Literature DB >> 24456499

Preferences for potential innovations in non-invasive colorectal cancer screening: A labeled discrete choice experiment for a Dutch screening campaign.

Tim M Benning1, Benedict G C Dellaert, Carmen D Dirksen, Johan L Severens.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The introduction of innovative non-invasive screening tests (e.g. tests based on stool and blood samples or both) may be a solution to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening uptake. However, preferences for these non-invasive screening tests have not been investigated in great detail yet. The purpose of this article therefore is to elicit individuals' preferences for different non-invasive screening tests in a Dutch screening campaign context.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: We investigate preferences by means of a labeled discrete choice experiment. Data of 815 individuals, aged 55-75 years, are used in the analysis.
RESULTS: Multinomial logit model analysis showed that the combi-test is generally preferred over the blood-test and the (currently available) stool-test. Furthermore, besides the large effect of screening test type, there are significant differences in preference depending on participants' socio-demographic background. Finally, the analysis showed a significant positive effect on screening test choice for the attributes sensitivity, risk reduction, and level of evidence and a non-significant effect for the attribute unnecessary follow-up test.
CONCLUSION: Introducing new non-invasive screening tests that are based on a combination of stool and blood samples (or blood sample only) has the potential to increase CRC screening participation compared to the current standard stool-based test.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24456499     DOI: 10.3109/0284186X.2013.877159

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Oncol        ISSN: 0284-186X            Impact factor:   4.089


  13 in total

Review 1.  Valuing Meta-Health Effects for Use in Economic Evaluations to Inform Reimbursement Decisions: A Review of the Evidence.

Authors:  Richard De Abreu Lourenco; Marion Haas; Jane Hall; Rosalie Viney
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  Preferences for Surveillance of Barrett's Oesophagus: a Discrete Choice Experiment.

Authors:  Norma B Bulamu; Gang Chen; Tim Bright; Julie Ratcliffe; Adrian Chung; Robert J L Fraser; Björn Törnqvist; David I Watson
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2018-11-26       Impact factor: 3.452

3.  Intratumoral density of regulatory T cells is a predictor of host immune response and chemotherapy response in colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Masanori Oshi; Joy Sarkar; Rongrong Wu; Yoshihisa Tokumaru; Li Yan; Kazuya Nakagawa; Atsushi Ishibe; Ryusei Matsuyama; Itaru Endo; Kazuaki Takabe
Journal:  Am J Cancer Res       Date:  2022-02-15       Impact factor: 6.166

4.  Attributes Used for Cancer Screening Discrete Choice Experiments: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Rebekah Hall; Antonieta Medina-Lara; Willie Hamilton; Anne E Spencer
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2021-10-21       Impact factor: 3.883

5.  Improving compliance to colorectal cancer screening using blood and stool based tests in patients refusing screening colonoscopy in Germany.

Authors:  Andreas Adler; Sebastian Geiger; Anne Keil; Harald Bias; Philipp Schatz; Theo deVos; Jens Dhein; Mathias Zimmermann; Rudolf Tauber; Bertram Wiedenmann
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-10-17       Impact factor: 3.067

Review 6.  Stated Preference for Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review of the Literature, 1990-2013.

Authors:  Carol Mansfield; Florence K L Tangka; Donatus U Ekwueme; Judith Lee Smith; Gery P Guy; Chunyu Li; A Brett Hauber
Journal:  Prev Chronic Dis       Date:  2016-02-25       Impact factor: 2.830

7.  The impact of sample type and procedural attributes on relative acceptability of different colorectal cancer screening regimens.

Authors:  Joanne M Osborne; Ingrid Flight; Carlene J Wilson; Gang Chen; Julie Ratcliffe; Graeme P Young
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2018-09-18       Impact factor: 2.711

8.  Patient preferences for massively parallel sequencing genetic testing of colorectal cancer risk: a discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  Deirdre Weymann; David L Veenstra; Gail P Jarvik; Dean A Regier
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2018-05-25       Impact factor: 4.246

9.  Genetic Variants in the Regulatory T cell-Related Pathway and Colorectal Cancer Prognosis.

Authors:  Sonja Neumeyer; Xinwei Hua; Petra Seibold; Lina Jansen; Axel Benner; Barbara Burwinkel; Niels Halama; Sonja I Berndt; Amanda I Phipps; Lori C Sakoda; Robert E Schoen; Martha L Slattery; Andrew T Chan; Manish Gala; Amit D Joshi; Shuji Ogino; Mingyang Song; Esther Herpel; Hendrik Bläker; Matthias Kloor; Dominique Scherer; Alexis Ulrich; Cornelia M Ulrich; Aung K Win; Jane C Figueiredo; John L Hopper; Finlay Macrae; Roger L Milne; Graham G Giles; Daniel D Buchanan; Ulrike Peters; Michael Hoffmeister; Hermann Brenner; Polly A Newcomb; Jenny Chang-Claude
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2020-10-02       Impact factor: 4.090

10.  A Blood Test for Methylated BCAT1 and IKZF1 vs. a Fecal Immunochemical Test for Detection of Colorectal Neoplasia.

Authors:  Erin L Symonds; Susanne K Pedersen; Rohan T Baker; David H Murray; Snigdha Gaur; Stephen R Cole; Geetha Gopalsamy; Dileep Mangira; Lawrence C LaPointe; Graeme P Young
Journal:  Clin Transl Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-01-14       Impact factor: 4.488

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.