ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2024
Health Economic Evaluation of Lung Cancer Screening Using a Diagnostic Blood Test: The Early Detection of Cancer of the Lung Scotland (ECLS).
Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2024. 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Cost-Effectiveness and Budget Impact of Lung Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening: insights from risk stratification, guidelines, and emerging technologies-a systematic review.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Five year mortality in an RCT of a lung cancer biomarker to select people for low dose CT screening.PloS one · 2025Trial
- Article
- The Importance of Comorbidities at Baseline and 5-Year Follow-Up in a Lung Cancer Biomarker Screening Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Lung cancer associated autoantibody responses are detectable years before clinical presentation.PloS one · 2025Article
- The health informatics centre: a safe haven and trusted research environment enabling world-leading research.International journal of population data science · 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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDiagnostic blood tests have the potential to identify lung cancer in people at high risk. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of a lung cancer screening intervention, using the EarlyCDT
methodsWe conducted a model-based lifetime analysis from a UK NHS and personal social services perspective. We estimated incremental net monetary benefit (NMB) for the ECLS intervention compared to no screening and to LDCT screening.
resultsThe incremental NMB of ECLS intervention compared to no screening was GBP 33,179 (95% CI: -GBP 81,396, GBP 147,180) and GBP 140,609 (95% CI: -GBP 36,255, GBP 316,612), respectively, for a cost-effectiveness threshold of GBP 20,000 and GBP 30,000 per quality-adjusted life year. The same figures compared with LDCT screening were GBP 162,095 (95% CI: GBP 52,698, GBP 271,735) and GBP 52,185 (95% CI: -GBP 115,152, GBP 219,711).
conclusionsThe ECLS intervention is the most cost-effective screening alternative, with the highest probability of being cost-effective, when compared to no screening or LDCT screening. This result may change with modifications of the parameters, suggesting that the three alternatives considered in the main analysis are potentially 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.