Literature DB >> 14986736

Screening, prevention and socioeconomic costs associated with the treatment of colorectal cancer.

Alberto Redaelli1, Carole W Cranor, Gary J Okano, Pat Ray Reese.   

Abstract

Colorectal cancer (CRC), the third most prevalent cancer worldwide, imposes a significant economic and humanistic burden on patients and society. One study conservatively estimated the annual expenditures for colorectal cancer to be approximately dollars US 5.3 billion in 2000, including both direct and indirect costs. However, other investigators estimated inpatient costs alone incurred in the US in 1994 to be around dollars US 5.14 billion. Therefore, the economic burden of colorectal cancer in the US could be projected to be somewhere in the range of dollars US 5.5-6.5 billion by considering that inpatient costs approximate 80% of total direct costs. No worldwide data have been published, but assuming that the US represents 25-40% of total expenditures in oncology, as seen for breast and lung cancers, a rough estimate for colorectal cancer would be in the range of dollars US 14-22 billion. Screening helps increase patient survival by diagnosing colorectal cancer early. The ideal method among the four tests most used (faecal occult blood test, flexible sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy and double contrast barium enema) has not been identified. Economic studies of colorectal cancer screening are complex because of the many variables involved, as well as the fact that the outcomes must be followed for many years, and the lack of consensus on screening guidelines. Intuitively, modelling colorectal cancer is one way to overcome these hurdles; published modelling studies predict colorectal cancer screening programs to be within the threshold of dollars US 40000 per life-year saved. The faecal occult blood test appears to be the only clearly effective test, both from a clinical and an economic viewpoint. Important limitations are the invasiveness and inconvenience of the screening procedures, except faecal occult blood test. Patients' comfort and satisfaction are essential in improving compliance with screening recommendations, which appears to be low even in the US (35% of the general population aged over 40 years and 60% of the high-risk population), the country with the highest awareness and compliance in the world. Since colorectal cancer is generally a disease of the elderly, its economic burden is expected to grow in the near future, mainly due to population aging. Potential avenues to pursue in order to contain or reduce the economic burden of colorectal cancer would be the design and implementation of efficient screening programmes, the improvement of patient awareness and compliance with screening guidelines, the development of appropriate prevention programs (i.e. primary and secondary), and earlier diagnosis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14986736     DOI: 10.2165/00019053-200321170-00001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics        ISSN: 1170-7690            Impact factor:   4.981


  89 in total

1.  Lifetime cancer-attributable cost of care for long term survivors of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Scott D Ramsey; Kristin Berry; Ruth Etzioni
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 10.864

2.  South African Gastro-enterology Society guidelines for colonoscopy in premalignant conditions and after resection of large-bowel cancer.

Authors:  M V Madden
Journal:  S Afr Med J       Date:  1992-04-04

Review 3.  Whole-grain intake and cancer: an expanded review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  D R Jacobs; L Marquart; J Slavin; L H Kushi
Journal:  Nutr Cancer       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 2.900

4.  The Colon Cancer Prevention Program (CoCaP): rationale, implementation, and preliminary results.

Authors:  A M Palitz; J V Selby; S Grossman; L J Finkler; M Bevc; C Kehr; C A Conell
Journal:  HMO Pract       Date:  1997-03

Review 5.  Colon cancer screening. Sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy.

Authors:  S K Khullar; J A DiSario
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am       Date:  1997-07

6.  Cancer statistics, 1999.

Authors:  S H Landis; T Murray; S Bolden; P A Wingo
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  1999 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 508.702

7.  Cancer Prevention: The Roles of Diet and Chemoprevention.

Authors: 
Journal:  Cancer Control       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 3.302

Review 8.  Nutrition and colorectal cancer.

Authors:  J D Potter
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 2.506

9.  Adjuvant therapy for stage III colon cancer: economics returns to research and cost-effectiveness of treatment.

Authors:  M L Brown; S G Nayfield; L M Shibley
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1994-03-16       Impact factor: 13.506

10.  Cost of patient follow-up after potentially curative colorectal cancer treatment.

Authors:  K S Virgo; A M Vernava; W E Longo; L W McKirgan; F E Johnson
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1995-06-21       Impact factor: 56.272

View more
  13 in total

Review 1.  Cost effectiveness of statins in coronary heart disease.

Authors:  Oscar H Franco; Anna Peeters; Caspar W N Looman; Luc Bonneux
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 3.710

2.  Telephone outreach to increase colorectal cancer screening in an urban minority population.

Authors:  Charles E Basch; Randi L Wolf; Corey H Brouse; Celia Shmukler; Alfred Neugut; Lawrence T DeCarlo; Steven Shea
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2006-10-31       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  Endoscopic submucosal dissection and its potential role in the management of early colorectal neoplasia in UK.

Authors:  Christopher Hayward; Toshio Uraoka; Naohisa Yahagi
Journal:  Frontline Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-04-03

4.  Burden of emergency and non-emergency colorectal cancer surgeries in West Virginia and the USA.

Authors:  Neel A Shah; Joel Halverson; Suresh Madhavan
Journal:  J Gastrointest Cancer       Date:  2013-03

5.  Laparoscopic versus conventional open surgery for immune function in patients with colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Chuanyuan Liu; Jungang Liu; Sen Zhang
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2011-08-06       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  Prevention, screening and treatment of colorectal cancer: a global and regional generalized cost effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Gary M Ginsberg; Stephen S Lim; Jeremy A Lauer; Benjamin P Johns; Cecilia R Sepulveda
Journal:  Cost Eff Resour Alloc       Date:  2010-03-17

Review 7.  Capecitabine, alone and in combination, in the management of patients with colorectal cancer: a review of the evidence.

Authors:  Pasquale Comella; Rossana Casaretti; Claudia Sandomenico; Antonio Avallone; Luca Franco
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 8.  Economic studies in colorectal cancer: challenges in measuring and comparing costs.

Authors:  K Robin Yabroff; Laurel Borowski; Joseph Lipscomb
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2013

Review 9.  Screening for bladder cancer: a perspective.

Authors:  Yair Lotan; Robert S Svatek; Núria Malats
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2007-11-21       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 10.  Cost considerations in the treatment of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Frank G A Jansman; Maarten J Postma; Jacobus R B J Brouwers
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 4.981

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.