Table 2.
League table of incremental cost-effectiveness ratio by intervention, from a societal perspective and extrapolated likelihood of cost-effectiveness level for breast cancer (BC) for four studies included.
| References | Intervention type and comparator | 2018 US$/QALY | Likelihood cost-effectiveness level for BC |
|---|---|---|---|
| Frew et al. (39) | Base case analysis Be Active vs. no scheme, 5-years time horizon | 721 | Very high |
| Frew et al. (39) | Be active vs. no scheme, 2-years time horizon | 3,374 | Very high |
| Frew et al. (39) | Reduction physical activity over time Be Active vs. no scheme | 3,850 | Very high |
| Peels et al. (40) | Computer-tailored PA intervention: basic printed vs. usual care, lifetime horizon | 11,606 | Very high |
| Bós et al. (37) | Low-fat-diet-intervention women with high risk of breast cancer with fat intake ≥32% vs. usual diet, starting at age 50 years; lifetime horizon | 12,600 | Very high |
| Bós et al. (37) | Low-fat-dieta-intervention women with high fat intake at baseline >36.8% vs. usual diet, starting at age 50 years; lifetime horizon | 15,468 | High |
| Peels et al. (40) | Computer-tailored PA intervention: web-based basic vs. usual care, lifetime horizon | 15,629 | High |
| Roux et al. (41) | An 8-weeks community intervention for walking/NO; lifetime horizon | 19,475 | High |
| Bós et al. (37) | Low-fat-diet-intervention women with high risk of breast cancer with fat intake ≥32% vs. usual diet, starting at age 55 years; lifetime horizon | 17,752 | High |
| Bós et al. (37) | Low-fat-diet-intervention women with high fat intake at baseline >36.8% vs. usual diet, starting at age 55 years; lifetime horizon | 18,583 | High |
| Bós et al. (37) | Low-fat-diet-intervention women with high risk of breast cancer with fat intake ≥32% vs. usual diet, starting at age 60 years; lifetime horizon | 18,647 | High |
| Bós et al. (37) | Low-fat-diet-intervention women with high fat intake at baseline >36.8% vs. usual diet, starting at age 60 years; lifetime horizon | 23,911 | Medium high |
| Bós et al. (37) | Low-fat-diet-intervention women with high with high risk of breast cancer with fat intake ≥32% vs. usual diet, starting at age 65 years; lifetime horizon | 24,451 | Medium high |
| Roux et al. (41) | Exposure to an environment favoring a more active lifestyle/NO; lifetime horizon | 34,827 | Medium |
| Bós et al. (37) | Low-fat-diet-intervention women with high fat intake at baseline >36.8% vs. usual diet, starting at age 65 years; lifetime horizon | 31,443 | Medim low |
| Roux et al. (41) | Initial training session for walking program/NO; lifetime horizon | 37,315 | Medium low |
| Peels et al. (40) | Computer-tailored PA intervention: web-based environment vs. printed; 5-years time horizon | 31,723 | Medium low |
| Roux et al. (41) | Personal trainer intervention and financial incentives for PA/NO; lifetime horizon | 40,657 | Medium low |
| Bós et al. (37) | Low-fat-diet-intervention women with high risk of breast cancer with fat intake ≥32% vs. usual diet, starting at age 70 years; lifetime horizon | 41,168 | Low |
| Roux et al. (41) | Organized walking groups, social events for promoting PA/N; lifetime horizon | 54,105 | Very low |
| Peels et al. (40) | Computer-tailored PA intervention: printed environment vs. basic, 5-years time horizon | 45,959 | Very low |
| Bós et al. (37) | Low-fat-diet-intervention women with high fat intake at baseline >36.8% vs. usual diet, starting at age 70 years; lifetime horizon | 51,197 | Very low |
| Peels et al. (40) | Computer-tailored PA intervention: vs. basic web-based; 5-years time horizon | 49,967 | Very low |
| Roux et al. (41) | Intensive lifestyle modification program, for high risk diabetes 2 adults/NO; lifetime horizon | 63,953 | Very low |
| Roux et al. (41) | A 6-years community health education intervention (Stanford 5 City Project) vs. no intervention (/NO); lifetime horizon | 93,457 | Null |
ICER values or value ranges were ≤ 12,499 for very high likelihood, 12,500–17,499 for high, 17,500–22,499 for medium high, 22,500–27,499 for medium, 27,500–32,499 for medium low, 32,500–37,499 for low, 37,500–50,000 for very low and null for ICER > 50,000. The study of Annemans et al. (36) is not included since no price-year was available, and Foster et al. (38) was not included since ICER/DALY was estimated. In Bós et al. estimates are presented from intervention start; estimates from the start of randomization as well as ICERs for the payer perspective were available in the publication, but not presented here, for purpose of comparison with the other three studies (37). Source: league table adapted from Greenberg et al. and likelihood extrapolation made by co-authors of the review (34).