ArticlePloS one2025
Lung cancer screening with volume computed tomography is cost-effective in Greece.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 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
- Real-World Prevalence, Treatment Patterns, and Economic Impact of EGFR- and ALK-Targeted Therapies in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Nationwide Analysis from Greece.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening (LCS) employing volume-based low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) in contrast to the absence of screening, targeting an asymptomatic high-risk population in Greece, leveraging the outcomes derived from the NELSON study, the largest European randomized control trial dedicated to LCS.
methodsA validated model incorporating a decision tree and an integrated state-transition Markov model was used to simulate the identification, diagnosis, and treatments for a population at high risk of developing lung cancer, from a healthcare payer perspective. Screen-detected lung cancers, costs, life years (LYs), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were predicted. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were conducted to assess the robustness and reliability of the model's outcomes under varying parameters and hypothetical situations.
resultsAnnual LCS with volume-based LDCT detected 17,104 more lung cancer patients at early-stage among 207,885 screening population, leading to 8,761 premature lung cancer deaths averted. In addition, in contrast to no screening, LCS yielded 86,207 LYs gained and 50,207 incremental QALYs at an additional cost of €278,971,940, resulting in an ICER of €3,236 per LY and €5,505 per QALY, over a lifetime horizon. These estimates were robust in sensitivity analyses.
conclusionsLCS with volume-based LDCT, targeting an asymptomatic high-risk population, is highly cost-effective in Greece. Implementing LCS ensures efficient allocation of public healthcare resources while delivering substantial clinical benefits to lung cancer patients.
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.