Author
Listed:
- Filip Siegfrids
(Finnish Cancer Registry)
- Sirpa Heinävaara
(Finnish Cancer Registry)
- Tytti Sarkeala
(Finnish Cancer Registry)
- Laura Niinikoski
(Finnish Cancer Registry)
- Juha Laine
(InFLAMES, University of Turku)
Abstract
Background Within Finland’s breast cancer screening program, all women aged 50–69 are invited to biennial screening. Current European guidelines recommend screening in ages 45–49 and 70–74 conditional upon, inter alia, demonstrated context-specific cost-effectiveness. This study aims to determine the cost-effectiveness of expanding the target population of biennial screening to ages 45 and/or 74, compared to the current national breast cancer screening strategy, in the Finnish setting. Methods Screening strategies’ costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALY), aggregated over a lifetime horizon for the population simulated through a decision-analytic model, allow for comparison through incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. The model, using a Markov cohort simulation approach, was adapted to the cancer stage classification system used by the Finnish Cancer Registry (FCR) and calibrated to observed metrics in the Finnish female population. The analysis was conducted from a limited societal perspective, using a discount rate of 3% for costs and outcomes. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess decision uncertainty, using an implicit willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold range of €25 000–50 000 per incremental QALY. Results Compared to the current national screening strategy, both strategies with a starting age of 45 were cost-effective at the WTP-threshold of €50 000 per incremental QALY. Biennial screening in ages 45–69 was also cost-effective at €25 000 per QALY and demonstrated the highest probability of cost-effectiveness of all screening strategies over the whole WTP-threshold range of €25 000–50 000 per QALY. Biennial screening in ages 50–74 was dominated by all strategies over the threshold range. Conclusions Expanding the national screening strategy target population age is likely to produce net health benefits to acceptable costs, insofar as women aged 45–49 are covered by the expansion. Only expanding the target population to age 74 is unlikely to be cost-effective, given a WTP-threshold range of €25 000–50 000 per incremental QALY.
Suggested Citation
Filip Siegfrids & Sirpa Heinävaara & Tytti Sarkeala & Laura Niinikoski & Juha Laine, 2025.
"Cost-effectiveness of expanding the target population of biennial screening for breast cancer from ages 50–69 to 45 and/or 74: A cohort modelling study in the Finnish setting,"
Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, December.
Handle:
RePEc:spr:hecrev:v:15:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1186_s13561-025-00628-5
DOI: 10.1186/s13561-025-00628-5
Download full text from publisher
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:hecrev:v:15:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1186_s13561-025-00628-5. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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/economics/journal/13561 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.