Cost-effectiveness analysis of population-based screening of hepatocellular carcinoma

Comparing ultrasonography with two-stage screening

Ming Jeng Kuo, Hsiu Hsi Chen, Chi Ling Chen, Jean Ching Yuan Fann, Sam Li Sheng Chen, Sherry Yueh Hsia Chiu, Yu Min Lin, Chao Sheng Liao, Hung Chuen Chang, Yueh Shih Lin, Amy Ming Fang Yen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Aim: To assess the cost-effectiveness of two populationbased hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) screening programs, two-stage biomarker-ultrasound method and mass screening using abdominal ultrasonography (AUS). Methods: In this study, we applied a Markov decision model with a societal perspective and a lifetime horizon for the general population-based cohorts in an area with high HCC incidence, such as Taiwan. The accuracy of biomarkers and ultrasonography was estimated from published meta-analyses. The costs of surveillance, diagnosis, and treatment were based on a combination of published literature, Medicare payments, and medical expenditure at the National Taiwan University Hospital. The main outcome measure was cost per lifeyear gained with a 3% annual discount rate. Results: The results show that the mass screening using AUS was associated with an incremental costeffectiveness ratio of USD39825 per life-year gained, whereas two-stage screening was associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of USD49733 per life-year gained, as compared with no screening. Screening programs with an initial screening age of 50 years old and biennial screening interval were the most cost-effective. These findings were sensitive to the costs of screening tools and the specificity of biomarker screening. Conclusion: Mass screening using AUS is more cost effective than two-stage biomarker-ultrasound screening. The most optimal strategy is an initial screening age at 50 years old with a 2-year inter-screening interval.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)3460-3470
Number of pages11
JournalWorld Journal of Gastroenterology
Volume22
Issue number12
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Mar 28 2016

Fingerprint

Cost-Benefit Analysis
Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Ultrasonography
Mass Screening
Costs and Cost Analysis
Biomarkers
Population
Taiwan
Health Expenditures
Medicare
Meta-Analysis
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Incidence

Keywords

  • Age
  • Cost-effectiveness
  • Markov model
  • One-stage abdominal ultrasonography screening
  • Sensitivity analysis
  • Two-stage biomarker-ultrasound screening

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Gastroenterology

Cite this

Cost-effectiveness analysis of population-based screening of hepatocellular carcinoma : Comparing ultrasonography with two-stage screening. / Kuo, Ming Jeng; Chen, Hsiu Hsi; Chen, Chi Ling; Fann, Jean Ching Yuan; Chen, Sam Li Sheng; Chiu, Sherry Yueh Hsia; Lin, Yu Min; Liao, Chao Sheng; Chang, Hung Chuen; Lin, Yueh Shih; Yen, Amy Ming Fang.

In: World Journal of Gastroenterology, Vol. 22, No. 12, 28.03.2016, p. 3460-3470.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kuo, Ming Jeng ; Chen, Hsiu Hsi ; Chen, Chi Ling ; Fann, Jean Ching Yuan ; Chen, Sam Li Sheng ; Chiu, Sherry Yueh Hsia ; Lin, Yu Min ; Liao, Chao Sheng ; Chang, Hung Chuen ; Lin, Yueh Shih ; Yen, Amy Ming Fang. / Cost-effectiveness analysis of population-based screening of hepatocellular carcinoma : Comparing ultrasonography with two-stage screening. In: World Journal of Gastroenterology. 2016 ; Vol. 22, No. 12. pp. 3460-3470.
@article{a11060ad07b74ba5856cc428491a815e,
title = "Cost-effectiveness analysis of population-based screening of hepatocellular carcinoma: Comparing ultrasonography with two-stage screening",
abstract = "Aim: To assess the cost-effectiveness of two populationbased hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) screening programs, two-stage biomarker-ultrasound method and mass screening using abdominal ultrasonography (AUS). Methods: In this study, we applied a Markov decision model with a societal perspective and a lifetime horizon for the general population-based cohorts in an area with high HCC incidence, such as Taiwan. The accuracy of biomarkers and ultrasonography was estimated from published meta-analyses. The costs of surveillance, diagnosis, and treatment were based on a combination of published literature, Medicare payments, and medical expenditure at the National Taiwan University Hospital. The main outcome measure was cost per lifeyear gained with a 3{\%} annual discount rate. Results: The results show that the mass screening using AUS was associated with an incremental costeffectiveness ratio of USD39825 per life-year gained, whereas two-stage screening was associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of USD49733 per life-year gained, as compared with no screening. Screening programs with an initial screening age of 50 years old and biennial screening interval were the most cost-effective. These findings were sensitive to the costs of screening tools and the specificity of biomarker screening. Conclusion: Mass screening using AUS is more cost effective than two-stage biomarker-ultrasound screening. The most optimal strategy is an initial screening age at 50 years old with a 2-year inter-screening interval.",
keywords = "Age, Cost-effectiveness, Markov model, One-stage abdominal ultrasonography screening, Sensitivity analysis, Two-stage biomarker-ultrasound screening",
author = "Kuo, {Ming Jeng} and Chen, {Hsiu Hsi} and Chen, {Chi Ling} and Fann, {Jean Ching Yuan} and Chen, {Sam Li Sheng} and Chiu, {Sherry Yueh Hsia} and Lin, {Yu Min} and Liao, {Chao Sheng} and Chang, {Hung Chuen} and Lin, {Yueh Shih} and Yen, {Amy Ming Fang}",
year = "2016",
month = "3",
day = "28",
doi = "10.3748/wjg.v22.i12.3460",
language = "English",
volume = "22",
pages = "3460--3470",
journal = "World Journal of Gastroenterology",
issn = "1007-9327",
publisher = "WJG Press",
number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost-effectiveness analysis of population-based screening of hepatocellular carcinoma

