Search

Objectives: To evaluate at which sensitivity digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) would become cost-effective compared to digital mammography (DM) in a population breast cancer screening program, given a constant estimate of specificity., Methods: In a microsimulation model, the cost-effectiveness of biennial screening for women aged 50-75 was simulated for three scenarios: DBT for women with dense breasts and DM for women with fatty breasts (scenario 1), DBT for the whole population (scenario 2) or maintaining DM screening (reference). For DM, sensitivity was varied depending on breast density from 65 to 87%, and for DBT from 65 to 100%. The specificity was set at 96.5% for both DM and DBT. Direct medical costs were considered, including screening, biopsy and treatment costs. Scenarios were considered to be cost-effective if the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was below €20,000 per life year gain (LYG)., Results: For both scenarios, the ICER was more favourable at increasing DBT sensitivity. Compared with DM screening, 0.8-10.2% more LYGs were found when DBT sensitivity was at least 75% for scenario 1, and 4.7-18.7% when DBT sensitivity was at least 80% for scenario 2. At €96 per DBT, scenario 1 was cost-effective at a DBT sensitivity of at least 90%, and at least 95% for scenario 2. At €80 per DBT, these values decreased to 80% and 90%, respectively., Conclusion: DBT is more likely to be a cost-effective alternative to mammography in women with dense breasts. Whether DBT could be cost-effective in a general population highly depends on DBT costs., Key Points: • DBT could be a cost-effective screening modality for women with dense breasts when its sensitivity is at least 90% at a maximum cost per screen of €96. • DBT has the potential to be cost-effective for screening all women when sensitivity is at least 90% at a maximum cost per screen of €80. • Whether DBT could be used as an alternative to mammography for screening all women is highly dependent on the cost of DBT per screen.

Aim: The Chinese Stroke Screening and Prevention Project (CSSPP) considers patients with 3 or more risk factors to be at high risk of stroke, and does not quantitatively assess the risk for stroke. However, to detect high-risk groups more efficiently, a health risk appraisal (HRA) model should be used to assess individual risk of stroke., Methods: The odds ratios for the 8 risk factors for stroke were pooled and the data were used to develop an HRA model to predict individuals' risks of developing stroke in the next 5 years. The Chinese screening project and HRA screening strategies were then compared., Results: We assessed 4196 Chinese individuals who received checkups in 2015. The average 5-year risk of stroke was 5.81‰, with men being at higher risk of stroke than women over that period. The average 5-year risk of stroke also increased with the number of risk factors. 932 individuals (22.2%) were identified as being at high risk of stroke according to CSSPP, whereas 318 individuals with fewer than 3 risk factors were considered being at low risk despite having a 5-year risk of stroke greater than 4.0% by our assessment. Notably, among patients with hypertension and diabetes who were classified as being at low risk of stroke by the CSSPP, the HRA recognized 15.9% and 14.3% as being at high risk of stroke, respectively., Conclusion: All 8 major risk factors affect stroke risk differently, and the efficiency of clustering these risk factors might be improved by considering the relative risk of each factor with an HRA model., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Rapid HIV voluntary counselling and testing (RVCT) is an alternative method of standard HIV voluntary counselling and testing (SVCT). Less is known about whether RVCT improves the receipt rate of HIV test results among clients who seek HIV counselling and testing. We aimed to evaluate effectiveness of RVCT on result receipt rate. We conducted a comprehensive search of databases containing Medline, EBSCO, Web of science, and Cochrane library to identify studies published up to August 2012. Reviewers extracted information independently. Risk of bias was evaluated with Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing study quality. Five randomised controlled trials were included and analysed for the result receipt rate using a random-effects model. The pooled receipt rate of HIV test results in the RVCT was significantly higher than in the SVCT (RR = 1.74, 95% CI = 1.47-2.07). Our results suggest RVCT as a favourable method to increase the receipt of HIV test results. Only two included studies assessed the modification of risk behaviour after HIV-CT in a different manner; also, the sample size was small in the current meta-analysis. In future research, it is necessary to confirm the effect of RVCT on disinhibition of post-test risk behaviour., (© The Author(s) 2014 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav.)

