Scott D Ramsey1, Wylie Burke, Lauren Clarke. 1. Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, and Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: There is uncertainty regarding the optimal strategy for identifying mutation carriers among those with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC). METHODS: We used decision analysis to compare the cost-effectiveness of 4 strategies among those with newly diagnosed colon cancer: (1) clinical and family history followed by microsatellite instability testing and germline testing (Bethesda guidelines); (2) universal microsatellite instability testing; (3) germline testing of those who meet clinical and family history criteria; and (4) universal germline testing. RESULTS: The added cost per year of life saved (YLS) for each strategy was as follows: (1) 11,865 US dollars/YLS, (2) 35,617 US dollars/YLS, (3) 49,702 US dollars/YLS, and (4) 267,548 US dollars/YLS. CONCLUSIONS: The Bethesda guidelines are the most cost-effectiveness approach to screen persons for HNPCC.
PURPOSE: There is uncertainty regarding the optimal strategy for identifying mutation carriers among those with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC). METHODS: We used decision analysis to compare the cost-effectiveness of 4 strategies among those with newly diagnosed colon cancer: (1) clinical and family history followed by microsatellite instability testing and germline testing (Bethesda guidelines); (2) universal microsatellite instability testing; (3) germline testing of those who meet clinical and family history criteria; and (4) universal germline testing. RESULTS: The added cost per year of life saved (YLS) for each strategy was as follows: (1) 11,865 US dollars/YLS, (2) 35,617 US dollars/YLS, (3) 49,702 US dollars/YLS, and (4) 267,548 US dollars/YLS. CONCLUSIONS: The Bethesda guidelines are the most cost-effectiveness approach to screen persons for HNPCC.
Authors: I González-García; V Moreno; M Navarro; J Martí-Ragué; E Marcuello; C Benasco; O Campos; G Capellà; M A Peinado Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2000-04-05 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: V J Bubb; L J Curtis; C Cunningham; M G Dunlop; A D Carothers; R G Morris; S White; C C Bird; A H Wyllie Journal: Oncogene Date: 1996-06-20 Impact factor: 9.867
Authors: Alejandro Giraldo; Andrea Gómez; Gustavo Salguero; Herbert García; Fabio Aristizábal; Oscar Gutiérrez; Luis Alberto Angel; Jorge Padrón; Carlos Martínez; Humberto Martínez; Omar Malaver; Luis Flórez; Rosa Barvo Journal: Fam Cancer Date: 2005 Impact factor: 2.375
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
Authors: Uri Ladabaum; Grace Wang; Jonathan Terdiman; Amie Blanco; Miriam Kuppermann; C Richard Boland; James Ford; Elena Elkin; Kathryn A Phillips Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2011-07-19 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Carlos J Gallego; Caroline S Bennette; Patrick Heagerty; Bryan Comstock; Martha Horike-Pyne; Fuki Hisama; Laura M Amendola; Robin L Bennett; Michael O Dorschner; Peter Tarczy-Hornoch; William M Grady; S Malia Fullerton; Susan B Trinidad; Dean A Regier; Deborah A Nickerson; Wylie Burke; Donald L Patrick; Gail P Jarvik; David L Veenstra Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2014-07-03 Impact factor: 2.226