Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39235813›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2024

Cost-Effectiveness of AI for Risk-Stratified Breast Cancer Screening.

Harry Hill, Cristina Roadevin, Stephen Duffy, Olena Mandrik, Adam Brentnall

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Implementing a Risk-Stratified National Breast Screening Programme in the United Kingdom: A Model-Based Cost-effectiveness Analysis.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Tumor Exposomics: A New Paradigm for Individualized Continuous Exposure Monitoring.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  12. Interpretable deep learning model of circulating genomics for quantitative survival prediction in advanced non-small cell lung cancer.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. AI for screening in healthcare: promise and challenges.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

5 authors.

Harry HillSchool of Medicine and Population Health, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
Cristina RoadevinNottingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.
Stephen DuffyWolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Olena MandrikSchool of Medicine and Population Health, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
Adam BrentnallWolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Previous research has shown good discrimination of short-term risk using an artificial intelligence (AI) risk prediction model (Mirai). However, no studies have been undertaken to evaluate whether this might translate into economic gains. Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of incorporating risk-stratified screening using a breast cancer AI model into the United Kingdom (UK) National Breast Cancer Screening Program. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study, conducted from January 1, 2023, to January 31, 2024, involved the development of a decision analytical model to estimate health-related quality of life, cancer survival rates, and costs over the lifetime of the female population eligible for screening. The analysis took a UK payer perspective, and the simulated cohort consisted of women aged 50 to 70 years at screening. Exposures: Mammography screening at 1 to 6 yearly screening intervals based on breast cancer risk and standard care (screening every 3 years). Main Outcomes and Measures: Incremental net monetary benefit based on quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and National Health Service (NHS) costs (given in pounds sterling; to convert to US dollars, multiply by 1.28). Results: Artificial intelligence-based risk-stratified programs were estimated to be cost-saving and increase QALYs compared with the current screening program. A screening schedule of every 6 years for lowest-risk individuals, biannually and triennially for those below and above average risk, respectively, and annually for those at highest risk was estimated to give yearly net monetary benefits within the NHS of approximately £60.4 (US $77.3) million and £85.3 (US $109.2) million, with QALY values set at £20 000 (US $25 600) and £30 000 (US $38 400), respectively. Even in scenarios where decision-makers hesitate to allocate additional NHS resources toward screening, implementing the proposed strategies at a QALY value of £1 (US $1.28) was estimated to generate a yearly monetary benefit of approximately £10.6 (US $13.6) million. Conclusions and Relevance: In this decision analytical model study of integrating risk-stratified screening with a breast cancer AI model into the UK National Breast Cancer Screening Program, risk-stratified screening was likely to be cost-effective, yielding added health benefits at reduced costs. These results are particularly relevant for health care settings where resources are under pressure. New studies to prospectively evaluate AI-guided screening appear warranted.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceBreast NeoplasmsCost-Benefit AnalysisEarly Detection of CancerAgedFemaleHumansMammographyMass ScreeningMiddle AgedQuality-Adjusted Life YearsRisk AssessmentUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID39235813
PMCPMC11377997

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.