ArticleEuropean radiology2022
Can we increase efficiency of CT lung cancer screening by combining with CVD and COPD screening? Results of an early economic evaluation.
Article in European radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-Effectiveness and Budget Impact of Lung Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Pooled it
- Economic evaluations of screening and case-finding for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD): a systematic review.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Population-Based Screening Using Low-Dose Chest Computed Tomography: A Systematic Review of Health Economic Evaluations.PharmacoEconomics · 2023Pooled it
- Headroom Analysis for Early Economic Evaluation: A Systematic Review.Applied health economics and health policy · 2023Pooled it
- Coronary artery calcium score-emerging role for opportunistic screening on thoracic CT and novel applications.The British journal of radiology · 2026Review
- Lung cancer screening in Lithuania: a cost-effectiveness analysis.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2026Article
- Results of a Swiss community-based pilot study on low-dose ct lung cancer screening.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2026Article
- Pros and cons of reporting incidental findings in lung cancer screening.European radiology · 2025Review
- Metabolomic Plasma Profile of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Patients.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Model-Based Cost-Utility Analysis of Combined Low-Dose Computed Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, and Cardiovascular Disease.JTO clinical and research reports · 2025Article
- Beyond lung cancer screening, an opportunity for early detection of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and cardiovascular diseases.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2024Article
- Willingness to participate in combination screening for lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and cardiovascular disease in four European countries.European radiology · 2024Article
- Health Care Utilization and Costs in Lung Cancer Screening Participants-A Propensity-Matched Economic Analysis.JTO clinical and research reports · 2023Article
- Tumor-educated platelet blood tests for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer detection and management.Scientific reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesEstimating the maximum acceptable cost (MAC) per screened individual for low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) lung cancer (LC) screening, and determining the effect of additionally screening for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), cardiovascular disease (CVD), or both on the MAC.
methodsA model-based early health technology assessment (HTA) was conducted to estimate whether a new intervention could be cost-effective by calculating the MAC at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) of €20k/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and €80k/QALY, for a population of current and former smokers, aged 50-75 years in The Netherlands. The MAC was estimated based on incremental QALYs gained from a stage shift assuming screened individuals are detected in earlier disease stages. Data were obtained from literature and publicly available statistics and validated with experts.
resultsThe MAC per individual for implementing LC screening at a WTP of €20k/QALY was €113. If COPD, CVD, or both were included in screening, the MAC increased to €230, €895, or €971 respectively. Scenario analyses assessed whether screening-specific disease high-risk populations would improve cost-effectiveness, showing that high-risk CVD populations were more likely to improve economic viability compared to COPD.
conclusionsThe economic viability of combined screening is substantially larger than for LC screening alone, primarily due to benefits from CVD screening, and is dependent on the target screening population, which is key to optimise the screening program. The total cost of breast and cervical cancer screening is lower (€420) than the MAC of Big-3, indicating that Big-3 screening may be acceptable from a health economic perspective. KEY POINTS: • Once-off combined low-dose CT screening for lung cancer, COPD, and CVD in individuals aged 50-75 years is potentially cost-effective if screening would cost less than €971 per screened individual. • Multi-disease screening requires detailed insight into the co-occurrence of these diseases to identify the optimal target screening population. • With the same target screening population and WTP, lung cancer-only screening should cost less than €113 per screened individual to be cost-effective.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.