Healthcare costs in the Danish randomised controlled lung cancer CT-screening trial: A registry study.

Abstract: Objectives: Low dose computerised tomography (CT) screening for lung cancer can reduce lung-cancer-specific mortality. The objective of this study was to analyse healthcare costs and healthcare utilisation of participants in the Danish lung cancer CT-screening trial (DLCST). Materials and methods: This registry study was nested in a randomised controlled trial (DLCST). 4104 participants, current or former heavy smokers, aged 50–70 years were randomised to five annual low dose CT scans or usual care during 2004–2010. Total healthcare costs and healthcare utilisation data for both the primary and the secondary healthcare sector were retrieved from public registries from randomisation – September 2011 and compared between (1) the CT-screening group and the control group and, (2) the control group and each of the true-positive, false-positive and true-negative groups. Results: The median annual costs per participant were significantly higher in the CT-screening group (Euros [EUR] 1342, interquartile range [IQR] 750–2980) compared with the control group (EUR 1190, IQR 590–2692) (p <0.0001). When the cost of the CT-screening programme was excluded, there was no longer a statistically significant difference between the CT-screening group (EUR 1155, IQR 567–2798) and the control group (p =0.52). Analyses according to the diagnostic groups showed that annual costs were 10.57 (95% CI 7.09–15.75) times higher for the true-positive and 1.67 (95% CI 1.20–2.32) times higher for the false-positive group compared with the control group. Conclusion: Low dose lung cancer CT screening increases healthcare costs compared with no screening; this difference was attributable to the costs of the CT-screening programme. Overall healthcare costs were higher for the true-positive and false-positive groups than for the control group, also when excluding the cost of the CT-screening programme. This increase was outweighed by the larger true-negative group showing no significant differences in costs compared with the control group. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]