Literature DB >> 22308519

Lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography: costs, national expenditures, and cost-effectiveness.

Bernardo H L Goulart1, Mark E Bensink, David G Mummy, Scott D Ramsey.   

Abstract

A recent randomized trial showed that low-dose CT (LDCT) screening reduces lung cancer mortality. Health care providers need an assessment of the national budget impact and cost-effectiveness of LDCT screening before this intervention is adopted in practice. Using data from the 2009 National Health Interview Survey, CMS, and the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST), the authors performed an economic analysis of LDCT screening that includes a budget impact model, an estimate of additional costs per lung cancer death avoided attributed to screening, and a literature search of cost-effectiveness analyses of LDCT screening. They conducted a one-way sensitivity analysis, reporting expenditures in 2011 U.S. dollars, and took the health care payer and patient perspectives. LDCT screening will add $1.3 to $2.0 billion in annual national health care expenditures for screening uptake rates of 50% to 75%, respectively. However, LDCT screening will avoid up to 8100 premature lung cancer deaths at a 75% screening rate. The prevalence of smokers who qualify for screening, screening uptake rates, and cost of LDCT scan were the most influential parameters on health care expenditures. The additional cost of screening to avoid one lung cancer death is $240,000. Previous cost-effectiveness analyses have not conclusively shown that LDCT is cost-effective. LDCT screening may add substantially to the national health care expenditures. Although LDCT screening can avoid more than 8000 lung cancer deaths per year, a cost-effectiveness analysis of the NLST will be critical to determine the value of this intervention and to guide decisions about its adoption.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22308519     DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2012.0023

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Compr Canc Netw        ISSN: 1540-1405            Impact factor:   11.908


  44 in total

Review 1.  What is quality, and can we define it in lung cancer?-the case for quality improvement.

Authors:  Farhood Farjah; Frank C Detterbeck
Journal:  Transl Lung Cancer Res       Date:  2015-08

2.  The utility of nodule volume in the context of malignancy prediction for small pulmonary nodules.

Authors:  Hiren J Mehta; James G Ravenel; Stephanie R Shaftman; Nichole T Tanner; Luca Paoletti; Katherine K Taylor; Martin C Tammemagi; Mario Gomez; Paul J Nietert; Michael K Gould; Gerard A Silvestri
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2014-03-01       Impact factor: 9.410

Review 3.  Screening for lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography: a review of current status.

Authors:  Henry M Marshall; Rayleen V Bowman; Ian A Yang; Kwun M Fong; Christine D Berg
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 2.895

4.  Predicted for greatness: 1994 molecule of the year--the DNA repair enzyme.

Authors:  Marianne Berwick
Journal:  Cancer Prev Res (Phila)       Date:  2014-03-20

5.  Results of the national lung cancer screening trial: where are we now?

Authors:  Neel P Chudgar; Peter R Bucciarelli; Elizabeth M Jeffries; Nabil P Rizk; Bernard J Park; Prasad S Adusumilli; David R Jones
Journal:  Thorac Surg Clin       Date:  2015-02-02       Impact factor: 1.750

6.  Issues in Lung Cancer Screening Among Asian American Immigrants.

Authors:  Mo-Kyung Sin; Vicky Taylor; Shin-Ping Tu
Journal:  J Immigr Minor Health       Date:  2016-06

7.  Secondary prevention at 360°: the important role of diagnostic imaging.

Authors:  Anna Micaela Ciarrapico; Guglielmo Manenti; Chiara Pistolese; Sebastiano Fabiano; Roberto Fiori; Andrea Romagnoli; Gianluigi Sergiacomi; Matteo Stefanini; Giovanni Simonetti
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2015-01-09       Impact factor: 3.469

8.  Is 20% of a loaf enough?

Authors:  Larry Kessler
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2013-02-25       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 9.  Risk factors assessment and risk prediction models in lung cancer screening candidates.

Authors:  Mariusz Adamek; Ewa Wachuła; Sylwia Szabłowska-Siwik; Agnieszka Boratyn-Nowicka; Damian Czyżewski
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2016-04

Review 10.  Lung Malignancies in HIV Infection.

Authors:  Keith Sigel; Robert Pitts; Kristina Crothers
Journal:  Semin Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2016-03-14       Impact factor: 3.119

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.