OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the direct costs of first and repeat colorectal cancer screening by immunochemical faecal occult blood testing (I-FOBT). METHODS: Florence district residents aged 50-70 were invited to undergo one-time I-FOBT every two years. Full colonoscopy was recommended for FOBT-positive subjects. Direct cost analysis was carried out separately for the first and repeat screening. All relevant resources consumed by the programme were calculated. RESULTS: Among 25,428 or 62,369 subjects invited to the first or repeat screening, respectively, the corresponding participation rate was 47.8% or 52.3%, and the positivity rate was 4.4% and 3.3%. Corresponding detection rates and positive predictive values for cancer and advanced adenoma were 11.3% or 8.9% and 32.4% or 32.8%, respectively. The assessment phase accounted for the major cost, as compared with recruitment and screening. All cost indicators were slightly higher in the first screening compared with repeat screening. Cost per cancer and advanced adenoma detected was similar in the first or repeat screening. A higher than observed participation rate would have substantially reduced screening cost. CONCLUSION: Analysis of I-FOBT-organized population-based screening cost demonstrates lower cost at repeat compared with first screening and provides reference for decision-making in screening implementation.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the direct costs of first and repeat colorectal cancer screening by immunochemical faecal occult blood testing (I-FOBT). METHODS: Florence district residents aged 50-70 were invited to undergo one-time I-FOBT every two years. Full colonoscopy was recommended for FOBT-positive subjects. Direct cost analysis was carried out separately for the first and repeat screening. All relevant resources consumed by the programme were calculated. RESULTS: Among 25,428 or 62,369 subjects invited to the first or repeat screening, respectively, the corresponding participation rate was 47.8% or 52.3%, and the positivity rate was 4.4% and 3.3%. Corresponding detection rates and positive predictive values for cancer and advanced adenoma were 11.3% or 8.9% and 32.4% or 32.8%, respectively. The assessment phase accounted for the major cost, as compared with recruitment and screening. All cost indicators were slightly higher in the first screening compared with repeat screening. Cost per cancer and advanced adenoma detected was similar in the first or repeat screening. A higher than observed participation rate would have substantially reduced screening cost. CONCLUSION: Analysis of I-FOBT-organized population-based screening cost demonstrates lower cost at repeat compared with first screening and provides reference for decision-making in screening implementation.
Authors: Vicent Hernandez; Joaquin Cubiella; M Carmen Gonzalez-Mao; Felipe Iglesias; Concepción Rivera; M Begoña Iglesias; Lucía Cid; Ines Castro; Luisa de Castro; Pablo Vega; Jose Antonio Hermo; Ramiro Macenlle; Alfonso Martínez-Turnes; David Martínez-Ares; Pamela Estevez; Estela Cid; M Carmen Vidal; Angeles López-Martínez; Elisabeth Hijona; Marta Herreros-Villanueva; Luis Bujanda; Jose Ignacio Rodriguez-Prada Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2014-01-28 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Caitlin C Murphy; Ethan A Halm; Celette Sugg Skinner; Bijal A Balasubramanian; Amit G Singal Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2020-05-26 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Giridhar Mohan; Sajal K Chattopadhyay; Donatus U Ekwueme; Susan A Sabatino; Devon L Okasako-Schmucker; Yinan Peng; Shawna L Mercer; Anilkrishna B Thota Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2019-08-30 Impact factor: 5.043