Cost differences between digital tomosynthesis and standard digital mammography in a breast cancer screening programme: results from the To-Be trial in Norway

Tron Anders Moger (), Jayson O. Swanson, Åsne Sørlien Holen, Berit Hanestad and Solveig Hofvind
Additional contact information
Tron Anders Moger: University of Oslo
Jayson O. Swanson: University of Oslo
Åsne Sørlien Holen: Cancer Registry of Norway
Berit Hanestad: Haukeland University Hospital
Solveig Hofvind: Cancer Registry of Norway

The European Journal of Health Economics, 2019, vol. 20, issue 8, No 11, 1269 pages

Abstract: Abstract Background Several studies in Europe and the US have shown promising results favouring digital breast tomosynthesis compared to standard digital mammography (DM). However, the costs of implementing the technology in screening programmes are not yet known. Methods A randomised controlled trial comparing the results from digital breast tomosynthesis including synthetic mammograms (DBT) vs. DM was performed in Bergen during 2016 and 2017 as a part of BreastScreen Norway. The trial included 29,453 women and allowed for a detailed comparison of procedure use and screening, recall and treatment costs estimated at the individual level. Results The increased cost of equipment, examination and reading time with DBT vs. DM was €8.5 per screened woman (95% CI 8.4−8.6). Costs of DBT remained significantly higher after adding recall assessment costs, €6.2 (95% CI 4.6−7.9). Substantial reductions in either examination and reading times, price of DBT equipment or price of IT storage and connectivity did not change the conclusion. Adding treatment costs resulted in too wide confidence intervals to draw definitive conclusions (additional costs of tomosynthesis €9.8, 95% CI –56 to 74). Performing biopsy at recall, radiation therapy and chemotherapy was significantly more frequent among women screened with DBT. Conclusion The results showed lower incremental costs of DBT vs. DM, compared to what is found in previous cost analyses of DBT and DM. However, the incremental costs were still higher for DBT compared with DM after including recall costs. Further studies with long-term treatment data are needed to understand the complete costs of implementing DBT in screening.

Keywords: Screening; Costs; Breast cancer; Mammography; Tomosynthesis (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: H51 I18 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10198-019-01094-7 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:20:y:2019:i:8:d:10.1007_s10198-019-01094-7

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer. ... cs/journal/10198/PS2

DOI: 10.1007/s10198-019-01094-7

Access Statistics for this article

The European Journal of Health Economics is currently edited by J.-M.G.v.d. Schulenburg

More articles in The European Journal of Health Economics from Springer, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ) Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().