Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40932847›Full record

ArticleEClinicalMedicine2025

Influence of changing patterns in lung cancer treatment and survival on the cost-effectiveness of CT screening: a modeling study.

Koen de Nijs, Kevin Ten Haaf, Dana Moldovanu, Juul Hubert, Isabelle van den Bosch, Anouk Eijkelboom, Carlijn van der Aalst, Harry J de Koning

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

8 authors.

Koen de NijsDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC - University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, 3015 CE, the Netherlands.
Kevin Ten HaafDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC - University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, 3015 CE, the Netherlands.
Dana MoldovanuDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC - University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, 3015 CE, the Netherlands.
Juul HubertDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC - University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, 3015 CE, the Netherlands.
Isabelle van den BoschDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC - University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, 3015 CE, the Netherlands.
Anouk EijkelboomDepartment of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation, Rijnkade 5, Utrecht, 3511 CV, the Netherlands.
Carlijn van der AalstDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC - University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, 3015 CE, the Netherlands.
Harry J de KoningDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC - University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, 3015 CE, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Cost-effectiveness analysisImmunotherapyLung neoplasmsMass screeningMolecular targeted therapyTomographyX-ray computed

Identifiers

PMID40932847
PMCPMC12418876

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.