• Nicole Mittmann, Natasha K Stout, Pablo Lee, Anna N A Tosteson, Amy Trentham-Dietz, Oguzhan Alagoz, and Martin J Yaffe.
• Health Outcomes and PharmacoEconomic (HOPE) Research Centre at Sunnybrook Research Institute and the University of Toronto.
• Health Rep. 2015 Dec 1; 26 (12): 16-25.

BackgroundBreast cancer screening technology and treatment have improved over the past decade. This analysis evaluates the total cost-effectiveness of various breast cancer screening strategies in Canada.Data And MethodsUsing the Wisconsin Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Monitoring Network (CISNET) breast cancer simulation model adapted to the Canadian context, costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) were evaluated for 11 mammography screening strategies that varied by start/stop age and screening frequency for the general population. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are presented, and sensitivity analyses are used to assess the robustness of model conclusions.ResultsIncremental cost-effectiveness analysis showed that triennial screening at ages 50 to 69 was the most cost-effective at $94,762 per QALY. Biennial ($97,006 per QALY) and annual ($226,278 per QALY) strategies had higher incremental ratios.InterpretationThe benefits and costs of screening rise with the number of screens per woman. Decisions about screening strategies may be influenced by willingness to pay and the rate of recall for further examination after positive screens.

23 keywords...

hide…