T2 - Comparing ultrasonography with two-stage screening

AU - Kuo, Ming Jeng

AU - Chen, Hsiu Hsi

AU - Chen, Chi Ling

AU - Fann, Jean Ching Yuan

AU - Chen, Sam Li Sheng

AU - Chiu, Sherry Yueh Hsia

AU - Lin, Yu Min

AU - Liao, Chao Sheng

AU - Chang, Hung Chuen

AU - Lin, Yueh Shih

AU - Yen, Amy Ming Fang

PY - 2016/3/28

Y1 - 2016/3/28

N2 - Aim: To assess the cost-effectiveness of two populationbased hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) screening programs, two-stage biomarker-ultrasound method and mass screening using abdominal ultrasonography (AUS). Methods: In this study, we applied a Markov decision model with a societal perspective and a lifetime horizon for the general population-based cohorts in an area with high HCC incidence, such as Taiwan. The accuracy of biomarkers and ultrasonography was estimated from published meta-analyses. The costs of surveillance, diagnosis, and treatment were based on a combination of published literature, Medicare payments, and medical expenditure at the National Taiwan University Hospital. The main outcome measure was cost per lifeyear gained with a 3% annual discount rate. Results: The results show that the mass screening using AUS was associated with an incremental costeffectiveness ratio of USD39825 per life-year gained, whereas two-stage screening was associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of USD49733 per life-year gained, as compared with no screening. Screening programs with an initial screening age of 50 years old and biennial screening interval were the most cost-effective. These findings were sensitive to the costs of screening tools and the specificity of biomarker screening. Conclusion: Mass screening using AUS is more cost effective than two-stage biomarker-ultrasound screening. The most optimal strategy is an initial screening age at 50 years old with a 2-year inter-screening interval.

AB - Aim: To assess the cost-effectiveness of two populationbased hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) screening programs, two-stage biomarker-ultrasound method and mass screening using abdominal ultrasonography (AUS). Methods: In this study, we applied a Markov decision model with a societal perspective and a lifetime horizon for the general population-based cohorts in an area with high HCC incidence, such as Taiwan. The accuracy of biomarkers and ultrasonography was estimated from published meta-analyses. The costs of surveillance, diagnosis, and treatment were based on a combination of published literature, Medicare payments, and medical expenditure at the National Taiwan University Hospital. The main outcome measure was cost per lifeyear gained with a 3% annual discount rate. Results: The results show that the mass screening using AUS was associated with an incremental costeffectiveness ratio of USD39825 per life-year gained, whereas two-stage screening was associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of USD49733 per life-year gained, as compared with no screening. Screening programs with an initial screening age of 50 years old and biennial screening interval were the most cost-effective. These findings were sensitive to the costs of screening tools and the specificity of biomarker screening. Conclusion: Mass screening using AUS is more cost effective than two-stage biomarker-ultrasound screening. The most optimal strategy is an initial screening age at 50 years old with a 2-year inter-screening interval.

KW - Age

KW - Cost-effectiveness

KW - Markov model

KW - One-stage abdominal ultrasonography screening

KW - Sensitivity analysis

KW - Two-stage biomarker-ultrasound screening

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84996520549&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84996520549&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3748/wjg.v22.i12.3460

DO - 10.3748/wjg.v22.i12.3460

M3 - Article

VL - 22

SP - 3460

EP - 3470

JO - World Journal of Gastroenterology

JF - World Journal of Gastroenterology

SN - 1007-9327

IS - 12

ER -