Cost-effectiveness of screening with contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging vs X-ray mammography of women at a high familial risk of breast cancer

I. Griebsch, J. Brown, C. Boggis, A. Dixon, M. Dixon, D. Easton, R. Eeles, D. G. Evans, Fiona Jane Gilbert, J. Hawnaur, P. Kessar, S. R. Lakhani, S. M. Moss, A. Nerurkar, A. R. Padhani, L. J. Pointon, J. Potterton, D. Thompson, L. W. Turnbull, L. G. WalkerR. Warren, M. O. Leach, MARIBS

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

88 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE MRI) is the most sensitive tool for screening women who are at high familial risk of breast cancer. Our aim in this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of X-ray mammography (XRM), CE MRI or both strategies combined. In total, 649 women were enrolled in the MARIBS study and screened with both CE MRI and mammography resulting in 1881 screens and 1-7 individual annual screening events. Women aged 35-49 years at high risk of breast cancer, either because they have a strong family history of breast cancer or are tested carriers of a BRCA1, BRCA2 or TP53 mutation or are at a 50% risk of having inherited such a mutation, were recruited from 22 centres and offered annual MRI and XRM for between 2 and 7 years. Information on the number and type of further investigations was collected and specifically calculated unit costs were used to calculate the incremental cost per cancer detected. The numbers of cancer detected was 13 for mammography, 27 for CE MRI and 33 for mammography and CE MRI combined. In the subgroup of BRCA1 (BRCA2) mutation carriers or of women having a first degree relative with a mutation in BRCA1 (BRCA2) corresponding numbers were 3 (6), 12 (7) and 12 (11), respectively. For all women, the incremental cost per cancer detected with CE MRI and mammography combined was 28 pound 284 compared to mammography. When only BRCA1 or the BRCA2 groups were considered, this cost would be reduced to 11 pound 731 (CE MRI vs mammography) and 15 pound 302 (CE MRI and mammography vs mammography). Results were most sensitive to the unit cost estimate for a CE MRI screening test. Contrast-enhanced MRI might be a cost-effective screening modality for women at high risk, particularly for the BRCA1 and BRCA2 subgroups. Further work is needed to assess the impact of screening on mortality and health-related quality of life.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)801-810
Number of pages10
JournalBritish Journal of Cancer
Volume95
Early online date3 Oct 2006
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2006

Keywords

  • cost-effectiveness analysis
  • breast MRI
  • screening
  • BRCA1 and BRCA2
  • breast cancer
  • high risk
  • 2 view mammography
  • mutation carriers
  • genetic risk
  • multicenter
  • MRI
  • protocol
  • surveillance
  • ultrasound

Cite this

Cost-effectiveness of screening with contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging vs X-ray mammography of women at a high familial risk of breast cancer. / Griebsch, I.; Brown, J.; Boggis, C.; Dixon, A.; Dixon, M.; Easton, D.; Eeles, R.; Evans, D. G.; Gilbert, Fiona Jane; Hawnaur, J.; Kessar, P.; Lakhani, S. R.; Moss, S. M.; Nerurkar, A.; Padhani, A. R.; Pointon, L. J.; Potterton, J.; Thompson, D.; Turnbull, L. W.; Walker, L. G.; Warren, R.; Leach, M. O.; MARIBS.

