BACKGROUND: The SOMIT trial randomized patients with idiopathic venous thromboembolism (IVTE) and without signs of cancer at routine medical examination, to extensive screening for cancer plus 2 years of follow-up or to just 2-year follow-up. METHODS: The data of the SOMIT-trial were used to perform a decision analysis. The screening tests were divided in several possible strategies. The number of detected cancer patients and the number of patients investigated further for an eventually benign condition were calculated for each strategy. The total costs for the screening strategy and for each detected cancer patient were determined. Based on the tumor type, stage, age and gender of the individual cancer patient, the difference in live years gained (LYG) was calculated between the two study groups. RESULTS:Computed tomography (CT) of the abdomen combined with sputum cytology and mammography detected 12 of the 14 patients with cancer and had one false-positive result. In general, screening strategies including abdominal/pelvic ultrasonography (US) or tumor markers yielded a higher number of patients needed to screen in comparison with those using abdominal/pelvic CT. Furthermore, the strategies which included colonoscopy, tumor markers, and abdominal/pelvic US were significantly more costly, had inferior LYG and higher costs per LYG, when compared with strategies using abdominal/pelvic CT. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the limitations of this analysis, the screening for cancer with a strategy including abdominal/pelvic CT with or without mammography and/or sputum cytology appears potentially useful for cancer screening in patients with IVTE. The cost-effectiveness analysis of this strategy needs confirmation in a large trial.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The SOMIT trial randomized patients with idiopathic venous thromboembolism (IVTE) and without signs of cancer at routine medical examination, to extensive screening for cancer plus 2 years of follow-up or to just 2-year follow-up. METHODS: The data of the SOMIT-trial were used to perform a decision analysis. The screening tests were divided in several possible strategies. The number of detected cancerpatients and the number of patients investigated further for an eventually benign condition were calculated for each strategy. The total costs for the screening strategy and for each detected cancerpatient were determined. Based on the tumor type, stage, age and gender of the individual cancerpatient, the difference in live years gained (LYG) was calculated between the two study groups. RESULTS: Computed tomography (CT) of the abdomen combined with sputum cytology and mammography detected 12 of the 14 patients with cancer and had one false-positive result. In general, screening strategies including abdominal/pelvic ultrasonography (US) or tumor markers yielded a higher number of patients needed to screen in comparison with those using abdominal/pelvic CT. Furthermore, the strategies which included colonoscopy, tumor markers, and abdominal/pelvic US were significantly more costly, had inferior LYG and higher costs per LYG, when compared with strategies using abdominal/pelvic CT. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the limitations of this analysis, the screening for cancer with a strategy including abdominal/pelvic CT with or without mammography and/or sputum cytology appears potentially useful for cancer screening in patients with IVTE. The cost-effectiveness analysis of this strategy needs confirmation in a large trial.
Authors: Matthew T Rondina; Nathan Wanner; Robert C Pendleton; Larry W Kraiss; Russell Vinik; Guy A Zimmerman; Marta Heilbrun; John M Hoffman; Kathryn A Morton Journal: Thromb Res Date: 2011-07-29 Impact factor: 3.944
Authors: Bruno L Ferreyro; Federico Angriman; Diego Giunta; María Lourdes Posadas-Martínez; Fernando Vazquez; Fernán Gonzalez Bernaldo De Quirós; Andre C K B Amaral; Damon C Scales Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2013-07-22 Impact factor: 4.430