Health utilities for participants in a population-based sample who meet eligibility criteria for lung cancer screening

Economic impact of using risk models for eligibility selection to the International lung screening Trial

OBJECTIVES

Using risk models as eligibility criteria for lung screening can reduce race and sex-based disparities. We used data from the International Lung Screening Trial(ILST; NCT02871856) to compare the economic impact of using the PLCOm2012 risk model or the US Preventative Services' categorical age-smoking history-based criteria (USPSTF-2013).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The cost-effectiveness of using PLCOm2012 versus USPSTF-2013 was evaluated with a decision analytic model based on the ILST and other screening trials. The primary outcomes were costs in 2020 International Dollars ($), quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) and incremental net benefit (INB, in $ per QALY). Secondary outcomes were selection characteristics and cancer detection rates (CDR).

RESULTS

Compared with the USPSTF-2013 criteria, the PLCOm2012 risk model resulted in $355 of cost savings per 0.2 QALYs gained (INB=$4294 at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $20 000/QALY (95 %CI: $4205-$4383). Using the risk model was more cost-effective in females at both a 1.5 % and 1.7 % 6-year risk threshold (INB=$6616 and $6112, respectively), compared with males ($5221 and $695). The PLCOm2012 model selected more females, more individuals with fewer years of formal education, and more people with other respiratory illnesses in the ILST. The CDR with the risk model was higher in females compared with the USPSTF-2013 criteria (Risk Ratio = 7.67, 95 % CI: 1.87-31.38).

CONCLUSION

The PLCOm2012 model saved costs, increased QALYs and mitigated socioeconomic and sex-based disparities in access to screening.

Updated cost-effectiveness analysis of lung cancer screening for Australia, capturing differences in the health economic impact of NELSON and NLST outcomes

BACKGROUND

A national, lung cancer screening programme is under consideration in Australia, and we assessed cost-effectiveness using updated data and assumptions.

METHODS

We estimated the cost-effectiveness of lung screening by applying screening parameters and outcomes from either the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) or the NEderlands-Leuvens Longkanker Screenings ONderzoek (NELSON) to Australian data on lung cancer risk, mortality, health-system costs, and smoking trends using a deterministic, multi-cohort model. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for a lifetime horizon.

RESULTS

The ICER for lung screening compared to usual care in the NELSON-based scenario was AU$39,250 (95% CI $18,150-108,300) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY); lower than the NLST-based estimate (ICER = $76,300, 95% CI $41,750-236,500). In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, lung screening was cost-effective in 15%/60% of NELSON-like simulations, assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of $30,000/$50,000 per QALY, respectively, compared to 0.5%/6.7% for the NLST. ICERs were most sensitive to assumptions regarding the screening-related lung cancer mortality benefit and duration of benefit over time. The cost of screening had a larger impact on ICERs than the cost of treatment, even after quadrupling the 2006-2016 healthcare costs of stage IV lung cancer.

DISCUSSION

Lung screening could be cost-effective in Australia, contingent on translating trial-like lung cancer mortality benefits to the clinic.

Study on Effects of Cyclophosphamide Combined with Vinorelbine in Advanced Small Cell Lung Cancer and Anteroposterior Changes in MRI

Objective. To explore the effects of cyclophosphamide combined with vinorelbine in advanced small cell lung cancer (SCLC) and anteroposterior changes in MRI. Methods. The clinical data of 90 patients with advanced SCLC admitted to our hospital from April 2020 to April 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. They were divided into the control group and the study group according to the order of admission, with 45 cases in each group. The control group received the routine treatment, while the study group was treated with cyclophosphamide and vinorelbine to compare the indexes of imaging data and clinical indicators between the two groups before and after treatment. Results. There was no significant difference in the indexes of imaging data between the two groups before treatment $\left(P>0.05\right)$ , and the indexes of imaging data in the study group were visibly lower than those in the control group after treatment $\left(P<0.001\right)$ . The DCR in the study group was significantly higher than that in the control group after treatment $\left(P<0.05\right)$ , while the QLQ-C30 scores and serum indices of the study group after treatment were significantly lower than those of the control group $\left(P<0.001\right)$ . Conclusion. Patients with advanced SCLC were treated with cyclophosphamide and vinorelbine, which can effectively improve the quality of life and reduce the expression of inflammatory factors. This treatment model has a higher application value, and the treatment value is also reflected compared with the routine treatment. At the same time, the permeability parameters obtained by MRI can predict the therapeutic effects of cyclophosphamide and vinorelbine, and further studies are helpful to establish a better solution for patients.