Cost-effectiveness analysis of population-based screening of hepatocellular carcinoma: Comparing ultrasonography with two-stage screening

Figure 1 Results of sensitivity analysis: Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves.

Figure 2 Cost-effectiveness of hepatocellular carcinoma screening with selected initial ages and selected screening intervals. The reference strategies were non-screening programs at the index initial ages. A: Strategies are labeled by the type and initial ages of screening; B: Strategies are labeled by the type and frequency of screening. AUS: Abdominal ultrasonography mass screening; Two: Two-stage biomarker-ultrasound screening.

Figure 3 Cost-effectiveness plane for different combinations of optimal, suboptimal initial ages and inter-screening intervals of ultrasonography screening. The slope of the dashed line represents the ceiling ratio. A: Annual screening from 40 years vs no screening; B: Annual screening from 50 years vs no screening; C: Biennial screening from 40 years vs no screening; D: Biennial screening from 50 years vs no screening.