BACKGROUND: Although the rationale for earlier screening of persons with a family history of colorectal cancer is plausible, there is no direct evidence that earlier assessment is either effective or cost-effective. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the clinical and economic effect of using family history assessment to identify persons for colorectal cancer screening before age 50. METHODS: We developed a decision model to compare costs and outcomes for two scenarios: (a) standard population screening starting at age 50; (b) family history assessment at age 40, followed by screening colonoscopy at age 40 for those with a suggestive family history of colorectal cancer. The analysis was conducted using the health insurer perspective. RESULTS: Using U.S. population estimates, 22 million would be eligible for family history assessment, and one million would be eligible for early colonoscopy; 2,834 invasive cancers would be detected, and 29,331 life years would be gained. The initial program cost would be USD $900 million. The discounted cost per life year gained of family history assessment versus no assessment equals USD $58,228. The results were most sensitive to the life expectancy benefit from earlier screening, the cost of colonoscopy, and the relative risk of colon cancer in those with a family history. CONCLUSIONS: The cost-effectiveness of family history assessment for colorectal cancer approaches that of other widely accepted technologies; yet, the results are sensitive to several assumptions where better data are needed. Because of the relatively high prevalence of family history in the population, careful analysis and empirical data are needed.
BACKGROUND: Although the rationale for earlier screening of persons with a family history of colorectal cancer is plausible, there is no direct evidence that earlier assessment is either effective or cost-effective. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the clinical and economic effect of using family history assessment to identify persons for colorectal cancer screening before age 50. METHODS: We developed a decision model to compare costs and outcomes for two scenarios: (a) standard population screening starting at age 50; (b) family history assessment at age 40, followed by screening colonoscopy at age 40 for those with a suggestive family history of colorectal cancer. The analysis was conducted using the health insurer perspective. RESULTS: Using U.S. population estimates, 22 million would be eligible for family history assessment, and one million would be eligible for early colonoscopy; 2,834 invasive cancers would be detected, and 29,331 life years would be gained. The initial program cost would be USD $900 million. The discounted cost per life year gained of family history assessment versus no assessment equals USD $58,228. The results were most sensitive to the life expectancy benefit from earlier screening, the cost of colonoscopy, and the relative risk of colon cancer in those with a family history. CONCLUSIONS: The cost-effectiveness of family history assessment for colorectal cancer approaches that of other widely accepted technologies; yet, the results are sensitive to several assumptions where better data are needed. Because of the relatively high prevalence of family history in the population, careful analysis and empirical data are needed.
Authors: G Hoff; J Sauar; M H Vatn; S Larsen; F Langmark; I E Moen; A Foerster; E Thiis-Evensen Journal: Scand J Gastroenterol Date: 1996-10 Impact factor: 2.423
Authors: L A Cannon-Albright; A Thomas; D E Goldgar; K Gholami; K Rowe; M Jacobsen; W P McWhorter; M H Skolnick Journal: Cancer Res Date: 1994-05-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Chanita Hughes Halbert; Henry Lynch; Jane Lynch; David Main; Susan Kucharski; Anil K Rustgi; Caryn Lerman Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2004-09-27
Authors: S J Winawer; A G Zauber; H Gerdes; M J O'Brien; L S Gottlieb; S S Sternberg; J H Bond; J D Waye; M Schapiro; J F Panish Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1996-01-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: D K Rex; G A Lehman; T M Ulbright; J J Smith; D C Pound; R H Hawes; D J Helper; M J Wiersema; C D Langefeld; W Li Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 1993-06 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Heather Hampel; Wendy L Frankel; Edward Martin; Mark Arnold; Karamjit Khanduja; Philip Kuebler; Mark Clendenning; Kaisa Sotamaa; Thomas Prior; Judith A Westman; Jenny Panescu; Dan Fix; Janet Lockman; Jennifer LaJeunesse; Ilene Comeras; Albert de la Chapelle Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-09-22 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Samir Gupta; Balambal Bharti; Dennis J Ahnen; Daniel D Buchanan; Iona C Cheng; Michelle Cotterchio; Jane C Figueiredo; Steven J Gallinger; Robert W Haile; Mark A Jenkins; Noralane M Lindor; Finlay A Macrae; Loïc Le Marchand; Polly A Newcomb; Stephen N Thibodeau; Aung Ko Win; Maria Elena Martinez Journal: Cancer Date: 2020-04-20 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Sharon J Rolnick; Alanna K Rahm; Jody M Jackson; Larissa Nekhlyudov; Katrina A B Goddard; Terry Field; Catherine McCarty; Cynthia Nakasato; Douglas Roblin; Christopher P Anderson; Rodolfo Valdez Journal: J Genet Couns Date: 2011-04-19 Impact factor: 2.537
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
Authors: Anne C Kirchhoff; Polly A Newcomb; Amy Trentham-Dietz; Hazel B Nichols; John M Hampton Journal: Fam Cancer Date: 2008-03-24 Impact factor: 2.375
Authors: Danilo V Viana; Juvenal R N Góes; Cláudio S R Coy; Maria de Lourdes Setsuko Ayrizono; Carmen S P Lima; Iscia Lopes-Cendes Journal: Fam Cancer Date: 2008-01-10 Impact factor: 2.375
Authors: Scott Ramsey; David Blough; Cara McDermott; Lauren Clarke; Robin Bennett; Wylie Burke; Polly Newcomb Journal: Public Health Genomics Date: 2009-03-02 Impact factor: 2.000