British journal of cancer · 2025
Annual versus less frequent mammographic surveillance in people with breast cancer aged 50 years and older in the UK (Mammo-50): cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Cocco Paola, Bojke Chris, Hulme Claire, Hall Peter S, Hopkins Amy, Marshall Andrea, Dunn Janet A, Meads David, Shinkins Bethany
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence on the optimal frequency of mammogram surveillance. At 5-year follow-up, the Mammo-50 trial found that, in patients aged 50+ and 3 years post diagnosis, less frequent mammograms were non-inferior to annual mammograms for breast-cancer-specific-survival, recurrence-free interval and overall survival.
METHODS: A within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis compared annual versus less frequent mammogram surveillance over 5 years from healthcare and societal perspectives. Hospital Episodes Statistics captured hospital-based resource use. Health-related quality of life and other cost data were obtained via questionnaires at surveillance mammograms. A budget impact analysis estimated NHS savings.
RESULTS: Less frequent surveillance led to cost savings of -£543.88 (-£1116; £26) and a small reduction in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of -0.02 (-0.095; 0.06) per patient. The incremental net monetary benefit at a £20,000/QALY threshold was £187 (-£1574; £2027). Including societal costs increased savings to £1543 per person (-£2416; -£669), and cost-effectiveness. Projected NHS savings were £185.87 million over 6 years.
CONCLUSION: Less frequent mammogram surveillance is cost-effective. Uncertainty remains due to variability in costs and quality of life estimates, and missing data in the less frequent arm due to study design. Given the trial's non-inferiority findings, this strategy is recommended from healthcare and societal perspectives.
METHODS: A within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis compared annual versus less frequent mammogram surveillance over 5 years from healthcare and societal perspectives. Hospital Episodes Statistics captured hospital-based resource use. Health-related quality of life and other cost data were obtained via questionnaires at surveillance mammograms. A budget impact analysis estimated NHS savings.
RESULTS: Less frequent surveillance led to cost savings of -£543.88 (-£1116; £26) and a small reduction in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of -0.02 (-0.095; 0.06) per patient. The incremental net monetary benefit at a £20,000/QALY threshold was £187 (-£1574; £2027). Including societal costs increased savings to £1543 per person (-£2416; -£669), and cost-effectiveness. Projected NHS savings were £185.87 million over 6 years.
CONCLUSION: Less frequent mammogram surveillance is cost-effective. Uncertainty remains due to variability in costs and quality of life estimates, and missing data in the less frequent arm due to study design. Given the trial's non-inferiority findings, this strategy is recommended from healthcare and societal perspectives.