Constanza Silvestrini, Lucas Perelli, Andrea Alcaraz, Natalia Espinola, Fernando Argento
{"title":"Budget impact of low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer in Argentina.","authors":"Constanza Silvestrini, Lucas Perelli, Andrea Alcaraz, Natalia Espinola, Fernando Argento","doi":"10.1080/14737167.2025.2460523","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Lung cancer (LC) is a leading cause of cancer mortality in Argentina. Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) had demonstrated higher efficacy than chest radiography as a screening method for early detection and reducing LC mortality. This study estimates the Budget Impact of implementing annual LDCT screening for individuals aged 55-74 with at least 30 pack-years of smoking in Argentina.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>A budgetary impact model for a dynamic cohort was developed from the Argentine health system's perspective, accounting for LC incidents, prevalents and death probability, distinguishing by disease stage and survival years. Model parameters were sourced from literature and official databases, with costs expressed in 2023 USD.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In Argentina, 726,420 individuals were eligible for annual LC screening. The average annual budget was USD 196,611,452 in the current scenario and USD 207,439,560 in the projected scenario, leading to a 5.20% incremental cost due to more false positives in LDCT and screening costs. The budget impact per member per month was USD 0.019, slightly above the estimated threshold of USD 0.015.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The introduction of LDCT for LC screening increased the health system budget in Argentina but improved early disease detection.</p>","PeriodicalId":12244,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2025.2460523","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Lung cancer (LC) is a leading cause of cancer mortality in Argentina. Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) had demonstrated higher efficacy than chest radiography as a screening method for early detection and reducing LC mortality. This study estimates the Budget Impact of implementing annual LDCT screening for individuals aged 55-74 with at least 30 pack-years of smoking in Argentina.
Research design and methods: A budgetary impact model for a dynamic cohort was developed from the Argentine health system's perspective, accounting for LC incidents, prevalents and death probability, distinguishing by disease stage and survival years. Model parameters were sourced from literature and official databases, with costs expressed in 2023 USD.
Results: In Argentina, 726,420 individuals were eligible for annual LC screening. The average annual budget was USD 196,611,452 in the current scenario and USD 207,439,560 in the projected scenario, leading to a 5.20% incremental cost due to more false positives in LDCT and screening costs. The budget impact per member per month was USD 0.019, slightly above the estimated threshold of USD 0.015.
Conclusions: The introduction of LDCT for LC screening increased the health system budget in Argentina but improved early disease detection.
期刊介绍:
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research (ISSN 1473-7167) provides expert reviews on cost-benefit and pharmacoeconomic issues relating to the clinical use of drugs and therapeutic approaches. Coverage includes pharmacoeconomics and quality-of-life research, therapeutic outcomes, evidence-based medicine and cost-benefit research. All articles are subject to rigorous peer-review.
The journal adopts the unique Expert Review article format, offering a complete overview of current thinking in a key technology area, research or clinical practice, augmented by the following sections:
Expert Opinion – a personal view of the data presented in the article, a discussion on the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results
Article Highlights – an executive summary of the author’s most critical points.