Economic Evaluation of the Breast Thermal Activity Indicator Plus Clinical Breast Examination
Author(s)
Jorge Salazar, MD1, Alejandro Jiménez-Ness2, Erick Jael P. Palomo Paz, MD3, Victor Emmanuel Martinez, Sr., MSc4, Herman Soto, Sr., MSc4, Abraham Emmanuel Frias Gasga, II, BS4.
1Welwaze, MIAMI, FL, USA, 2USA, 3Clinical Coordinator, Consultant, Mexico city, Mexico, 4HS Estudios Farmacoeconómicos, Iztapalapa, Mexico.
1Welwaze, MIAMI, FL, USA, 2USA, 3Clinical Coordinator, Consultant, Mexico city, Mexico, 4HS Estudios Farmacoeconómicos, Iztapalapa, Mexico.
OBJECTIVES: To perform a comprehensive economic evaluation of the breast thermal activity indicator (BTAI) in conjunction with clinical breast examination (CBE), from a public health perspective in Mexico.
METHODS: A systematic review (SR) was conducted to answer the question: Is the use of BTAI plus CBE superior in sensitivity and specificity vs. CBE in the early detection of possible breast disease? Based on this evidence, a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) was performed, using a decision tree model, comparing the direct medical costs and effectiveness values associated with BTAI plus CBE vs BCE, over a time horizon of 15 minutes, the time needed to measure and detect significant temperature differences with BTAI.
RESULTS: In the SR only 1 study met the established inclusion and exclusion criteria, in which the comparison with CBE was addressed, it was estimated that BTAI plus CBE represents a 14% increase in the probability of detecting breast cancer (BC) vs CBE for each woman with breast Cancer analyzed, who obtained a positive result. To complement the robustness of the study, the efficacy of BTAI plus CBE vs. biopsy as the gold standard was analyzed and the results were: sensitivity 94%, specificity 98%. The CEA demonstrated that BTAI plus CBE is a cost-effective option versus CBE, with an ICER ranging from $5,684.64 to $8,653.29 MXN, per true positive and true negative result, respectively, values below the willingness-to-pay threshold in Mexico (one GDP per capita, corresponding to $259,702.61 MXN for 2024).
CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study translates into additional investment by the public health sector in Mexico with improved health outcomes.
METHODS: A systematic review (SR) was conducted to answer the question: Is the use of BTAI plus CBE superior in sensitivity and specificity vs. CBE in the early detection of possible breast disease? Based on this evidence, a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) was performed, using a decision tree model, comparing the direct medical costs and effectiveness values associated with BTAI plus CBE vs BCE, over a time horizon of 15 minutes, the time needed to measure and detect significant temperature differences with BTAI.
RESULTS: In the SR only 1 study met the established inclusion and exclusion criteria, in which the comparison with CBE was addressed, it was estimated that BTAI plus CBE represents a 14% increase in the probability of detecting breast cancer (BC) vs CBE for each woman with breast Cancer analyzed, who obtained a positive result. To complement the robustness of the study, the efficacy of BTAI plus CBE vs. biopsy as the gold standard was analyzed and the results were: sensitivity 94%, specificity 98%. The CEA demonstrated that BTAI plus CBE is a cost-effective option versus CBE, with an ICER ranging from $5,684.64 to $8,653.29 MXN, per true positive and true negative result, respectively, values below the willingness-to-pay threshold in Mexico (one GDP per capita, corresponding to $259,702.61 MXN for 2024).
CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study translates into additional investment by the public health sector in Mexico with improved health outcomes.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2025-11, ISPOR Europe 2025, Glasgow, Scotland
Value in Health, Volume 28, Issue S2
Code
EE389
Topic
Clinical Outcomes, Economic Evaluation, Medical Technologies
Disease
Oncology