Health Economic Evaluation of Lung Cancer Screening Using a Diagnostic Blood Test: The Early Detection of Cancer of the Lung Scotland (ECLS)
-
Published:2024-06-18
Issue:6
Volume:31
Page:3546-3562
-
ISSN:1718-7729
-
Container-title:Current Oncology
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Current Oncology
Author:
Robles-Zurita Jose Antonio12, McMeekin Nicola2, Sullivan Frank34ORCID, Mair Frances S.5ORCID, Briggs Andrew6
Affiliation:
1. Department of Applied Economics (Statistics and Econometrics), University of Malaga, El Ejido nº 6, 29013 Malaga, Spain 2. Health Economics and Health Technology Assessment (HEHTA), School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8TP, UK 3. School of Medicine, University of St Andrews, St Andrews KY16 9AJ, UK 4. Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5G 1V7, Canada 5. General Practice and Primary Care, School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8TP, UK 6. Faculty of Public Health and Policy, Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London WC1E 7HT, UK
Abstract
Background: Diagnostic blood tests have the potential to identify lung cancer in people at high risk. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of a lung cancer screening intervention, using the EarlyCDT®-Lung Test (ECLS) with subsequent X-ray and low-dose chest CT scans (LDCT) for patients with a positive test result, compared to both usual care and LDCT screening for the target population. Methods: We conducted a model-based lifetime analysis from a UK NHS and personal social services perspective. We estimated incremental net monetary benefit (NMB) for the ECLS intervention compared to no screening and to LDCT screening. Results: The incremental NMB of ECLS intervention compared to no screening was GBP 33,179 (95% CI: −GBP 81,396, GBP 147,180) and GBP 140,609 (95% CI: −GBP 36,255, GBP 316,612), respectively, for a cost-effectiveness threshold of GBP 20,000 and GBP 30,000 per quality-adjusted life year. The same figures compared with LDCT screening were GBP 162,095 (95% CI: GBP 52,698, GBP 271,735) and GBP 52,185 (95% CI: −GBP 115,152, GBP 219,711). Conclusions: The ECLS intervention is the most cost-effective screening alternative, with the highest probability of being cost-effective, when compared to no screening or LDCT screening. This result may change with modifications of the parameters, suggesting that the three alternatives considered in the main analysis are potentially cost-effective.
Funder
Oncimmune Ltd. Scottish Government Health & Social Care Directorate of the Chief Scientist Office
Reference40 articles.
1. World Health Organisation (2024, March 22). Cancer. Available online: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/cancer. 2. Public Health Scotland (2024, March 22). Cancer Mortality in Scotland—Annual Update to 2021. Available online: https://publichealthscotland.scot/publications/cancer-mortality/cancer-mortality-in-scotland-annual-update-to-2021/. 3. Public Health Information for Scotland (2024, March 22). Lung Cancer: Key Points. Available online: https://www.scotpho.org.uk/health-conditions/cancer-lung/key-points/. 4. Office of National Statistics (2024, March 22). Cancer Survival in England—Adults Diagnosed—Office for National Statistics, Available online: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/datasets/cancersurvivalratescancersurvivalinenglandadultsdiagnosed. 5. Sullivan, F.M., Farmer, E., Mair, F.S., Treweek, S., Kendrick, D., Jackson, C., Robertson, C., Briggs, A., McCowan, C., and Bedford, L. (2017). Detection in blood of autoantibodies to tumour antigens as a case-finding method in lung cancer using the EarlyCDT((R))-Lung Test (ECLS): Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. BMC Cancer, 17.
|
|