Collapse
|
|
32
|
Desimini EM, Aldredge P, Gardner K. Development & Evolution of an Incidental Lung Lesion Program. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2017. [DOI: 10.1080/10463356.2015.11884000] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
|
|
33
|
Kim JY. Analyzing competing risks in the treatment of lung cancer: a good start. J Thorac Dis 2017; 9:474-476. [PMID: 28449448 DOI: 10.21037/jtd.2017.02.96] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Jae Y Kim
- Department of Surgery, Division of Thoracic Surgery, City of Hope, Duarte, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
34
|
Yang SC, Lai WW, Lin CC, Su WC, Ku LJ, Hwang JS, Wang JD. Cost-effectiveness of implementing computed tomography screening for lung cancer in Taiwan. Lung Cancer 2017. [PMID: 28625633 DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2017.04.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 50] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A screening program for lung cancer requires more empirical evidence. Based on the experience of the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST), we developed a method to adjust lead-time bias and quality-of-life changes for estimating the cost-effectiveness of implementing computed tomography (CT) screening in Taiwan. METHODS The target population was high-risk (≥30 pack-years) smokers between 55 and 75 years of age. From a nation-wide, 13-year follow-up cohort, we estimated quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE), loss-of-QALE, and lifetime healthcare expenditures per case of lung cancer stratified by pathology and stage. Cumulative stage distributions for CT-screening and no-screening were assumed equal to those for CT-screening and radiography-screening in the NLST to estimate the savings of loss-of-QALE and additional costs of lifetime healthcare expenditures after CT screening. Costs attributable to screen-negative subjects, false-positive cases and radiation-induced lung cancer were included to obtain the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio from the public payer's perspective. RESULTS The incremental costs were US$22,755 per person. After dividing this by savings of loss-of-QALE (1.16 quality-adjusted life year (QALY)), the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was US$19,683 per QALY. This ratio would fall to US$10,947 per QALY if the stage distribution for CT-screening was the same as that of screen-detected cancers in the NELSON trial. CONCLUSIONS Low-dose CT screening for lung cancer among high-risk smokers would be cost-effective in Taiwan. As only about 5% of our women are smokers, future research is necessary to identify the high-risk groups among non-smokers and increase the coverage.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Szu-Chun Yang
- Department of Internal Medicine, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, No. 138, Sheng Li Road, Tainan 704, Taiwan; Department of Public Health, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, No. 1, University Road, Tainan 701, Taiwan.
| | - Wu-Wei Lai
- Department of Surgery, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, No. 138, Sheng Li Road, Tainan 704, Taiwan.
| | - Chien-Chung Lin
- Department of Internal Medicine, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, No. 138, Sheng Li Road, Tainan 704, Taiwan.
| | - Wu-Chou Su
- Department of Internal Medicine, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, No. 138, Sheng Li Road, Tainan 704, Taiwan.
| | - Li-Jung Ku
- Department of Public Health, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, No. 1, University Road, Tainan 701, Taiwan.
| | - Jing-Shiang Hwang
- Institute of Statistical Science, Academia Sinica, No. 128 Academia Road, Section 2, Taipei 115, Taiwan.
| | - Jung-Der Wang
- Department of Internal Medicine, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, No. 138, Sheng Li Road, Tainan 704, Taiwan; Department of Public Health, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, No. 1, University Road, Tainan 701, Taiwan; Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, No. 138, Sheng Li Road, Tainan 704, Taiwan.
