File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Cost effectiveness of mammography screening for Chinese women

TitleCost effectiveness of mammography screening for Chinese women
Authors
KeywordsChinese
Cost effectiveness
Mammography
Screening
Issue Date2007
PublisherJohn Wiley & Sons, Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/28741
Citation
Cancer, 2007, v. 110 n. 4, p. 885-895 How to Cite?
AbstractBACKGROUND. Although the cost effectiveness of screening mammography in most western developed populations has been accepted, it may not apply to Chinese women, who have a much lower breast cancer incidence. The authors estimated the cost effectiveness of biennial mammography in Hong Kong Chinese women to inform evidence-based screening policies. METHODS. For the current study, a state-transition Markov model was developed to simulate mammography screening, breast cancer diagnosis, and treatment in a hypothetical cohort of Chinese women. The benefit of mammography was modeled by assuming a stage shift, in which cancers in screened women were more likely to be diagnosed at an earlier disease stage. The authors compared costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) saved, and life years saved (LYS) for 5 screening strategies. RESULTS. Biennial screening resulted in a gain in life expectancy ranging from 4.3 days to 9.4 days compared with no screening at an incremental cost of from US$1166 to US$2425 per woman. The least costly, nondominated screening option was screening from ages 40 years to 69 years, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of US$61,600 per QALY saved or US$64,400 per LYS compared with no screening. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, the probability of the ICER being below a threshold of US$50,000 per QALY (LYS) was 15.3% (14.6%). CONCLUSIONS. The current results suggested that mammography for Hong Kong Chinese women currently may not be cost effective based on the arbitrary threshold of US$50,000 per QALY. However, clinicians must remain vigilant and periodically should revisit the question of population screening: Disease rates in China have been increasing because of westernization and socioeconomic development. © 2007 American Cancer Society.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/92551
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 5.649
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 3.188
ISI Accession Number ID
References
Errata

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorWong, IOLen_HK
dc.contributor.authorKuntz, KMen_HK
dc.contributor.authorCowling, BJen_HK
dc.contributor.authorLam, CLKen_HK
dc.contributor.authorLeung, GMen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-17T10:49:50Z-
dc.date.available2010-09-17T10:49:50Z-
dc.date.issued2007en_HK
dc.identifier.citationCancer, 2007, v. 110 n. 4, p. 885-895en_HK
dc.identifier.issn0008-543Xen_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/92551-
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND. Although the cost effectiveness of screening mammography in most western developed populations has been accepted, it may not apply to Chinese women, who have a much lower breast cancer incidence. The authors estimated the cost effectiveness of biennial mammography in Hong Kong Chinese women to inform evidence-based screening policies. METHODS. For the current study, a state-transition Markov model was developed to simulate mammography screening, breast cancer diagnosis, and treatment in a hypothetical cohort of Chinese women. The benefit of mammography was modeled by assuming a stage shift, in which cancers in screened women were more likely to be diagnosed at an earlier disease stage. The authors compared costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) saved, and life years saved (LYS) for 5 screening strategies. RESULTS. Biennial screening resulted in a gain in life expectancy ranging from 4.3 days to 9.4 days compared with no screening at an incremental cost of from US$1166 to US$2425 per woman. The least costly, nondominated screening option was screening from ages 40 years to 69 years, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of US$61,600 per QALY saved or US$64,400 per LYS compared with no screening. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, the probability of the ICER being below a threshold of US$50,000 per QALY (LYS) was 15.3% (14.6%). CONCLUSIONS. The current results suggested that mammography for Hong Kong Chinese women currently may not be cost effective based on the arbitrary threshold of US$50,000 per QALY. However, clinicians must remain vigilant and periodically should revisit the question of population screening: Disease rates in China have been increasing because of westernization and socioeconomic development. © 2007 American Cancer Society.en_HK
dc.languageengen_HK
dc.publisherJohn Wiley & Sons, Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/28741en_HK
dc.relation.ispartofCanceren_HK
dc.rightsCancer. Copyright © John Wiley & Sons, Inc.-
dc.subjectChineseen_HK
dc.subjectCost effectivenessen_HK
dc.subjectMammographyen_HK
dc.subjectScreeningen_HK
dc.subject.meshAdult-
dc.subject.meshAsian Continental Ancestry Group - statistics and numerical data-
dc.subject.meshBreast Neoplasms - diagnosis - economics - ethnology-
dc.subject.meshMammography - economics-
dc.subject.meshMass Screening - economics - methods-
dc.titleCost effectiveness of mammography screening for Chinese womenen_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.openurlhttp://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&issn=0008-543X&volume=110&issue=4&spage=885&epage=895&date=2007&atitle=Cost+Effectiveness+of+Mammography+Screening+for+Chinese+Women-
dc.identifier.emailWong, IOL: iolwong@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailCowling, BJ: bcowling@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailLam, CLK: clklam@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailLeung, GM: gmleung@hkucc.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityWong, IOL=rp01806en_HK
dc.identifier.authorityCowling, BJ=rp01326en_HK
dc.identifier.authorityLam, CLK=rp00350en_HK
dc.identifier.authorityLeung, GM=rp00460en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_OA_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/cncr.22848en_HK
dc.identifier.pmid17607668-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-34547866691en_HK
dc.identifier.hkuros132903-
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-34547866691&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume110en_HK
dc.identifier.issue4en_HK
dc.identifier.spage885en_HK
dc.identifier.epage895en_HK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000248586700025-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_HK
dc.relation.erratumdoi:10.1002/cncr.24825-
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridWong, IOL=7102513940en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridKuntz, KM=35355556400en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridCowling, BJ=8644765500en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLam, CLK=24755913900en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLeung, GM=7007159841en_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats