Literature DB >> 24887616

Should colorectal cancer screening be considered in elderly persons without previous screening? A cost-effectiveness analysis.

Frank van Hees, J Dik F Habbema, Reinier G Meester, Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Marjolein van Ballegooijen, Ann G Zauber.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends against routine screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) in adequately screened persons older than 75 years but does not address the appropriateness of screening in elderly persons without previous screening.
OBJECTIVE: To determine at what ages CRC screening should be considered in unscreened elderly persons and to determine which test is indicated at each age.
DESIGN: Microsimulation modeling study. DATA SOURCES: Observational and experimental studies. TARGET POPULATION: Unscreened persons aged 76 to 90 years with no, moderate, and severe comorbid conditions. TIME HORIZON: Lifetime. PERSPECTIVE: Societal. INTERVENTION: One-time colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, or fecal immunochemical test (FIT) screening. OUTCOME MEASURES: Quality-adjusted life-years gained, costs, and costs per quality-adjusted life-year gained. RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: In unscreened elderly persons with no comorbid conditions, CRC screening was cost-effective up to age 86 years. Screening with colonoscopy was indicated up to age 83 years, sigmoidoscopy was indicated at age 84 years, and FIT was indicated at ages 85 and 86 years. In unscreened persons with moderate comorbid conditions, screening was cost-effective up to age 83 years (colonoscopy indicated up to age 80 years, sigmoidoscopy at age 81 years, and FIT at ages 82 and 83 years). In unscreened persons with severe comorbid conditions, screening was cost-effective up to age 80 years (colonoscopy indicated up to age 77 years, sigmoidoscopy at age 78 years, and FIT at ages 79 and 80 years). RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSES: Results were most sensitive to assuming a lower willingness to pay per quality-adjusted life-year gained. LIMITATION: Only persons at average risk for CRC were considered.
CONCLUSION: In unscreened elderly persons CRC screening should be considered well beyond age 75 years. A colonoscopy is indicated at most ages. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Cancer Institute.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24887616      PMCID: PMC4109030          DOI: 10.7326/M13-2263

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Intern Med        ISSN: 0003-4819            Impact factor:   25.391


  35 in total

1.  Polyps of the colon in Barcelona, Spain. An autopsy study.

Authors:  J A Bombi
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1988-04-01       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 2.  Polyp miss rate determined by tandem colonoscopy: a systematic review.

Authors:  Jeroen C van Rijn; Johannes B Reitsma; Jaap Stoker; Patrick M Bossuyt; Sander J van Deventer; Evelien Dekker
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 10.864

3.  A randomised study of screening for colorectal cancer using faecal occult blood testing: results after 13 years and seven biennial screening rounds.

Authors:  O D Jørgensen; O Kronborg; C Fenger
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 23.059

4.  Prevalence of polyps in an autopsy series from areas with varying incidence of large-bowel cancer.

Authors:  J C Clark; Y Collan; T J Eide; J Estève; S Ewen; N M Gibbs; O M Jensen; E Koskela; R MacLennan; J G Simpson
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  1985-08-15       Impact factor: 7.396

5.  Polyps and cancer of the large bowel: a necropsy study in Liverpool.

Authors:  A R Williams; B A Balasooriya; D W Day
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1982-10       Impact factor: 23.059

6.  Adenomatous lesions of the large bowel: an autopsy survey.

Authors:  R R Rickert; O Auerbach; L Garfinkel; E C Hammond; J M Frasca
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1979-05       Impact factor: 6.860

7.  The prevalence of polyps of the large intestine in Oslo: an autopsy study.

Authors:  M H Vatn; H Stalsberg
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1982-02-15       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  Risk of perforation after colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy: a population-based study.

Authors:  Nicolle M Gatto; Harold Frucht; Vijaya Sundararajan; Judith S Jacobson; Victor R Grann; Alfred I Neugut
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2003-02-05       Impact factor: 13.506

9.  Comorbidity-adjusted life expectancy: a new tool to inform recommendations for optimal screening strategies.

Authors:  Hyunsoon Cho; Carrie N Klabunde; K Robin Yabroff; Zhuoqiao Wang; Angela Meekins; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Angela B Mariotto
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2013-11-19       Impact factor: 25.391

10.  Polyps of the large intestine in Aarhus, Denmark. An autopsy study.

Authors:  L G Johannsen; O Momsen; N O Jacobsen
Journal:  Scand J Gastroenterol       Date:  1989-09       Impact factor: 2.423

View more
  47 in total

Review 1.  Colorectal Cancer Screening and Surveillance Colonoscopy in Older Adults.

Authors:  Jennifer K Maratt; Audrey H Calderwood
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol       Date:  2019-06

2.  Colorectal cancer deaths attributable to nonuse of screening in the United States.

Authors:  Reinier G S Meester; Chyke A Doubeni; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; S Lucas Goede; Theodore R Levin; Virginia P Quinn; Marjolein van Ballegooijen; Douglas A Corley; Ann G Zauber
Journal:  Ann Epidemiol       Date:  2014-12-05       Impact factor: 3.797

Review 3.  Evaluation of the Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Personalized Surveillance After Colorectal Adenomatous Polypectomy.

Authors:  Ethna McFerran; James F O'Mahony; Richard Fallis; Duncan McVicar; Ann G Zauber; Frank Kee
Journal:  Epidemiol Rev       Date:  2017-01-01       Impact factor: 6.222

4.  Frailty Assessment Predicts Acute Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Screening Colonoscopy.

Authors:  Sasha Taleban; Nima Toosizadeh; Shilpa Junna; Todd Golden; Sehem Ghazala; Rita Wadeea; Coco Tirambulo; Jane Mohler
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2018-05-24       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 5.  The value of models in informing resource allocation in colorectal cancer screening: the case of The Netherlands.

Authors:  Frank van Hees; Ann G Zauber; Harriët van Veldhuizen; Marie-Louise A Heijnen; Corine Penning; Harry J de Koning; Marjolein van Ballegooijen; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2015-06-10       Impact factor: 23.059

6.  Value Of Waiving Coinsurance For Colorectal Cancer Screening In Medicare Beneficiaries.

Authors:  Elisabeth F P Peterse; Reinier G S Meester; Andrea Gini; Chyke A Doubeni; Daniel S Anderson; Franklin G Berger; Ann G Zauber; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 6.301

7.  High-Intensity Versus Low-Intensity Surveillance for Patients With Colorectal Adenomas: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

Authors:  Reinier G S Meester; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Sidney J Winawer; Ann G Zauber; Amy B Knudsen; Uri Ladabaum
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2019-09-24       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  Personalizing colonoscopy screening for elderly individuals based on screening history, cancer risk, and comorbidity status could increase cost effectiveness.

Authors:  Frank van Hees; Sameer D Saini; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Sandeep Vijan; Reinier G S Meester; Harry J de Koning; Ann G Zauber; Marjolein van Ballegooijen
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2015-08-04       Impact factor: 22.682

9.  Influence of Age and Comorbidity on Colorectal Cancer Screening in the Elderly.

Authors:  Carrie N Klabunde; Yingye Zheng; Virginia P Quinn; Elisabeth F Beaber; Carolyn M Rutter; Ethan A Halm; Jessica Chubak; Chyke A Doubeni; Jennifer S Haas; Aruna Kamineni; Marilyn M Schapira; Pamela M Vacek; Michael P Garcia; Douglas A Corley
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2016-06-22       Impact factor: 5.043

10.  Validation of Models Used to Inform Colorectal Cancer Screening Guidelines: Accuracy and Implications.

Authors:  Carolyn M Rutter; Amy B Knudsen; Tracey L Marsh; V Paul Doria-Rose; Eric Johnson; Chester Pabiniak; Karen M Kuntz; Marjolein van Ballegooijen; Ann G Zauber; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2016-01-08       Impact factor: 2.583

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.