Literature DB >> 11601929

Cost-effectiveness of microsatellite instability screening as a method for detecting hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer.

S D Ramsey1, L Clarke, R Etzioni, M Higashi, K Berry, N Urban.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The National Cancer Institute has published consensus guidelines for universal screening for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) in patients with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost-effectiveness of screening compared with standard care in eligible patients with colorectal cancer and their siblings and children.
DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis. DATA SOURCES: National colorectal cancer registry data, the Creighton International Hereditary Colorectal Cancer Registry, Medicare claims records, and published literature. TARGET POPULATION: Patients with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer and their siblings and children. TIME HORIZON: Lifetime (varies depending on age at screening). PERSPECTIVE: Societal.
INTERVENTIONS: Initial office-based screening to determine eligibility (based on personal and family cancer history), followed by tumor testing for microsatellite instability. Those with microsatellite instability were offered genetic testing for HNPCC. Siblings and children of patients with cancer and the HNPCC mutation were offered genetic testing, and those who were found to carry the mutation received lifelong colorectal cancer screening. MEASUREMENTS: Life-years gained. RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: When only the patients with cancer were considered, cost-effectiveness of screening was $42 210 per life-year gained. When patients with cancer and their siblings and children were considered together, cost-effectiveness increased to $7556 per life-year gained. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: The model was most sensitive to the estimated survival gain from screening siblings and children, to the prevalence of HNPCC mutations among patients with newly diagnosed cancer, and to the discount rate. In probabilistic analysis, the 90% CI for the cost-effectiveness of screening patients with cancer plus their relatives was $4874 to $21 576 per life-year gained.
CONCLUSION: Screening patients with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer for HNPCC is cost-effective, especially if the benefits to their immediate relatives are considered.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11601929     DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-135-8_part_1-200110160-00008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Intern Med        ISSN: 0003-4819            Impact factor:   25.391


  35 in total

Review 1.  Global registries for measuring pharmacoeconomic and quality-of-life outcomes: focus on design and data collection, analysis and interpretation.

Authors:  Lisa Kennedy; Ann-Marie Craig
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  Bethesda criteria for microsatellite instability testing: impact on the detection of new cases of Lynch syndrome.

Authors:  Miguel Serrano; Pedro Lage; Sara Belga; Bruno Filipe; Inês Francisco; Paula Rodrigues; Ricardo Fonseca; Paula Chaves; Isabel Claro; Cristina Albuquerque; António Dias Pereira
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 2.375

3.  Sharing genetic test results in Lynch syndrome: communication with close and distant relatives.

Authors:  Elena M Stoffel; Beth Ford; Rowena C Mercado; Darashana Punglia; Wendy Kohlmann; Peggy Conrad; Amie Blanco; Kristen M Shannon; Mark Powell; Stephen B Gruber; Jonathan Terdiman; Daniel C Chung; Sapna Syngal
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2008-02-07       Impact factor: 11.382

Review 4.  Challenges to the translation of genomic information into clinical practice and health policy: Utilization, preferences and economic value.

Authors:  Kathryn A Phillips; Su-Ying Liang; Stephanie Van Bebber
Journal:  Curr Opin Mol Ther       Date:  2008-06

5.  Prevalence and predictors of appropriate colorectal cancer surveillance in Lynch syndrome.

Authors:  Elena M Stoffel; Rowena C Mercado; Wendy Kohlmann; Beth Ford; Shilpa Grover; Peggy Conrad; Amie Blanco; Kristen M Shannon; Mark Powell; Daniel C Chung; Jonathan Terdiman; Stephen B Gruber; Sapna Syngal
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-03-30       Impact factor: 10.864

6.  Cost-effectiveness and diagnostic effectiveness analyses of multiple algorithms for the diagnosis of Lynch syndrome.

Authors:  Milena Gould-Suarez; Hashem B El-Serag; Benjamin Musher; Luis Miguel Franco; Guoqing J Chen
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2014-06-24       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 7.  Genetic screening.

Authors:  Wylie Burke; Beth Tarini; Nancy A Press; James P Evans
Journal:  Epidemiol Rev       Date:  2011-06-27       Impact factor: 6.222

Review 8.  Genetic testing and common disorders in a public health framework: how to assess relevance and possibilities. Background Document to the ESHG recommendations on genetic testing and common disorders.

Authors:  Frauke Becker; Carla G van El; Dolores Ibarreta; Eleni Zika; Stuart Hogarth; Pascal Borry; Anne Cambon-Thomsen; Jean Jacques Cassiman; Gerry Evers-Kiebooms; Shirley Hodgson; A Cécile J W Janssens; Helena Kaariainen; Michael Krawczak; Ulf Kristoffersson; Jan Lubinski; Christine Patch; Victor B Penchaszadeh; Andrew Read; Wolf Rogowski; Jorge Sequeiros; Lisbeth Tranebjaerg; Irene M van Langen; Helen Wallace; Ron Zimmern; Jörg Schmidtke; Martina C Cornel
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 4.246

Review 9.  Collaborative cancer epidemiology in the 21st century: the model of cancer consortia.

Authors:  Michael R Burgio; John P A Ioannidis; Brett M Kaminski; Eric Derycke; Scott Rogers; Muin J Khoury; Daniela Seminara
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2013-09-17       Impact factor: 4.254

10.  Characteristics of health information gatherers, disseminators, and blockers within families at risk of hereditary cancer: implications for family health communication interventions.

Authors:  Laura M Koehly; June A Peters; Regina Kenen; Lindsey M Hoskins; Anne L Ersig; Natalia R Kuhn; Jennifer T Loud; Mark H Greene
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2009-10-15       Impact factor: 9.308

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.