| |
Collapse
|
|
35
|
Nguyen XV, Davies L, Eastwood JD, Hoang JK. Extrapulmonary Findings and Malignancies in Participants Screened With Chest CT in the National Lung Screening Trial. J Am Coll Radiol 2017; 14:324-330. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2016.09.044] [Citation(s) in RCA: 46] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/31/2016] [Revised: 09/24/2016] [Accepted: 09/29/2016] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
|
|
36
|
ten Haaf K, Tammemägi MC, Bondy SJ, van der Aalst CM, Gu S, McGregor SE, Nicholas G, de Koning HJ, Paszat LF. Performance and Cost-Effectiveness of Computed Tomography Lung Cancer Screening Scenarios in a Population-Based Setting: A Microsimulation Modeling Analysis in Ontario, Canada. PLoS Med 2017; 14:e1002225. [PMID: 28170394 PMCID: PMC5295664 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002225] [Citation(s) in RCA: 106] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/29/2016] [Accepted: 12/14/2016] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) results indicate that computed tomography (CT) lung cancer screening for current and former smokers with three annual screens can be cost-effective in a trial setting. However, the cost-effectiveness in a population-based setting with >3 screening rounds is uncertain. Therefore, the objective of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening in a population-based setting in Ontario, Canada, and evaluate the effects of screening eligibility criteria. METHODS AND FINDINGS This study used microsimulation modeling informed by various data sources, including the Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP), Ontario Cancer Registry, smoking behavior surveys, and the NLST. Persons, born between 1940 and 1969, were examined from a third-party health care payer perspective across a lifetime horizon. Starting in 2015, 576 CT screening scenarios were examined, varying by age to start and end screening, smoking eligibility criteria, and screening interval. Among the examined outcome measures were lung cancer deaths averted, life-years gained, percentage ever screened, costs (in 2015 Canadian dollars), and overdiagnosis. The results of the base-case analysis indicated that annual screening was more cost-effective than biennial screening. Scenarios with eligibility criteria that required as few as 20 pack-years were dominated by scenarios that required higher numbers of accumulated pack-years. In general, scenarios that applied stringent smoking eligibility criteria (i.e., requiring higher levels of accumulated smoking exposure) were more cost-effective than scenarios with less stringent smoking eligibility criteria, with modest differences in life-years gained. Annual screening between ages 55-75 for persons who smoked ≥40 pack-years and who currently smoke or quit ≤10 y ago yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $41,136 Canadian dollars ($33,825 in May 1, 2015, United States dollars) per life-year gained (compared to annual screening between ages 60-75 for persons who smoked ≥40 pack-years and who currently smoke or quit ≤10 y ago), which was considered optimal at a cost-effectiveness threshold of $50,000 Canadian dollars ($41,114 May 1, 2015, US dollars). If 50% lower or higher attributable costs were assumed, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of this scenario was estimated to be $38,240 ($31,444 May 1, 2015, US dollars) or $48,525 ($39,901 May 1, 2015, US dollars), respectively. If 50% lower or higher costs for CT examinations were assumed, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of this scenario was estimated to be $28,630 ($23,542 May 1, 2015, US dollars) or $73,507 ($60,443 May 1, 2015, US dollars), respectively. This scenario would screen 9.56% (499,261 individuals) of the total population (ever- and never-smokers) at least once, which would require 4,788,523 CT examinations, and reduce lung cancer mortality in the total population by 9.05% (preventing 13,108 lung cancer deaths), while 12.53% of screen-detected cancers would be overdiagnosed (4,282 overdiagnosed cases). Sensitivity analyses indicated that the overall results were most sensitive to variations in CT examination costs. Quality of life was not incorporated in the analyses, and assumptions for follow-up procedures were based on data from the NLST, which may not be generalizable to a population-based setting. CONCLUSIONS Lung cancer screening with stringent smoking eligibility criteria can be cost-effective in a population-based setting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kevin ten Haaf
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC—University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Martin C. Tammemägi
- Department of Health Sciences, Brock University, St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada
| | - Susan J. Bondy
- University of Toronto Dalla Lana School of Public Health, Ontario, Canada
- Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Ontario Tobacco Research Unit, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Carlijn M. van der Aalst
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC—University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Sumei Gu
- Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - S. Elizabeth McGregor
- Population, Public & Indigenous Health, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Garth Nicholas
- The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Harry J. de Koning
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC—University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Lawrence F. Paszat
- University of Toronto Dalla Lana School of Public Health, Ontario, Canada
- Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
|
37
|
Ma X, Siegelman J, Paik DS, Mulshine JL, St Pierre S, Buckler AJ. Volumes Learned: It Takes More Than Size to "Size Up" Pulmonary Lesions. Acad Radiol 2016; 23:1190-8. [PMID: 27287713 DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2016.04.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/23/2015] [Revised: 04/08/2016] [Accepted: 04/10/2016] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES This study aimed to review the current understanding and capabilities regarding use of imaging for noninvasive lesion characterization and its relationship to lung cancer screening and treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS Our review of the state of the art was broken down into questions about the different lung cancer image phenotypes being characterized, the role of imaging and requirements for increasing its value with respect to increasing diagnostic confidence and quantitative assessment, and a review of the current capabilities with respect to those needs. RESULTS The preponderance of the literature has so far been focused on the measurement of lesion size, with increasing contributions being made to determine the formal performance of scanners, measurement tools, and human operators in terms of bias and variability. Concurrently, an increasing number of investigators are reporting utility and predictive value of measures other than size, and sensitivity and specificity is being reported. Relatively little has been documented on quantitative measurement of non-size features with corresponding estimation of measurement performance and reproducibility. CONCLUSIONS The weight of the evidence suggests characterization of pulmonary lesions built on quantitative measures adds value to the screening for, and treatment of, lung cancer. Advanced image analysis techniques may identify patterns or biomarkers not readily assessed by eye and may also facilitate management of multidimensional imaging data in such a way as to efficiently integrate it into the clinical workflow.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xiaonan Ma
- Elucid Bioimaging Inc., 225 Main Street, Wenham, MA 01984.
