» Articles » PMID: 24769920

Cost-effectiveness of Breast Cancer Control Strategies in Central America: the Cases of Costa Rica and Mexico

Overview
Journal PLoS One
Date 2014 Apr 29
PMID 24769920
Citations 10
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

This paper reports the most cost-effective policy options to support and improve breast cancer control in Costa Rica and Mexico. Total costs and effects of breast cancer interventions were estimated using the health care perspective and WHO-CHOICE methodology. Effects were measured in disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted. Costs were assessed in 2009 United States Dollars (US$). To the extent available, analyses were based on locally obtained data. In Costa Rica, the current strategy of treating breast cancer in stages I to IV at a 80% coverage level seems to be the most cost-effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of US$4,739 per DALY averted. At a coverage level of 95%, biennial clinical breast examination (CBE) screening could improve Costa Rica's population health twofold, and can still be considered very cost-effective (ICER US$5,964/DALY). For Mexico, our results indicate that at 95% coverage a mass-media awareness raising program (MAR) could be the most cost-effective (ICER US$5,021/DALY). If more resources are available in Mexico, biennial mammography screening for women 50-70 yrs (ICER US$12,718/DALY), adding trastuzumab (ICER US$13,994/DALY) or screening women 40-70 yrs biennially plus trastuzumab (ICER US$17,115/DALY) are less cost-effective options. We recommend both Costa Rica and Mexico to engage in MAR, CBE or mammography screening programs, depending on their budget. The results of this study should be interpreted with caution however, as the evidence on the intervention effectiveness is uncertain. Also, these programs require several organizational, budgetary and human resources, and the accessibility of breast cancer diagnostic, referral, treatment and palliative care facilities should be improved simultaneously. A gradual implementation of early detection programs should give the respective Ministries of Health the time to negotiate the required budget, train the required human resources and understand possible socioeconomic barriers.

Citing Articles

Framework for developing cost-effectiveness analysis threshold: the case of Egypt.

Fasseeh A, Korra N, Elezbawy B, Sedrak A, Gamal M, Eldessouki R J Egypt Public Health Assoc. 2024; 99(1):12.

PMID: 38825614 PMC: 11144683. DOI: 10.1186/s42506-024-00159-7.


Economic evaluations of mammography to screen for breast cancer in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review.

Icanervilia A, van der Schans J, Cao Q, de Carvalho A, Cordova-Pozo K, Thobari J J Glob Health. 2022; 12:04048.

PMID: 35837900 PMC: 9284087. DOI: 10.7189/jogh.12.04048.


Public Policies and Programs for the Prevention and Control of Breast Cancer in Latin American Women: Scoping Review.

Ramos Herrera I, Lemus Flores M, Reyna Sevilla A, Gonzalez Castaneda M, Torres Gutierrez F, Crocker Sagastume R JMIR Cancer. 2022; 8(3):e32370.

PMID: 35793130 PMC: 9301550. DOI: 10.2196/32370.


Advances in breast cancer screening modalities and status of global screening programs.

Luo C, Wang L, Zhang Y, Lu M, Lu B, Cai J Chronic Dis Transl Med. 2022; 8(2):112-123.

PMID: 35774423 PMC: 9215717. DOI: 10.1002/cdt3.21.


Economic Evaluations of Breast Cancer Care in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Scoping Review.

Erfani P, Bhangdia K, Stauber C, Mugunga J, Pace L, Fadelu T Oncologist. 2021; 26(8):e1406-e1417.

PMID: 34050590 PMC: 8342576. DOI: 10.1002/onco.13841.


References
1.
Zotov V, Shyyan R . Introduction of breast cancer screening in Chernihiv Oblast in the Ukraine: report of a PATH Breast Cancer Assistance Program experience. Breast J. 2003; 9 Suppl 2:S75-80. DOI: 10.1046/j.1524-4741.9.s2.7.x. View

2.
Khan S, Stewart A, Morrow M . Does aggressive local therapy improve survival in metastatic breast cancer?. Surgery. 2002; 132(4):620-6; discussion 626-7. DOI: 10.1067/msy.2002.127544. View

3.
Palacio-Mejia L, Lazcano-Ponce E, Allen-Leigh B, Hernandez-Avila M . [Regional differences in breast and cervical cancer mortality in Mexico between 1979-2006]. Salud Publica Mex. 2009; 51 Suppl 2:s208-19. DOI: 10.1590/s0036-36342009000800011. View

4.
Devi B, Tang T, Corbex M . Reducing by half the percentage of late-stage presentation for breast and cervix cancer over 4 years: a pilot study of clinical downstaging in Sarawak, Malaysia. Ann Oncol. 2007; 18(7):1172-6. DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdm105. View

5.
Bland K, Menck H, Morrow M, Winchester D, WINCHESTER D . The National Cancer Data Base 10-year survey of breast carcinoma treatment at hospitals in the United States. Cancer. 1998; 83(6):1262-73. DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0142(19980915)83:6<1262::aid-cncr28>3.0.co;2-2. View