JAMA network open · 2026
Economic Evaluation of Tobacco Treatments From the Screen ASSIST Lung Cancer Screening Trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Levy Douglas E, Hassan Shahzeb, Wint Amy J, Marotta Caylin, Gonzalez Irina, Chang Yuchiao, Rigotti Nancy A, Haas Jennifer S, Park Elyse R
Аннотация
IMPORTANCE: Integrating smoking cessation interventions within lung cancer screening (LCS) programs may significantly reduce smoking-related morbidity and mortality. Data on costs and cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions in the context of LCS can foster the dissemination of effective treatments.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness from a health system perspective of 8 smoking cessation treatment strategies evaluated in the context of the Screen Aiding Screening Support In Stopping Tobacco (ASSIST) trial among patients undergoing LCS in 1 large health care system.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Screen ASSIST trial used a 3-way factorial design testing the effectiveness of 8 combinations of smoking cessation treatments at a health system in Massachusetts with 11 participating LCS sites. In this economic evaluation, costs and cost-effectiveness were evaluated prospectively and contextualized through sensitivity analyses. Participants included English-speaking and Spanish-speaking patients who smoked and were scheduled for LCS between April 2019 and July 2023.
INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomized to 4 vs 8 counseling sessions, 2 vs 8 weeks of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), and screening for social determinants of health (SDH) vs no screening.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary effectiveness outcome was self-reported 7-day smoking abstinence at 6 months. Cost measures included both start-up and operating costs, with incremental cost per quit (ICQ) calculated relative to usual care.
RESULTS: Screen ASSIST had 642 participants (mean [SD] age, 64.0 [6.5] years; 358 female [55.8%]; mean [SD] 36.8 [19.4] pack-years; mean [SD] 16.2 [8.2] cigarettes per day). Start-up costs for the program were $131 371, primarily for electronic health record programming ($124 903). Operating costs for the intervention conditions ranged from $196 272 to $274 865 for 642 participants. The ICQ of 8 counseling sessions, 2 weeks NRT, and no SDH screening was $3050 (95% CI, $1286-4815), the most cost-effective condition. Per-patient costs and ICQ would be lower in health systems serving larger patient populations.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this economic evaluation of smoking cessation treatment in LCS, 8-session counseling combined with 2 weeks of NRT was a cost-effective strategy, with a favorable ICQ relative to usual care and other treatment strategies evaluated. These findings are relevant for health systems considering integrating smoking cessation programs with LCS services.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness from a health system perspective of 8 smoking cessation treatment strategies evaluated in the context of the Screen Aiding Screening Support In Stopping Tobacco (ASSIST) trial among patients undergoing LCS in 1 large health care system.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Screen ASSIST trial used a 3-way factorial design testing the effectiveness of 8 combinations of smoking cessation treatments at a health system in Massachusetts with 11 participating LCS sites. In this economic evaluation, costs and cost-effectiveness were evaluated prospectively and contextualized through sensitivity analyses. Participants included English-speaking and Spanish-speaking patients who smoked and were scheduled for LCS between April 2019 and July 2023.
INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomized to 4 vs 8 counseling sessions, 2 vs 8 weeks of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), and screening for social determinants of health (SDH) vs no screening.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary effectiveness outcome was self-reported 7-day smoking abstinence at 6 months. Cost measures included both start-up and operating costs, with incremental cost per quit (ICQ) calculated relative to usual care.
RESULTS: Screen ASSIST had 642 participants (mean [SD] age, 64.0 [6.5] years; 358 female [55.8%]; mean [SD] 36.8 [19.4] pack-years; mean [SD] 16.2 [8.2] cigarettes per day). Start-up costs for the program were $131 371, primarily for electronic health record programming ($124 903). Operating costs for the intervention conditions ranged from $196 272 to $274 865 for 642 participants. The ICQ of 8 counseling sessions, 2 weeks NRT, and no SDH screening was $3050 (95% CI, $1286-4815), the most cost-effective condition. Per-patient costs and ICQ would be lower in health systems serving larger patient populations.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this economic evaluation of smoking cessation treatment in LCS, 8-session counseling combined with 2 weeks of NRT was a cost-effective strategy, with a favorable ICQ relative to usual care and other treatment strategies evaluated. These findings are relevant for health systems considering integrating smoking cessation programs with LCS services.