Table 3.
Strategy | Change in 5-year lung cancer survival | Costs | QALYs | ICER (versus current/no screening) | ICER (versus previous) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
No screening | £1103 | 8.50215 | |||
S-60-75-3%a | + 16.1% | £1126 | 8.50297 | £28,169 | £28,169 |
S-55-75-3% | + 16.4% | £1129 | 8.50306 | £28,784 | £35,453 |
S-55-80-3% | + 16.1% | £1135 | 8.50319 | £30,821 | £44,087 |
T-55-80-3% | + 21.0% | £1151 | 8.50337 | £40,034 | £95,292 |
aIn a fully incremental analysis, only S-60-75-3% would be cost-effective at a threshold of £30,000 per QALY gained. ICER incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, QALY quality-adjusted life year, S single one-off screen design, T triple-screen design. Strategy nomenclature: X-XX-XX-X% = screening programme design type-minimum entry age-maximum entry age-minimum lung cancer risk threshold