An economic scenario analysis of implementing artificial intelligence in BreastScreen Norway–Impact on radiologist person-years, costs and effects
Menée à l'aide d'une simulation utilisant des données récentes provenant de fournisseurs d'Intelligence artificielle (IA) et du registre norvégien des cancers, cette étude estime, en fonction de 4 scénarios, le rapport coût-efficacité de l'IA dans le cadre du programme national de dépistage du cancer du sein
Objective : To study the implications of implementing artificial intelligence (AI) as a decision support tool in the Norwegian breast cancer screening program concerning cost-effectiveness and time savings for radiologists.
Methods : In a decision tree model using recent data from AI vendors and the Cancer Registry of Norway, and assuming equal effectiveness of radiologists plus AI compared to standard practice, we simulated costs, effects and radiologist person-years over the next 20 years under different scenarios: 1) Assuming a €1 additional running cost of AI instead of the €3 assumed in the base case, 2) varying the AI-score thresholds for single vs. double readings, 3) varying the consensus and recall rates, and 4) reductions in the interval cancer rate compared to standard practice.
Results : AI was unlikely to be cost-effective, even when only one radiologist was used alongside AI for all screening exams. This also applied when assuming a 10% reduction in the consensus and recall rates. However, there was a 30–50% reduction in the radiologists’ screen-reading volume. Assuming an additional running cost of €1 for AI, the costs were comparable, with similar probabilities of cost-effectiveness for AI and standard practice. Assuming a 5% reduction in the interval cancer rate, AI proved to be cost-effective across all willingness-to-pay values.
Conclusions : AI may be cost-effective if the interval cancer rate is reduced by 5% or more, or if its additional cost is €1 per screening exam. Despite a substantial reduction in screening volume, this remains modest relative to the total radiologist person-years available within breast centers, accounting for only 3–4% of person-years.
Journal of Medical Screening , résumé, 2025