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has shown the potential to improve the screening effectiveness among women with dense breasts. The introduction of fast abbreviated protocols (AP) makes MRI more feasible to be used in a general population. We aimed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of AP-MRI in women with dense breasts (heterogeneously/extremely dense) in a population-based screening program. A previously validated model (SiMRiSc) was applied, with parameters updated for women with dense breasts. Breast density was assumed to decrease with increased age. The base scenarios included six biennial AP-MRI strategies, with biennial mammography from age 50–74 as reference. Fourteen alternative scenarios were performed by varying screening interval (triennial and quadrennial) and by applying a combined strategy of mammography and AP-MRI. A 3% discount rate for both costs and life years gained (LYG) was applied. Model robustness was evaluated using univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. The six biennial AP-MRI strategies ranged from 132 to 562 LYG per 10,000 women, where more frequent application of AP-MRI was related to higher LYG. The optimal strategy was biennial AP-MRI screening from age 50–65 for only women with extremely dense breasts, producing an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of € 18,201/LYG. At a threshold of € 20,000/LYG, the probability that the optimal strategy was cost-effective was 79%. Population-based biennial breast cancer screening with AP-MRI from age 50–65 for women with extremely dense breasts might be a cost-effective alternative to mammography, but is not an option for women with heterogeneously dense breasts. • AP-MRI can be cost-effective for screening women with extremely dense breast. • The more frequent the use of AP-MRI, the more life years will be gained. • Biennial AP-MRI for women with extremely dense breast up to age 65 is optimal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Instead of a single value for mammographic sensitivity, a sensitivity function based on tumor size more realistically reflects mammography's detection capability. Because previous models may have overestimated size-specific sensitivity, we aimed to provide a novel approach to improve sensitivity estimation as a function of tumor size. Using aggregated data on interval and screen-detected cancers, observed tumor sizes were back-calculated to the time of screening using an exponential tumor growth model and a follow-up time of 4 years. From the observed number of detected cancers and an estimation of the number of false-negative cancers, a model for the sensitivity as a function of tumor size was determined. A univariate sensitivity analysis was conducted by varying follow-up time and tumor volume doubling time (TVDT). A systematic review was conducted for external validation of the sensitivity model. Aggregated data of 22,915 screen-detected and 10,670 interval breast cancers from the Dutch screening program were used. The model showed that sensitivity increased from 0 to 85% for tumor sizes from 2 to 20 mm. When TVDT was set at the upper and lower limits of the confidence interval, sensitivity for a 20-mm tumor was 74% and 93%, respectively. The estimated sensitivity gave comparable estimates to those from two of three studies identified by our systematic review. Derived from aggregated breast screening outcomes data, our model's estimation of sensitivity as a function of tumor size may provide a better representation of data observed in screening programs than other models. • Mammographic sensitivity is a key indicator of screening effectiveness. • Previous model using logistic function might overestimate size-specific sensitivity. • Our model showed that sensitivity increased from 0 to 85% for tumor sizes from 2 to 20 mm. • Our model may provide a better representation of data observed in screening programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Asian countries, ultrasound has been proposed as a possible alternative for mammography in breast cancer screening because of its superiority in dense breasts, accessibility and low costs. This research aimed to meta-analyze the evidence for the diagnostic performance of ultrasound compared to mammography for breast cancer screening in Asian women. PubMed, Web of Science, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched for studies that concurrently compared mammography and ultrasound in 2000–2019. Data extraction and risk of bias were performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA) statement. The primary outcome was the sensitivity and specificity. Bivariate random models were used to generate pooled estimates of diagnostic parameters and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). In total, 4424 studies were identified of which six studies met the inclusion criteria with a sample size of 124,425 women. The pooled mean prevalence of the included studies was 3.7‰ (range: 1.2–5.7‰). The pooled sensitivity of mammography was significantly higher than that of ultrasound (0.81 [95% CI 0.71–0.88] versus 0.65 [95% CI 0.58–0.72], p = 0.03), but no significant differences were found in specificity (0.98 [95% CI: 0.94–1.00] versus 0.99 [95% CI: 0.97–1.00], p = 0.65). In conclusion, based on the currently available data on sensitivity alone, there is no indication that ultrasound can replace mammography in breast cancer screening in Asian women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]