Clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of integrating smoking cessation into lung cancer screening: a microsimulation model

CMAJ Open. 2020 Sep 22;8(3):E585-E592. doi: 10.9778/cmajo.20190134. Print 2020 Jul-Sep.

Abstract

Background: Low-dose computed tomography (CT) screening can reduce lung cancer mortality in people at high risk; adding a smoking cessation intervention to screening could further improve screening program outcomes. This study aimed to assess the impact of adding a smoking cessation intervention to lung cancer screening on clinical outcomes, costs and cost-effectiveness.

Methods: Using the OncoSim-Lung mathematical microsimulation model, we compared the projected lifetime impact of a smoking cessation intervention (nicotine replacement therapy, varenicline and 12 wk of counselling) in the context of annual low-dose CT screening for lung cancer in people at high risk to lung cancer screening without a cessation intervention in Canada. The simulated population consisted of Canadians born in 1940-1974; lung cancer screening was offered to eligible people in 2020. In the base-case scenario, we assumed that the intervention would be offered to smokers up to 10 times; each intervention would achieve a 2.5% permanent quit rate. Sensitivity analyses varied key model inputs. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios with a lifetime horizon from the health system's perspective, discounted at 1.5% per year. Costs are in 2019 Canadian dollars.

Results: Offering a smoking cessation intervention in the context of lung cancer screening could lead to an additional 13% of smokers quitting smoking. It could potentially prevent 12 more lung cancers and save 200 more life-years for every 1000 smokers screened, at a cost of $22 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The results were most sensitive to quit rate. The intervention would cost over $50 000 per QALY gained with a permanent quit rate of less than 1.25% per attempt.

Interpretation: Adding a smoking cessation intervention to lung cancer screening is likely cost-effective. To optimize the benefits of lung cancer screening, health care providers should encourage participants who still smoke to quit smoking.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Aged
  • Canada / epidemiology
  • Cohort Studies
  • Cost-Benefit Analysis / methods*
  • Counseling
  • Early Detection of Cancer / economics
  • Early Detection of Cancer / methods
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Lung Neoplasms / diagnostic imaging*
  • Lung Neoplasms / epidemiology
  • Male
  • Mass Screening / economics*
  • Mass Screening / methods*
  • Middle Aged
  • Models, Theoretical
  • Quality-Adjusted Life Years
  • Smoking / drug therapy
  • Smoking / epidemiology
  • Smoking Cessation / economics*
  • Smoking Cessation Agents / therapeutic use
  • Tobacco Use Cessation Devices
  • Tomography, X-Ray Computed / methods
  • Varenicline / therapeutic use

Substances

  • Smoking Cessation Agents
  • Varenicline