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.
Filip Siegfrids, Sirpa Heinävaara, Tytti Sarkeala, Laura Niinikoski, Juha Laine
{"title":"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.","authors":"Filip Siegfrids, Sirpa Heinävaara, Tytti Sarkeala, Laura Niinikoski, Juha Laine","doi":"10.1186/s13561-025-00628-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":46936,"journal":{"name":"Health Economics Review","volume":"15 1","pages":"35"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11987236/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Economics Review","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13561-025-00628-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
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.
期刊介绍:
Health Economics Review is an international high-quality journal covering all fields of Health Economics. A broad range of theoretical contributions, empirical studies and analyses of health policy with a health economic focus will be considered for publication. Its scope includes macro- and microeconomics of health care financing, health insurance and reimbursement as well as health economic evaluation, health services research and health policy analysis. Further research topics are the individual and institutional aspects of health care management and the growing importance of health care in developing countries.