文献检索文档翻译深度研究
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
邀请有礼套餐&价格历史记录

新学期,新优惠

限时优惠:9月1日-9月22日

30天高级会员仅需29元

1天体验卡首发特惠仅需5.99元

了解详情
不再提醒
插件&应用
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
高级版
套餐订阅购买积分包
AI 工具
文献检索文档翻译深度研究
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2025

2021 年美国预防服务工作组推荐肺癌筛查的成本效益评估。

Cost-effectiveness Evaluation of the 2021 US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation for Lung Cancer Screening.

机构信息

Department of Health Services Research, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.

Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.

出版信息

JAMA Oncol. 2021 Dec 1;7(12):1833-1842. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2021.4942.


DOI:10.1001/jamaoncol.2021.4942
PMID:34673885
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8532037/
Abstract

IMPORTANCE: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) issued its 2021 recommendation on lung cancer screening, which lowered the starting age for screening from 55 to 50 years and the minimum cumulative smoking exposure from 30 to 20 pack-years relative to its 2013 recommendation. Although costs are expected to increase because of the expanded screening eligibility criteria, it is unknown whether the new guidelines for lung cancer screening are cost-effective. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the 2021 USPSTF recommendation for lung cancer screening compared with the 2013 recommendation and to explore the cost-effectiveness of 6 alternative screening strategies that maintained a minimum cumulative smoking exposure of 20 pack-years and an ending age for screening of 80 years but varied the starting ages for screening (50 or 55 years) and the number of years since smoking cessation (≤15, ≤20, or ≤25). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A comparative cost-effectiveness analysis using 4 independently developed microsimulation models that shared common inputs to assess the population-level health benefits and costs of the 2021 recommended screening strategy and 6 alternative screening strategies compared with the 2013 recommended screening strategy. The models simulated a 1960 US birth cohort. Simulated individuals entered the study at age 45 years and were followed up until death or age 90 years, corresponding to a study period from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2050. EXPOSURES: Low-dose computed tomography in lung cancer screening programs with a minimum cumulative smoking exposure of 20 pack-years. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) of the 2021 vs 2013 USPSTF lung cancer screening recommendations as well as 6 alternative screening strategies vs the 2013 USPSTF screening strategy. Strategies with a mean ICER lower than $100 000 per QALY were deemed cost-effective. RESULTS: The 2021 USPSTF recommendation was estimated to be cost-effective compared with the 2013 recommendation, with a mean ICER of $72 564 (range across 4 models, $59 493-$85 837) per QALY gained. The 2021 recommendation was not cost-effective compared with 6 alternative strategies that used the 20 pack-year criterion. Strategies associated with the most cost-effectiveness included those that expanded screening eligibility to include a greater number of former smokers who had not smoked for a longer duration (ie, ≤20 years and ≤25 years since smoking cessation vs ≤15 years since smoking cessation). In particular, the strategy that screened former smokers who quit within the past 25 years and began screening at age 55 years was associated with screening coverage closest to that of the 2021 USPSTF recommendation yet yielded greater cost-effectiveness, with a mean ICER of $66 533 (range across 4 models, $55 693-$80 539). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This economic evaluation found that the 2021 USPSTF recommendation for lung cancer screening was cost-effective; however, alternative screening strategies that maintained a minimum cumulative smoking exposure of 20 pack-years but included individuals who quit smoking within the past 25 years may be more cost-effective and warrant further evaluation.

摘要

重要性:美国预防服务工作组(USPSTF)发布了其 2021 年关于肺癌筛查的建议,将筛查起始年龄从 55 岁降低至 50 岁,将最低累计吸烟量从 30 包年降低至 20 包年,与 2013 年的建议相比。尽管由于扩大了筛查资格标准,预计成本会增加,但尚不清楚新的肺癌筛查指南是否具有成本效益。

目的:评估 2021 年 USPSTF 推荐的肺癌筛查与 2013 年建议相比的成本效益,并探讨 6 种替代筛查策略的成本效益,这些策略保持了最低累计吸烟量为 20 包年和筛查截止年龄为 80 岁,但改变了筛查起始年龄(50 岁或 55 岁)和戒烟后年限(≤15 年、≤20 年或≤25 年)。

设计、设置和参与者:使用 4 个独立开发的微模拟模型进行比较成本效益分析,这些模型共享共同的输入,以评估 2021 年推荐的筛查策略和 6 种替代筛查策略与 2013 年推荐的筛查策略相比的人群健康效益和成本。这些模型模拟了 1960 年美国出生的队列。模拟个体在 45 岁时进入研究,并随访至死亡或 90 岁,对应的研究期间为 2005 年 1 月 1 日至 2050 年 12 月 31 日。

暴露:肺癌筛查计划中的低剂量计算机断层扫描,最低累计吸烟量为 20 包年。

主要结果和测量:2021 年与 2013 年 USPSTF 肺癌筛查建议相比的增量成本效益比(ICER),以及 6 种替代筛查策略与 2013 年 USPSTF 筛查策略相比的增量成本效益比。平均 ICER 低于 100000 美元/质量调整生命年(QALY)的策略被认为是具有成本效益的。

