» Articles » PMID: 21892105

Cost-effectiveness of Computed Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer in the United States

Overview
Journal J Thorac Oncol
Publisher Elsevier
Date 2011 Sep 6
PMID 21892105
Citations 96
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Introduction: A randomized trial has demonstrated that lung cancer screening reduces mortality. Identifying participant and program characteristics that influence the cost-effectiveness of screening will help translate trial results into benefits at the population level.

Methods: Six U.S. cohorts (men and women aged 50, 60, or 70 years) were simulated in an existing patient-level lung cancer model. Smoking histories reflected observed U.S. patterns. We simulated lifetime histories of 500,000 identical individuals per cohort in each scenario. Costs per quality-adjusted life-year gained ($/QALY) were estimated for each program: computed tomography screening; stand-alone smoking cessation therapies (4-30% 1-year abstinence); and combined programs.

Results: Annual screening of current and former smokers aged 50 to 74 years costs between $126,000 and $169,000/QALY (minimum 20 pack-years of smoking) or $110,000 and $166,000/QALY (40 pack-year minimum), when compared with no screening and assuming background quit rates. Screening was beneficial but had a higher cost per QALY when the model included radiation-induced lung cancers. If screen participation doubled background quit rates, the cost of annual screening (at age 50 years, 20 pack-year minimum) was below $75,000/QALY. If screen participation halved background quit rates, benefits from screening were nearly erased. If screening had no effect on quit rates, annual screening costs more but provided fewer QALYs than annual cessation therapies. Annual combined screening/cessation therapy programs at age 50 years costs $130,500 to $159,700/QALY, when compared with annual stand-alone cessation.

Conclusions: The cost-effectiveness of computed tomography screening will likely be strongly linked to achievable smoking cessation rates. Trials and further modeling should explore the consequences of relationships between smoking behaviors and screen participation.

Citing Articles

Optimal Pathways to Lung Cancer Screening in Primary Care Settings: A Scoping Review.

K Symvoulakis E, Bouloukaki I, Christodoulakis A, Aravantinou-Karlatou A, Tsiligianni I Curr Oncol. 2025; 32(1).

PMID: 39851924 PMC: 11764254. DOI: 10.3390/curroncol32010008.


Uptake and 4-week quit rates from an opt-out co-located smoking cessation service delivered alongside community-based low-dose computed tomography screening within the Yorkshire Lung Screening Trial.

Murray R, Alexandris P, Baldwin D, Brain K, Britton J, Crosbie P Eur Respir J. 2024; 63(4).

PMID: 38636970 PMC: 11024392. DOI: 10.1183/13993003.01768-2023.


Understanding the perceived benefits, barriers, and cues to action for lung cancer screening among Latinos: A qualitative study.

Alaniz-Cantu E, Goodwin K, Smith L, Acosta E, Chavez-Iniguez A, Evans M Front Oncol. 2024; 14:1365739.

PMID: 38571494 PMC: 10987732. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1365739.


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

Kale M, Sigel K, Arora A, Ferket B, Wisnivesky J, Kong C JTO Clin Res Rep. 2024; 5(3):100635.

PMID: 38450056 PMC: 10915410. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtocrr.2024.100635.


Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Risk Factor-Based Lung Cancer Screening Program by Low-Dose Computer Tomography in Current Smokers in China.

Zhang T, Chen X, Li C, Wen X, Lin T, Huang J Cancers (Basel). 2023; 15(18).

PMID: 37760416 PMC: 10527380. DOI: 10.3390/cancers15184445.


References
1.
Handy Jr J, Asaph J, Skokan L, Reed C, Koh S, Brooks G . What happens to patients undergoing lung cancer surgery? Outcomes and quality of life before and after surgery. Chest. 2002; 122(1):21-30. DOI: 10.1378/chest.122.1.21. View

2.
Ashraf H, Tonnesen P, Holst Pedersen J, Dirksen A, Thorsen H, Dossing M . Effect of CT screening on smoking habits at 1-year follow-up in the Danish Lung Cancer Screening Trial (DLCST). Thorax. 2008; 64(5):388-92. DOI: 10.1136/thx.2008.102475. View

3.
Berrington de Gonzalez A, Kim K, Berg C . Low-dose lung computed tomography screening before age 55: estimates of the mortality reduction required to outweigh the radiation-induced cancer risk. J Med Screen. 2008; 15(3):153-8. PMC: 2782431. DOI: 10.1258/jms.2008.008052. View

4.
Park E, Ostroff J, Rakowski W, Gareen I, Diefenbach M, Feibelmann S . Risk perceptions among participants undergoing lung cancer screening: baseline results from the National Lung Screening Trial. Ann Behav Med. 2009; 37(3):268-79. PMC: 2831282. DOI: 10.1007/s12160-009-9112-9. View

5.
Manser R, Dalton A, Carter R, Byrnes G, Elwood M, Campbell D . Cost-effectiveness analysis of screening for lung cancer with low dose spiral CT (computed tomography) in the Australian setting. Lung Cancer. 2005; 48(2):171-85. DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2004.11.001. View