ArticlePublic health in practice (Oxford, England)2026
Economic benefit of expanding mammography screening for breast cancer in Colombia: A cost modelling analysis.
Article in Public health in practice (Oxford, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Objectives: Breast cancer (BC) remains a leading cause of mortality, especially when diagnosed at advanced or metastatic stages. Early detection improves survival and reduces treatment costs. This study estimates the economic implications of expanding mammography screening coverage on breast cancer care in Colombia by modelling stage redistribution and associated direct medical treatment costs. Study design: This is a cost-benefit study to evaluate the impact of breast cancer screening strategies on the cost of care in Colombia. Methods: A 5-year Markov model estimated costs by cancer phenotype and clinical stage, utilising healthcare resource utilization data from a comprehensive Colombian cancer center. We compared current costs (31% mammography coverage) with projected costs, assuming a 70% screening rate (using the Netherlands' distribution as a reference). Results: Data from 284 Colombian BC patients were included: Luminal (59%), HER2+ (26%), and Triple-Negative BC (15%). First-year costs varied widely, ranging from early-stage Luminal (USD 10,309) to metastatic HER2+ (USD 60,612). Advanced BC significantly drove healthcare costs. By increasing screening coverage to 70%, the number of early-stage cases detected each year would increase by 56% compared to the current 33%. Increasing screening could shift diagnoses earlier, reducing the average 5-year cost per patient from $68,183 to $58,542. This would translate to a USD 164 million saving for Colombia. Conclusions: Increasing screening coverage improves patient outcomes by detecting more early-stage cases and significantly reduces healthcare expenditures by decreasing costly advanced-stage diagnoses, yielding substantial savings for the Colombian health system.
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.