Lung cancer screening by low-dose computed tomography: a cost-effectiveness analysis of alternative programmes in the UK using a newly developed natural history-based economic model

Table 3 Base case results of screening strategies forming the cost-effectiveness frontier (per person)

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

ISSN: 2397-7523