ArticleJAMA network open2025
Cost-Effectiveness of Breast Cancer Screening Using Digital Mammography in Canada.
Article in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Health Economic Evaluations of Breast Cancer Screening Strategies: A Systematic Review Focusing on Methodology and Quality Assessment.Applied health economics and health policy · 2026Pooled it
- Breast cancer screening in Europe and the role of general practitioners: A 32-country comparative survey.The European journal of general practice · 2026Article
- Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of a bone metastasis cancer board for skeletal-related events of breast cancer.Japanese journal of clinical oncology · 2026Article
- Earlier screening, better outcomes? Revisiting breast cancer screening guidelines for women in their 40s.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness of AI-enhanced breast cancer screening in Iran: a microsimulation study.Health economics review · 2026Article
- Potential Economic Value of Multi-cancer Early Detection Testing Under Differential Cost Trends for Cancer Screening and Management.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2026Article
- Whole-mount histopathology as spatial ground truth for artificial intelligence in prostate cancer: a structured narrative review of techniques, models, and translational gaps.American journal of clinical and experimental urology · 2026Review
- Extension of the mammographic screening programme in Italy: cost-benefit analysis of early diagnosis in the 45-49 and 70-74 age groups.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- LENS: A mammography-specific hybrid CNN-Transformer with lesion-aware evidence modeling.PloS one · 2026Article
- Costs of breast cancer care by stage and HER-2 Status: a population-based study.Frontiers in health services · 2026Article
- The Canadian Breast Cancer Symposium 2025: Meeting Report.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- Explainable Deep Learning for Breast Lesion Classification in Digital and Contrast-Enhanced Mammography.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Survival Benefits and Less Intensive Treatment for Women with Early-Stage Breast Cancer Diagnosed While Participating in Population-Based Screening.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Stratifying Breast Lesion Risk Using BI-RADS: A Correlative Study of Imaging and Histopathology.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Do women with a history of breast cancer recommend risk-based breast cancer screening? An in-depth interview study.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Breast Cancer Screening among Young Women in Tanzania: Findings from the 2022 Demographic and Health Survey.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Evolving breast cancer treatments have led to improved outcomes but carry a substantial financial burden. The association of treatment costs with the cost-effectiveness of screening mammography is unknown. Objective: To determine the cost-effectiveness of population-based breast cancer screening in the context of current treatment standards. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this economic evaluation, the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer/Statistics Canada OncoSim-Breast microsimulation model was used to estimate the impact of various screening schedules in terms of clinical outcomes and treatment costs. Breast cancer treatment costs were derived from activity-based costing published in 2023 specific to a publicly funded health system in Ontario, Canada. A single birth cohort of individuals assigned female at birth in 1975 was modeled until death or age 99 years (whichever came first). Exposures: Five screening scenarios were modeled: no screening, biennial (ages 50-74 years and 40-74 years), hybrid (biennial ages 40-49 years and annual ages 50-74 years), and annual screening (ages 40-74 years). Main Outcomes and Measures: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for deaths averted, life-years (LYs) gained, and incremental cost-utility ratios for quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained were determined for screening scenarios. Sensitivity analyses were conducted by varying screening participation rates and reducing recall rates to 5% and the estimated mortality benefits of screening. Results: Earlier initiation of breast cancer screening at age 40 years (vs age 50 years) was associated with improved clinical outcomes (deaths averted, LYs saved, and QALYs gained) and reduced health care spending on breast cancer treatment. From a health system perspective, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for biennial screening at ages 40 to 74 years compared with biennial screening at ages 50 to 74 years were cost saving, with CAD$49 759 saved per death averted, $1558 per LY saved, and $2007 saved per QALY gained. Annual screening at ages 40 to 74 years was cost-effective while achieving the best breast cancer outcomes, with costs of $25 501 per death averted, $1100 per LY saved, and $1447 per QALY gained compared with the current Canadian standard of biennial screening at ages 50 to 74 years. Conclusions and Relevance: In this economic analysis, although screening costs increased according to the number of lifetime screens, they were completely or largely offset by reduced breast cancer therapy costs. Digital mammography was a highly cost-effective tool to reduce breast cancer mortality. These results have important policy implications for all single-payer health systems and call for greater investment in screening programs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.