Benefits and costs of interventions to improve breast cancer outcomes in African American women
- PMID: 15173213
- DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2004.05.009
Benefits and costs of interventions to improve breast cancer outcomes in African American women
Abstract
Purpose: Historically, African American women have experienced higher breast cancer mortality than white women, despite lower incidence. Our objective was to evaluate whether costs of increasing rates of screening or application of intensive treatment will be off-set by survival benefits for African American women.
Methods: We use a stochastic simulation model of the natural history of breast cancer to evaluate the incremental societal costs and benefits of status quo versus targeted biennial screening or treatment improvements among African Americans 40 years of age and older. Main outcome measures were number of mammograms, stage, all-cause mortality, and discounted costs per life year saved (LYS).
Results: At the current screening rate of 76%, there is little incremental benefit associated with further increasing screening, and the costs are high: 124,053 US dollars and 124,217 US dollars per LYS for lay health worker and patient reminder interventions, respectively, compared with the status quo. Using reminders would cost 51,537 US dollars per LYS if targeted to virtually unscreened women or 78,130 US dollars per LYS if targeted to women with a two-fold increase in baseline risk. If all patients received the most intensive treatment recommended, costs increase but deaths decrease, for a cost of 52,678 US dollars per LYS. Investments of up to 6,000 US dollars per breast cancer patient could be used to enhance treatment and still yield cost-effectiveness ratios of less than 75,000 US dollars per LYS.
Conclusion: Except in pockets of unscreened or high-risk women, further investments in interventions to increase screening are unlikely to be an efficient use of resources. Ensuring that African American women receive intensive treatment seems to be the most cost-effective approach to decreasing the disproportionate mortality experienced by this population.
Comment in
-
An ounce of prevention or a pound of cure? Investing to improve breast cancer outcomes for African American women.J Clin Oncol. 2004 Jul 1;22(13):2517-8. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2004.04.902. Epub 2004 Jun 1. J Clin Oncol. 2004. PMID: 15173212 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Toward optimal screening strategies for older women. Costs, benefits, and harms of breast cancer screening by age, biology, and health status.J Gen Intern Med. 2005 Jun;20(6):487-96. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.0116.x. J Gen Intern Med. 2005. PMID: 15987322 Free PMC article.
-
Costs and benefits of different strategies to screen for cervical cancer in less-developed countries.J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002 Oct 2;94(19):1469-83. doi: 10.1093/jnci/94.19.1469. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002. PMID: 12359856
-
Cost-effectiveness of breast cancer screening in women on dialysis.Am J Kidney Dis. 2008 Nov;52(5):916-29. doi: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2008.06.015. Epub 2008 Sep 11. Am J Kidney Dis. 2008. PMID: 18789566
-
Costs of breast cancer and the cost-effectiveness of breast cancer screening.Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1991;7(4):604-15. doi: 10.1017/s0266462300007169. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1991. PMID: 1778705 Review.
-
Cost-effectiveness analysis of interventions to enhance mammography compliance using computer modeling (CAN*TROL).Value Health. 2004 Mar-Apr;7(2):175-85. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2004.72326.x. Value Health. 2004. PMID: 15164807 Review.
Cited by
-
Do recently diagnosed black breast cancer patients find questions about cancer fatalism acceptable? A preliminary report.J Cancer Educ. 2011 Mar;26(1):5-10. doi: 10.1007/s13187-010-0134-6. J Cancer Educ. 2011. PMID: 20602185
-
Benefits and harms of mammography screening after age 74 years: model estimates of overdiagnosis.J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015 May 6;107(7):djv103. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djv103. Print 2015 Jul. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015. PMID: 25948872 Free PMC article.
-
The Italian health surveillance (SiVeAS) prioritization approach to reduce chronic disease risk factors.Int J Public Health. 2012 Aug;57(4):719-33. doi: 10.1007/s00038-012-0341-5. Epub 2012 Feb 14. Int J Public Health. 2012. PMID: 22331313
-
Evaluating a tailored intervention to increase screening mammography in an urban area.J Natl Med Assoc. 2005 Oct;97(10):1350-60. J Natl Med Assoc. 2005. PMID: 16353657 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Structure, Function, and Applications of the Georgetown-Einstein (GE) Breast Cancer Simulation Model.Med Decis Making. 2018 Apr;38(1_suppl):66S-77S. doi: 10.1177/0272989X17698685. Med Decis Making. 2018. PMID: 29554462 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical