Assessing Lung Cancer Screening Programs under Uncertainty in a Heterogeneous Population |
| |
Authors: | Henk Broekhuizen Catharina G.M. Groothuis-Oudshoorn Rozemarijn Vliegenthart Harry J.M. Groen Maarten J. IJzerman |
| |
Affiliation: | 1. Radboud University Medical Center, Department of Health Evidence, Nijmegen, The Netherlands;2. University of Twente, Faculty of Behavioural Management and Social Sciences, Technical Medical Centre, Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Enschede, The Netherlands;3. University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Radiology, Groningen, The Netherlands;4. University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Pulmonary Diseases, Groningen, The Netherlands;5. University of Melbourne, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences and Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia |
| |
Abstract: |
BackgroundLung cancer screening can reduce cancer mortality. Most implementation studies focus only on low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) and clinical attributes of screening and do not include preferences of potential participants. In this study we evaluated the perceived value of screening programs based on LDCT, breath analysis (BA), or blood biomarkers (BB) according to the perspective of the target population.MethodsA multi-criteria decision analysis framework was adopted. The weights of seven attributes of screening (sensitivity, specificity, radiation burden, duration of screening process, waiting time until results are communicated, location of screening, and mode of screening) were obtained from an earlier study that included a broad sample from the Netherlands. Performance data for the screening modalities was obtained from clinical trials and expert opinion. Parameter uncertainty about clinical performances was incorporated probabilistically, while heterogeneity in preferences was analyzed through subgroup analyses.ResultsThe mean overall values were 0.58 (CI: 0.57 to 0.59), 0.57 (CI: 0.56 to 0.59), and 0.44 (CI: 0.43 to 0.45) for BB, BA, and LDCT, respectively. Seventy-seven per cent of respondents preferred BB or BA. For most subgroups, the overall values were similar to those of the entire sample. BA had the highest value for respondents who would have been eligible for earlier screening trials.DiscussionBB and BA seem valuable to participants because they can be applied in a primary care setting. Although LDCT still seems preferable given its strong and positive evidence base, it is important to take non-clinical attributes into account to maximize attendance. |
| |
Keywords: | lung cancer screening multicriteria decision analysis public preferences subgroup analysis uncertainty |
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录! |
|