Table 3. Upper Limits of Incremental Cost-effectiveness Ratio for Each Screening Strategy in Univariate Sensitivity Analyses by Initial Screening Age^a.

Initial screening age and screening strategy	Utility scoresb		Compliance with screening		Discount rate		Prevalences of EC- and GC-related health statesb		Costs of screeningc		Annual transition probability from severe esophageal dysplasia or CIS to early EC
	Vs no screening	Vs the next most effective strategy	Vs no screening	Vs the next most effective strategy	Vs no screening	Vs the next most effective strategy	Vs no screening	Vs the next most effective strategy	Vs no screening	Vs the next most effective strategy	Vs no screening	Vs the next most effective strategy
40-44 y
Screening once per lifetime	11 778d	11 778d	4016	4016	6671	6671	4711	4711	4422	4422	4592	4592
Screening every 10 y	4498	2877	1883	1271	3440	2144	1737	1129	2272	1570	2186	1658
Screening every 5 y	5116	6395	1845	2277	3467	3513	1811	1927	2397	2603	2308	2513
Screening every 3 y	6202	11 273d	2085	5204	3871	5260	2082	3003	2758	4022	2609	3659
Screening every 2 y	7452	19 296d	2619	13 156d	4480	8663	2451	5127	3240	6747	2996	5740
45-49
Screening once per lifetime	6153	6153	2760	2760	4486	4486	3448	3448	3092	3092	2677	2677
Screening every 10 y	5236	4571	1912	1473	3248	2358	1934	1389	2304	1842	2259	1986
Screening every 5 y	5310	5455	1853	2155	3246	3241	1949	1979	2370	2502	2284	2333
Screening every 3 y	6217	10 190	2020	4874	3583	4782	2206	3090	2687	3830	2539	3455
Screening every 2 y	7678	22 118d	2552	10 504d	4128	7457	2605	5002	3163	6125	2936	5387
50-54 y
Screening once per lifetime	3976	3976	1674	1974	3216	3216	2609	2609	2296	2296	2134	2134
Screening every 10 y	4253	4844	1564	1409	2897	2367	2010	1479	2122	1876	2069	1972
Screening every 5 y	5210	7982	1850	2752	2998	3197	2091	2219	2292	2609	2238	2560
Screening every 3 y	5803	8366	2233	6715	3252	4255	2320	3550	2542	3197	2424	3161
Screening every 2 y	7025	17 484d	2821	12 807d	3695	6278	2710	4887	2956	5401	2768	4787
55-59 y
Screening once per lifetime	3271	3271	1394	1394	2601	2601	2127	2127	1882	1882	1920	1920
Screening every 10 y	4841	52 896e	1527	2043	2746	3194	2151	2191	2084	2608	2194	2954
Screening every 5 y	5026	5620	1680	2573	2777	2868	2186	2277	2155	2366	2210	2258
Screening every 3 y	6162	13 002d	2076	5658	3046	4045	2476	3421	2443	3496	2455	3346
Screening every 2 y	6920	12 320d	2523	13 669d	3357	5377	2814	5008	2745	4770	2694	4255
60-64 y
Screening once per lifetime	3635	3635	1360	1360	2476	2476	1995	1995	1794	1794	2054	2054
Screening every 5 y	5310	31 253e	1566	2611	2697	3324	2235	2736	2055	2741	2324	3033
Screening every 3 y	6082	11 374d	1805	4871	2847	3515	2448	3321	2228	3001	2459	3044
Screening every 2 y	6492	9464	2076	11 769d	3011	4159	2683	4334	2399	3621	2586	3459
65-69 y
Screening once per lifetime	8653	8653	1741	1741	3128	3128	2375	2375	2185	2185	3053	3053
Screening every 2 y	14 302d	25 436d	2019	4801	3372	4011	2747	3644	2456	3153	3313	3959

Abbreviations: CIS, carcinoma in situ; EC, esophageal cancer; GC, gastric cancer; ICER, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

^aOnly main sensitive parameters are shown; ICERs are expressed as the value in 2019.

^bAs a set of parameters, all the parameters changed simultaneously with a positive correlation in univariate sensitivity analyses.

^cIncluding screening mobilization and administration costs, endoscopic examination costs, and treatment costs for endoscopic complications. The 3 parameters changed simultaneously with a positive correlation in univariate sensitivity analyses.

^dThe upper limit of ICER was higher than the per capita GDP but lower than 3 times the per capita GDP.

^eThe upper limit of ICER was higher than 3 times the per capita GDP.