The cost-effectiveness of the Manchester 'lung health checks', a community-based lung cancer low-dose CT screening pilot

被引:35
作者
Hinde, Sebastian [1 ]
Crilly, Tessa [2 ]
Balata, Haval [3 ]
Bartlett, Rachel [2 ]
Crilly, John [2 ]
Barber, Phil [3 ,4 ]
Threlfall, Anthony [4 ]
Tonge, Janet [4 ,5 ]
Booton, Richard [3 ]
Crosbie, Phil A. [3 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Univ York, Ctr Hlth Econ, York, N Yorkshire, England
[2] Crystal Blue Consulting Ltd, London, England
[3] Manchester Univ NHS Fdn Trust, Manchester Thorac Oncol Ctr, North West Lung Ctr, Manchester, Lancs, England
[4] Macmillan Canc Improvement Partnership, Manchester, Lancs, England
[5] Manchester Hlth & Care Commissioning, Manchester, Lancs, England
[6] Univ Manchester, Div Canc Sci, Fac Biol Med & Hlth, Manchester, Lancs, England
关键词
Screening; Lung cancer; Economic evaluation; Cost-effectiveness; Early detection; Low-dose CT; COMPUTED-TOMOGRAPHY;
D O I
10.1016/j.lungcan.2018.10.029
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background. Previous evaluations of low-dose CT (LDCT) lung cancer screening programmes have taken very different approaches in the design of the informative trials and the methods applied to determine cost-effectiveness. Therefore, it has not been possible to determine if differences in cost-effectiveness are due to different screening approaches or the evaluation methodology. This study reports the findings of an evaluation of the first round of a community-based, LDCT screening pilot Manchester, applying previously published methodology to ensure consistency. Methods: Using the economic evaluation method reported in the UKLS trial, applying Manchester specific evidence where possible, we estimate the cost-effectiveness of LDCT for lung cancer. Estimates of the total costs and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated. Results: The Manchester programme cost 663,076, diagnosed 42 patients with lung cancer resulting in a gain in population health of 88.13 discounted life years, equivalent to 65.85 QALYs. This implied an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 10,069 pound/QALY. Conclusions: We found the Manchester programme to be a cost-effective use of limited NHS resources. The findings suggest that further research is now needed not as to whether LDCT screening is cost-effective but under what conditions can it improve patient health by the most while remaining cost-effective.
引用
收藏
页码:119 / 124
页数:6
相关论文
共 27 条
[1]   Reduced Lung-Cancer Mortality with Low-Dose Computed Tomographic Screening [J].
Aberle, Denise R. ;
Adams, Amanda M. ;
Berg, Christine D. ;
Black, William C. ;
Clapp, Jonathan D. ;
Fagerstrom, Richard M. ;
Gareen, Ilana F. ;
Gatsonis, Constantine ;
Marcus, Pamela M. ;
Sicks, JoRean D. .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2011, 365 (05) :395-409
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1999, 172 U YORK YORK HLTH
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2016, NHS REF COSTS 2015 2
[4]  
Baldwin D. R., 2017, BMJ, V359
[5]   Symptom lead times in lung and colorectal cancers: what are the benefits of symptom-based approaches to early diagnosis? [J].
Biswas, M. ;
Ades, A. E. ;
Hamilton, W. .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2015, 112 (02) :271-277
[6]   Cost-Effectiveness of CT Screening in the National Lung Screening Trial [J].
Black, William C. ;
Gareen, Ilana F. ;
Soneji, Samir S. ;
Sicks, JoRean D. ;
Keeler, Emmett B. ;
Aberle, Denise R. ;
Naeim, Arash ;
Church, Timothy R. ;
Silvestri, Gerard A. ;
Gorelick, Jeremy ;
Gatsonis, Constantine .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2014, 371 (19) :1793-1802
[7]  
Briggs A., 2006, DECISION MODELLING H
[8]   Methods for the estimation of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence cost-effectiveness threshold [J].
Claxton, Karl ;
Martin, Steve ;
Soares, Marta ;
Rice, Nigel ;
Spackman, Eldon ;
Hinde, Sebastian ;
Devlin, Nancy ;
Smith, Peter C. ;
Sculpher, Mark .
HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, 2015, 19 (14) :1-+
[9]  
Crosbie P.A., 2018, THORAX
[10]  
CRUK, 2014, SAV LIV AV COSTS AN