In: British Journal of Cancer, Vol. 95, 2006, p. 801-810.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Griebsch, I, Brown, J, Boggis, C, Dixon, A, Dixon, M, Easton, D, Eeles, R, Evans, DG, Gilbert, FJ, Hawnaur, J, Kessar, P, Lakhani, SR, Moss, SM, Nerurkar, A, Padhani, AR, Pointon, LJ, Potterton, J, Thompson, D, Turnbull, LW, Walker, LG, Warren, R, Leach, MO & MARIBS 2006, 'Cost-effectiveness of screening with contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging vs X-ray mammography of women at a high familial risk of breast cancer', British Journal of Cancer, vol. 95, pp. 801-810. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6603356
Griebsch, I. ; Brown, J. ; Boggis, C. ; Dixon, A. ; Dixon, M. ; Easton, D. ; Eeles, R. ; Evans, D. G. ; Gilbert, Fiona Jane ; Hawnaur, J. ; Kessar, P. ; Lakhani, S. R. ; Moss, S. M. ; Nerurkar, A. ; Padhani, A. R. ; Pointon, L. J. ; Potterton, J. ; Thompson, D. ; Turnbull, L. W. ; Walker, L. G. ; Warren, R. ; Leach, M. O. ; MARIBS. / Cost-effectiveness of screening with contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging vs X-ray mammography of women at a high familial risk of breast cancer. In: British Journal of Cancer. 2006 ; Vol. 95. pp. 801-810.
@article{5096713689544a2c83f0f23a6dcaa42d,
title = "Cost-effectiveness of screening with contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging vs X-ray mammography of women at a high familial risk of breast cancer",
abstract = "Contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE MRI) is the most sensitive tool for screening women who are at high familial risk of breast cancer. Our aim in this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of X-ray mammography (XRM), CE MRI or both strategies combined. In total, 649 women were enrolled in the MARIBS study and screened with both CE MRI and mammography resulting in 1881 screens and 1-7 individual annual screening events. Women aged 35-49 years at high risk of breast cancer, either because they have a strong family history of breast cancer or are tested carriers of a BRCA1, BRCA2 or TP53 mutation or are at a 50{\%} risk of having inherited such a mutation, were recruited from 22 centres and offered annual MRI and XRM for between 2 and 7 years. Information on the number and type of further investigations was collected and specifically calculated unit costs were used to calculate the incremental cost per cancer detected. The numbers of cancer detected was 13 for mammography, 27 for CE MRI and 33 for mammography and CE MRI combined. In the subgroup of BRCA1 (BRCA2) mutation carriers or of women having a first degree relative with a mutation in BRCA1 (BRCA2) corresponding numbers were 3 (6), 12 (7) and 12 (11), respectively. For all women, the incremental cost per cancer detected with CE MRI and mammography combined was 28 pound 284 compared to mammography. When only BRCA1 or the BRCA2 groups were considered, this cost would be reduced to 11 pound 731 (CE MRI vs mammography) and 15 pound 302 (CE MRI and mammography vs mammography). Results were most sensitive to the unit cost estimate for a CE MRI screening test. Contrast-enhanced MRI might be a cost-effective screening modality for women at high risk, particularly for the BRCA1 and BRCA2 subgroups. Further work is needed to assess the impact of screening on mortality and health-related quality of life.",
keywords = "cost-effectiveness analysis, breast MRI, screening, BRCA1 and BRCA2, breast cancer, high risk, 2 view mammography, mutation carriers, genetic risk, multicenter, MRI, protocol, surveillance , ultrasound",
author = "I. Griebsch and J. Brown and C. Boggis and A. Dixon and M. Dixon and D. Easton and R. Eeles and Evans, {D. G.} and Gilbert, {Fiona Jane} and J. Hawnaur and P. Kessar and Lakhani, {S. R.} and Moss, {S. M.} and A. Nerurkar and Padhani, {A. R.} and Pointon, {L. J.} and J. Potterton and D. Thompson and Turnbull, {L. W.} and Walker, {L. G.} and R. Warren and Leach, {M. O.} and MARIBS",
year = "2006",
doi = "10.1038/sj.bjc.6603356",
language = "English",
volume = "95",
pages = "801--810",
journal = "British Journal of Cancer",
issn = "0007-0920",
publisher = "Nature Publishing Group",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost-effectiveness of screening with contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging vs X-ray mammography of women at a high familial risk of breast cancer

AU - Griebsch, I.

AU - Brown, J.

AU - Boggis, C.

AU - Dixon, A.

AU - Dixon, M.

AU - Easton, D.

AU - Eeles, R.

AU - Evans, D. G.

AU - Gilbert, Fiona Jane

AU - Hawnaur, J.

AU - Kessar, P.

AU - Lakhani, S. R.

AU - Moss, S. M.

AU - Nerurkar, A.

AU - Padhani, A. R.

AU - Pointon, L. J.

AU - Potterton, J.

