Literature DB >> 20087087

Value-of-information analysis to guide future research in the management of the colorectal malignant polyp.

Cesare Hassan1, Perry J Pickhardt, Emilio Di Giulio, Myriam G M Hunink, Angelo Zullo, Bruno Buongiorno Nardelli.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The efficacy of surgery in the postendoscopic management of low-risk malignant polyps is unclear. Although interobserver variability in the histological diagnosis was shown, its importance is unknown. The purpose of this study was to guide future research on the optimal strategy for low-risk polyps with the use of value-of-information analysis.
METHODS: A decision-analysis model was constructed comparing the strategies of referring or not referring (waiting) to surgery patients with low-risk polyps. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed to explore the effect of uncertainty about the input parameters. Value-of-information analysis was used to estimate the expected benefit of future research that would eliminate the decision uncertainty.
RESULTS: The number of postendoscopic surgeries to prevent 1 cancer-related death was 208. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of surgery vs waiting strategy was $215,291/life-year gained, surgery being a suboptimal choice in the reference case analysis. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that surgery was the optimal choice in 61% of the simulated scenarios. Most of the decision uncertainty was related with the combination of histological inaccuracy, prevalence of residual disease, and surgical mortality. The expected societal monetary benefit of further research from the perspective of the United States was estimated to be $1 billion.
CONCLUSIONS: The small benefit and the relatively high costs associated with surgery argue against surgical referral for low-risk malignant polyps; however, when a suboptimal histopathological accuracy was simulated, surgery appeared to be the most cost-effective option, prompting the need for further research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20087087     DOI: 10.1007/DCR.0b013e3181c3be55

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum        ISSN: 0012-3706            Impact factor:   4.585


  4 in total

1.  When to wait for more evidence? Real options analysis in proton therapy.

Authors:  Janneke P C Grutters; Keith R Abrams; Dirk de Ruysscher; Madelon Pijls-Johannesma; Hans J M Peters; Eric Beutner; Philippe Lambin; Manuela A Joore
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2011-12-06

Review 2.  A systematic and critical review of the evolving methods and applications of value of information in academia and practice.

Authors:  Lotte Steuten; Gijs van de Wetering; Karin Groothuis-Oudshoorn; Valesca Retèl
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Pathologist second opinion significantly alters clinical management of pT1 endoscopically resected colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Gian Luca Rampioni Vinciguerra; Giulio Antonelli; Francesca Citron; Giammauro Berardi; Stefano Angeletti; Gustavo Baldassarre; Andrea Vecchione; Emilio Di Giulio; Emanuela Pilozzi
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2019-06-17       Impact factor: 4.064

Review 4.  Clinical outcome of low- and high-risk malignant colorectal polyps: results of a population-based study and meta-analysis of the available literature.

Authors:  Carmela Di Gregorio; Luca Reggiani Bonetti; Carmela de Gaetani; Monica Pedroni; Shaniko Kaleci; Maurizio Ponz de Leon
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2012-03-27       Impact factor: 3.397

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.