» Articles » PMID: 35837900

Economic Evaluations of Mammography to Screen for Breast Cancer in Low- and Middle-income Countries: A Systematic Review

Overview
Journal J Glob Health
Date 2022 Jul 15
PMID 35837900
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) have limited resources compared to high-income countries (HICs). Therefore, it is critical that LMICs implement cost-effective strategies to reduce the burden of breast cancer. This study aimed to answer the question of whether mammography is a cost-effective breast cancer screening method in LMICs.

Methods: A systematic article search was conducted through Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Econlit. Studies were included only if they conducted a full economic evaluation and focused on mammography screening in LMICs. Two reviewers screened through the title and abstract of each article and continued with full-text selection. Data were extracted and synthesized narratively. Quality assessment for each included study was conducted using the Consensus Health Economic Criteria (CHEC) extended checklist.

Results: This review identified 21 studies economically evaluating mammography as a breast cancer screening method in LMICs. Eighteen of these studies concluded that mammography screening was a cost-effective strategy. Most studies (71%) were conducted in upper-middle-income countries (Upper MICs). The quality of the studies varied from low to good. Important factors determining cost-effectiveness are the target age group (eg, 50-59 years), the screening interval (eg, biennial or triennial), as well as any combination with other breast cancer control strategies (eg, combination with treatment strategy for breast cancer patients).

Conclusions: Mammography screening appeared to be a cost-effective strategy in LMICs, particularly in Upper MICs. More studies conducted in lower-middle-income and low-income countries are needed to better understand the cost-effectiveness of mammography screening in these regions.

Citing Articles

High-value breast cancer care within resource limitations.

Verhoeven D, Siesling S, Allemani C, Roy P, Travado L, Bhoo-Pathy N Oncologist. 2024; 29(7):e899-e909.

PMID: 38780115 PMC: 11224985. DOI: 10.1093/oncolo/oyae080.


Health-related quality of life in breast cancer patients in low-and-middle-income countries in Asia: a systematic review.

Ngo N, Nguyen H, Nguyen P, Vo T, Phung T, Pham A Front Glob Womens Health. 2023; 4:1180383.

PMID: 37389285 PMC: 10304018. DOI: 10.3389/fgwh.2023.1180383.


Cost-effectiveness evaluation of risk-based breast cancer screening in Urban Hebei Province.

Shi J, Guan Y, Liang D, Li D, He Y, Liu Y Sci Rep. 2023; 13(1):3370.

PMID: 36849794 PMC: 9971026. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-29985-z.

References
1.
Peintinger F . National Breast Screening Programs across Europe. Breast Care (Basel). 2020; 14(6):354-358. PMC: 6940461. DOI: 10.1159/000503715. View

2.
Souza F, Polanczyk C . Is Age-targeted full-field digital mammography screening cost-effective in emerging countries? A micro simulation model. Springerplus. 2013; 2:366. PMC: 3736082. DOI: 10.1186/2193-1801-2-366. View

3.
Barfar E, Rashidian A, Hosseini H, Nosratnejad S, Barooti E, Zendehdel K . Cost-effectiveness of mammography screening for breast cancer in a low socioeconomic group of Iranian women. Arch Iran Med. 2014; 17(4):241-5. DOI: 014174/AIM.005. View

4.
Paez A . Grey literature: An important resource in systematic reviews. J Evid Based Med. 2017; . DOI: 10.1111/jebm.12265. View

5.
Melendez-Torres G, OMara-Eves A, Thomas J, Brunton G, Caird J, Petticrew M . Interpretive analysis of 85 systematic reviews suggests that narrative syntheses and meta-analyses are incommensurate in argumentation. Res Synth Methods. 2016; 8(1):109-118. PMC: 5347877. DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1231. View