Lower recurrence risk through mammographic screening reduces breast cancer treatment costs.

Health Office, City of Turku, POB 1, 20701 Turku, Finland.
Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) (Impact Factor: 2.09). 11/2008; 17(6):550-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2008.08.008
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Mammographic screening is associated with a reduced risk of breast cancer recurrence. The objective of the study was to evaluate treatment costs due to breast cancer recurrence in relation to patients' use of mammographic screening, consecutively collected in a defined population. The study included 418 women exposed to screening and 109 women unexposed to screening diagnosed with stage I-III breast cancer. During the first eight years after primary diagnosis, 19% (N=80) of the exposed women and 33% (N=36) of the unexposed women developed recurrent disease, P=0.002. In the exposed group, 41% of the 8-year treatment costs were for the treatment of patients who developed recurrent disease, compared with 52% in the unexposed group, P=0.039. Among the relapsed patients, the mean post-recurrence costs were EUR14,950, accounting for 65% of their total 8-year costs. The mean post-recurrence costs were comparable for both exposure groups irrespective of the detection method.

  • Source
    Survey of Anesthesiology 11/1997; 41(6):331-332.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Cost pressures and the need to demonstrate cost-effectiveness of new interventions require consideration of the costs of treating disease. This study presents analyses of resource use data covering 199 postmenopausal women who experienced a breast cancer recurrent event between 1991 and 2004 and were treated at the Western General Hospital, Edinburgh. Aggregate (5-year) treatment costs for alternative recurrent events were estimated, as well as the annual costs incurred by patients experiencing contralateral, locoregional, or distant recurrence, who remained alive without further recurrence for a year. The 95% confidence intervals for the 5-year costs of recurrence ranged from pounds 10,000 to pounds 37,000 for locoregional recurrence, and pounds 14,500- pounds 20,000 for distant recurrence. No evidence of significant variations in these costs across time periods between 1991 and 2004 was identified. Annual costs for patients remaining in the same health state showed high initial costs for contralateral and locoregional recurrence, with low costs in subsequent years, while costs associated with distant recurrence declined at a slower rate and plateaued at 4-5 years post-diagnosis. The cost estimates presented in this paper not only inform the magnitude of the resource consequences of breast cancer recurrences, but they are also better suited to informing cost-effectiveness analyses, which have a far greater role in allocating health-care resources.
    British Journal of Cancer 09/2007; 97(4):479-85. · 4.82 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The objective of this study was to evaluate the hospital treatment costs of invasive breast cancer in relation to the mode of detection, i.e. by mammography screening, between screenings or without screening during a population-based mammography screening programme, which started in 1987 among 36,000 women aged 40 to 74 years in the city of Turku, Southwest Finland. The treatment costs and survival days of 556 women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer at the age of 40 to 74 years in 1987 to 1993 were followed up for five years from diagnosis or until death, whichever occurred first. Screen-detected cancers had the lowest average costs. The mean treatment costs per patient were 1.4-fold for clinical cancers and 1.3-fold for interval cancers compared to screen-detected cancers (p<0.001). The corresponding ratios in the mean treatment costs per survival day were 3.5 for clinical cancers and 1.9 for interval cancers (p<0.001). The mean treatment costs per patient were 1.3-fold for the non-screened group (clinical cancers) compared to the screened group (screen-detected and interval cancers) (p<0.001). The corresponding ratio was 3, when the mean treatment costs per survival day were compared (p<0.001). The estimated savings resulting from early treatment were 26-30% measured as a proportion of the screening costs for 1987 to 1993. The treatment costs of screen-detected cancers are lower than those of cancers detected by other methods. The study shows the potential for reducing treatment costs through early detection of breast cancer by mammography screening.
    The European Journal of Public Health 06/2004; 14(2):128-33. · 2.46 Impact Factor