OBJECTIVES: To estimate the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and resource impact of faecal occult blood testing (FOBT) and flexible sigmoidoscopy (FSIG) screening options for colorectal cancer to inform the Department of Health's policy on bowel cancer screening in England. METHODS: We developed a state transition model to simulate the life experience of a cohort of individuals without polyps or cancer through to the development of adenomatous polyps and malignant carcinoma and subsequent death in the general population of England. The costs, effects and resource impact of five screening options were evaluated: (a) FOBT for individuals aged 50-69 (biennial screening); (b) FOBT for individuals aged 60-69 (biennial screening); (c) once-only FSIG for individuals aged 55; (d) once-only FSIG for individuals aged 60; and (e) once-only FSIG for individuals aged 60, followed by FOBT for individuals aged 61-70 (biennial screening). RESULTS: The model suggests that screening using FSIG with or without FOBT may be cost-saving and may produce additional benefits compared with a policy of no screening. The marginal cost-effectiveness of FOBT options compared to a policy of no screening is estimated to be below pound3000 per quality adjusted life year gained. CONCLUSIONS: Screening using FOBT and/or FSIG is potentially a cost-effective strategy for the early detection of colorectal cancer. However, the practical feasibility of alternative screening programmes is inevitably limited by current pressures on endoscopy services.
OBJECTIVES: To estimate the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and resource impact of faecal occult blood testing (FOBT) and flexible sigmoidoscopy (FSIG) screening options for colorectal cancer to inform the Department of Health's policy on bowel cancer screening in England. METHODS: We developed a state transition model to simulate the life experience of a cohort of individuals without polyps or cancer through to the development of adenomatous polyps and malignant carcinoma and subsequent death in the general population of England. The costs, effects and resource impact of five screening options were evaluated: (a) FOBT for individuals aged 50-69 (biennial screening); (b) FOBT for individuals aged 60-69 (biennial screening); (c) once-only FSIG for individuals aged 55; (d) once-only FSIG for individuals aged 60; and (e) once-only FSIG for individuals aged 60, followed by FOBT for individuals aged 61-70 (biennial screening). RESULTS: The model suggests that screening using FSIG with or without FOBT may be cost-saving and may produce additional benefits compared with a policy of no screening. The marginal cost-effectiveness of FOBT options compared to a policy of no screening is estimated to be below pound3000 per quality adjusted life year gained. CONCLUSIONS: Screening using FOBT and/or FSIG is potentially a cost-effective strategy for the early detection of colorectal cancer. However, the practical feasibility of alternative screening programmes is inevitably limited by current pressures on endoscopy services.
Authors: F Loeve; M L Brown; R Boer; M van Ballegooijen; G J van Oortmarssen; J D Habbema Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2000-04-05 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: S J Winawer; A G Zauber; M J O'Brien; M N Ho; L Gottlieb; S S Sternberg; J D Waye; J Bond; M Schapiro; E T Stewart Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1993-04-01 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: C Senore; N Segnan; F P Rossini; R Ferraris; M Cavallero; F Coppola; M Pennazio; W S Atkin Journal: J Med Screen Date: 1996 Impact factor: 2.136
Authors: L Tilson; L Sharp; C Usher; C Walsh; Whyte S; A O'Ceilleachair; C Stuart; B Mehigan; M John Kennedy; P Tappenden; J Chilcott; A Staines; H Comber; M Barry Journal: Eur J Health Econ Date: 2011-06-03
Authors: Tazio Vanni; Jonathan Karnon; Jason Madan; Richard G White; W John Edmunds; Anna M Foss; Rosa Legood Journal: Pharmacoeconomics Date: 2011-01 Impact factor: 4.981
Authors: K L Flitcroft; D J B St John; K Howard; S M Carter; M P Pignone; G P Salkeld; L J Trevena Journal: J Med Screen Date: 2011-11-21 Impact factor: 2.136
Authors: Antonieta Medina-Lara; Bogdan Grigore; Ruth Lewis; Jaime Peters; Sarah Price; Paolo Landa; Sophie Robinson; Richard Neal; William Hamilton; Anne E Spencer Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2020-11 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Marjolein van Ballegooijen; Ann G Zauber; J Dik F Habbema; Ernst J Kuipers Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2009-09-24 Impact factor: 13.506