Literature DB >> 10805834

The impact of colorectal cancer screening on life expectancy.

J M Inadomi1, A Sonnenberg.   

Abstract

METHODS: The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of screening for colorectal cancer on life expectancy and estimate the number of colonoscopies needed per life year saved. The declining exponential approximation of life expectancy was used to calculate the effect of colorectal cancer screening on expected remaining lifetime. The annual number of deaths from colorectal cancer and the size of the population were obtained from the vital statistics of the United States. Published reports were consulted to determine the decrease in mortality from colorectal cancer achieved by fecal occult blood testing, screening sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy. A Markov chain analysis was used to determine the endoscopic resources required to screen and survey the entire population of U.S. residents age 50 years until death or age 85 years.
RESULTS: Colorectal cancer decreases the life expectancy of U.S. residents aged 50 to 54 years by 292 days and those aged 70 to 74 years by 70 days. Screening with fecal occult blood tests extends expected lifetime of the 2 age groups by 51 and 12 days, respectively, whereas screening with sigmoidoscopy leads to increases of 86 and 21 days. Colonoscopic screening increases expected lifetime by 170 and 41 days, respectively. The number of colonoscopies needed to save 1 year of expected life ranges from 2.9 to 6.0, depending on the type of screening regimen used.
CONCLUSIONS: The extension of life through screening colonoscopy is two or three times longer than the extension achieved through flexible sigmoidoscopy or fecal occult blood test, respectively. Although a large number of colonoscopies are required to screen the U.S. population, relatively few colonoscopies need to be invested per year of life expectancy saved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10805834     DOI: 10.1016/s0016-5107(00)70282-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc        ISSN: 0016-5107            Impact factor:   9.427


  13 in total

1.  Perspectives: should older patients be screened for colorectal cancer?

Authors:  James Buxbaum; Edward Schneider
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 3.199

2.  Appropriateness of outpatient gastrointestinal endoscopy in a non-academic hospital.

Authors:  João Mangualde; Marie I Cremers; Ana M Vieira; Ricardo Freire; Elia Gamito; Cristina Lobato; Ana L Alves; Fátima Augusto; Ana P Oliveira
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2011-10-16

3.  Assessing the impact of screening colonoscopy on mortality in the medicare population.

Authors:  Cary P Gross; Pamela R Soulos; Joseph S Ross; Laura D Cramer; Christopher Guerrero; Mary E Tinetti; R Scott Braithwaite
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2011-08-13       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  Colorectal cancer in geriatric patients: endoscopic diagnosis and surgical treatment.

Authors:  Andreas Kirchgatterer; Pius Steiner; Dietmar Hubner; Eva Fritz; Gerhard Aschl; Josef Preisinger; Maximilian Hinterreiter; Bernhard Stadler; Peter Knoflach
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2005-01-21       Impact factor: 5.742

5.  Improving rates for screening colonoscopy: Analysis of the health information national trends survey (HINTS I) data.

Authors:  Timothy M Geiger; Brent W Miedema; Mugur V Geana; Klaus Thaler; Nitin J Rangnekar; Glen T Cameron
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-12-11       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 6.  Endoscopy in the Elderly: a Cautionary Approach, When to Stop.

Authors:  Rita Abdelmessih; Christopher D Packey; Garrett Lawlor
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-09

Review 7.  Multidisciplinary management of elderly patients with rectal cancer: recommendations from the SICG (Italian Society of Geriatric Surgery), SIFIPAC (Italian Society of Surgical Pathophysiology), SICE (Italian Society of Endoscopic Surgery and new technologies), and the WSES (World Society of Emergency Surgery) International Consensus Project.

Authors:  Mauro Podda; Patricia Sylla; Gianluca Baiocchi; Michel Adamina; Vanni Agnoletti; Ferdinando Agresta; Luca Ansaloni; Alberto Arezzo; Nicola Avenia; Walter Biffl; Antonio Biondi; Simona Bui; Fabio C Campanile; Paolo Carcoforo; Claudia Commisso; Antonio Crucitti; Nicola De'Angelis; Gian Luigi De'Angelis; Massimo De Filippo; Belinda De Simone; Salomone Di Saverio; Giorgio Ercolani; Gustavo P Fraga; Francesco Gabrielli; Federica Gaiani; Mario Guerrieri; Angelo Guttadauro; Yoram Kluger; Ari K Leppaniemi; Andrea Loffredo; Tiziana Meschi; Ernest E Moore; Monica Ortenzi; Francesco Pata; Dario Parini; Adolfo Pisanu; Gilberto Poggioli; Andrea Polistena; Alessandro Puzziello; Fabio Rondelli; Massimo Sartelli; Neil Smart; Michael E Sugrue; Patricia Tejedor; Marco Vacante; Federico Coccolini; Justin Davies; Fausto Catena
Journal:  World J Emerg Surg       Date:  2021-07-02       Impact factor: 5.469

8.  Project ACTIVE: a Randomized Controlled Trial of Personalized and Patient-Centered Preventive Care in an Urban Safety-Net Setting.

Authors:  Melanie Applegate; Ebony Scott; Glen B Taksler; Mirtala Sanchez; Nguyet Duong; Laurie Mark; Ellen Caniglia; Andrew Wallach; R Scott Braithwaite
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2021-01-14       Impact factor: 5.128

9.  Colonoscopy in the very elderly: a review of 157 cases.

Authors:  Marc Zerey; B Lauren Paton; Philip D Khan; Amy E Lincourt; Kent W Kercher; Frederick L Greene; B Todd Heniford
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-03-13       Impact factor: 3.453

10.  Progression to pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma from pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia: Results of a simulation model.

Authors:  Mary Linton B Peters; Andrew Eckel; Peter P Mueller; Angela C Tramontano; Davis T Weaver; Anna Lietz; Chin Hur; Chung Yin Kong; Pari V Pandharipande
Journal:  Pancreatology       Date:  2018-07-29       Impact factor: 3.977

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.