Cargando…
The cost-effectiveness of digital breast tomosynthesis in a population breast cancer screening program
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate at which sensitivity digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) would become cost-effective compared to digital mammography (DM) in a population breast cancer screening program, given a constant estimate of specificity. METHODS: In a microsimulation model, the cost-effectiveness of b...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7476964/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32382844 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-06812-x |
_version_ | 1783579796370882560 |
---|---|
author | Wang, Jing Phi, Xuan-Anh Greuter, Marcel J. W. Daszczuk, Alicja M. Feenstra, Talitha L. Pijnappel, Ruud M. Vermeulen, Karin M. Buls, Nico Houssami, Nehmat Lu, Wenli de Bock, Geertruida H. |
author_facet | Wang, Jing Phi, Xuan-Anh Greuter, Marcel J. W. Daszczuk, Alicja M. Feenstra, Talitha L. Pijnappel, Ruud M. Vermeulen, Karin M. Buls, Nico Houssami, Nehmat Lu, Wenli de Bock, Geertruida H. |
author_sort | Wang, Jing |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: To evaluate at which sensitivity digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) would become cost-effective compared to digital mammography (DM) in a population breast cancer screening program, given a constant estimate of specificity. METHODS: In a microsimulation model, the cost-effectiveness of biennial screening for women aged 50–75 was simulated for three scenarios: DBT for women with dense breasts and DM for women with fatty breasts (scenario 1), DBT for the whole population (scenario 2) or maintaining DM screening (reference). For DM, sensitivity was varied depending on breast density from 65 to 87%, and for DBT from 65 to 100%. The specificity was set at 96.5% for both DM and DBT. Direct medical costs were considered, including screening, biopsy and treatment costs. Scenarios were considered to be cost-effective if the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was below €20,000 per life year gain (LYG). RESULTS: For both scenarios, the ICER was more favourable at increasing DBT sensitivity. Compared with DM screening, 0.8–10.2% more LYGs were found when DBT sensitivity was at least 75% for scenario 1, and 4.7–18.7% when DBT sensitivity was at least 80% for scenario 2. At €96 per DBT, scenario 1 was cost-effective at a DBT sensitivity of at least 90%, and at least 95% for scenario 2. At €80 per DBT, these values decreased to 80% and 90%, respectively. CONCLUSION: DBT is more likely to be a cost-effective alternative to mammography in women with dense breasts. Whether DBT could be cost-effective in a general population highly depends on DBT costs. KEY POINTS: • DBT could be a cost-effective screening modality for women with dense breasts when its sensitivity is at least 90% at a maximum cost per screen of €96. • DBT has the potential to be cost-effective for screening all women when sensitivity is at least 90% at a maximum cost per screen of €80. • Whether DBT could be used as an alternative to mammography for screening all women is highly dependent on the cost of DBT per screen. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00330-020-06812-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7476964 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-74769642020-09-21 The cost-effectiveness of digital breast tomosynthesis in a population breast cancer screening program Wang, Jing Phi, Xuan-Anh Greuter, Marcel J. W. Daszczuk, Alicja M. Feenstra, Talitha L. Pijnappel, Ruud M. Vermeulen, Karin M. Buls, Nico Houssami, Nehmat Lu, Wenli de Bock, Geertruida H. Eur Radiol Breast OBJECTIVES: To evaluate at which sensitivity digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) would become cost-effective compared to digital mammography (DM) in a population breast cancer screening program, given a constant estimate of specificity. METHODS: In a microsimulation model, the cost-effectiveness of biennial screening for women aged 50–75 was simulated for three scenarios: DBT for women with dense breasts and DM for women with fatty breasts (scenario 1), DBT for the whole population (scenario 2) or maintaining DM screening (reference). For DM, sensitivity was varied depending on breast density from 65 to 87%, and for DBT from 65 to 100%. The specificity was set at 96.5% for both DM and DBT. Direct medical costs were considered, including screening, biopsy and treatment costs. Scenarios were considered to be cost-effective if the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was below €20,000 per life year gain (LYG). RESULTS: For both scenarios, the ICER was more favourable at increasing DBT sensitivity. Compared with DM screening, 0.8–10.2% more LYGs were found