Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Sep 1;6(9):1381-1389.
doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.2922.

Cost-effectiveness of Breast Cancer Screening With Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Women at Familial Risk

Affiliations

Cost-effectiveness of Breast Cancer Screening With Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Women at Familial Risk

H Amarens Geuzinge et al. JAMA Oncol. .

Abstract

Importance: For women with a 20% or more familial risk of breast cancer without a known BRCA1/2 (BRCA1, OMIM 113705; and BRCA2, OMIM 114480) or TP53 (OMIM 151623) variant, screening guidelines vary substantially, and cost-effectiveness analyses are scarce.

Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) screening strategies for women with a 20% or more familial risk for breast cancer without a known BRCA1/2 or TP53 variant.

Design, setting, and participants: In this economic evaluation, conducted from February 1, 2019, to May 25, 2020, microsimulation modeling was used to estimate costs and effectiveness on a lifetime horizon from age 25 years until death of MRI screening among a cohort of 10 million Dutch women with a 20% or more familial risk for breast cancer without a known BRCA1/2 or TP53 variant. A Dutch screening setting was modeled. Most data were obtained from the randomized Familial MRI Screening (FaMRIsc) trial, which included Dutch women aged 30 to 55 years. A health care payer perspective was applied.

Interventions: Several screening protocols with varying ages and intervals including those of the randomized FaMRIsc trial, consisting of the mammography (Mx) protocol (annual mammography and clinical breast examination) and the MRI protocol (annual MRI and clinical breast examination plus biennial mammography).

Main outcomes and measures: Costs, life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated and discounted by 3%. A threshold of €22 000 (US $24 795.87) per QALY was applied.

Results: This economic evaluation modeling study estimated that, on a lifetime horizon per 1000 women with the Mx protocol of the FaMRIsc trial, 346 breast cancers would be detected, and 49 women were estimated to die from breast cancer, resulting in 22 885 QALYs and total costs of €7 084 767 (US $7 985 134.61). The MRI protocol resulted in 79 additional QALYs and additional €2 657 266 (US $2 994 964.65). Magnetic resonance imaging performed only every 18 months between the ages of 35 and 60 years followed by the national screening program was considered optimal, with an ICER of €21 380 (US $24 097.08) compared with the previous nondominated strategy in the ranking, when applying the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence threshold. Annual screening alternating MRI and mammography between the ages of 35 and 60 years, followed by the national screening program, gave similar outcomes. Higher thresholds would favor annual MRI screening. The ICER was most sensitive to the unit cost of MRI and the utility value for ductal carcinoma in situ and localized breast cancer.

Conclusions and relevance: This study suggests that MRI screening every 18 months between the ages of 35 and 60 years for women with a family history of breast cancer is cost-effective within the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence threshold for all densities. Higher thresholds would favor annual MRI screening. These outcomes support a change of current screening guidelines for this specific risk group and support MRI screening.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Mann reported receiving grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from Siemens Healthineers; grants and personal fees from Bayer Healthcare; grants from Medtronic, Screenpoint Medical, and BD; and personal fees from Transonic Imaging outside the submitted work. Dr de Koning reported receiving grants from ZonMw during the conduct of the study; personal fees outside the submitted work; and grants on breast cancer control from Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu, Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modelling Network of the National Institutes of Health, and the European Union. No other disclosures were reported.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. Efficiency Frontier of Screening Strategies
Number indicates interval, and ranges represent women’s ages reported in years; all results are discounted by 3%. CBE indicates clinical breast examination; FaMRIsc, Familial MRI Screening Study; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; Mx, mammography; and QALY, quality-adjusted life-year. Additional costs €1 = $1.13 on July 1, 2020.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.. Tornado Diagram of the 1-Way Sensitivity Analyses
All results are discounted by 3%. DCIS indicates ductal carcinoma in situ; ICER, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; Mx, mammography; and QALY, quality-adjusted life-year.

Comment in

References

    1. Claus EB, Risch NJ, Thompson WD. Age at onset as an indicator of familial risk of breast cancer. Am J Epidemiol. 1990;131(6):961-972. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a115616 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hartmann LC, Lindor NM. The role of risk-reducing surgery in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(5):454-468. doi:10.1056/NEJMra1503523 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Saadatmand S, Bretveld R, Siesling S, Tilanus-Linthorst MMA. Influence of tumour stage at breast cancer detection on survival in modern times: population based study in 173,797 patients. BMJ. 2015;351:h4901. doi:10.1136/bmj.h4901 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W, et al. ; American Cancer Society Breast Cancer Advisory Group . American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J Clin. 2007;57(2):75-89. doi:10.3322/canjclin.57.2.75 - DOI - PubMed
    1. oncoline Richtlijn mammacarcinoom (breast cancer national guideline). Accessed January 15, 2019.https://www.oncoline.nl/borstkanker.