title: Cost-effectiveness of digital mammography screening before the age of 50 in The Netherlands.
abstract: In the Netherlands, routine mammography screening starts at age 50. This starting age may have to be reconsidered because of the increasing breast cancer incidence among women aged 40 to 49 and the recent implementation of digital mammography. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of digital mammography screening that starts between age 40 and 49, using a microsimulation model. Women were screened before age 50, in addition to the current programme (biennial 50-74). Screening strategies varied in starting age (between 40 and 50) and frequency (annual or biennial). The numbers of breast cancers diagnosed, life-years gained (LYG) and breast cancer deaths averted were predicted and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated to compare screening scenarios. Biennial screening from age 50 to 74 (current strategy) was estimated to gain 157 life years per 1,000 women with lifelong follow-up, compared to a situation without screening, and cost €3,376/LYG (3.5% discounted). Additional screening increased the number of LYG, compared to no screening, ranging from 168 to 242. The costs to generate one additional LYG (i.e., ICER), comparing a screening strategy to the less intensive alternative, were estimated at €5,329 (biennial 48-74 vs. current strategy), €7,628 (biennial 45-74 vs. biennial 48-74), €10,826 (biennial 40-74 vs. biennial 45-74) and €18,759 (annual 40-49 + biennial 50-74 vs. biennial 40-74). Other strategies (49 + biennial 50-74 and annual 45-49 + biennial 50-74) resulted in less favourable ICERs. These findings show that extending the Dutch screening programme by screening between age 40 and 49 is cost-effective, particularly for biennial strategies.
authors.affiliation: Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
authors.forename: Valérie D V
authors.initials: VD
authors.lastname: Sankatsing
authors.affiliation: Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
authors.forename: Eveline A M
authors.initials: EA
authors.lastname: Heijnsdijk
authors.affiliation: Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
authors.forename: Paula A
authors.initials: PA
authors.lastname: van Luijt
authors.affiliation: Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
authors.forename: Nicolien T
authors.initials: NT
authors.lastname: van Ravesteyn
authors.affiliation: Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
authors.forename: Jacques
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Fracheboud
authors.affiliation: Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
authors.forename: Harry J
authors.initials: HJ
authors.lastname: de Koning
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D001943:Breast Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000453:epidemiology*; D003198:Computer Simulation; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D055088:Early Detection of Cancer / Q000191:economics / Q000379:methods*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008327:Mammography / Q000191:economics* / Q000379:methods; D008403:Mass Screening; D008875:Middle Aged; D009426:Netherlands
keywords: age; breast cancer; computer simulation; cost-effectiveness; mammography screening