ArticleEClinicalMedicine2025
Influence of changing patterns in lung cancer treatment and survival on the cost-effectiveness of CT screening: a modeling study.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Implementation of a national lung cancer screening in Austria : Position paper of the Austrian Radiological Society (ÖRG), the Austrian Society of Pneumology (ÖGP), the Austrian Society of General Practice and Family Medicine (ÖGAM) and the Austrian Society of Thoracic Surgery (ÖGTC)].Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2026Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of Universal Low-Dose Computed Tomographic Lung Cancer Screening in Singapore.JAMA network open · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: With the introduction of immune- and targeted therapies, lung cancer survival has lengthened, but per-patient costs of treatment have also increased. Both the clinical outcomes and costs of late stage disease have bearing on the benefits and relative cost of early detection interventions. Cost-effectiveness estimates of lung cancer (LC) computed tomography (CT) screening, crucial for policymaking, using such real-world recent data have been limited. Methods: Registry data of the entire Dutch LC patient population (n = 137,129) inform treatment cost and real-world survival before (2012-2017) and after (2018-2021) widespread novel therapy introduction. The MISCAN-Lung (MIcrosimulation SCreening Analysis) microsimulation model projects the population-level benefits and harms of CT screening for Dutch 1949-1979 cohorts. Findings: From 2012-2017 to 2018-2021, per-patient care expenditures increased 52%. Survival improvements differ by patient subgroup; for males <65 y, 3-year relative survival for stage-IV adenocarcinoma increased from 10.6% to 22%. MISCAN model simulations found annual screening ages 55-75 from 1.51% PLCOm-risk (Prostatem Lung Colorectal Ovarian Screening trial model) as cost-effective (<€20,000 per Quality Adjusted Life Years Gained (QALYG)). After adjusting LC survival to novel therapies, screening is expected to yield 3253 QALYG and 4118 LYG per 100,000 population, 3.2% (QALYG) and 3.7% (LYG) lower than before novel therapies. However, expected net screening costs decrease 16.7% as late-stage treatment has become more expensive and is applied longer; the savings in late-stage therapy cost were estimated to have increased 183%. The cost per QALYG decreased 13.9%, from €14,172/QALY to €12,201/QALY. Interpretation: Novel treatments for late-stage lung cancer have made lung cancer screening more cost-effective. While LC survival improves due to novel treatments for advanced disease, the increased expenditures outpace survival gains. Screening implementation still needs prioritization, even as late-stage LC survival improves. Funding: European Union Horizon 2020 grant 848294: 4-IN-THE-LUNG-RUN. VENI grant number 09150161910060 (Dutch Research Council/Netherlands Organisation of Health Research (ZonMW)).
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.