Table 4

Scenarios* of different structural model parameters (mean per 100 000 persons) by strategy

Costs (£ millions)QALYsPrimary prevention versus early detectionPrimary prevention versus no intvn
Early detectionPrimary preventionNo intvnEarly detectionPrimary preventionNo intvnIncremental cost (£m)Incremental QALYsIncremental cost (£m)Incremental QALYs
Base case (30 years duration, age 50, 3% discounting costs & QALYs)493.5386.4406.11 821 1951 822 9371 821 201−107.11742−19.71736
Duration of model
 10 years166.5113.6121.3860 698860 985860 726−52.9287−7.7259
 20 years327.5240.5256.01 453 6671 454 6121 453 701−87.0945−15.5910
 40 years639.4522.9544.32 003 1332 005 4772 003 101−116.52344−21.42376
Starting age (mean of distribution)
 30 years306.7194.6211.91 978 9591 979 8061 978 953−112.0848−17.3854
 40 years370.5257.2278.01 933 0751 934 4071 933 072−113.31332−20.81335
 60 years674.1581.0596.81 603 4951 605 3811 603 524−93.11886−15.81857
Discounting†
 Costs 3%, QALYs 0%493.5386.4406.12 633 3482 636 3612 633 329−107.13013−19.73031
 Costs 0%, QALYs 0%786.6631.0659.92 633 3482 636 3612 633 329−155.73013−28.93031
  • *Analyses were performed by changing the parameter of interest and rerunning the model with 5000 Monte Carlo simulation.

  • †In general, people value instant benefits, for example, a golden tan versus avoiding skin cancers in future. This time preference for seeking benefits now rather than later is dealt with through discounting, giving future benefits a lower present value than immediate benefits. However, this makes prevention initiatives more unfavourable than without discounting. In prevention analyses therefore, discounting is controversial and warrants scenario analyses.

  • QALYs, quality-adjusted life years.