Cost-effectiveness and health impact of lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography for never smokers in Japan and the United States: a modelling study

Table 2 Results of the base-case analysis

Country	Gender	Strategy	Cost (US$)	Incremental cost (US$)	Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs)	Incremental QALYs	ICER (US$/QALY gained)	Life expectancy life-years (LYs)	Incremental LYs	ICER (US$/LY gained)
Japan	Male	LDCT	20,446	–	17.8812	–	–	18.0655	–	–
		CXR	26,016	5,570	17.7508	− 0.1304	dominated	17.8955	− 0.1700	dominated
		No screening	73,315	52,869	17.2775	− 0.6036	dominated	17.4929	− 0.5726	dominated
	Female	LDCT	30,065	–	17.6650	–	–	17.9603	–	–
		CXR	41,420	11,354	17.4506	− 0.2144	dominated	17.6846	− 0.2756	dominated
		No screening	115,771	85,706	16.6997	− 0.9653	dominated	17.0419	− 0.9184	dominated
United States	Male	No screening	362	–	15.2610	–	–	15.2639	–	–
		CXR	929	568	15.2657	0.0047	121,806	15.2675	0.0036	155,850
		LDCT	4,497	3,567	15.2668	0.0012	3,001,304	15.2691	0.0016	2,205,027
	Female	No screening	606	–	16.9297	–	–	16.9346	–	–
		CXR	1,124	518	16.9384	0.0087	59,649	16.9416	0.0070	74,232
		LDCT	5,041	3,917	16.9403	0.0019	2,097,969	16.9442	0.0026	1,478,214

LDCT low-dose computed tomography, CXR chest X-ray, ICER incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, dominated less effective and more costly than others

ISSN: 1471-2466