RESUMO

O câncer de pulmão é reconhecidamente um dos mais agressivos dentre os tumores, com alta letalidade. A detecção precoce do câncer de pulmão com tomografia computadorizada de baixa dose tem sido avaliada em diversos países e implementada em alguns. Entretanto, a implementação do rastreamento com uso dessa tecnologia para detecção precoce de novos casos, permanece questionado no mundo, e no Brasil não está recomendado. Por esse motivo, foi elaborada uma avaliação de custo-efetividade do uso da tomografia computadorizada de baixa dose como estratégia de rastreamento para detecção precoce do câncer de pulmão em população de risco sob a perspectiva do Sistema Único de Saúde como órgão financiador. Inicialmente uma revisão sistemática foi elaborada e descrita uma síntese das diferentes abordagens disponíveis nas avaliações econômicas. Os 30 estudos selecionados e incluídos na revisão mostraram qualidade global, com bom padrão metodológico, que atendeu a mais de 80% dos critérios estabelecidos pelo formulário (Consensus Health Economic Criteria list). A análise da eficiência comparativa entre duas alternativas (anual e bianual) para o diagnóstico precoce de câncer de pulmão, considerando a estratégia de rastreamento com tomografia computadorizada de baixa dose e a conduta clínica sem rastreio, como cenário de referência, teve por base uma coorte hipotética de 100.000 indivíduos assintomáticos, e tabagistas de alto risco. O horizonte temporal considerou a expectativa de vida dos indivíduos, e a perspectiva foi o Sistema Único de Saúde como financiador da assistência à saúde. Apenas os custos médicos diretos dos itens relacionados ao processo de diagnóstico e tratamento foram estimados. O desfecho foi medido em anos de vida ganhos. O desconto de 5% foi aplicado aos custos e benefícios. E realizadas análises de sensibilidade determinística univariada e probabilística. A razão de custo-efetividade incremental da estratégia de rastreamento anual com a tomografia computadorizada de baixa dose para a detecção precoce de câncer de pulmão foi estimada em R$ 97.583,52 por cada ano de vida ganho e de R$ 56.642,20 por ano de vida ganho, com o rastreio a cada dois anos. A análise determinística mostrou que o impacto da redução da incidência de câncer de pulmão, em ambas as alternativas (anual e bianual), chega a gerar quase o triplo dos gastos estimados para a razão de custo-efetividade incremental. Para o anual esse aumento chega a R$ 176.834,47, fora do limiar de R$105.000,00, enquanto o rastreamento bianual, mesmo dobrando os gastos, ainda se manteria dentro do limiar de custo-efetividade atualmente definido para o país. Os demais parâmetros de relevância (sensibilidade do rastreamento para detecção de câncer e a proporção de diagnósticos em estadio I/II com o rastreamento) não impactaram nos resultados finais. A análise probabilística das alternativas de rastreamento mostrou para o rastreamento anual 52% das simulações dentro do limiar estabelecido e 94,2% referente ao bianual. O resultado do modelo econômico mostrou resultados favoráveis com a adoção da estratégia de rastreamento de câncer de pulmão com uso de tomografia computadorizada de baixa dose comparada a condução clínica, realizada a cada dois anos em população de alto risco, sob a perspectiva do SUS. (AU)

Lung cancer is one of the most aggressive tumors, with high lethality. Early detection of lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography has been evaluated in several countries and implemented in some. However, the implementation of screening using this technology for early detection of new cases remains questioned worldwide, but in Brazil, it has not been recommended. Thus, a cost-effectiveness assessment of a screening strategy with low-dose computed tomography for early lung cancer detection in a high-risk population under the Unified Health System perspective as a funding body. First, a systematic review was performed and synthesized the different approaches available in economic evaluations. Thirty studies selected and included in the review showed overall quality, with a well-designed methodological standard, which met more than 80% of the criteria established by the Consensus Health Economic Criteria (CHEC) list form. The analysis of the comparative efficiency between two alternatives (annual and biannual) for the early diagnosis of lung cancer, considering the screening strategy with low-dose computed tomography and the clinical management, without screening, as a reference scenario, was based on a cohort hypothetical 100,000 asymptomatic individuals, and high-risk smokers. The time horizon considered the individuals' life expectancy, and the perspective was the Brazilian Unified Health System as the funder of health care. Only the direct medical costs of items related to the diagnosis and treatment process were estimated. The outcome measure was life years gained. A discount of 5% has been applied to costs and benefits. A deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis has been performed. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the annual screening strategy for early lung cancer detection has been estimated at BRL 97,583.52 for each life-year gained and BRL 56,642.20 per year of life gained, with screening every two years. The deterministic analysis showed that the impact of reducing the incidence of lung cancer, in both alternatives (annual and biannual) generated almost three times the estimated expenses for the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. For the annual survey, this increase reaches BRL 176,834.47, outside the BRL 105,000.00 threshold, while biannual screening, even doubling the expenses, would remain within the cost-effectiveness threshold currently defined for the country. The other relevant parameters (screening sensitivity for cancer detection and the proportion of stage I/II diagnoses with screening) have no impact on the final results. The probabilistic analysis showed that 52% of simulations within the established threshold correspond to the annual screening, and 94.2% to the biannual. The economic model designed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening using low-dose computed tomography compared to clinical care showed favorable results from the strategy performed every two years in a high-risk population, under the SUS perspective. (AU)

