Literature DB >> 9610704

Screening mammography beginning at age 40 years: a reappraisal of cost-effectiveness.

C J Rosenquist1, K K Lindfors.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Several recent studies have added significant information regarding the benefit of screening mammography, especially in the 40-49-years age group. This new information makes it important to reassess the cost-effectiveness of screening.
METHODS: A Markov model was used to study the cost-effectiveness of 4 age-related screening strategies: 1) annually from ages 40-79 years; 2) annually from ages 40-64 years and biennially from ages 65-79 years; 3) annually from ages 40-49 years and biennially from ages 50-79 years; and 4) annually from ages 40-79 years in high risk women (10%) and biennially from ages 40-49 years followed by annually from ages 50 -79 years in normal risk women (90%). An additional strategy simulating hormone status and estrogen exposure was evaluated. Cost-effectiveness was expressed as marginal cost per year-life saved (MCYLS).
RESULTS: The MCYLS varied from $18,800 to $16,100. For all strategies this was within the range of other generally acceptable diagnostic and therapeutic medical procedures. There was a 14% decrease in MCYLS from the least cost-effective to the most cost-effective strategy.
CONCLUSIONS: Cost-effectiveness of four age-related mammographic screening strategies was evaluated. The MCYLS for all strategies was within a generally accepted range. With increasing concerns regarding the cost of health care, this information may be useful in health policy decision-making.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9610704     DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0142(19980601)82:11<2235::aid-cncr19>3.0.co;2-v

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  8 in total

1.  Benefits, harms, and costs for breast cancer screening after US implementation of digital mammography.

Authors:  Natasha K Stout; Sandra J Lee; Clyde B Schechter; Karla Kerlikowske; Oguzhan Alagoz; Donald Berry; Diana S M Buist; Mucahit Cevik; Gary Chisholm; Harry J de Koning; Hui Huang; Rebecca A Hubbard; Diana L Miglioretti; Mark F Munsell; Amy Trentham-Dietz; Nicolien T van Ravesteyn; Anna N A Tosteson; Jeanne S Mandelblatt
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2014-05-28       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 2.  Willingness to pay for cancer prevention.

Authors:  Timothy L Hunt; Bryan R Luce; Matthew J Page; Robin Pokrzywinski
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Breast cancer survival among economically disadvantaged women: the influences of delayed diagnosis and treatment on mortality.

Authors:  Emily Rose Smith; Swann Arp Adams; Irene Prabhu Das; Matteo Bottai; Jeanette Fulton; James R Hebert
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2008-10-03       Impact factor: 4.254

4.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of mammography and clinical breast examination strategies: a comparison with current guidelines.

Authors:  Charlotte Hsieh Ahern; Yu Shen
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2009-03-03       Impact factor: 4.254

Review 5.  Can imaging help improve the survival of cancer patients?

Authors:  K Miles
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2011-10-03       Impact factor: 3.909

6.  Cost-effectiveness of breast cancer screening using mammography in Vietnamese women.

Authors:  Chi Phuong Nguyen; Eddy M M Adang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-03-26       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Cost effectiveness analysis of a polygenic risk tailored breast cancer screening programme in Singapore.

Authors:  Jerry Zeng Yang Wong; Jia Hui Chai; Yen Shing Yeoh; Nur Khaliesah Mohamed Riza; Jenny Liu; Yik-Ying Teo; Hwee Lin Wee; Mikael Hartman
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2021-04-23       Impact factor: 2.655

8.  Cost effectiveness of breast cancer screening using mammography; a systematic review.

Authors:  Arash Rashidian; Eshagh Barfar; Hamed Hosseini; Shirin Nosratnejad; Esmat Barooti
Journal:  Iran J Public Health       Date:  2013-04-01       Impact factor: 1.429

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.