Skip to main content
Log in

Incremental cost‐effectiveness of double‐reading mammograms

  • Published:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background. Double reading is a widely used criterion standard in breast cancer screening despite a lack of evidence of the cost‐effectiveness of the second reading. This study evaluates the incremental cost‐effectiveness of such a strategy.

Design. Cost‐effectiveness analysis: Nationwide population‐based semi‐annual screening program for women aged 50–59 in Finland. Participation rate was 91%. All mammograms (95,423) performed during 1990–1995 in three screening centers of the Finnish Cancer Society were read by two radiologists with gradings recorded. The effectiveness of the double reading was the difference in cancers detected in the double compared to that of the single reading. Incremental costs of the double reading for the health care and non‐health care and the time costs were estimated. The main outcome measure was the incremental cost per additional cancer found as a result of the double‐reading strategy.

Results. The total number of cancers detected with the double and single reading were 290 and 261, respectively. A significantly higher ratio of carcinoma in situ was the causative pathology in cancers detected only by the second reader. The cost per cancer detected with a single reading was US$ 18,340. The incremental cost of any additional cancer found was US$ 25,523, that is, a 39% higher cost per additional cancer found by double reading.

Conclusions. The additional cost per cancer detected by double reading is not drastically higher than with single reading. However, the additional cost per life year saved may be much higher.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Brown J, Bryan S, Warren R: Mammography screening: An incremental cost effectiveness analysis of double versus single reading of mammograms. BMJ 312(7034): 809–812, 1996

    Google Scholar 

  2. Parvinen I, Kauhava L, Helenius H, Immonen-Räihä P, Räsänen O: The hospital care and screening costs of mamma ca in Helsinki, Tampere and Turku 1981–1990 (in Finnish): Suomen Lääkärilehti 16: 1804–1811, 1996

    Google Scholar 

  3. Holli K, Hakama M, Hakala T: Use of hospital services by breast cancer patients by stage of the disease: Implications on the costs of cancer control. Breast Cancer Res Treat 37: 237–241, 1996

    Google Scholar 

  4. Anderson E, Muir B, Walsh J, Kirkpatrick A: The efficacy of double reading mammograms in breast screening. Clin Radiol 49(4): 248–51, 1994

    Google Scholar 

  5. Wright C, Mueller C: Screening mammography and public health policy: The need for perspective. Lancet 346: 29–32, 1995

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ernster V, Barclay J, Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Henderson C: Incidence of and treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. JAMA 275: 913–918, 1996

    Google Scholar 

  7. Brown M, Fintor L: Cost-effectiveness of breast cancer screening: Preliminary results of a systematic review of the literature. Breast Cancer Res Treat 25(2): 113–118, 1993

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Leivo, T., Salminen, T., Sintonen, H. et al. Incremental cost‐effectiveness of double‐reading mammograms. Breast Cancer Res Treat 54, 261–267 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006136107092

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006136107092

Navigation