Table 3 Univariate sensitivity analysis, marginal: active screening scenarios compared to no screening where the outcome is cost per quality-adjusted life-year (discount = 1.5%)

Scenario	Marginal cost-effectiveness ratio, $
Scenario	Base case	No treatment	50% missed screens	100% sensitivity	No trastuzumab	Utilities +25%*	Utilities -25%*
No screening
Triennial age 50-69 yr	36 981	165 119	33 327	27 487	33 035	29 585	46 227
Triennial age 50-74 yr	40 193	179 359	36 920	30 283	36 243	32 154	50 241
Biennial age 50-69 yr	37 265	207 737	32 768	26 606	33 498	29 812	46 581
Biennial age 50-74 yr	40 851	205 444	36 442	29 581	36 848	32 681	51 064
Annual age 50-69 yr	45 855	247 211	36 556	34 224	42 836	36 684	57 318
Annual age 40-49 yr	73 414	1 248 787	58 199	75 173	64 669	58 731	91 767
Annual age 50-74 yr	49 587	276 755	40 447	24 491	46 545	39 669	61 983
Annual age 40-49 yr, biennial age 50-69 yr	51 442	373 350	42 949	36 529	46 656	41 153	64 302
Annual age 40-49 yr, biennial age 50-74 yr	52 603	371 187	44 603	37 739	47 731	42 082	65 753
Annual age 40-69 yr	55 386	370 904	43 883	40 491	51 114	44 309	69 232
Annual age 40-74 yr	57 938	415 165	46 069	42 313	53 467	46 351	72 423

*More favourable marginal cost-utility ratio when the health preference values were increased by 25%, thereby showing greater benefits between the screening and no-screening scenarios.