Risk-based lung cancer screening in heavy smokers: a benefit–harm and cost-effectiveness modeling study

Abstract Background Annual screening through low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) is recommended for heavy smokers. However, it is questionable whether all individuals require annual screening given the potential harms of LDCT screening. This study examines the benefit–harm and cost-effectiveness of...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Yin Liu, Huifang Xu, Lihong Lv, Xiaoyang Wang, Ruihua Kang, Xiaoli Guo, Hong Wang, Liyang Zheng, Hongwei Liu, Lanwei Guo, Qiong Chen, Shuzheng Liu, Youlin Qiao, Shaokai Zhang
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2024-02-01
Series:BMC Medicine
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-024-03292-4
_version_ 1797274362634567680
author Yin Liu
Huifang Xu
Lihong Lv
Xiaoyang Wang
Ruihua Kang
Xiaoli Guo
Hong Wang
Liyang Zheng
Hongwei Liu
Lanwei Guo
Qiong Chen
Shuzheng Liu
Youlin Qiao
Shaokai Zhang
author_facet Yin Liu
Huifang Xu
Lihong Lv
Xiaoyang Wang
Ruihua Kang
Xiaoli Guo
Hong Wang
Liyang Zheng
Hongwei Liu
Lanwei Guo
Qiong Chen
Shuzheng Liu
Youlin Qiao
Shaokai Zhang
author_sort Yin Liu
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Background Annual screening through low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) is recommended for heavy smokers. However, it is questionable whether all individuals require annual screening given the potential harms of LDCT screening. This study examines the benefit–harm and cost-effectiveness of risk-based screening in heavy smokers and determines the optimal risk threshold for screening and risk-stratified screening intervals. Methods We conducted a comparative cost-effectiveness analysis in China, using a cohort-based Markov model which simulated a lung cancer screening cohort of 19,146 heavy smokers aged 50 ~ 74 years old, who had a smoking history of at least 30 pack-years and were either current smokers or had quit for < 15 years. A total of 34 risk-based screening strategies, varying by different risk groups for screening eligibility and screening intervals (1-year, 2-year, 3-year, one-off, non-screening), were evaluated and were compared with annual screening for all heavy smokers (the status quo strategy). The analysis was undertaken from the health service perspective with a 30-year time horizon. The willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was adopted as three times the gross domestic product (GDP) of China in 2021 (CNY 242,928) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Results Compared with the status quo strategy, nine risk-based screening strategies were found to be cost-effective, with two of them even resulting in cost-saving. The most cost-effective strategy was the risk-based approach of annual screening for individuals with a 5-year risk threshold of ≥ 1.70%, biennial screening for individuals with a 5-year risk threshold of 1.03 ~ 1.69%, and triennial screening for individuals with a 5-year risk threshold of < 1.03%. This strategy had the highest incremental net monetary benefit (iNMB) of CNY 1032. All risk-based screening strategies were more efficient than the status quo strategy, requiring 129 ~ 656 fewer screenings per lung cancer death avoided, and 0.5 ~ 28 fewer screenings per life-year gained. The cost-effectiveness of risk-based screening was further improved when individual adherence to screening improved and individuals quit smoking after being screened. Conclusions Risk-based screening strategies are more efficient in reducing lung cancer deaths and gaining life years compared to the status quo strategy. Risk-stratified screening intervals can potentially balance long-term benefit–harm trade-offs and improve the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screenings.
first_indexed 2024-03-07T14:57:21Z
format Article
id doaj.art-4b6d516b788e482faa590f92ca6088b6
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1741-7015
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-07T14:57:21Z
publishDate 2024-02-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series BMC Medicine
spelling doaj.art-4b6d516b788e482faa590f92ca6088b62024-03-05T19:21:21ZengBMCBMC Medicine1741-70152024-02-0122111810.1186/s12916-024-03292-4Risk-based lung cancer screening in heavy smokers: a benefit–harm and cost-effectiveness modeling studyYin Liu0Huifang Xu1Lihong Lv2Xiaoyang Wang3Ruihua Kang4Xiaoli Guo5Hong Wang6Liyang Zheng7Hongwei Liu8Lanwei Guo9Qiong Chen10Shuzheng Liu11Youlin Qiao12Shaokai Zhang13Department of Cancer Epidemiology, The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer HospitalDepartment of Cancer Epidemiology, The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer HospitalDepartment of Cancer Epidemiology, The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer HospitalDepartment of Cancer Epidemiology, The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer HospitalDepartment of Cancer Epidemiology, The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer HospitalDepartment of Cancer Epidemiology, The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer HospitalDepartment of Cancer Epidemiology, The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer HospitalDepartment of Cancer Epidemiology, The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer HospitalDepartment of Cancer Epidemiology, The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer HospitalDepartment of Cancer Epidemiology, The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer HospitalDepartment of Cancer Epidemiology, The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer HospitalDepartment of Cancer Epidemiology, The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer HospitalDepartment of Cancer Epidemiology, The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer HospitalDepartment of Cancer Epidemiology, The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer HospitalAbstract Background Annual screening through low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) is recommended for heavy smokers. However, it is questionable whether all individuals require annual screening given the potential harms of LDCT screening. This study examines the benefit–harm and cost-effectiveness of risk-based screening in heavy smokers and determines the optimal risk threshold for screening and risk-stratified screening intervals. Methods We conducted a comparative cost-effectiveness analysis in China, using a cohort-based Markov model which simulated a lung cancer screening cohort of 19,146 heavy smokers aged 50 ~ 74 years old, who had a smoking history of at least 30 pack-years and were either current smokers or had quit for < 15 years. A total of 34 risk-based screening strategies, varying by different risk groups for screening eligibility and screening intervals (1-year, 2-year, 3-year, one-off, non-screening), were evaluated and were compared with annual screening for all heavy smokers (the status quo strategy). The analysis was undertaken from the health service perspective with a 30-year time horizon. The willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was adopted as three times the gross domestic product (GDP) of China in 2021 (CNY 242,928) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Results Compared with the status quo strategy, nine risk-based screening strategies were found to be cost-effective, with two of them even resulting in cost-saving. The most cost-effective strategy was the risk-based approach of annual screening for individuals with a 5-year risk threshold of ≥ 1.70%, biennial screening for individuals with a 5-year risk threshold of 1.03 ~ 1.69%, and triennial screening for individuals with a 5-year risk threshold of < 1.03%. This strategy had the highest incremental net monetary benefit (iNMB) of CNY 1032. All risk-based screening strategies were more efficient than the status quo strategy, requiring 129 ~ 656 fewer screenings per lung cancer death avoided, and 0.5 ~ 28 fewer screenings per life-year gained. The cost-effectiveness of risk-based screening was further improved when individual adherence to screening improved and individuals quit smoking after being screened. Conclusions Risk-based screening strategies are more efficient in reducing lung cancer deaths and gaining life years compared to the status quo strategy. Risk-stratified screening intervals can potentially balance long-term benefit–harm trade-offs and improve the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screenings.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-024-03292-4Lung cancerRisk-based screeningBenefitHarmCost-effective
spellingShingle Yin Liu
Huifang Xu
Lihong Lv
Xiaoyang Wang
Ruihua Kang
Xiaoli Guo
Hong Wang
Liyang Zheng
Hongwei Liu
Lanwei Guo
Qiong Chen
Shuzheng Liu
Youlin Qiao
Shaokai Zhang
Risk-based lung cancer screening in heavy smokers: a benefit–harm and cost-effectiveness modeling study
BMC Medicine
Lung cancer
Risk-based screening
Benefit
Harm
Cost-effective
title Risk-based lung cancer screening in heavy smokers: a benefit–harm and cost-effectiveness modeling study
title_full Risk-based lung cancer screening in heavy smokers: a benefit–harm and cost-effectiveness modeling study
title_fullStr Risk-based lung cancer screening in heavy smokers: a benefit–harm and cost-effectiveness modeling study
title_full_unstemmed Risk-based lung cancer screening in heavy smokers: a benefit–harm and cost-effectiveness modeling study
title_short Risk-based lung cancer screening in heavy smokers: a benefit–harm and cost-effectiveness modeling study
title_sort risk based lung cancer screening in heavy smokers a benefit harm and cost effectiveness modeling study
topic Lung cancer
Risk-based screening
Benefit
Harm
Cost-effective
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-024-03292-4
work_keys_str_mv AT yinliu riskbasedlungcancerscreeninginheavysmokersabenefitharmandcosteffectivenessmodelingstudy
AT huifangxu riskbasedlungcancerscreeninginheavysmokersabenefitharmandcosteffectivenessmodelingstudy
AT lihonglv riskbasedlungcancerscreeninginheavysmokersabenefitharmandcosteffectivenessmodelingstudy
AT xiaoyangwang riskbasedlungcancerscreeninginheavysmokersabenefitharmandcosteffectivenessmodelingstudy
AT ruihuakang riskbasedlungcancerscreeninginheavysmokersabenefitharmandcosteffectivenessmodelingstudy
AT xiaoliguo riskbasedlungcancerscreeninginheavysmokersabenefitharmandcosteffectivenessmodelingstudy
AT hongwang riskbasedlungcancerscreeninginheavysmokersabenefitharmandcosteffectivenessmodelingstudy
AT liyangzheng riskbasedlungcancerscreeninginheavysmokersabenefitharmandcosteffectivenessmodelingstudy
AT hongweiliu riskbasedlungcancerscreeninginheavysmokersabenefitharmandcosteffectivenessmodelingstudy
AT lanweiguo riskbasedlungcancerscreeninginheavysmokersabenefitharmandcosteffectivenessmodelingstudy
AT qiongchen riskbasedlungcancerscreeninginheavysmokersabenefitharmandcosteffectivenessmodelingstudy
AT shuzhengliu riskbasedlungcancerscreeninginheavysmokersabenefitharmandcosteffectivenessmodelingstudy
AT youlinqiao riskbasedlungcancerscreeninginheavysmokersabenefitharmandcosteffectivenessmodelingstudy
AT shaokaizhang riskbasedlungcancerscreeninginheavysmokersabenefitharmandcosteffectivenessmodelingstudy