A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted in screening for breast cancer. The use of conventional mammography, digital and magnetic resonance imaging were compared with natural disease history as a baseline. A Markov model projected breast cancer in a group of 100,000 women for a 30 year period, with screening every two years. Four distinct scenarios were modeled: (1) the natural history of breast cancer, as a baseline, (2) conventional film mammography, (3) digital mammography and (4) magnetic resonance imaging. The costs of the scenarios modeled ranged from R$ 194.216,68 for natural history, to R$ 48.614.338,31, for screening with magnetic resonance imaging. The difference in effectiveness between the interventions ranged from 300 to 78.000 years of life gained in the cohort. The ratio of incremental cost-effectiveness in terms of cost per life-year gains, conventional mammographic screening has produced an extra year for R$ 13.573,07. The ICER of magnetic resonance imaging was R$ 2.904.328,88, compared to no screening. In conclusion, it is more cost-effective to perform the screening with conventional mammography than other technological interventions.
Cost-effectiveness; Markov model; Mammography
