The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2026
Economic and health impact of integrating smoking cessation services into NHS cancer care pathways in England: a modelling study.
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.
Green Maisie, Harper Sam, Telfer-Thomas Ellen, Agrawal Sanjay, Callister Matthew E J, Lane Jenna L, Warren Graham, Murray Rachael L, Evison Matthew, Sheikh Mahdi, Malcolm Robert
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Research has shown that smoking post-diagnosis negatively impacts cancer outcomes. This study aimed to assess the health and cost impacts of introducing smoking cessation services at cancer diagnosis for people who smoke.
METHODS: A cost-effectiveness model was developed using a UK National Health Service (NHS) and Personal Social Services perspective. A partitioned survival model was built and survival analysis was used to estimate the proportion of the cohort in each health state (progression-free, progressed and dead) based on smoking status. Four populations were explored: lung cancer (stage 1-3a), head and neck cancer (stage 3-4), kidney cancer, and general cancer.
FINDINGS: Over a lifetime time horizon, offering smoking cessation at diagnosis resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £2606, £5495 and £4055 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), for lung, head and neck, and general cancer, respectively. The intervention was dominant for kidney cancer. Offering smoking cessation extended life by 2-8 months and slowed cancer progression by 2-6 months.
INTERPRETATION: This analysis indicates that implementing smoking cessation into NHS cancer care is cost effective at a £20,000 per QALY willingness-to-pay threshold, and provides large health benefits. Smoking cessation aligns with the NHS 10-year plan to move from treating sickness to preventing illnesses.
FUNDING: This study was funded by the Manchester Foundation Trust.
METHODS: A cost-effectiveness model was developed using a UK National Health Service (NHS) and Personal Social Services perspective. A partitioned survival model was built and survival analysis was used to estimate the proportion of the cohort in each health state (progression-free, progressed and dead) based on smoking status. Four populations were explored: lung cancer (stage 1-3a), head and neck cancer (stage 3-4), kidney cancer, and general cancer.
FINDINGS: Over a lifetime time horizon, offering smoking cessation at diagnosis resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £2606, £5495 and £4055 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), for lung, head and neck, and general cancer, respectively. The intervention was dominant for kidney cancer. Offering smoking cessation extended life by 2-8 months and slowed cancer progression by 2-6 months.
INTERPRETATION: This analysis indicates that implementing smoking cessation into NHS cancer care is cost effective at a £20,000 per QALY willingness-to-pay threshold, and provides large health benefits. Smoking cessation aligns with the NHS 10-year plan to move from treating sickness to preventing illnesses.
FUNDING: This study was funded by the Manchester Foundation Trust.