Assuntos

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Lung Cancer (LC) in Puerto Rico (PR) is the fifth most common malignancy (5.2%), the third most common among men (5.9%) and the fifth among women (4.6%), with a mortality of 11.3%. Despite current data demonstrating the importance and clinical value for lung cancer screening LDCT Screening among high risk patients remains low regardless of the potential to prevent thousands of lung cancer deaths per year. Due to significant disparities in health care in PR it is believed that LDCT use for lung cancer screening in PR is not been enforced in the private sector. METHODS: A self-administered anonymous survey was provided to a group of pulmonologists at the annual meeting of the PR Pneumology Society. The survey contained questions regarding characteristics of their practice and implementation of lung cancer screening. Provided information was tabulated in percentages. RESULTS: A total of 31 pulmonologists participated in the administration of the survey. Most participants had their medical practice in the metropolitan area (52%), which is the most populated area with best access to physicians and health care services. The sample from the north area comprised 19% of the subjects. All respondents were affiliated to health care institutions. As most of them served 1-3 health care centers (96%) with access to specialized equipment such as Chest CT. Most of the physicians (99%) had availability of chest CT scan within 1 hour from their practices and 97% were aware of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force lung cancer screening recommendations. Their age range was 41 and over (55%). Despite the above there were discrepancies when asked about lung cancer screening implementation. Sixteen (16) percent did not perform lung cancer screening at all, and 77% that performed screening, reported limitations to it. CONCLUSION: This data suggests that although lung cancer screening has shown to reduce mortality and is recommended by the USPTF, it is not been conducted appropriately in PR. The main limitation identified was what the health insurance had to offer rather than lack of health insurance. Other factor to take in consideration is the lack of a comprehensive screening program for Lung Cancer anywhere in the island. In addition, costs associated with staff and implementation were noted as a significant barrier among the surveyed pulmonologists.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Country-specific evidence is needed to guide decisions regarding whether and how to implement lung cancer screening in different settings. For this study, we estimated the potential numbers of individuals screened and lung cancer deaths prevented in Brazil after applying different strategies to define screening eligibility. METHODS: We applied the Lung Cancer Death Risk Assessment Tool (LCDRAT) to survey data on current and former smokers (ever-smokers) in 15 Brazilian state capital cities that comprise 18% of the Brazilian population. We evaluated three strategies to define eligibility for screening: (1) pack-years and cessation time (≥30 pack-years and <15 years since cessation); (2) the LCDRAT risk model with a fixed risk threshold; and (3) LCDRAT with age-specific risk thresholds. FINDINGS: Among 2.3 million Brazilian ever-smokers aged 55-79 years, 21,459 (95%CI 20,532-22,387) lung cancer deaths were predicted over 5 years without screening. Applying the fixed risk-based eligibility definition would prevent more lung cancer deaths than the pack-years definition [2,939 (95%CI 2751-3127) vs. 2,500 (95%CI 2318-2681) lung cancer deaths], and with higher screening efficiency [NNS=177 (95%CI 170-183) vs. 205 (95%CI 194-216)], but would tend to screen older individuals [mean age 67.8 (95%CI 67.5-68.2) vs. 63.4 (95%CI 63.0-63.9) years]. Applying age-specific risk thresholds would allow younger ever-smokers to be screened, although these individuals would be at lower risk. The age-specific thresholds strategy would avert three-fifths (60.1%) of preventable lung cancer deaths [N = 2629 (95%CI 2448-2810)] by screening 21.9% of ever-smokers. INTERPRETATION: The definition of eligibility impacts the efficiency of lung cancer screening and the mean age of the eligible population. As implementation of lung screening proceeds in different countries, our analytical framework can be used to guide similar analyses in other contexts. Due to limitations of our models, more research would be needed.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: One challenge in high-quality lung cancer screening (LCS) is maintaining adherence with annual and short-interval follow-up screens among high-risk individuals who have undergone baseline low-dose CT (LDCT). This study aimed to characterize attitudes and beliefs toward lung cancer and LCS and to identify factors associated with LCS adherence. METHODS: We administered a questionnaire to 269 LCS participants to assess attitudes and beliefs toward lung cancer and LCS. Clinical data including sociodemographics and screening adherence were obtained from the LCS Program Registry. RESULTS: African-American individuals had significantly greater lung cancer worries compared with Whites (6.10 vs. 4.66, P < .001). In making the decision to undergo LCS, African-American participants described screening convenience and cost as very important factors significantly more frequently than Whites (60% vs. 26.8%, P< .001 and 58.4% vs. 37.8%, P = .001; respectively). African-American individuals with greater than high school education had significantly higher odds of LCS adherence (aOR 2.55; 95% CI, 1.14-5.60) than Whites with less than high school education. Participants who described screening convenience and cost as "very important" had significantly lower odds of completing screening follow-up after adjusting for demographic and other factors (aOR 0.56; 95% CI, 0.33-0.97 and aOR 0.54; 95% CI, 0.33-0.91, respectively). CONCLUSION: Racial differences in beliefs about lung cancer and LCS exist among African-American and White individuals enrolled in an LCS program. Cost, convenience, and low educational attainment may be barriers to LCS adherence, specifically among African-American individuals. IMPACT: More research is needed on how barriers can be overcome to improve LCS adherence.

