Literature DB >> 23796793

Colorectal cancer screening with blood-based biomarkers: cost-effectiveness of methylated septin 9 DNA versus current strategies.

Uri Ladabaum1, John Allen, Michael Wandell, Scott Ramsey.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Screening reduces colorectal cancer mortality, but many persons remain unscreened. Screening with a blood test could improve screening rates. We estimated the comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening with emerging biomarkers, illustrated by a methylated Septin 9 DNA plasma assay ((m)SEPT9), versus established strategies.
METHODS: We conducted a cost-utility analysis using a validated decision analytic model comparing (m)SEPT9, fecal occult blood testing (FOBT), fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), sigmoidoscopy, and colonoscopy, projecting lifetime benefits and costs.
RESULTS: In the base case, (m)SEPT9 decreased colorectal cancer incidence by 35% to 41% and colorectal cancer mortality by 53% to 61% at costs of $8,400 to $11,500/quality-adjusted life year gained versus no screening. All established screening strategies were more effective than (m)SEPT9. FIT was cost saving, dominated (m)SEPT9, and was preferred among all the alternatives. Screening uptake and longitudinal adherence rates over time strongly influenced the comparisons between strategies. At the population level, (m)SEPT9 yielded incremental benefit at acceptable costs when it increased the fraction of the population screened more than it was substituted for other strategies.
CONCLUSIONS: (m)SEPT9 seems to be effective and cost-effective compared with no screening. To be cost-effective compared with established strategies, (m)SEPT9 or blood-based biomarkers with similar test performance characteristics would need to achieve substantially higher uptake and adherence rates than the alternatives. It remains to be proven whether colorectal cancer screening with a blood test can improve screening uptake or long-term adherence compared with established strategies. IMPACT: Our study offers insights into the potential role of colorectal cancer screening with blood-based biomarkers. ©2013 AACR.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23796793     DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-13-0204

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev        ISSN: 1055-9965            Impact factor:   4.254


  31 in total

Review 1.  Septin Form and Function at the Cell Cortex.

Authors:  Andrew A Bridges; Amy S Gladfelter
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2015-05-08       Impact factor: 5.157

2.  Epi proColon® 2.0 CE: A Blood-Based Screening Test for Colorectal Cancer.

Authors:  Yvette N Lamb; Sohita Dhillon
Journal:  Mol Diagn Ther       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 4.074

3.  Cost-effectiveness of High-performance Biomarker Tests vs Fecal Immunochemical Test for Noninvasive Colorectal Cancer Screening.

Authors:  Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; S Lucas Goede; Linda J W Bosch; Veerle Melotte; Beatriz Carvalho; Manon van Engeland; Gerrit A Meijer; Harry J de Koning; Marjolein van Ballegooijen
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2017-07-18       Impact factor: 11.382

4.  To foster screening, new colon cancer tests emphasize convenience.

Authors:  Cassandra Willyard
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 53.440

Review 5.  Blood-based tests for colorectal cancer screening: do they threaten the survival of the FIT test?

Authors:  Robert S Bresalier; Scott Kopetz; Dean E Brenner
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2015-02-14       Impact factor: 3.199

6.  Genome-wide DNA methylation profiling in triple-negative breast cancer reveals epigenetic signatures with important clinical value.

Authors:  Clare Stirzaker; Elena Zotenko; Susan J Clark
Journal:  Mol Cell Oncol       Date:  2015-05-26

7.  Cost-effectiveness of patient navigation to increase adherence with screening colonoscopy among minority individuals.

Authors:  Uri Ladabaum; Ajitha Mannalithara; Lina Jandorf; Steven H Itzkowitz
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2014-12-09       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  Contrasting Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening Under Commercial Insurance vs. Medicare.

Authors:  Uri Ladabaum; Ajitha Mannalithara; Joel V Brill; Zachary Levin; Kate M Bundorf
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-06-15       Impact factor: 10.864

Review 9.  Role of Raman spectroscopy and surface enhanced Raman spectroscopy in colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Cerys A Jenkins; Paul D Lewis; Peter R Dunstan; Dean A Harris
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2016-05-15

Review 10.  Colorectal cancer biomarkers: to be or not to be? Cautionary tales from a road well travelled.

Authors:  Kim Y C Fung; Edouard Nice; Ilka Priebe; Damien Belobrajdic; Aloke Phatak; Leanne Purins; Bruce Tabor; Celine Pompeia; Trevor Lockett; Timothy E Adams; Antony Burgess; Leah Cosgrove
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-01-28       Impact factor: 5.742

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.