Comparative cost-effectiveness of screening for lung cancer using different risk scores and thresholds: the Yorkshire Lung Screening Trial

Background Lung cancer (LC) is the most common cause of cancer death in the UK and worldwide, but screening with low-dose CT (LDCT) reduces LC deaths. The UK National Screening Committee has recommended nationwide roll-out of LDCT screening, but the optimal risk thresholds for eligibility remain uncertain. Methods We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis in the Yorkshire Lung Screening Trial (YLST) population comparing three eligibility criteria: US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) 2013 , Prostate Lung Colorectal and Ovarian study (PLCO) M2012 ≥1.51% and Liverpool Lung Project model (LLP) v2 ≥5%. A Markov model estimated a no-screening counterfactual. Scenario analyses assessed how increasing PLCO M2012 (1.51%–7%) and LLP v2 (5%–9%) thresholds affected LC detection, costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Payouts per detected LC were calculated using mortality and utility estimates from the literature and cost data from the trial. Results Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) versus no screening were £3949 (USPSTF 2013 ), £3797 (LLP v2 ≥5%) and £4013 (PLCO M2012 ≥1.51%). PLCO M2012 yielded the largest numbers screened and LCs detected, most QALYs gained and highest incremental net monetary benefit. Raising LLP v2 and PLCO M2012 thresholds reduced both ICERs and QALYs gained. Conclusion All three screening eligibility criteria are cost-effective according to the UK’s willingness to pay threshold of £20 000/QALY. Within the range of thresholds observed in YLST, PLCO M2012 thresholds between ≥1.51% and ≥4% offered the most efficient cost–benefit trade-offs. Evidence suggests that lowering thresholds further would detect more LC cases while remaining cost-effective. These findings support the criteria implemented in YLST, but do not by themselves identify the optimal screening threshold for the wider UK population. Trial registration number ISRCTN42704678 .

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Thorax
Published
2026-06-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1136/thorax-2025-223859
Primary Topic
Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparative cost-effectiveness of screening for lung cancer using different risk scores and thresholds: the Yorkshire Lung Screening Trial

Neil Hancock, Rhian Gabe, Daniel Vulkan, Matthew Callister et al.
Thorax
Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
article

Comparative cost-effectiveness of screening for lung cancer using different risk scores and thresholds: the Yorkshire Lung Screening Trial

Neil Hancock, Rhian Gabe, Daniel Vulkan, Matthew Callister, Yingying Zhang, Philip Crosbie, Sebastian Hinde, Marta Soares, Catriona S Marshall, Irene Simmonds
article en

Abstract

Background Lung cancer (LC) is the most common cause of cancer death in the UK and worldwide, but screening with low-dose CT (LDCT) reduces LC deaths. The UK National Screening Committee has recommended nationwide roll-out of LDCT screening, but the optimal risk thresholds for eligibility remain uncertain. Methods We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis in the Yorkshire Lung Screening Trial (YLST) population comparing three eligibility criteria: US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) 2013 , Prostate Lung Colorectal and Ovarian study (PLCO) M2012 ≥1.51% and Liverpool Lung Project model (LLP) v2 ≥5%. A Markov model estimated a no-screening counterfactual. Scenario analyses assessed how increasing PLCO M2012 (1.51%–7%) and LLP v2 (5%–9%) thresholds affected LC detection, costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Payouts per detected LC were calculated using mortality and utility estimates from the literature and cost data from the trial. Results Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) versus no screening were £3949 (USPSTF 2013 ), £3797 (LLP v2 ≥5%) and £4013 (PLCO M2012 ≥1.51%). PLCO M2012 yielded the largest numbers screened and LCs detected, most QALYs gained and highest incremental net monetary benefit. Raising LLP v2 and PLCO M2012 thresholds reduced both ICERs and QALYs gained. Conclusion All three screening eligibility criteria are cost-effective according to the UK’s willingness to pay threshold of £20 000/QALY. Within the range of thresholds observed in YLST, PLCO M2012 thresholds between ≥1.51% and ≥4% offered the most efficient cost–benefit trade-offs. Evidence suggests that lowering thresholds further would detect more LC cases while remaining cost-effective. These findings support the criteria implemented in YLST, but do not by themselves identify the optimal screening threshold for the wider UK population. Trial registration number ISRCTN42704678 .

Thorax
University of Leeds (GB), Queen Mary University of London (GB), Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust (GB), University of Manchester (GB), University of York (GB)
National Institute for Health and Care Research, Manchester Biomedical Research Centre
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.