Assuntos

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: The improvement of low-dose CT (LDCT) lung cancer screening selection criteria could help to include more individuals who have lung cancer, or in whom lung cancer will develop, while avoiding significant cost increase. We evaluated baseline results of LDCT lung cancer screening in a population with a heterogeneous risk profile for lung cancer. METHODS: LDCT lung cancer screening was implemented alongside a preventive health programme in a private hospital in Brazil. Individuals older than 45 years, smokers and former smokers, regardless of tobacco exposure, were included. Patients were classified according to the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) eligibility criteria and to PLCOm2012 6-year lung cancer risk. Patient characteristics, CT positivity rate, detection rate of lung cancer and false-positive rate were assessed. RESULTS: LDCT scans of 472 patients were evaluated and three lung adenocarcinomas were diagnosed. CT positivity rate (Lung-RADS 3/4) was significantly higher (p=0.019) in the NLST group (10.1% (95% CI, 5.9% to 16.9%)) than in the non-NLST group (3.6% (95% CI, 2.62% to 4.83%)) and in the PLCOm2012 high-risk group (14.3% (95% CI, 6.8% to 27.7%)) than in the PLCOm2012 low-risk group (3.7% (95% CI, 2.9% to 4.8%)) (p=0.016). Detection rate of lung cancer was also significantly higher (p=0.018) among PLCOm2012 high-risk patients (5.7% (95% CI, 2.5% to 12.6%)) than in the PLCOm2012 low-risk individuals (0.2% (95% CI, 0.1% to 1.1%)). The false-positive rate for NLST criteria (16.4% (95% CI, 13.2% to 20.1%)) was higher (p<0.001) than for PLCOm2012 criteria (7.6 (95% CI, 5.3% to 10.5%)). DISCUSSION: Our study indicates a lower performance when screening low-risk individuals in comparison to screening patients meeting NLST criteria and PLCOm2012 high-risk patients. Also, incorporating PLCOm2012 6-year lung cancer risk ≥0.0151 as an eligibility criterion seems to increase lung cancer screening effectiveness.

Assuntos

RESUMO

El cáncer pulmonar es el más mortal de todos los cánceres. Debido a que la gran mayoría de los cánceres pulmonares son causados por el hábito de fumar, su erradicación es la mejor estrategia de prevención primaria. El diagnóstico del cáncer pulmonar en etapas tempranas mejora significativamente su pronóstico, por lo que ésta es la mejor estrategia de prevención secundaria. Recientemente se ha reportado que un programa de pesquisa de cáncer pulmonar con escáner de tórax (TAC) reduce la mortalidad por cáncer. El objetivo de esta revisión es, en primer lugar, apelar a la evidencia en cuanto al rendimiento de los programas de pesquisa de cáncer pulmonar en poblaciones de alto riesgo, y en segundo lugar, analizar las distintas estrategias que tiene un médico cuando se enfrenta a un paciente a quien se le ha encontrado incidentalmente un nódulo pulmonar.

Lung cancer is a deadly disease. Since this cancer is closely related to tobacco smoke, the best way to avoid this disease is smoking prevention. Unfortunately smoking is a worldwide epidemic and in Chile its prevalence is not decreasing. The second best strategy is an early detection. For the first time there is a report showing that screening with the use of low dose CT reduces mortality from lung cancer. The prognosis is much better in early stages. The purpose of this publication is to review the evidence about screening of lung cancer, and to analyze the different strategies to deal, in the general practice, with a finding of a lung nodule.

Assuntos