Is non-contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging cost-effective for screening of hepatocellular carcinoma?

Introduction: Ultrasonography (US) is the current standard of care for imaging surveillance in patients at risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been explored as an alternative, given the higher sensitivity of MRI, although this comes at a higher cost. We perfo...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Genevieve Jingwen Tan, Chau Hung Lee, Yan Sun, Cher Heng Tan
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wolters Kluwer – Medknow Publications 2024-01-01
Series:Singapore Medical Journal
Subjects:
Online Access:https://journals.lww.com/10.11622/smedj.2021153
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1823863743016075264
author Genevieve Jingwen Tan
Chau Hung Lee
Yan Sun
Cher Heng Tan
author_facet Genevieve Jingwen Tan
Chau Hung Lee
Yan Sun
Cher Heng Tan
author_sort Genevieve Jingwen Tan
collection DOAJ
description Introduction: Ultrasonography (US) is the current standard of care for imaging surveillance in patients at risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been explored as an alternative, given the higher sensitivity of MRI, although this comes at a higher cost. We performed a cost-effective analysis comparing US and dual-sequence non-contrast-enhanced MRI (NCEMRI) for HCC surveillance in the local setting. Methods: Cost-effectiveness analysis of no surveillance, US surveillance and NCEMRI surveillance was performed using Markov modelling and microsimulation. At-risk patient cohort was simulated and followed up for 40 years to estimate the patients’ disease status, direct medical costs and effectiveness. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were calculated. Results: Exactly 482,000 patients with an average age of 40 years were simulated and followed up for 40 years. The average total costs and QALYs for the three scenarios — no surveillance, US surveillance and NCEMRI surveillance — were SGD 1,193/7.460 QALYs, SGD 8,099/11.195 QALYs and SGD 9,720/11.366 QALYs, respectively. Conclusion: Despite NCEMRI having a superior diagnostic accuracy, it is a less cost-effective strategy than US for HCC surveillance in the general at-risk population. Future local cost-effectiveness analyses should include stratifying surveillance methods with a variety of imaging techniques (US, NCEMRI, contrast-enhanced MRI) based on patients’ risk profiles.
format Article
id doaj-art-1de9e8f3939346fe8b879ec26c62d9f5
institution Kabale University
issn 0037-5675
2737-5935
language English
publishDate 2024-01-01
publisher Wolters Kluwer – Medknow Publications
record_format Article
series Singapore Medical Journal
spelling doaj-art-1de9e8f3939346fe8b879ec26c62d9f52025-02-09T10:19:06ZengWolters Kluwer – Medknow PublicationsSingapore Medical Journal0037-56752737-59352024-01-01651232910.11622/smedj.2021153Is non-contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging cost-effective for screening of hepatocellular carcinoma?Genevieve Jingwen TanChau Hung LeeYan SunCher Heng TanIntroduction: Ultrasonography (US) is the current standard of care for imaging surveillance in patients at risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been explored as an alternative, given the higher sensitivity of MRI, although this comes at a higher cost. We performed a cost-effective analysis comparing US and dual-sequence non-contrast-enhanced MRI (NCEMRI) for HCC surveillance in the local setting. Methods: Cost-effectiveness analysis of no surveillance, US surveillance and NCEMRI surveillance was performed using Markov modelling and microsimulation. At-risk patient cohort was simulated and followed up for 40 years to estimate the patients’ disease status, direct medical costs and effectiveness. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were calculated. Results: Exactly 482,000 patients with an average age of 40 years were simulated and followed up for 40 years. The average total costs and QALYs for the three scenarios — no surveillance, US surveillance and NCEMRI surveillance — were SGD 1,193/7.460 QALYs, SGD 8,099/11.195 QALYs and SGD 9,720/11.366 QALYs, respectively. Conclusion: Despite NCEMRI having a superior diagnostic accuracy, it is a less cost-effective strategy than US for HCC surveillance in the general at-risk population. Future local cost-effectiveness analyses should include stratifying surveillance methods with a variety of imaging techniques (US, NCEMRI, contrast-enhanced MRI) based on patients’ risk profiles.https://journals.lww.com/10.11622/smedj.2021153cost-effectiveness analysishepatocellular carcinomamagnetic resonance imagingultrasound surveillance
spellingShingle Genevieve Jingwen Tan
Chau Hung Lee
Yan Sun
Cher Heng Tan
Is non-contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging cost-effective for screening of hepatocellular carcinoma?
Singapore Medical Journal
cost-effectiveness analysis
hepatocellular carcinoma
magnetic resonance imaging
ultrasound surveillance
title Is non-contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging cost-effective for screening of hepatocellular carcinoma?
title_full Is non-contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging cost-effective for screening of hepatocellular carcinoma?
title_fullStr Is non-contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging cost-effective for screening of hepatocellular carcinoma?
title_full_unstemmed Is non-contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging cost-effective for screening of hepatocellular carcinoma?
title_short Is non-contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging cost-effective for screening of hepatocellular carcinoma?
title_sort is non contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging cost effective for screening of hepatocellular carcinoma
topic cost-effectiveness analysis
hepatocellular carcinoma
magnetic resonance imaging
ultrasound surveillance
url https://journals.lww.com/10.11622/smedj.2021153
work_keys_str_mv AT genevievejingwentan isnoncontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingcosteffectiveforscreeningofhepatocellularcarcinoma
AT chauhunglee isnoncontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingcosteffectiveforscreeningofhepatocellularcarcinoma
AT yansun isnoncontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingcosteffectiveforscreeningofhepatocellularcarcinoma
AT cherhengtan isnoncontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingcosteffectiveforscreeningofhepatocellularcarcinoma