{"title":"低剂量计算机断层扫描肺癌筛查在高危人群(前)吸烟者在比利时的经济评价","authors":"Mattias Neyt, Janis Luyten, Fabian Desimpel, Cécile Camberlin, Célia Primus-de Jong, Leen Verleye","doi":"10.1016/j.lungcan.2025.108697","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Before implementing a screening programme, it is important to balance the benefits against the harms and assess its cost-effectiveness. To date, no such evaluation of lung cancer screening has been conducted in Belgium. The objective of this study was to examine the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening using low-dose CT (LDCT) in a Belgian population of (ex-)smokers.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This economic evaluation is based on the results of the NELSON trial and supplemented with Belgian stage- and histology-specific survival data, Belgian real-world diagnosis and treatment costs, and information from the literature (e.g. quality of life). Incremental costs and effects were modelled by combining a decision tree (invitation, screening and diagnosis) with a Markov model (cancers detected in the intervention and comparator group). The results are expressed as costs per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Benefits and harms are also presented on a 1000-person figure.</div></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><div>Based on the NELSON screening strategy, three rounds of LDCT screening for lung cancer (in years 0, 1 and 3) compared to no screening is associated with an incremental gain of 4.6 QALYs and an incremental cost of €78<!--> <!-->000 per 100 participants. This results in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €18<!--> <!-->530 per QALY gained.</div></div><div><h3>Interpretation</h3><div>In the Belgian healthcare setting, LDCT screening of (ex-)smokers for lung cancer is likely to be cost-effective if policy makers are willing to pay more than €20<!--> <!-->000 per QALY gained. However, before implementing lung cancer screening, it is important to gain insight into the impact of incidental findings, available budgets, and capacity within the healthcare system. It is also important to evaluate the willingness to participate when individuals are fully informed about the benefits and harms of LDCT lung cancer screening.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":18129,"journal":{"name":"Lung Cancer","volume":"207 ","pages":"Article 108697"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An economic evaluation of lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography in a high-risk population of (ex-)smokers in Belgium\",\"authors\":\"Mattias Neyt, Janis Luyten, Fabian Desimpel, Cécile Camberlin, Célia Primus-de Jong, Leen Verleye\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.lungcan.2025.108697\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Before implementing a screening programme, it is important to balance the benefits against the harms and assess its cost-effectiveness. To date, no such evaluation of lung cancer screening has been conducted in Belgium. The objective of this study was to examine the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening using low-dose CT (LDCT) in a Belgian population of (ex-)smokers.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This economic evaluation is based on the results of the NELSON trial and supplemented with Belgian stage- and histology-specific survival data, Belgian real-world diagnosis and treatment costs, and information from the literature (e.g. quality of life). Incremental costs and effects were modelled by combining a decision tree (invitation, screening and diagnosis) with a Markov model (cancers detected in the intervention and comparator group). The results are expressed as costs per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Benefits and harms are also presented on a 1000-person figure.</div></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><div>Based on the NELSON screening strategy, three rounds of LDCT screening for lung cancer (in years 0, 1 and 3) compared to no screening is associated with an incremental gain of 4.6 QALYs and an incremental cost of €78<!--> <!-->000 per 100 participants. This results in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €18<!--> <!-->530 per QALY gained.</div></div><div><h3>Interpretation</h3><div>In the Belgian healthcare setting, LDCT screening of (ex-)smokers for lung cancer is likely to be cost-effective if policy makers are willing to pay more than €20<!--> <!-->000 per QALY gained. However, before implementing lung cancer screening, it is important to gain insight into the impact of incidental findings, available budgets, and capacity within the healthcare system. It is also important to evaluate the willingness to participate when individuals are fully informed about the benefits and harms of LDCT lung cancer screening.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18129,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Lung Cancer\",\"volume\":\"207 \",\"pages\":\"Article 108697\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Lung Cancer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169500225005896\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lung Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169500225005896","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
An economic evaluation of lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography in a high-risk population of (ex-)smokers in Belgium
Background
Before implementing a screening programme, it is important to balance the benefits against the harms and assess its cost-effectiveness. To date, no such evaluation of lung cancer screening has been conducted in Belgium. The objective of this study was to examine the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening using low-dose CT (LDCT) in a Belgian population of (ex-)smokers.
Methods
This economic evaluation is based on the results of the NELSON trial and supplemented with Belgian stage- and histology-specific survival data, Belgian real-world diagnosis and treatment costs, and information from the literature (e.g. quality of life). Incremental costs and effects were modelled by combining a decision tree (invitation, screening and diagnosis) with a Markov model (cancers detected in the intervention and comparator group). The results are expressed as costs per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Benefits and harms are also presented on a 1000-person figure.
Findings
Based on the NELSON screening strategy, three rounds of LDCT screening for lung cancer (in years 0, 1 and 3) compared to no screening is associated with an incremental gain of 4.6 QALYs and an incremental cost of €78 000 per 100 participants. This results in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €18 530 per QALY gained.
Interpretation
In the Belgian healthcare setting, LDCT screening of (ex-)smokers for lung cancer is likely to be cost-effective if policy makers are willing to pay more than €20 000 per QALY gained. However, before implementing lung cancer screening, it is important to gain insight into the impact of incidental findings, available budgets, and capacity within the healthcare system. It is also important to evaluate the willingness to participate when individuals are fully informed about the benefits and harms of LDCT lung cancer screening.
期刊介绍:
Lung Cancer is an international publication covering the clinical, translational and basic science of malignancies of the lung and chest region.Original research articles, early reports, review articles, editorials and correspondence covering the prevention, epidemiology and etiology, basic biology, pathology, clinical assessment, surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, combined treatment modalities, other treatment modalities and outcomes of lung cancer are welcome.