Lower costs of hospital treatment of breast cancer through a population-based mammography screening programme

European Journal of Public Health

Volumn 14, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 128-133

  Kauhava, Lea ^a   Immonen Räihä, Pirjo ^b   Parvinen, Ilmo ^c   Helenius, Hans ^d   Kaljonen, Anne ^g   Räsänen, Osmo ^e   Pylkkänen, Liisa ^f   Klemi, Pekka J ^f  

^a Health Office City of Turku   (Finland)

^b Raisio Regional Hospital   (Finland)

^c Finnish Natl Fund for Res/Devmt   (Finland)

^d UNIVERSITY OF TURKU   (Finland)

^e Cancer Society of Southwest Finland   (Finland)

^f TURKU UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Finland)

^g NONE

Author keywords

Breast cancer; Cost savings; Mammography screening; Treatment costs

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER INVASION; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURVIVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST CONTROL; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; COST OF ILLNESS; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; EVALUATION; FEMALE; FINLAND; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH PROGRAM; HOSPITAL CARE; HOSPITAL COST; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; POPULATION RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SCREENING TEST; SURVIVAL RATE; TREATMENT PLANNING;

ADULT; AGED; BREAST NEOPLASMS; COST OF ILLNESS; COST SAVINGS; FEMALE; FINLAND; HOSPITAL COSTS; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; POPULATION SURVEILLANCE;

EID: 3042648548     PISSN: 11011262     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/14.2.128     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Finnish Cancer Registry. Cancer incidence in Finland 1996 and 1997. Helsinki: Cancer Society of Finland Publication No. 61, 2000.
2. Tabar L, Vitak B, Chen HH, Yen MF, Duffy SW, Smith RA. Beyond randomized controlled trials: organized mammographic screening substantially reduces breast carcinoma mortality. Cancer 2001;91:1724-31.
3. Klemi PJ, Toikkanen S, Räsänen O, Parvinen I, Joensuu H. Mammography screening interval and the frequency of interval cancers in a population-based screening. Br J Cancer 1997;75:762-6.
4. Holli K, Hakama M, Hakala T. Use of hospital services by breast cancer patients by stage of the disease: implications on the costs of cancer control. Breast Cancer Res Treatment 1996;37:237-41.
5. Legorreta AP, Brooks RJ, Leibowitz AN, Solin LJ. Cost of breast cancer treatment: a 4-year longitudinal study. Arch Intern Med 1996;156:2197-201.
6. Butler JR, Furnival CM, Hart RF. The costs of treating breast cancer in Australia and the implications for breast cancer screening. Aust N Z J Surg 1995;65:485-91.
7. Carter AP, Thompson RS, Bourdeau RV, Andenes J, Mustin H, Straley H. A clinically effective breast cancer screening program can be cost-effective, too. Prev Med 1987;16:19-34.
8. de Koning HJ, van Ineveld BM, de Haes JC, van Oortmarssen GJ, Klijn JG, van der Maas PJ. Advanced breast cancer and its prevention by screening. Br J Cancer 1992;65:950-5.
9. Salkeld G, Gerard K. Will early detection of breast cancer reduce the costs of treatment? Aust J Public Health 1994;18:388-93.
10. Hakama M, Pukkala E, Heikkilä M, Kallio M. Effectiveness of the public health policy for breast cancer screening in Finland: population based cohort study. BMJ 1997;314:864-7.
11. Immonen-Räihä P, Kauhava L, Parvinen I, Helenius H, Klemi P. Customer fee and participation in breast-cancer screening. Lancet 2001;358:1425.
12. Siegel JE, Weinstein MC, Russell LB, Gold MR. Recommendations for reporting cost-effectiveness analyses. Consensus statement of the panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. JAMA 1996;276:1339-41.
13. Brown DW, French MT, Schweitzer ME, McGeary KA, McCoy CB, Ullmann SG. Economic evaluation of breast cancer screening: a review. Cancer Pract 1999;7:28-33.
14. Tengs TO, Adams ME, Pliskin JS, et al. Five-hundred life-saving interventions and their cost-effectiveness. Risk Anal 1995;15:369-90.
15. UICC (International Union Against Cancer). TNM classification of malignant tumours. 4th rev ed. Berlin: Springer Verlag, 1987.
16. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, Weinstein MC, editors. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.
17. Weinstein MC, Siegel JE, Gold MR, Kamlet MS, Russell LB. Recommendations of the panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. JAMA 1996;276:1253-8.
18. Page DL, Dupont WD, Rogers LW, Landenberger M. Intraductal carcinoma of the breast: follow-up after biopsy only. Cancer 1982;49:751-8.
19. McCullagh P, Nelder JA. Generalized Linear Models. 2nd ed. London: Chapman and Hall, 1989.
20. International Agency for Research on Cancer. Breast cancer screening. IARC Handbooks of Cancer Prevention. Lyon: IARC Press, 2002.
21. Jardines L, Callans LS, Torosian MH. Recurrent breast cancer: presentation, diagnosis, and treatment. Semin Oncol 1993;20:538-47.
22. Hurley SF, Huggins RM, Snyder RD, Bishop JF. The cost of breast cancer recurrences. Br J Cancer 1992;65:449-55.
23. Will BP, Berthelot JM, Le Petit C, Tomiak EM, Verma S, Evans WK. Estimates of the lifetime costs of breast cancer treatment in Canada. Eur J Cancer 2000;36:724-35.
24. Wolstenholme JL, Smith SJ, Whynes DK. The costs of treating breast cancer in the United Kingdom: implications for screening. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1998;14:277-89.
25. Nyström L, Andersson I, Bjurstam N, Frisell J, Nordenskjöld B, Rutqvist LE. Long-term effects of mammography screening: updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials. Lancet 2002:359:909-19.