Projected clinical, resource use, and fiscal impacts of implementing low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening in Medicare

Journal of Oncology Practice

Volumn 11, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 267-272

  Roth, Joshua A ^a   Sullivan, Sean D ^a   Goulart, Bernardo H L ^a   Ravelo, Arliene ^a   Sanderson, Joanna C ^a   Ramsey, Scott D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER STAGING; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HUMAN; LOW DOSE COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; LUNG CANCER; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MEDICARE; SIMULATION; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; EARLY CANCER DIAGNOSIS; ECONOMICS; FORECASTING; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; LEGISLATION AND JURISPRUDENCE; LUNG TUMOR; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; RISK FACTOR; SMOKING; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; THEORETICAL MODEL; UNITED STATES; UTILIZATION; X-RAY COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY;

AGED; COMPUTER SIMULATION; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FORECASTING; HEALTH CARE COSTS; HEALTH PLANNING; HEALTH POLICY; HEALTH RESOURCES; HUMANS; LUNG NEOPLASMS; MEDICARE; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, THEORETICAL; NEOPLASM STAGING; RISK FACTORS; SMOKING; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84937704562     PISSN: 15547477     EISSN: 1935469X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1200/JOP.2014.002600     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Howlader N, Noone AM, Krapcho M, et al: (eds): SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2009. Bethesda, MD, National Cancer Institute, 2012
2. Aberle DR, Adams AM, Berg CD, et al: Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med 365:395-409, 2011
3. Moyer VA: Screening for lung cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 160:330-338, 2014
4. Pinsky PF, Gierada DS, Hocking W, et al: National Lung Screening Trial findings by age: Medicare-eligible versus under-65 population. Ann Intern Med 161:627-633, 2014
5. Congressional Budget Office: Medicare: Baseline Projections, April 2014. http://www.cbo.gov/publication/44205
6. Oken MM, Hocking WG, Kvale PA, et al: Screening by chest radiograph and lung cancer mortality: The Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) randomized trial. JAMA 306:1865-1873, 2011
7. Cronin KA, Yu B, Krapcho M, et al: Modeling the dissemination of mammography in the United States. Cancer Causes Control 16:701-712, 2005
8. Church TR, Black WC, Aberle DR, et al: Results of initial low-dose computed tomographic screening for lung cancer. N Engl J Med 368:1980-1991, 2013
9. Dinan MA, Curtis LH, Carpenter WR, et al: Stage migration, selection bias, and survival associated with the adoption of positron emission tomography among medicare beneficiaries with non-small-cell lung cancer, 1998-2003. J Clin Oncol 30:2725-2730, 2012
10. Patz EF Jr, Pinsky P, Gatsonis C, et al: Overdiagnosis in low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer. JAMA Intern Med 174:269-274, 2014
11. American Lung Association: Providing Guidance on Lung Cancer Screening to Patients and Physicians. http://www.lung.org/lung-disease/lung-cancer/lung-cancer-screening-guidelines/lung-cancer-screening.pdf
12. Villanti AC, Jiang Y, Abrams DB, et al: A cost-utility analysis of lung cancer screening and the additional benefits of incorporating smoking cessation interventions. PLoS One 8:e71379, 2013
13. Goulart BH, Bensink ME, Mummy DG, et al: Lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography: Costs, national expenditures, and cost-effectiveness. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 10:267-275, 2012
14. Priola AM, Priola SM, Giaj-Levra M, et al: Clinical implications and added costs of incidental findings in an early detection study of lung cancer by using low-dose spiral computed tomography. Clin Lung Cancer 14:139-148, 2013
15. Yabroff KR, Lamont EB, Mariotto A, et al: Cost of care for elderly cancer patients in the United States. J Natl Cancer Inst 100:630-641, 2008
16. Rosenberg MA, Feuer EJ, Yu B, et al: Chapter 3: Cohort life tables by smoking status, removing lung cancer as a cause of death. Risk Anal 32:S25-S38, 2012 (suppl 1)
17. Briggs AH, Ades AE, Price MJ: Probabilistic sensitivity analysis for decision trees with multiple branches: Use of the Dirichlet distribution in a Bayesian framework. Med Decis Making 23:341-350, 2003
18. O'Hagan A, McCabe C, Akehurst R, et al: Incorporation of uncertainty in health economic modelling studies. Pharmacoeconomics 23:529-536, 2005
19. Pyenson BS, Sander MS, Jiang Y, et al: An actuarial analysis shows that offering lung cancer screening as an insurance benefit would save lives at relatively low cost. Health Aff (Millwood) 31:770-779, 2012
20. Pyenson BS, Henschke CI, Yankelevitz DF, et al: Offering lung cancer screening to high-risk Medicare beneficiaries saves lives and is cost-effective: An actuarial analysis. Am Health Drug Benefits 7:272-282, 2014
21. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, et al: Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York, NY, Oxford University Press USA, 1996
22. Black WC, Gareen IF, Soneji SS, et al: Cost-effectiveness of CT screening in the National Lung Screening Trial. N Engl J Med 371:1793-1802, 2014
23. Neumann PJ, Cohen JT, Weinstein MC: Updating cost-effectiveness: The curious resilience of the $50,000-per-QALY threshold. N Engl J Med 371:796-797, 2014