Literature DB >> 16230069

Projected national impact of colorectal cancer screening on clinical and economic outcomes and health services demand.

Uri Ladabaum1, Kenneth Song.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is effective and cost-effective, but the potential national impact of widespread screening is uncertain. It is controversial whether screening colonoscopy can be offered widely and how emerging tests may impact health services demand. Our aim was to produce integrated, comprehensive estimates of the impact of widespread screening on national clinical and economic outcomes and health services demand.
METHODS: We used a Markov model and census data to estimate the national consequences of screening 75% of the US population with conventional and emerging strategies.
RESULTS: Screening decreased CRC incidence by 17%-54% to as few as 66,000 cases per year and CRC mortality by 28%-60% to as few as 23,000 deaths per year. With no screening, total annual national CRC-related expenditures were 8.4 US billion dollars. With screening, expenditures for CRC care decreased by 1.5-4.4 US billion dollars but total expenditures increased to 9.2-15.4 US billion dollars. Screening colonoscopy every 10 years required 8.1 million colonoscopies per year including surveillance, with other strategies requiring 17%-58% as many colonoscopies. With improved screening uptake, total colonoscopy demand increased in general, even assuming substantial use of virtual colonoscopy.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite savings in CRC care, widespread screening is unlikely to be cost saving and may increase national expenditures by 0.8-2.8 US billion dollars per year with conventional tests. The current national endoscopic capacity, as recently estimated, may be adequate to support widespread use of screening colonoscopy in the steady state. The impact of emerging tests on colonoscopy demand will depend on the extent to which they replace screening colonoscopy or increase screening uptake in the population.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16230069     DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2005.07.059

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastroenterology        ISSN: 0016-5085            Impact factor:   22.682


  50 in total

1.  Rate and yield of repeat upper endoscopy in patients with dyspepsia.

Authors:  Uri Ladabaum; Viam Dinh
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-05-28       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 2.  Challenges and possible solutions to colorectal cancer screening for the underserved.

Authors:  Samir Gupta; Daniel A Sussman; Chyke A Doubeni; Daniel S Anderson; Lukejohn Day; Amar R Deshpande; B Joseph Elmunzer; Adeyinka O Laiyemo; Jeanette Mendez; Ma Somsouk; James Allison; Taft Bhuket; Zhuo Geng; Beverly B Green; Steven H Itzkowitz; Maria Elena Martinez
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2014-03-28       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 3.  Screening tests for colorectal cancer: a menu of options remains relevant.

Authors:  James E Allison; Michael Lawson
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 5.075

4.  Cost-Effectiveness and National Effects of Initiating Colorectal Cancer Screening for Average-Risk Persons at Age 45 Years Instead of 50 Years.

Authors:  Uri Ladabaum; Ajitha Mannalithara; Reinier G S Meester; Samir Gupta; Robert E Schoen
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2019-03-28       Impact factor: 22.682

5.  Early detection of colon cancer-the kaiser permanente northwest 30-year history: how do we measure success? Is it the test, the number of tests, the stage, or the percentage of screen-detected patients?

Authors:  David Moiel; John Thompson
Journal:  Perm J       Date:  2011

Review 6.  FIT testing: an overview.

Authors:  Lukejohn W Day; Taft Bhuket; James Allison
Journal:  Curr Gastroenterol Rep       Date:  2013-11

7.  Prediction of the Risk of a Metachronous Advanced Colorectal Neoplasm Using a Novel Scoring System.

Authors:  Ji Young Lee; Hye Won Park; Min-Ju Kim; Jong-Soo Lee; Ho-Su Lee; Hye-Sook Chang; Jaewon Choe; Sung Wook Hwang; Dong-Hoon Yang; Seung-Jae Myung; Suk-Kyun Yang; Jeong-Sik Byeon
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2016-06-29       Impact factor: 3.199

8.  Cost-effectiveness of patient navigation to increase adherence with screening colonoscopy among minority individuals.

Authors:  Uri Ladabaum; Ajitha Mannalithara; Lina Jandorf; Steven H Itzkowitz
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2014-12-09       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  Optical colonoscopy and virtual colonoscopy numbers after initiation of a CT colonography program: long term data.

Authors:  Mark Benson; Jeff Pier; Sally Kraft; David Kim; Perry Pickhardt; Jennifer Weiss; Deepak Gopal; Mark Reichelderfer; Patrick Pfau
Journal:  J Gastrointestin Liver Dis       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 2.008

10.  Contrasting Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening Under Commercial Insurance vs. Medicare.

Authors:  Uri Ladabaum; Ajitha Mannalithara; Joel V Brill; Zachary Levin; Kate M Bundorf
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-06-15       Impact factor: 10.864

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.