| | - Jenifer Siegelman
- Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston Massachusetts; Department of Radiology (hospital-based), Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - David S Paik
- Elucid Bioimaging Inc., 225 Main Street, Wenham, MA 01984
| | - James L Mulshine
- Department of Internal Medicine, Rush University, Chicago, Illinois
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
38
|
Raymakers AJN, Mayo J, Lam S, FitzGerald JM, Whitehurst DGT, Lynd LD. Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Lung Cancer Screening Strategies Using Low-Dose Computed Tomography: a Systematic Review. APPLIED HEALTH ECONOMICS AND HEALTH POLICY 2016; 14:409-418. [PMID: 26873091 DOI: 10.1007/s40258-016-0226-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/05/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) has been shown to deliver appreciable reductions in mortality in high-risk patients. However, in an era of constrained medical resources, the cost-effectiveness of such a program needs to be demonstrated. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature analyzing the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening using LDCT. METHODS We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, EBM Reviews-Health Technology Assessment, the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS-EED), and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Due to technological progress in CT, we limited our search to studies published between January 2000 and December 2014. Our search returned 393 unique results. After removing studies that did not meet our inclusion criteria, 13 studies remained. Costs are presented in 2014 US dollars (US$). RESULTS The results from the economic evaluations identified in this review were varied. All identified studies reported outcomes using either additional survival (life-years gained) or quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs gained). Results ranged from US$18,452 to US$66,480 per LYG and US$27,756 to US$243,077 per QALY gained for repeated screening. The results of cost-effectiveness analyses were sensitive to several key model parameters, including the prevalence of lung cancer, cost of LDCT for screening, the proportion of lung cancer detected as localized disease, lead time bias, and, if included, the characteristics of a smoking cessation program. CONCLUSIONS The cost-effectiveness of a lung cancer screening program using LDCT remains to be conclusively resolved. It is expected that its cost-effectiveness will largely depend on identifying an appropriate group of high-risk subjects.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adam J N Raymakers
- Collaboration for Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CORE), Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Room 4102-2405 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
- Centre for Health Evaluation and Outcomes Sciences (CHEOS), St Paul's Hospital, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
| | - John Mayo
- Department of Radiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Stephen Lam
- Department of Integrative Oncology, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Division of Respiratory Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - J Mark FitzGerald
- Division of Respiratory Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - David G T Whitehurst
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada
- Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Larry D Lynd
- Collaboration for Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CORE), Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Room 4102-2405 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Centre for Health Evaluation and Outcomes Sciences (CHEOS), St Paul's Hospital, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
|
39
|
Raz DJ, Wu GX, Consunji M, Nelson R, Sun C, Erhunmwunsee L, Ferrell B, Sun V, Kim JY. Perceptions and Utilization of Lung Cancer Screening Among Primary Care Physicians. J Thorac Oncol 2016; 11:1856-1862. [PMID: 27346412 DOI: 10.1016/j.jtho.2016.06.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 59] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/06/2016] [Revised: 05/26/2016] [Accepted: 06/12/2016] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) is effective at reducing lung cancer mortality in high-risk current and former smokers. Despite the fact that screening is recommended by the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF), few eligible patients are screened. We set out to study the barriers to LCS by surveying primary care physicians (PCPs). METHODS We surveyed a randomly selected sample of 1384 eligible PCPs between January and October 2015, using the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile, though surveys sent by mail, fax, and e-mail. The survey included questions regarding knowledge of LCS guidelines, utilization of LCS over the prior 12 months, and perceptions of barriers to LCS. Training background, years in practice, practice type, and demographics were also collected. RESULTS The survey response rate was 18%. Responders and nonresponders did not differ by practice or demographic characteristics. Of the respondents, 47% indicated that LCS was recommended by the USPSTF, 52% had referred at least one patient for LDCT, and 12% had referred at least one patient to a LCS program over the prior 12 months. Perceived barriers to LCS included uncertainty regarding ther benefit of LCS, concern regarding insurance coverage, and the harm of LCS. CONCLUSIONS Although LCS is recommended by the USPSTF, LDCT is utilized in a minority of eligible patients, as reported by surveyed PCPs. Approximately half of PCPs are familiar with USPSTF recommendations for LCS and a number of physician barriers to adherence to guidelines exist. Additional study of physician- and system-based interventions to improve adherence to LCS recommendations is needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dan J Raz
- Division of Thoracic Surgery, City of Hope, Duarte, California.
