Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37760416›Full record

ArticleCancers2023

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Risk Factor-Based Lung Cancer Screening Program by Low-Dose Computer Tomography in Current Smokers in China.

Tiantian Zhang, Xudong Chen, Caichen Li, Xiaoqin Wen, Tengfei Lin, Jiaxing Huang, Jianxing He, Nanshan Zhong, Jie Jiang, Wenhua Liang

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Tiantian ZhangCollege of Pharmacy/Guangdong-Hong Kong-Marco Greater Bay Area (GBA), Institue for Real-World Value and Evidence of Drugs and Medical Devices/Southern Institute of Pharmacoeconomics and Health Technology Assessment/International Cooperative Laboratory of Traditional Chinese Medicine Modernization and Innovative Drug, Development of Ministry of Education (MOE) of China, Jinan University, Guangzhou 510632, China.
Xudong ChenCollege of Pharmacy/Guangdong-Hong Kong-Marco Greater Bay Area (GBA), Institue for Real-World Value and Evidence of Drugs and Medical Devices/Southern Institute of Pharmacoeconomics and Health Technology Assessment/International Cooperative Laboratory of Traditional Chinese Medicine Modernization and Innovative Drug, Development of Ministry of Education (MOE) of China, Jinan University, Guangzhou 510632, China.ORCID 0000-0002-7087-4075
Caichen LiDepartment of Thoracic Surgery and Oncology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, China State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou 510120, China.
Xiaoqin WenCollege of Pharmacy/Guangdong-Hong Kong-Marco Greater Bay Area (GBA), Institue for Real-World Value and Evidence of Drugs and Medical Devices/Southern Institute of Pharmacoeconomics and Health Technology Assessment/International Cooperative Laboratory of Traditional Chinese Medicine Modernization and Innovative Drug, Development of Ministry of Education (MOE) of China, Jinan University, Guangzhou 510632, China.ORCID 0009-0002-4063-7471
Tengfei LinShenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen 518000, China.
Jiaxing HuangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery and Oncology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, China State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou 510120, China.
Jianxing HeDepartment of Thoracic Surgery and Oncology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, China State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou 510120, China.
Nanshan ZhongDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, China State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou 510120, China.
Jie JiangCollege of Pharmacy/Guangdong-Hong Kong-Marco Greater Bay Area (GBA), Institue for Real-World Value and Evidence of Drugs and Medical Devices/Southern Institute of Pharmacoeconomics and Health Technology Assessment/International Cooperative Laboratory of Traditional Chinese Medicine Modernization and Innovative Drug, Development of Ministry of Education (MOE) of China, Jinan University, Guangzhou 510632, China.
Wenhua LiangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery and Oncology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, China State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou 510120, China.
First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University · CNJinan University · CNChinese Academy of Sciences · CN

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 72274079
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although the effectiveness of lung cancer screening by low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) could be shown in China, there could be variation in the evidence concerning the economic impact. Our study explores the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening and optimizes the best definition of a high-risk population. A Markov model consisting of the natural history and post-diagnosis states was constructed to estimate the costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of LDCT screening compared with no screening. A total of 36 distinct risk factor-based screening strategies were assessed by incorporating starting ages of 40, 45, 50, 55, 60 and 65 years, stopping ages of 69, 74 and 79 years as well as smoking eligibility criteria. Screening data came from community-based mass screening with LDCT for lung cancer in Guangzhou. Compared with no screening, all screening scenarios led to incremental costs and QALYs. When the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was USD37,653, three times the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita in China, six of nine strategies on the efficiency frontier may be cost-effective. Annual screening between 55 and 79 years of age for those who smoked more than 20 pack-years, which yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of USD35,000.00 per QALY gained, was considered optimal. In sensitivity analyses, the result was stable in most cases. The trends of the results are roughly the same in scenario analyses. According to the WTP threshold of different regions, the optimal screening strategies were annual screening for those who smoked more than 20 pack-years, between 50 and 79 years of age in Zhejiang province, 55-79 years in Guangdong province and 65-74 years in Yunnan province. However, annual screening was unlikely to be cost-effective in Heilongjiang province under our modelling assumptions, indicating that tailored screening policies should be made regionally according to the local epidemiological and economic situation.

Indexed as

Chinacost-effectiveness analysiscurrent smokersLDCT screeninglung cancer

Identifiers

PMID37760416
PMCPMC10527380
OpenAlexW4386485602

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.