Cost-effectiveness of risk model-based lung cancer screening in smokers and nonsmokers in China.

IF 7 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Tiantian Zhang, Yue Wang, Xuechen Chen, Xueer Yang, Leyao Zhang, Nagham Bazzi, Ling Bai, Aaron Finley, Jie Jiang, Jianxing He, Wenhua Liang
{"title":"Cost-effectiveness of risk model-based lung cancer screening in smokers and nonsmokers in China.","authors":"Tiantian Zhang, Yue Wang, Xuechen Chen, Xueer Yang, Leyao Zhang, Nagham Bazzi, Ling Bai, Aaron Finley, Jie Jiang, Jianxing He, Wenhua Liang","doi":"10.1186/s12916-025-04065-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>China bears the largest global burden of lung cancer, with a striking 40% of cases occurring in individuals who have never smoked. While the mortality-reducing benefits of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) for lung cancer screening are established, the quest for an optimal screening strategy continues, considering the potential adverse effects of LDCT. The Chinese NCC-LCm2021 model was developed based on a nationwide population to identify at-risk individuals among smokers and nonsmokers. However, the cost-effectiveness of this model has yet to be determined.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The cost-effectiveness analysis simulates a Chinese birth cohort using a calibrated Markov model based on individual data from a prospective cohort of the Guangzhou Lung Cancer Screening Program. Health utility was extracted from the literature. Cost parameters were obtained from the price of basic medical services in public medical institutions. Our analysis evaluated 236 distinct screening strategies, varying by screening initiation age, risk thresholds, and smoking status. The primary outcomes were quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For smokers, four strategies on the efficiency frontier yielded incremental QALYs ranging from 0.011 to 0.039 compared to no screening, with ICERs ranging from $21,874 to $55,038 when compared to the previous efficient strategies. The optimal strategy was annual screening of smokers aged 45 years and older with a 3-year risk of lung cancer incidence of 0.55%, offering the largest gain in QALYs at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $38,224 (three times GDP per capita). This optimal strategy dominated the 2023 Chinese guideline-recommended strategy. For nonsmokers, the strategies on the efficiency frontier yielded incremental QALYs ranging from 0.006 to 0.041 compared to no screening, with ICERs ranging from $26,517 to $37,994 when compared to the previous efficient strategies. Correspondingly, the optimal strategy is annual screening of nonsmokers aged 45 years and older with a 3-year risk of lung cancer incidence of 0.20%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This economic evaluation found that lung cancer screening strategies based on the Chinese NCC-LC<sub>m2021</sub> model were cost-effective for both smokers and non-smokers in China. Furthermore, tailoring risk thresholds to smokers and nonsmokers can enhance the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening.</p>","PeriodicalId":9188,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medicine","volume":"23 1","pages":"315"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12121091/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-025-04065-3","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: China bears the largest global burden of lung cancer, with a striking 40% of cases occurring in individuals who have never smoked. While the mortality-reducing benefits of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) for lung cancer screening are established, the quest for an optimal screening strategy continues, considering the potential adverse effects of LDCT. The Chinese NCC-LCm2021 model was developed based on a nationwide population to identify at-risk individuals among smokers and nonsmokers. However, the cost-effectiveness of this model has yet to be determined.

Methods: The cost-effectiveness analysis simulates a Chinese birth cohort using a calibrated Markov model based on individual data from a prospective cohort of the Guangzhou Lung Cancer Screening Program. Health utility was extracted from the literature. Cost parameters were obtained from the price of basic medical services in public medical institutions. Our analysis evaluated 236 distinct screening strategies, varying by screening initiation age, risk thresholds, and smoking status. The primary outcomes were quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

Results: For smokers, four strategies on the efficiency frontier yielded incremental QALYs ranging from 0.011 to 0.039 compared to no screening, with ICERs ranging from $21,874 to $55,038 when compared to the previous efficient strategies. The optimal strategy was annual screening of smokers aged 45 years and older with a 3-year risk of lung cancer incidence of 0.55%, offering the largest gain in QALYs at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $38,224 (three times GDP per capita). This optimal strategy dominated the 2023 Chinese guideline-recommended strategy. For nonsmokers, the strategies on the efficiency frontier yielded incremental QALYs ranging from 0.006 to 0.041 compared to no screening, with ICERs ranging from $26,517 to $37,994 when compared to the previous efficient strategies. Correspondingly, the optimal strategy is annual screening of nonsmokers aged 45 years and older with a 3-year risk of lung cancer incidence of 0.20%.

Conclusions: This economic evaluation found that lung cancer screening strategies based on the Chinese NCC-LCm2021 model were cost-effective for both smokers and non-smokers in China. Furthermore, tailoring risk thresholds to smokers and nonsmokers can enhance the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening.

基于风险模型的中国吸烟者和非吸烟者肺癌筛查的成本-效果
背景:中国是全球肺癌负担最重的国家,其中40%的病例发生在从不吸烟的人群中。虽然低剂量计算机断层扫描(LDCT)在肺癌筛查中降低死亡率的好处已经确立,但考虑到LDCT潜在的不良影响,对最佳筛查策略的探索仍在继续。中国NCC-LCm2021模型是基于全国人群开发的,用于识别吸烟者和非吸烟者中的高危人群。然而,这种模式的成本效益还有待确定。方法:基于广州肺癌筛查项目前瞻性队列的个人数据,使用校准的马尔可夫模型模拟中国出生队列的成本-效果分析。从文献中提取健康效用。成本参数来源于公立医疗机构基本医疗服务价格。我们的分析评估了236种不同的筛查策略,这些策略因筛查起始年龄、风险阈值和吸烟状况而异。主要结局为质量调整生命年(QALYs)和增量成本-效果比(ICERs)。结果:对于吸烟者,与没有筛查相比,在效率前沿的四种策略产生的增量qaly从0.011到0.039不等,与以前的有效策略相比,ICERs从21,874美元到55,038美元不等。最佳策略是每年筛查45岁及以上的吸烟者,3年肺癌发病率风险为0.55%,在支付意愿(WTP)阈值为38,224美元(人均GDP的三倍)时,QALYs的收益最大。这一最优策略主导了2023年中国指南推荐的策略。对于非吸烟者,与没有筛查相比,在效率前沿的策略产生的增量qaly从0.006到0.041不等,与之前的有效策略相比,ICERs从26,517美元到37,994美元不等。相应地,最佳策略是每年筛查45岁及以上的非吸烟者,3年肺癌发病率风险为0.20%。结论:本经济评估发现,基于中国NCC-LCm2021模型的肺癌筛查策略对中国吸烟者和非吸烟者都具有成本效益。此外,调整吸烟者和非吸烟者的风险阈值可以提高肺癌筛查的成本效益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Medicine
BMC Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
13.10
自引率
1.10%
发文量
435
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medicine is an open access, transparent peer-reviewed general medical journal. It is the flagship journal of the BMC series and publishes outstanding and influential research in various areas including clinical practice, translational medicine, medical and health advances, public health, global health, policy, and general topics of interest to the biomedical and sociomedical professional communities. In addition to research articles, the journal also publishes stimulating debates, reviews, unique forum articles, and concise tutorials. All articles published in BMC Medicine are included in various databases such as Biological Abstracts, BIOSIS, CAS, Citebase, Current contents, DOAJ, Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Science Citation Index Expanded, OAIster, SCImago, Scopus, SOCOLAR, and Zetoc.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信