The Breast · 2021 · 23 citations · 27 references
MedicinePreventive MedicineRadiologyCancer ScreeningCost-effectiveness AnalysisDiagnostic ImagingBreast Density AssessmentBreast ImagingMagnetic Resonance ImagingMedical ImagingPopulation ScreeningScreeningAlternative ScenariosCost-effectivenessLife-years Gained ModelingMammographyModel Robustness AssessmentProbabilistic Sensitivity AnalysisScreening Effectiveness EvaluationScreening Mammography
INTRODUCTION: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has shown the potential to improve the screening effectiveness among women with dense breasts. The introduction of fast abbreviated protocols (AP) makes MRI more feasible to be used in a general population. We aimed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of AP-MRI in women with dense breasts (heterogeneously/extremely dense) in a population-based screening program. METHODS: A previously validated model (SiMRiSc) was applied, with parameters updated for women with dense breasts. Breast density was assumed to decrease with increased age. The base scenarios included six biennial AP-MRI strategies, with biennial mammography from age 50-74 as reference. Fourteen alternative scenarios were performed by varying screening interval (triennial and quadrennial) and by applying a combined strategy of mammography and AP-MRI. A 3% discount rate for both costs and life years gained (LYG) was applied. Model robustness was evaluated using univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: The six biennial AP-MRI strategies ranged from 132 to 562 LYG per 10,000 women, where more frequent application of AP-MRI was related to higher LYG. The optimal strategy was biennial AP-MRI screening from age 50-65 for only women with extremely dense breasts, producing an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of € 18,201/LYG. At a threshold of € 20,000/LYG, the probability that the optimal strategy was cost-effective was 79%. CONCLUSION: Population-based biennial breast cancer screening with AP-MRI from age 50-65 for women with extremely dense breasts might be a cost-effective alternative to mammography, but is not an option for women with heterogeneously dense breasts.
27
Breast-Cancer Screening — Viewpoint of the IARC Working Group
Béatrice Secretan, Chiara Scoccianti, Dana Loomis et al. · New England Journal of Medicine · 2015 · 961 citations · Full text
Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) Statement
Don Husereau, Michael Drummond, Stavros Petrou et al. · Value in Health · 2013 · 681 citations
Christiane Kühl, Simone Schrading, Kevin Strobel et al. · Journal of Clinical Oncology · 2014 · 675 citations
Lotte E. Elshof, Konstantinos Tryfonidis, Leen Slaets et al. · European Journal of Cancer · 2015 · 380 citations · Full text
Medicine, Oncology, Breast Oncology +12