ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2022
Cost-effectiveness of screening smokers and ex-smokers for lung cancer in the Netherlands in different age groups.
Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening: insights from risk stratification, guidelines, and emerging technologies-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
- Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Lung Cancer Screening Using Low-Dose Computed Tomography: A Systematic Review Assessing Strategy Comparison and Risk Stratification.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2022Pooled it
- Considering research waste in economic evaluations of low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2026Review
- Cost effectiveness analysis of low dose computed tomography lung cancer screening in Chinese population.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Incorporating High-Risk Individuals Beyond Smoking History Into Lung Cancer Screening in Hong Kong: A Cost-Effectiveness Study.JTO clinical and research reports · 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
- Cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening with volume computed tomography in Portugal.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2024Article
- Cost-effectiveness of home-based screening of the general population for albuminuria to prevent progression of cardiovascular and kidney disease.EClinicalMedicine · 2024Article
- Determining Association between Lung Cancer Mortality Worldwide and Risk Factors Using Fuzzy Inference Modeling and Random Forest Modeling.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Thoracic surgery in the Netherlands.Journal of thoracic disease · 2022Review
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of screening smokers and ex-smokers for lung cancer in the Netherlands.
methodsA Markov model was used to evaluate the health effects and costs of lung cancer screening from the healthcare perspective. The effects and costs of ten screening scenarios with different start and stop ages of screening were examined across a lifetime horizon in a cohort of 100,000 smokers and ex- smokers 50 years and older.
resultsThe incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of screening smokers and ex-smokers aged 50-60 years, 50-70 years, and 50 years and older are below the cost-effectiveness threshold of € 20,000 per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Screening 50-60-year-old smokers and ex-smokers was the most cost-effective scenario with an ICER of € 14,094 per QALY gained. However, screening smokers and ex-smokers 50 years and older yielded the highest QALYs and resulted in an ICER of € 16,594 per QALY, which is below the threshold of € 20,000 per QALY. All screening scenarios compared to no screening resulted in CERs between the € 14,000 and € 16,000 per QALY gained. The efficiency frontier showed that screening smokers and ex-smokers in the age groups 70 years and older, 60-70 years, 60 years and older are excluded by extended dominance by no screening, screening smokers and ex-smokers aged 50-60 years and 50-70 years.
conclusionThis study showed that lung cancer screening is cost-effective in the Netherlands.
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.