Cost-effectiveness of pharmaceutical smoking cessation intervention in China primary cancer prevention.
10.3760/cma.j.cn112152-20231024-00229
- Author:
Pei Yuan SUN
1
;
Yu Ting XIE
1
;
Ran Ran QIE
1
;
Huang HUANG
1
;
Zhuo Lun HU
1
;
Meng Yao WU
1
;
Qi YAN
1
;
Cai Rong ZHU
2
;
Ju Fang SHI
3
;
Kai Yong ZOU
3
;
Ya Wei ZHANG
1
Author Information
1. Department of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
2. Department of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, West China School of Public Health, Sichuan University, West China Fourth Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610044, China.
3. Office of Cancer Screening, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- MeSH:
Humans;
Cost-Benefit Analysis;
Smoking Cessation;
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis;
Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms;
Varenicline;
China;
Kidney Neoplasms;
Pharmaceutical Preparations
- From:
Chinese Journal of Oncology
2024;46(1):66-75
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objectives: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of typical pharmaceutical smoking cessation intervention strategies in China in the context of primary cancer prevention. Methods: Markov cohort simulation models were established to simulate the burden of 12 smoking caused cancer, including lung cancer, oral cancer, nasopharyngeal cancer, laryngeal cancer, esophageal cancer, gastric cancer, pancreatic cancer, liver cancer, kidney cancer, bladder cancer, cervical cancer, and acute myeloid leukemia. Taking incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) as the main indicator, the model sets one year as the cycling period for 50 periods and simulates the cohort of 10 000 thirty-five-year-old current smokers with various smoking cessation strategies. To ensure the robustness of conclusion, univariate sensitivity analysis, probability sensitivity analysis, and age-group sensitivity analysis were conducted. Results: The results showed that varenicline intervention was the most cost-effective intervention. Compared to the next most effective option, incremental cost of each additional quality-adjusted life year is 11 140.28 yuan, which is below the threshold of willingness to pay (1 year GDP per capita). The value of ICER increased as the increasing age group of adopting intervention, but neither exceeded the threshold of willingness to pay. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that the value of discount rate, the hazard ratio and cost of intervention strategy had a greater impact on the result of ICER. Conclusion: In China, the use of varenicline to quit smoking is highly cost effective in the context of cancer primary prevention, especially for younger smokers.
