ArticleBreast cancer (Tokyo, Japan)2023
Cost-effectiveness of clinical breast examination screening programme among HER2-positive breast cancer patients: a modelling study.
Article in Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Health Economic Evaluations of Breast Cancer Screening Strategies: A Systematic Review Focusing on Methodology and Quality Assessment.Applied health economics and health policy · 2026Pooled it
- Paclitaxel-based strategy as first-line therapy for advanced breast cancer: a model-based economic evaluation for China.Future oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Addressing Global Gaps in Mammography Screening for Improved Breast Cancer Detection: A Review of the Literature.Cureus · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeFor many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), breast cancer (BC) screening based on mammography is not a viable option. Clinical breast examination (CBE) may represent a pragmatic and cost-effective alternative. This paper examines the cost-effectiveness of CBE screening programme among a patient group for whom its cost-effectiveness is likely to be least evident (HER2-positive patients) and discuss the wider implications for BC screening in LMICs.
methodsA Markov model was used to examine clinical and economic outcomes over a life-time horizon from the patient, public payer, and healthcare sector perspective. HER2-positive patients entered the model at either disease-free survival or metastatic BC state. The downstaging effect of CBE determined the starting probabilities in the no-screening and screening scenarios. The model used a monthly cycle length, with half-cycle correction. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 1.5% annually.
resultsCompared with no-screening, the cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per quality-adjusted life-year gained for the CBE screening programme was $1801, $2381, and $4179 from three mentioned perspectives, respectively. The finding of cost-effectiveness remained robust to a range of sensitivity analyses. The parameters to which ICERs are most sensitive are average age of cohorts, reduction in proportion of metastatic patients at diagnosis, cost of CBE, and BC detection rate of the programme.
conclusionFor HER2-positive patients and compared with no-screening, CBE screening programme in Vietnam is cost-effective from all investigated perspectives. CBE is a 'good value' intervention and should be considered for implementation throughout Vietnam as well as in LMICs where mammography is not feasible.
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.