| | - Geena X Wu
- Division of Thoracic Surgery, City of Hope, Duarte, California
| | - Martin Consunji
- Division of Thoracic Surgery, City of Hope, Duarte, California
| | - Rebecca Nelson
- Department of Biostatistics, City of Hope, Duarte, California
| | - Canlan Sun
- Department of Population Sciences, City of Hope, Duarte, California
| | | | - Betty Ferrell
- Department of Population Sciences, City of Hope, Duarte, California
| | - Virginia Sun
- Department of Population Sciences, City of Hope, Duarte, California
| | - Jae Y Kim
- Division of Thoracic Surgery, City of Hope, Duarte, California
| |
Collapse
|
|
40
|
Sorrie K, Cates L, Hill A. The Case for Lung Cancer Screening: What Nurses Need to Know. Clin J Oncol Nurs 2016; 20:E82-7. [DOI: 10.1188/16.cjon.e82-e87] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
|
|
41
|
Field JK, Duffy SW, Baldwin DR, Brain KE, Devaraj A, Eisen T, Green BA, Holemans JA, Kavanagh T, Kerr KM, Ledson M, Lifford KJ, McRonald FE, Nair A, Page RD, Parmar MK, Rintoul RC, Screaton N, Wald NJ, Weller D, Whynes DK, Williamson PR, Yadegarfar G, Hansell DM. The UK Lung Cancer Screening Trial: a pilot randomised controlled trial of low-dose computed tomography screening for the early detection of lung cancer. Health Technol Assess 2016; 20:1-146. [PMID: 27224642 PMCID: PMC4904185 DOI: 10.3310/hta20400] [Citation(s) in RCA: 204] [Impact Index Per Article: 22.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/04/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Lung cancer kills more people than any other cancer in the UK (5-year survival < 13%). Early diagnosis can save lives. The USA-based National Lung Cancer Screening Trial reported a 20% relative reduction in lung cancer mortality and 6.7% all-cause mortality in low-dose computed tomography (LDCT)-screened subjects. OBJECTIVES To (1) analyse LDCT lung cancer screening in a high-risk UK population, determine optimum recruitment, screening, reading and care pathway strategies; and (2) assess the psychological consequences and the health-economic implications of screening. DESIGN A pilot randomised controlled trial comparing intervention with usual care. A population-based risk questionnaire identified individuals who were at high risk of developing lung cancer (≥ 5% over 5 years). SETTING Thoracic centres with expertise in lung cancer imaging, respiratory medicine, pathology and surgery: Liverpool Heart & Chest Hospital, Merseyside, and Papworth Hospital, Cambridgeshire. PARTICIPANTS Individuals aged 50-75 years, at high risk of lung cancer, in the primary care trusts adjacent to the centres. INTERVENTIONS A thoracic LDCT scan. Follow-up computed tomography (CT) scans as per protocol. Referral to multidisciplinary team clinics was determined by nodule size criteria. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Population-based recruitment based on risk stratification; management of the trial through web-based database; optimal characteristics of CT scan readers (radiologists vs. radiographers); characterisation of CT-detected nodules utilising volumetric analysis; prevalence of lung cancer at baseline; sociodemographic factors affecting participation; psychosocial measures (cancer distress, anxiety, depression, decision satisfaction); and cost-effectiveness modelling. RESULTS A total of 247,354 individuals were approached to take part in the trial; 30.7% responded positively to the screening invitation. Recruitment of participants resulted in 2028 in the CT arm and 2027 in the control arm. A total of 1994 participants underwent CT scanning: 42 participants (2.1%) were diagnosed with lung cancer; 36 out of 42 (85.7%) of the screen-detected cancers were identified as stage 1 or 2, and 35 (83.3%) underwent surgical resection as their primary treatment. Lung cancer was more common in the lowest socioeconomic group. Short-term adverse psychosocial consequences were observed in participants who were randomised to the intervention arm and in those who had a major lung abnormality detected, but these differences were modest and temporary. Rollout of screening as a service or design of a full trial would need to address issues of outreach. The health-economic analysis suggests that the intervention could be cost-effective but this needs to be confirmed using data on actual lung cancer mortality. CONCLUSIONS The UK Lung Cancer Screening (UKLS) pilot was successfully undertaken with 4055 randomised individuals. The data from the UKLS provide evidence that adds to existing data to suggest that lung cancer screening in the UK could potentially be implemented in the 60-75 years age group, selected via the Liverpool Lung Project risk model version 2 and using CT volumetry-based management protocols. FUTURE WORK The UKLS data will be pooled with the NELSON (Nederlands Leuvens Longkanker Screenings Onderzoek: Dutch-Belgian Randomised Lung Cancer Screening Trial) and other European Union trials in 2017 which will provide European mortality and cost-effectiveness data. For now, there is a clear need for mortality results from other trials and further research to identify optimal methods of implementation and delivery. Strategies for increasing uptake and providing support for underserved groups will be key to implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN78513845. FUNDING This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 40. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- John K Field
- Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, Institute of Translational Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Stephen W Duffy
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - David R Baldwin
- Respiratory Medicine Unit, David Evans Research Centre, Department of Respiratory Medicine, Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham, UK
| | - Kate E Brain
- Division of Population Medicine, College of Biomedical and Life Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| | - Anand Devaraj
- Department of Radiology, Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Tim Eisen
- Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Beverley A Green
- Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, Institute of Translational Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - John A Holemans
- Department of Radiology, Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK
| | | | - Keith M Kerr
- Department of Pathology, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Martin Ledson
- Department of Respiratory Medicine, Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK
| | - Kate J Lifford
- Division of Population Medicine, College of Biomedical and Life Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| | - Fiona E McRonald
- Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, Institute of Translational Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Arjun Nair
- Department of Radiology, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Richard D Page
- Department of Thoracic Surgery, Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK
| | | | - Robert C Rintoul
- Department of Thoracic Oncology, Papworth Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - Nicholas Screaton
- Department of Radiology, Papworth Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - Nicholas J Wald
- Centre for Environmental and Preventive Medicine, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - David Weller
- School of Clinical Sciences and Community Health, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - David K Whynes
- School of Economics, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Paula R Williamson
- Department of Biostatistics, Institute of Translational Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Ghasem Yadegarfar
- Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, Institute of Translational Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - David M Hansell
- Department of Radiology, Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
|
42
|
Abstract
Most patients with lung cancer are diagnosed when they present with symptoms, they have advanced stage disease, and curative treatment is no longer an option. An effective screening test has long been desired for early detection with the goal of reducing mortality from lung cancer. Sputum cytology, chest radiography, and computed tomography (CT) scan have been studied as potential screening tests. The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) demonstrated a 20% reduction in mortality with low-dose CT (LDCT) screening, and guidelines now endorse annual LDCT for those at high risk. Implementation of screening is underway with the desire that the benefits be seen in clinical practice outside of a research study format. Concerns include management of false positives, cost, incidental findings, radiation exposure, and overdiagnosis. Studies continue to evaluate LDCT screening and use of biomarkers in risk assessment and diagnosis in attempt to further improve outcomes for patients with lung cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David E Midthun
- 1Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
43
|
Palma JF, Das P, Liesenfeld O. Lung cancer screening: utility of molecular applications in conjunction with low-dose computed tomography guidelines. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 2016; 16:435-47. [DOI: 10.1586/14737159.2016.1149469] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
|
|
44
|
Couraud S, Milleron B. Lung cancer screening: what is new since the NLST results? CURRENT PULMONOLOGY REPORTS 2016. [DOI: 10.1007/s13665-016-0139-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
|
|
45
|
Andreano A, Anghinoni E, Autelitano M, Bellini A, Bersani M, Bizzoco S, Cavalieri d'Oro L, Decarli A, Lucchi S, Mannino S, Panciroli E, Rebora P, Rognoni M, Sampietro G, Villa M, Zocchetti C, Zucchi A, Valsecchi MG, Russo AG. Indicators based on registers and administrative data for breast cancer: routine evaluation of oncologic care pathway can be implemented. J Eval Clin Pract 2016; 22:62-70. [PMID: 26290172 DOI: 10.1111/jep.12436] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 07/15/2015] [Indexed: 01/16/2023]
Abstract
RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES Assuring the best standards of care - in a sustainable way - in chronic diseases as breast cancer is nowadays an important challenge for any health system. The aim of this study was to present the methodology used to define a set of quality indicators, computable from administrative data for the pathway of care of breast cancer, and its application at a population level. METHOD The cohort of 2007-2009 incident cases of breast cancer was identified through a network of six cancer registers in Northern Italy. Cases of sarcoma and lymphoma, patients with multiple primary cancers and those metastatic at diagnosis were excluded; 9614 women were retained for the analysis. For each indicator, the sub-cohort of women eligible for the diagnostic/therapeutic procedures was identified and calculations were performed through record linkage between the cohort and sources of health information. Data on potential available confounders or prognostic factors were also collected. RESULTS For a few indicators, such as cyto-histological assessment before surgery (62%) and intensive follow-up (79%), deviation from recommendations was evident. Younger patients (≤50 years) more frequently needed a short term re-intervention, while older patients less frequently underwent reconstructive surgery and received palliative care. Several indicators had a great variability across hospitals. In some cases, this heterogeneity appeared to be related to the hospital size, with high-volume hospitals being more compliant to guidelines. CONCLUSION It is possible to evaluate the quality of cancer care delivered in clinical practice in recent years, in order to implement interventions aimed to improve adherence to international standards of care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anita Andreano
- Osservatorio Epidemiologico, ASL Milano 1, Magenta, Italy.,Centro di Biostatistica per l'Epidemiologia Clinica, Dipartimento di Scienze della Salute, Università di Milano Bicocca, Monza, Italy
| | - Emanuela Anghinoni
- Servizio di Epidemiologia e Registri di Popolazione, ASL Cremona, Cremona, Italy
| | | | - Aldo Bellini
- Dipartimento PAC, ASL Milano 2, Melegnano, Italy
| | | | - Sabrina Bizzoco
- Servizio di Epidemiologia e Registri di Popolazione, ASL Cremona, Cremona, Italy
| | | | - Adriano Decarli
- Dipartimento di Scienze Cliniche e di Comunità, Università di Milano, Milano, Italy
| | - Silvia Lucchi
- Analisi Statistiche e Progetti di Ricerca, ASL Cremona, Cremona, Italy
| | - Salvatore Mannino
- Servizio di Epidemiologia e Registri di Popolazione, ASL Cremona, Cremona, Italy
| | | | - Paola Rebora
- Centro di Biostatistica per l'Epidemiologia Clinica, Dipartimento di Scienze della Salute, Università di Milano Bicocca, Monza, Italy
| | - Magda Rognoni
- U.O. Epidemiologia, ASL Monza e Brianza, Monza, Italy
| | | | - Marco Villa
- Analisi Statistiche e Progetti di Ricerca, ASL Cremona, Cremona, Italy
| | | | - Alberto Zucchi
- Servizio Epidemiologico Aziendale, ASL Bergamo, Bergamo, Italy
| | - Maria Grazia Valsecchi
- Centro di Biostatistica per l'Epidemiologia Clinica, Dipartimento di Scienze della Salute, Università di Milano Bicocca, Monza, Italy
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
46
|
|
|
47
|
Cost-effectiveness analysis of lung cancer screening with low-dose computerised tomography of the chest in Poland. Contemp Oncol (Pozn) 2015; 19:480-6. [PMID: 26843847 PMCID: PMC4731456 DOI: 10.5114/wo.2015.56656] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/23/2014] [Accepted: 01/23/2015] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Aim of the study To determine the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer (LC) screening with low-dose computerised tomography of the chest, as compared to an approach without screening, reimbursed today by the National Health Fund (NHF) in Poland. Material and methods In order to analyse the current costs of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures of a model LC patient treated today, a model group consisting of 199 consecutive patients diagnosed and treated in the Oncology Centre in Bydgoszcz, Poland from January 2007 to April 2010 was used. The number and type of performed procedures in this group was obtained from the Polish Register of Neoplasms and the NHF. Only direct medical costs were analysed. To calculate the total costs of screening, diagnostics, and treatment of the hypothetical LC patient who would have cancer diagnosed with screening CT, data from the literature and costs calculated for the model group were used. Prices of procedures were obtained from the price list of the NHF on 30 April 2010 and did not change from that time until June 2014. One-way sensitivity analysis was performed. Results The average cost per LC patient, diagnosed and treated without screening, is 5567.50 EUR, and median LC-specific survival is one year. In the hypothetical LC patient with cancer diagnosed by screening, the average cost is 13689.35 EUR per LC patient, with a median LC-specific survival of at least seven years. A calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) is 1353.64 EUR/year of life gained. Conclusions Lung cancer screening with low-dose CT would be highly cost-effective in Poland.