结果:与 2013 年的建议相比,2021 年 USPSTF 的建议被认为是具有成本效益的,其增量成本效益比为每获得一个质量调整生命年(QALY)增加 72564 美元(4 个模型的平均值,59493 美元至 85837 美元)。与使用 20 包年标准的 6 种替代策略相比,2021 年的建议不具有成本效益。与成本效益最高的策略相关的策略包括扩大筛查资格,纳入更多未吸烟且吸烟时间更长的前吸烟者(即,戒烟时间≤20 年和≤25 年,而非≤15 年)。特别是,筛查过去 25 年内戒烟的前吸烟者,并在 55 岁开始筛查的策略,与 2021 年 USPSTF 建议的筛查覆盖率最为接近,但具有更高的成本效益,平均 ICER 为 66533 美元(4 个模型的平均值,55693 美元至 80539 美元)。

结论和相关性:这项经济评估发现,2021 年 USPSTF 关于肺癌筛查的建议具有成本效益;然而,保持最低累计吸烟量为 20 包年但纳入在过去 25 年内戒烟的个体的替代筛查策略可能更具成本效益,值得进一步评估。

相似文献

[1]
Cost-effectiveness Evaluation of the 2021 US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation for Lung Cancer Screening.

JAMA Oncol. 2021-12-1

[2]
Cost-effectiveness of Low-Dose Computed Tomography With a Plasma-Based Biomarker for Lung Cancer Screening in China.

JAMA Netw Open. 2022-5-2

[3]
Evaluation of the Benefits and Harms of Lung Cancer Screening With Low-Dose Computed Tomography: Modeling Study for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

JAMA. 2021-3-9

[4]
Risk Model-Based Lung Cancer Screening : A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

Ann Intern Med. 2023-3

[5]

2021-3

[6]
Performance and Cost-Effectiveness of Computed Tomography Lung Cancer Screening Scenarios in a Population-Based Setting: A Microsimulation Modeling Analysis in Ontario, Canada.

PLoS Med. 2017-2-7

[7]
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Lung Cancer Screening in the United States: A Comparative Modeling Study.

Ann Intern Med. 2019-11-5

[8]
Screening for Lung Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

JAMA. 2021-3-9

[9]
Screening for lung cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.

Ann Intern Med. 2014-3-4

[10]
Clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of integrating smoking cessation into lung cancer screening: a microsimulation model.

CMAJ Open. 2020-9-22

引用本文的文献

[1]
Computed Tomographic Screening Intervals for Patients at Moderate Risk of Lung Cancer.

JAMA Netw Open. 2025-7-1

[2]
Cost-effectiveness of risk model-based lung cancer screening in smokers and nonsmokers in China.

BMC Med. 2025-5-28

[3]
Natural history models for lung Cancer: A scoping review.

Lung Cancer. 2025-5

[4]
Prevalent findings on low-dose CT scan lung cancer screening: a French prospective pilot study.

Eur J Public Health. 2025-4-1

[5]
Advances in early detection of non-small cell lung cancer: A comprehensive review.

Cancer Med. 2024-9

[6]
Cost-Effectiveness of Lung Cancer Screening with Low-Dose Computed Tomography: Comparing Hungarian Screening Protocols with the US NLST.

Cancers (Basel). 2024-8-23

[7]
Combined Breast and Lung Cancer Screening Among Dual-Eligible Women: A Descriptive Study.

J Surg Res. 2025-3

[8]
Projected effectiveness of lung cancer screening and concurrent smoking cessation support in the Netherlands.

EClinicalMedicine. 2024-4-8

[9]
[Lung cancer screening: new frontiers].

Radiologie (Heidelb). 2024-6

[10]
Polygenic risk-stratified screening for nasopharyngeal carcinoma in high-risk endemic areas of China: a cost-effectiveness study.

Front Public Health. 2024

本文引用的文献

[1]
Screening for Lung Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

JAMA. 2021-3-9

[2]
Evaluation of the Benefits and Harms of Lung Cancer Screening With Low-Dose Computed Tomography: Modeling Study for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

JAMA. 2021-3-9

[3]
Potential Disparities by Sex and Race or Ethnicity in Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility Rates.

Chest. 2021-7

[4]
Cost-Effectiveness of Smoking Cessation Interventions in the Lung Cancer Screening Setting: A Simulation Study.

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2021-8-2

[5]
Lung cancer screening eligibility and use with low-dose computed tomography: Results from the 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System cross-sectional survey.

Cancer. 2021-3-1

[6]
State Variation in Low-Dose Computed Tomography Scanning for Lung Cancer Screening in the United States.

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2021-8-2

[7]
Addressing Disparities in Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility and Healthcare Access. An Official American Thoracic Society Statement.

Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2020-10-1

[8]
Lung Cancer Screening Uptake: Analysis of BRFSS 2018.

J Gen Intern Med. 2021-9

[9]
Risk Prediction Model Versus United States Preventive Services Task Force Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility Criteria: Reducing Race Disparities.

J Thorac Oncol. 2020-11

[10]
Screening Adherence in the Veterans Administration Lung Cancer Screening Demonstration Project.

Chest. 2020-10

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

推荐工具

医学文档翻译智能文献检索