Cost-Effectiveness of Lung Cancer Screening with Low-Dose Computed Tomography: Comparing the NLST and NELSON Trial Protocols

We aimed to directly compare the cost-effectiveness of the NELSON and NLST screening protocols, two trials influencing lung cancer screening implementation internationally. A decision-analytic model analyzing the cost-effectiveness of the NELSON protocols was manipulated to reflect the protocols of the NLST, while maintaining features specific to the Hungarian healthcare setting. In the NELSON protocol, there are three possible outcomes to the initial round of screening: positive, negative, or indeterminate, indicating an uncertain degree of suspicion for lung cancer. This pro-tocol differs from the NLST protocol, in which the only possible screening outcomes are positive or negative, with no indeterminate option. The NLST pathway for smokers aged 55-74 resulted in a 43 € increase in total average lifetime costs compared to the Hungarian screening pathway and re-sulted in a lifetime gain of 0.006 QALYs. The incremental costs and QALYs yield an ICER of 7875 €/QALY. Our results demonstrate that assigning any suspicious LDCT screen as a positive result (NLST protocol) rather than indeterminate (NELSON protocol) can yield a slight QALY gain that is worth the additional use of resources according to Hungary’s willingness to pay threshold. Our study provides insight on the cost-effectiveness, advantages, and disadvantages of various LDCT screening protocols for lung cancer and can assist other countries as they implement their screening programs.