A group of researchers led by the University of Navarra Clinic has verified the cost-effectiveness relationship to implement a risk prediction model for lung cancer screening in Spain, concluding that being able to identify high-risk patients is “more effective” and “less expensive” than widespread screening or the option of not screening.
In depth
This type of analysis is based on the LungFlag risk prediction modelan algorithm that uses individualized clinical variables to identify people with a high risk of suffering from non-small cell lung cancer, and which also allows reduce the number of low-dose computed tomography scans, which is what optimizes this cost-benefit ratio.
“Between the 80 and 85 percent of lung cancer is non-small cella very aggressive entity from the beginning and about which there are doubts as to whether it can be detected in time. Efforts to screen for lung cancer focus on this type, because that is what most cases are like, especially adenocarcinomas,” explained the director of the Department of Pulmonology at the Clínica Universidad de Navarra, Dr. Luis Seijo.
More details
The specialist has also recalled that these types of patients are frequently diagnosed in advanced stages of the disease, at which time No there are curative treatment options, and that results in a “poor prognosis” and a “low rate” five-year survival; it should be noted that the World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that 30 percent of these patients could be cured if they received early diagnosis and treatment..
During the study, they have been calculated health outcomes and costs over a lifetime horizon, comparing a scenario of LungFlag screening versus no screening, and LungFlag screening versus screening of the entire population meeting the 2013 US Preventive Services Task Force criteria (USPSTF), a North American working group whose criteria are focused on the recommendation of annual screening for lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography, for adults between 55 and 80 years of age with a history of smoking. 30 packs of cigarettes a year, and who currently smoke or have stopped smoking in the last 15 years.
To take into account
Researchers have shown that the cost-effectiveness of LungFlag is better than the scenario without screening and compared to screening of the entire population; The results have shown that, from a cohort of 3,835,128 people who meet USPSTF criteria, 56 percent would require low-dose CT scans, while with LungFlag only six percent would require such scans.
Dr. Seijo has highlighted that this tool It is being used in screening projects to more effectively identify patients who may benefit, avoiding costs from those who will not benefit.
“The relevant thing is to make it more cost-beneficial. This scientific article has shown that the strategy of using an algorithm to identifying at-risk patients, beyond simply screening, reduces costs“added Dr. Seijo, who has collaborated in the study together with groups of multidisciplinary experts from different hospitals, and who has had the support of the pharmaceutical industry.
#Research #verifies #effectiveness #implementing #lung #cancer #risk #prediction #model
