Cargando…

Cost-effectiveness of using artificial intelligence versus polygenic risk score to guide breast cancer screening

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines for mammography screening for breast cancer vary across agencies, especially for women aged 40–49. Using artificial Intelligence (AI) to read mammography images has been shown to predict breast cancer risk with higher accuracy than alternative approaches including poly...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mital, Shweta, Nguyen, Hai V.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9074290/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35524200
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-022-09613-1
_version_ 1784701452760907776
author Mital, Shweta
Nguyen, Hai V.
author_facet Mital, Shweta
Nguyen, Hai V.
author_sort Mital, Shweta
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Current guidelines for mammography screening for breast cancer vary across agencies, especially for women aged 40–49. Using artificial Intelligence (AI) to read mammography images has been shown to predict breast cancer risk with higher accuracy than alternative approaches including polygenic risk scores (PRS), raising the question whether AI-based screening is more cost-effective than screening based on PRS or existing guidelines. This study provides the first evidence to shed light on this important question. METHODS: This study is a model-based economic evaluation. We used a hybrid decision tree/microsimulation model to compare the cost-effectiveness of eight strategies of mammography screening for women aged 40–49 (screening beyond age 50 follows existing guidelines). Six of these strategies were defined by combinations of risk prediction approaches (AI, PRS or family history) and screening frequency for low-risk women (no screening or biennial screening). The other two strategies involved annual screening for all women and no screening, respectively. Data used to populate the model were sourced from the published literature. RESULTS: Risk prediction using AI followed by no screening for low-risk women is the most cost-effective strategy. It dominates (i.e., costs more and generates fewer quality adjusted life years (QALYs)) strategies for risk prediction using PRS followed by no screening or biennial screening for low-risk women, risk prediction using AI or family history followed by biennial screening for low-risk women, and annual screening for all women. It also extendedly dominates (i.e., achieves higher QALYs at a lower incremental cost per QALY) the strategy for risk prediction using family history followed by no screening for low-risk women. Meanwhile, it is cost-effective versus no screening, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $23,755 per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: Risk prediction using AI followed by no breast cancer screening for low-risk women is the most cost-effective strategy. This finding can be explained by AI’s ability to identify high-risk women more accurately than PRS and family history (which reduces the possibility of delayed breast cancer diagnosis) and fewer false-positive diagnoses from not screening low-risk women. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09613-1.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9074290
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-90742902022-05-07 Cost-effectiveness of using artificial intelligence versus polygenic risk score to guide breast cancer screening Mital, Shweta Nguyen, Hai V. BMC Cancer Research BACKGROUND: Current guidelines for mammography screening for breast cancer vary across agencies, especially for women aged 40–49. Using artificial Intelligence (AI) to read mammography images has been shown to predict breast cancer risk with higher accuracy than alternative approaches including polygenic risk scores (PRS), raising the question whether AI-based screening is more cost-effective than screening based on PRS or existing guidelines. This study provides the first evidence to shed light on this important question. METHODS: This study is a model-based economic evaluation. We used a hybrid decision tree/microsimulation model to compare the cost-effectiveness of eight strategies of mammography screening for women aged 40–49 (screening beyond age 50 follows existing guidelines). Six of these strategies were defined by combinations of risk prediction approaches (AI, PRS or family history) and screening frequency for low-risk women (no screening or biennial screening). The other two strategies involved annual screening for all women and no screening, respectively. Data used to populate the model were sourced from the published literature. RESULTS: Risk prediction using AI followed by no screening for low-risk women is the most cost-effective strategy. It dominates (i.e., costs more and generates fewer quality adjusted life years (QALYs)) strategies for risk prediction using PRS followed by no screening or biennial screening for low-risk women, risk prediction using AI or family history followed by biennial screening for low-risk women, and annual screening for all women. It also extendedly dominates (i.e., achieves higher QALYs at a lower incremental cost per QALY) the strategy for risk prediction using family history followed by no screening for low-risk women. Meanwhile, it is cost-effective versus no screening, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $23,755 per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: Risk prediction using AI followed by no breast cancer screening for low-risk women is the most cost-effective strategy. This finding can be explained by AI’s ability to identify high-risk women more accurately than PRS and family history (which reduces the possibility of delayed breast cancer diagnosis) and fewer false-positive diagnoses from not screening low-risk women. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09613-1. BioMed Central 2022-05-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9074290/ /pubmed/35524200 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-022-09613-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis 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/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Mital, Shweta
Nguyen, Hai V.
Cost-effectiveness of using artificial intelligence versus polygenic risk score to guide breast cancer screening
title Cost-effectiveness of using artificial intelligence versus polygenic risk score to guide breast cancer screening
title_full Cost-effectiveness of using artificial intelligence versus polygenic risk score to guide breast cancer screening
title_fullStr Cost-effectiveness of using artificial intelligence versus polygenic risk score to guide breast cancer screening
title_full_unstemmed Cost-effectiveness of using artificial intelligence versus polygenic risk score to guide breast cancer screening
title_short Cost-effectiveness of using artificial intelligence versus polygenic risk score to guide breast cancer screening
title_sort cost-effectiveness of using artificial intelligence versus polygenic risk score to guide breast cancer screening
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9074290/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35524200
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-022-09613-1
work_keys_str_mv AT mitalshweta costeffectivenessofusingartificialintelligenceversuspolygenicriskscoretoguidebreastcancerscreening
AT nguyenhaiv costeffectivenessofusingartificialintelligenceversuspolygenicriskscoretoguidebreastcancerscreening