AU - Thompson, D.

AU - Turnbull, L. W.

AU - Walker, L. G.

AU - Warren, R.

AU - Leach, M. O.

AU - MARIBS

PY - 2006

Y1 - 2006

N2 - Contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE MRI) is the most sensitive tool for screening women who are at high familial risk of breast cancer. Our aim in this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of X-ray mammography (XRM), CE MRI or both strategies combined. In total, 649 women were enrolled in the MARIBS study and screened with both CE MRI and mammography resulting in 1881 screens and 1-7 individual annual screening events. Women aged 35-49 years at high risk of breast cancer, either because they have a strong family history of breast cancer or are tested carriers of a BRCA1, BRCA2 or TP53 mutation or are at a 50% risk of having inherited such a mutation, were recruited from 22 centres and offered annual MRI and XRM for between 2 and 7 years. Information on the number and type of further investigations was collected and specifically calculated unit costs were used to calculate the incremental cost per cancer detected. The numbers of cancer detected was 13 for mammography, 27 for CE MRI and 33 for mammography and CE MRI combined. In the subgroup of BRCA1 (BRCA2) mutation carriers or of women having a first degree relative with a mutation in BRCA1 (BRCA2) corresponding numbers were 3 (6), 12 (7) and 12 (11), respectively. For all women, the incremental cost per cancer detected with CE MRI and mammography combined was 28 pound 284 compared to mammography. When only BRCA1 or the BRCA2 groups were considered, this cost would be reduced to 11 pound 731 (CE MRI vs mammography) and 15 pound 302 (CE MRI and mammography vs mammography). Results were most sensitive to the unit cost estimate for a CE MRI screening test. Contrast-enhanced MRI might be a cost-effective screening modality for women at high risk, particularly for the BRCA1 and BRCA2 subgroups. Further work is needed to assess the impact of screening on mortality and health-related quality of life.

AB - Contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE MRI) is the most sensitive tool for screening women who are at high familial risk of breast cancer. Our aim in this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of X-ray mammography (XRM), CE MRI or both strategies combined. In total, 649 women were enrolled in the MARIBS study and screened with both CE MRI and mammography resulting in 1881 screens and 1-7 individual annual screening events. Women aged 35-49 years at high risk of breast cancer, either because they have a strong family history of breast cancer or are tested carriers of a BRCA1, BRCA2 or TP53 mutation or are at a 50% risk of having inherited such a mutation, were recruited from 22 centres and offered annual MRI and XRM for between 2 and 7 years. Information on the number and type of further investigations was collected and specifically calculated unit costs were used to calculate the incremental cost per cancer detected. The numbers of cancer detected was 13 for mammography, 27 for CE MRI and 33 for mammography and CE MRI combined. In the subgroup of BRCA1 (BRCA2) mutation carriers or of women having a first degree relative with a mutation in BRCA1 (BRCA2) corresponding numbers were 3 (6), 12 (7) and 12 (11), respectively. For all women, the incremental cost per cancer detected with CE MRI and mammography combined was 28 pound 284 compared to mammography. When only BRCA1 or the BRCA2 groups were considered, this cost would be reduced to 11 pound 731 (CE MRI vs mammography) and 15 pound 302 (CE MRI and mammography vs mammography). Results were most sensitive to the unit cost estimate for a CE MRI screening test. Contrast-enhanced MRI might be a cost-effective screening modality for women at high risk, particularly for the BRCA1 and BRCA2 subgroups. Further work is needed to assess the impact of screening on mortality and health-related quality of life.

KW - cost-effectiveness analysis

KW - breast MRI

KW - screening

KW - BRCA1 and BRCA2

KW - breast cancer

KW - high risk

KW - 2 view mammography

KW - mutation carriers

KW - genetic risk

KW - multicenter

KW - MRI

KW - protocol

KW - surveillance

KW - ultrasound

U2 - 10.1038/sj.bjc.6603356

DO - 10.1038/sj.bjc.6603356

M3 - Article

VL - 95

SP - 801

EP - 810

JO - British Journal of Cancer

JF - British Journal of Cancer

SN - 0007-0920

ER -