Catching Cancer Early: The Undeniable Cost-Effectiveness of Scanning

The UK is at a critical juncture in the fight against cancer. While medical science continues to advance treatments, the biggest gains we can make right now aren't in complex therapeutics, but in something far simpler and more effective: early detection.

For years, we've debated the upfront cost of population-wide screening programmes, particularly for diseases like breast and lung cancer. But as leading voices in cancer care have rightly argued, this perspective is fundamentally flawed. When you factor in the long-term economic and human costs, the choice is clear: screening is not a luxury, it's an essential investment.

The Argument for Action

We must acknowledge the crucial point made by Dr Micheal Michell, Consultant Radiologist at Kings College Hospital, London, who has consistently highlighted that cancer is a "fixable problem" and that increasing access to screening means a "better chance of catching cancer early." The NHS has set an ambitious target to diagnose 75% of all cancers at an early stage (Stage 1 or 2) by 2028. Dwindling screening participation—with figures around 65% for breast screening—puts this goal at risk, and every percentage point missed has a profound cost.

The question is no longer can we afford to scan, but rather, can we afford not to?

Screening: The Cost-Saving Difference

When a cancer is detected through screening, it is typically an early, localised Stage I or II tumour. This drastically changes the treatment pathway, transforming a potentially terminal diagnosis into a curable one, often with minimal intervention.

Scenario	Intervention Cost & Outcomes	Economic Impact
Early Detection (Screening)	Stage I Cancer: Local surgery, sometimes radiotherapy, minimal or no chemotherapy. Shorter hospital stays. High survival rate (over 90% for Stage I breast cancer).	Low Cost. Rapid return to productivity. Minimal burden on chronic care services. High Quality-Adjusted Life-Years (QALYs) gained.
Late Detection (Symptomatic)	Stage IV Cancer: Complex, systemic, multi-modal treatment (extensive chemotherapy, immunotherapy, multiple surgeries, palliative care). Long and frequent hospital stays. Lower survival rate.	High Cost. Dramatically increased pharmaceutical and service expenditure. Significant loss of life-years and productivity. Long-term dependence on health services.

The Lung and Breast Case

1. Lung Cancer: Data, including research on the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST), shows that screening high-risk individuals with Low-Dose CT scans detects over 80% of lung cancers at a curable stage. The cost of a few preventative CT scans is negligible compared to the astronomical lifetime expense of managing late-stage metastatic lung cancer, which requires aggressive, sustained treatment and lengthy periods of care.

2. Breast Cancer: Mammography programmes offer one of the most compelling health economics arguments. The cost of a mammogram is minor, yet it allows for treatments like a simple lumpectomy rather than a full mastectomy followed by years of debilitating chemotherapy required for more advanced disease.

Simply put, the incremental cost per Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY) gained by screening falls well within internationally accepted thresholds for cost-effectiveness. Investing in a £200 screening test today saves the NHS thousands in chronic care and curative costs tomorrow.

A Call for Investment and Participation

The solution lies in making early diagnosis programmes robust, accessible, and highly utilised. This means sustainable funding for Community Diagnostic Centres (CDCs), which bring essential scanning equipment like CT and MRI into local areas to alleviate pressure on hospitals and make screening appointments easier to access.

For DEOS Consulting, the message is clear: supporting and promoting these early scanning initiatives is the most responsible financial and ethical decision the healthcare system can make. Every scan that catches a Stage I cancer is not just a life saved; it’s a budget protected.

We must shift the narrative from screening as an expense to screening as the definitive strategy for fiscal sustainability and improved public health. Let’s act now to ensure that for breast and lung cancer, and all cancers, we are always one step ahead.

For further information about DEOS Consulting’s role in mobile health screening, go to: www.ukdeos.com