when DBT sensitivity was at least 75% for scenario 1, and 4.7–18.7% when DBT sensitivity was at least 80% for scenario 2. At €96 per DBT, scenario 1 was cost-effective at a DBT sensitivity of at least 90%, and at least 95% for scenario 2. At €80 per DBT, these values decreased to 80% and 90%, respectively. CONCLUSION: DBT is more likely to be a cost-effective alternative to mammography in women with dense breasts. Whether DBT could be cost-effective in a general population highly depends on DBT costs. KEY POINTS: • DBT could be a cost-effective screening modality for women with dense breasts when its sensitivity is at least 90% at a maximum cost per screen of €96. • DBT has the potential to be cost-effective for screening all women when sensitivity is at least 90% at a maximum cost per screen of €80. • Whether DBT could be used as an alternative to mammography for screening all women is highly dependent on the cost of DBT per screen. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00330-020-06812-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020-05-07 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7476964/ /pubmed/32382844 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-06812-x Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Breast Wang, Jing Phi, Xuan-Anh Greuter, Marcel J. W. Daszczuk, Alicja M. Feenstra, Talitha L. Pijnappel, Ruud M. Vermeulen, Karin M. Buls, Nico Houssami, Nehmat Lu, Wenli de Bock, Geertruida H. The cost-effectiveness of digital breast tomosynthesis in a population breast cancer screening program |
title | The cost-effectiveness of digital breast tomosynthesis in a population breast cancer screening program |
title_full | The cost-effectiveness of digital breast tomosynthesis in a population breast cancer screening program |
title_fullStr | The cost-effectiveness of digital breast tomosynthesis in a population breast cancer screening program |
title_full_unstemmed | The cost-effectiveness of digital breast tomosynthesis in a population breast cancer screening program |
title_short | The cost-effectiveness of digital breast tomosynthesis in a population breast cancer screening program |
title_sort | cost-effectiveness of digital breast tomosynthesis in a population breast cancer screening program |
topic | Breast |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7476964/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32382844 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-06812-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT wangjing thecosteffectivenessofdigitalbreasttomosynthesisinapopulationbreastcancerscreeningprogram AT phixuananh thecosteffectivenessofdigitalbreasttomosynthesisinapopulationbreastcancerscreeningprogram AT greutermarceljw thecosteffectivenessofdigitalbreasttomosynthesisinapopulationbreastcancerscreeningprogram AT daszczukalicjam thecosteffectivenessofdigitalbreasttomosynthesisinapopulationbreastcancerscreeningprogram AT feenstratalithal thecosteffectivenessofdigitalbreasttomosynthesisinapopulationbreastcancerscreeningprogram AT pijnappelruudm thecosteffectivenessofdigitalbreasttomosynthesisinapopulationbreastcancerscreeningprogram AT vermeulenkarinm thecosteffectivenessofdigitalbreasttomosynthesisinapopulationbreastcancerscreeningprogram AT bulsnico thecosteffectivenessofdigitalbreasttomosynthesisinapopulationbreastcancerscreeningprogram AT houssaminehmat thecosteffectivenessofdigitalbreasttomosynthesisinapopulationbreastcancerscreeningprogram AT luwenli thecosteffectivenessofdigitalbreasttomosynthesisinapopulationbreastcancerscreeningprogram AT debockgeertruidah thecosteffectivenessofdigitalbreasttomosynthesisinapopulationbreastcancerscreeningprogram AT wangjing costeffectivenessofdigitalbreasttomosynthesisinapopulationbreastcancerscreeningprogram AT phixuananh costeffectivenessofdigitalbreasttomosynthesisinapopulationbreastcancerscreeningprogram AT greutermarceljw costeffectivenessofdigitalbreasttomosynthesisinapopulationbreastcancerscreeningprogram AT daszczukalicjam costeffectivenessofdigitalbreasttomosynthesisinapopulationbreastcancerscreeningprogram AT feenstratalithal costeffectivenessofdigitalbreasttomosynthesisinapopulationbreastcancerscreeningprogram AT pijnappelruudm costeffectivenessofdigitalbreasttomosynthesisinapopulationbreastcancerscreeningprogram AT vermeulenkarinm costeffectivenessofdigitalbreasttomosynthesisinapopulationbreastcancerscreeningprogram AT bulsnico costeffectivenessofdigitalbreasttomosynthesisinapopulationbreastcancerscreeningprogram AT houssaminehmat costeffectivenessofdigitalbreasttomosynthesisinapopulationbreastcancerscreeningprogram AT luwenli costeffectivenessofdigitalbreasttomosynthesisinapopulationbreastcancerscreeningprogram AT debockgeertruidah costeffectivenessofdigitalbreasttomosynthesisinapopulationbreastcancerscreeningprogram |