Collapse
|
|
48
|
Computed tomography screening for lung cancer in the National Lung Screening Trial: a cost-effectiveness analysis. J Thorac Imaging 2015; 30:79-87. [PMID: 25635704 DOI: 10.1097/rti.0000000000000136] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) demonstrated that screening with low-dose CT versus chest radiography reduced lung cancer mortality by 16% to 20%. More recently, a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of CT screening for lung cancer versus no screening in the NLST was performed. The CEA conformed to the reference-case recommendations of the US Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine, including the use of the societal perspective and an annual discount rate of 3%. The CEA was based on several important assumptions. In this paper, I review the methods and assumptions used to obtain the base case estimate of $81,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. In addition, I show how this estimate varied widely among different subsets and when some of the base case assumptions were changed and speculate on the cost-effectiveness of CT screening for lung cancer outside the NLST.
Collapse
|
|
49
|
Guessous I, Cornuz J. Why and how would we implement a lung cancer screening program? Public Health Rev 2015; 36:10. [PMID: 29450038 PMCID: PMC5804495 DOI: 10.1186/s40985-015-0010-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2015] [Accepted: 10/02/2015] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
For decades, lung cancer has been the most common cancer in terms of both incidence and mortality. There has been very little improvement in the prognosis of lung cancer. Early treatment following early diagnosis is considered to have potential for development. The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST), a large, well-designed randomized controlled trial, evaluated low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) as a screening tool for lung cancer. Compared with chest X-ray, annual LDCT screening reduced death from lung cancer and overall mortality by 20 and 6.7 %, respectively, in high-risk people aged 55–74 years. Several smaller trials of LDCT screening are under way, but none are sufficiently powered to detect a 20 % reduction in lung cancer death. Thus, it is very unlikely that the NLST results will be replicated. In addition, the NLST raises several issues related to screening, such as the high false-positive rate, overdiagnosis and cost. Healthcare providers and systems are now left with the question of whether the available findings should be translated into practice. We present the main reasons for implementing lung cancer screening in high-risk adults and discuss the main issues related to lung cancer screening. We stress the importance of eligibility criteria, smoking cessation programs, primary care physicians, and informed-decision making should lung cancer screening be implemented. Seven years ago, we were waiting for the results of trials. Such evidence is now available. Similar to almost all other cancer screens, uncertainties exist and persist even after recent scientific efforts and data. We believe that by staying within the characteristics of the original trial and appropriately sharing the evidence as well as the uncertainties, it is reasonable to implement a LDCT lung cancer screening program for smokers and former smokers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Idris Guessous
- 1Unit of Population Epidemiology, Division of primary care medicine, Department of Community Medicine, Primary Care and Emergency Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.,2Division of Chronic Diseases, Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, Lausanne University Hospital, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.,3Department of Epidemiology, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA USA
| | - Jacques Cornuz
- 4Department of Ambulatory Care and Community Medicine University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
|
50
|
Jacobson FL. Lung Cancer Screening With Low-Dose Computed Tomography Beyond the National Lung Screening Trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2015; 107:djv286. [DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djv286] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
|