Cost-effectiveness of screening for lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography: A systematic literature review

European Journal of Public Health

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 2016, Pages 168-175

  Puggina, Anna ^a   Broumas, Athanasios ^b   Ricciardi, Walter ^a   Boccia, Stefania ^a  

^a CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY   (Italy)

^b BOCCONI UNIVERSITY   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; EARLY CANCER DIAGNOSIS; ECONOMICS; HUMAN; LUNG NEOPLASMS; PROCEDURES; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; RADIATION DOSE; RISK ASSESSMENT; X-RAY COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; HUMANS; LUNG NEOPLASMS; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; RADIATION DOSAGE; RISK ASSESSMENT; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84962032912     PISSN: 11011262     EISSN: 1464360X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/ckv158     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. GLOBOCAN 2012 (IARC), Section of Cancer Surveillance. Available at: http://globocan.iarc.fr/(27 October 2014, date last accessed).
2. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts and Figures 2012. Atlanta, GA, 2012. Available at: http://www.cancer.org/research/cancerfactsstatistics/cancerfactsfigures2012/(27 October 2014, date last accessed).
3. Molina JR, Yang P, Cassivi SD, et al. Non-small cell lung cancer: epidemiology, risk factors, treatment, and survivorship. Mayo Clin Proc 2008;83:584-94.
4. Vansteenkiste J, De Ruysscher D, Eberhardt WEE, et al. Early-stage and locally advanced (non-metastatic) non-small cell lung cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines. Ann Oncol 2013;24:vi89-98.
5. Henschke CI, McCauley DI, Yankelevitz DF, et al. Early Lung Cancer Action Project: overall design and findings from baseline screening. Lancet 1999;354:99-105.
6. International Early Lung Cancer Action Program Investigators, Henschke CI, Yankelevitz DF, et al. Survival of patients with stage I lung cancer detected on CT screening. N Engl J Med 2006;355:1763-71.
7. Swensen SJ, Jett JR, Hartman TE, et al. Lung cancer screening with CT: Mayo Clinic experience. Radiology 2003;226:756-61.
8. Pastorino U, Bellomi M, Landoni C, et al. Early lung-cancer detection with spiral CT and positron emission tomography in heavy smokers: 2-year results. Lancet 2003;362:593-7.
9. Gohagan JK, Marcus PM, Fagerstrom RM, et al. Final results of the Lung Screening Study, a randomized feasibility study of spiral CT versus chest x-ray screening for lung cancer. Lung Cancer 2005;47:9-15.
10. Wilson DO, Weissfeld JL, Fuhrman CR, et al. The Pittsburgh Lung Screening Study (PLuSS): outcomes within 3 years of a first computed tomography scan. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2008;178:956-61.
11. USPSTF. Lung cancer screening: recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 2004;140:738-9.
12. National Lung Screening Trial Research Team, Church TR, Black WC, et al. Results of initial low-dose computed tomographic screening for lung cancer. N Engl J Med 2013;368:1980-91.
13. Moyer VA. Screening for lung cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 2014;160:330-8.
14. Black C, Bagust A, Boland A, et al. The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of computed tomography screening for lung cancer: systematic reviews. Health Technol Assess 2006;10:iii-iv. , ix-x, 1-90.
15. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med 2009;6:1-28.
16. Black WC, Gareen IF, Soneji SS, et al. Cost-effectiveness of CT Screening in the National Lung Screening Trial. N Engl J Med 2014;371:1793-802.
17. 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 2014;7:272-82.
18. Villanti AC, Jiang Y, Abramas DB, et al. A cost-utility analysis of lung cancer screening and the additional benefits of incorporating smoking cessation interventions. PLoS One 2013;8:1-11.
19. McMahon PM, Kong CY, Bouzan C, et al. Cost-effectiveness of computed tomography screening for lung cancer in the United States. J Thorac Oncol 2011;6:1841-8.
20. Mahedevia PJ, Fleischer LA, Frick KD, et al. Lung cancer screening with helical computed tomography in older adult smokers. JAMA 2003;289:313-22.
21. Wisnivesky JP, Mushlin AI, Sicherman N, et al. The cost-effectiveness of low-dose CT screening for lung cancer. Chest 2003;124:614-21.
22. Marshall D, Simpson KN, Earle CC, et al. Economic decision analysis model of screening for lung cancer. Eur J Cancer 2001;37:1759-67.
23. Manser R, Dalton A, Carter R, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of screening for lung cancer with low dose spiral CT (computed tomography) in the Australian setting. Lung Cancer 2005;48:171-85.
24. Shmueli A, Fraifeld S, Peretz T, et al. Cost-effectiveness of baseline low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer: The Israeli experience. Value Health 2013;16:922-31.
25. Grosse SD. Assessing cost-effectiveness in healthcare: history of the $50,000 per QALY threshold. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2008;8:165-78.
26. Neumann PJ, Cohen JT, Weinstein MC. Updating cost-effectiveness-The curious resilence of the $50,000 per QALY threshold. N Engl J Med 2014;371:796-7.