IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/eujhec/v23y2022i7d10.1007_s10198-021-01422-w.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-effectiveness of screening smokers and ex-smokers for lung cancer in the Netherlands in different age groups

Author

Listed:
  • Mohamed N. M. T. Al Khayat

    (University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen
    Isala Hospital Zwolle)

  • Job F. H. Eijsink

    (University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen
    Isala Hospital Zwolle
    University of Groningen)

  • Maarten J. Postma

    (University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen
    University of Groningen
    University of Groningen)

  • Ewoudt M. W. Garde

    (St. Antonius Hospital
    Utrecht University)

  • Marinus Hulst

    (University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen
    Martini Hospital Groningen)

Abstract

Objective We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of screening smokers and ex-smokers for lung cancer in the Netherlands. Methods A Markov model was used to evaluate the health effects and costs of lung cancer screening from the healthcare perspective. The effects and costs of ten screening scenarios with different start and stop ages of screening were examined across a lifetime horizon in a cohort of 100,000 smokers and ex- smokers 50 years and older. Results The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of screening smokers and ex-smokers aged 50–60 years, 50–70 years, and 50 years and older are below the cost-effectiveness threshold of € 20,000 per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Screening 50–60-year-old smokers and ex-smokers was the most cost-effective scenario with an ICER of € 14,094 per QALY gained. However, screening smokers and ex-smokers 50 years and older yielded the highest QALYs and resulted in an ICER of € 16,594 per QALY, which is below the threshold of € 20,000 per QALY. All screening scenarios compared to no screening resulted in CERs between the € 14,000 and € 16,000 per QALY gained. The efficiency frontier showed that screening smokers and ex-smokers in the age groups 70 years and older, 60–70 years, 60 years and older are excluded by extended dominance by no screening, screening smokers and ex-smokers aged 50–60 years and 50–70 years. Conclusion This study showed that lung cancer screening is cost-effective in the Netherlands.

Suggested Citation

  • Mohamed N. M. T. Al Khayat & Job F. H. Eijsink & Maarten J. Postma & Ewoudt M. W. Garde & Marinus Hulst, 2022. "Cost-effectiveness of screening smokers and ex-smokers for lung cancer in the Netherlands in different age groups," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(7), pages 1221-1227, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:23:y:2022:i:7:d:10.1007_s10198-021-01422-w
    DOI: 10.1007/s10198-021-01422-w
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10198-021-01422-w
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10198-021-01422-w?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kevin ten Haaf & Martin C Tammemägi & Susan J Bondy & Carlijn M van der Aalst & Sumei Gu & S Elizabeth McGregor & Garth Nicholas & Harry J de Koning & Lawrence F Paszat, 2017. "Performance and Cost-Effectiveness of Computed Tomography Lung Cancer Screening Scenarios in a Population-Based Setting: A Microsimulation Modeling Analysis in Ontario, Canada," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(2), pages 1-20, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Matthew Fabbro & Kirah Hahn & Olivia Novaes & Mícheál Ó’Grálaigh & James F. O’Mahony, 2022. "Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Lung Cancer Screening Using Low-Dose Computed Tomography: A Systematic Review Assessing Strategy Comparison and Risk Stratification," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 6(6), pages 773-786, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Deborah J Schofield & Melanie J B Zeppel & Owen Tan & Sharyn Lymer & Michelle M Cunich & Rupendra N Shrestha, 2018. "A Brief, Global History of Microsimulation Models in Health: Past Applications, Lessons Learned and Future Directions," International Journal of Microsimulation, International Microsimulation Association, vol. 11(1), pages 97-142.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Cost-effectiveness; Screening; Lung cancer; Smokers; Ex-smokers;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
    • D04 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Microeconomic Policy: Formulation; Implementation; Evaluation

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:23:y:2022:i:7:d:10.1007_s10198-021-01422-w. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.