Literature DB >> 11028135

A decision model and cost-effectiveness analysis of colorectal cancer screening and surveillance guidelines for average-risk adults.

R K Khandker1, J D Dulski, J B Kilpatrick, R P Ellis, J B Mitchell, W B Baine.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Guidelines for colorectal cancer screening and surveillance in people at average risk and at increased risk have recently been published by the American Gastroenterological Association. The guidelines for the population at average risk were evaluated using cost-effectiveness analyses.
METHODS: Since colorectal cancers primarily arise from precancerous adenomas, a state transition model of disease progression from adenomatous polyps was developed. Rather than assuming that polyps turn to cancer after a fixed interval (dwell time), such transitions were modeled to occur as an exponential function of the age of the polyps. Screening strategies included periodic fecal occult blood test, flexible sigmoidoscopy, double-contrast barium enema, and colonoscopy. Screening costs in 1994 dollars were estimated using Medicare and private claims data, and clinical parameters were based upon published studies.
RESULTS: Cost per life-year saved was $12,636 for flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5 years and $14,394 for annual fecal occult blood testing. The assumption made for polyp dwell time critically affected the attractiveness of alternative screening strategies.
CONCLUSIONS: Sigmoidoscopy every 5 years and annual fecal blood testing were the two most cost-effective strategies, but with low compliance, occult blood testing was less cost-effective. Lowering colonoscopy costs greatly improved the cost-effectiveness of colonoscopy every 10 years.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11028135     DOI: 10.1017/s0266462300102077

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care        ISSN: 0266-4623            Impact factor:   2.188


  30 in total

1.  Probability model for estimating colorectal polyp progression rates.

Authors:  Chaitra Gopalappa; Selen Aydogan-Cremaschi; Tapas K Das; Seza Orcun
Journal:  Health Care Manag Sci       Date:  2010-10-05

2.  Feasible economic strategies to improve screening compliance for colorectal cancer in Korea.

Authors:  Sang Min Park; Young Ho Yun; Soonman Kwon
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2005-03-21       Impact factor: 5.742

3.  Does a negative screening colonoscopy ever need to be repeated?

Authors:  H Brenner; J Chang-Claude; C M Seiler; T Stürmer; M Hoffmeister
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2006-02-09       Impact factor: 23.059

Review 4.  Cancer screening in renal transplant recipients: what is the evidence?

Authors:  Germaine Wong; Jeremy R Chapman; Jonathan C Craig
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 8.237

Review 5.  Calibration methods used in cancer simulation models and suggested reporting guidelines.

Authors:  Natasha K Stout; Amy B Knudsen; Chung Yin Kong; Pamela M McMahon; G Scott Gazelle
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  A framework for evaluating the cost-effectiveness of patient decision aids: A case study using colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Scott B Cantor; Tanya Rajan; Suzanne K Linder; Robert J Volk
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2015-05-12       Impact factor: 4.018

7.  Screening methods for early detection of colorectal cancers and polyps: summary of evidence-based analyses.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2009-09-01

8.  A systematic comparison of microsimulation models of colorectal cancer: the role of assumptions about adenoma progression.

Authors:  Karen M Kuntz; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Carolyn M Rutter; Amy B Knudsen; Marjolein van Ballegooijen; James E Savarino; Eric J Feuer; Ann G Zauber
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2011-06-14       Impact factor: 2.583

9.  Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening in high-risk Spanish patients: use of a validated model to inform public policy.

Authors:  Uri Ladabaum; Angel Ferrandez; Angel Lanas
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2010-09-01       Impact factor: 4.254

10.  What is the most cost-effective strategy to screen for second primary colorectal cancers in male cancer survivors in Korea?

Authors:  Sang-Min Park; Sun-Young Kim; Craig-C Earle; Seung-Yong Jeong; Young-Ho Yun
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-07-07       Impact factor: 5.742

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.