Literature DB >> 27879412

Modeling Individual Patient Preferences for Colorectal Cancer Screening Based on Their Tolerance for Complications Risk.

Glen B Taksler1, Adam T Perzynski2, Michael W Kattan3.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Recommendations for colorectal cancer screening encourage patients to choose among various screening methods based on individual preferences for benefits, risks, screening frequency, and discomfort. We devised a model to illustrate how individuals with varying tolerance for screening complications risk might decide on their preferred screening strategy.
METHODS: We developed a discrete-time Markov mathematical model that allowed hypothetical individuals to maximize expected lifetime utility by selecting screening method, start age, stop age, and frequency. Individuals could choose from stool-based testing every 1 to 3 years, flexible sigmoidoscopy every 1 to 20 years with annual stool-based testing, colonoscopy every 1 to 20 years, or no screening. We compared the life expectancy gained from the chosen strategy with the life expectancy available from a benchmark strategy of decennial colonoscopy.
RESULTS: For an individual at average risk of colorectal cancer who was risk neutral with respect to screening complications (and therefore was willing to undergo screening if it would actuarially increase life expectancy), the model predicted that he or she would choose colonoscopy every 10 years, from age 53 to 73 years, consistent with national guidelines. For a similar individual who was moderately averse to screening complications risk (and therefore required a greater increase in life expectancy to accept potential risks of colonoscopy), the model predicted that he or she would prefer flexible sigmoidoscopy every 12 years with annual stool-based testing, with 93% of the life expectancy benefit of decennial colonoscopy. For an individual with higher risk aversion, the model predicted that he or she would prefer 2 lifetime flexible sigmoidoscopies, 20 years apart, with 70% of the life expectancy benefit of decennial colonoscopy.
CONCLUSION: Mathematical models may formalize how individuals with different risk attitudes choose between various guideline-recommended colorectal cancer screening strategies.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Markov models; cost-benefit analysis; decision analysis; gastroenterology; internal medicine; preventive medicine—screening; preventive services

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27879412      PMCID: PMC5373966          DOI: 10.1177/0272989X16679161

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Decis Making        ISSN: 0272-989X            Impact factor:   2.583


  37 in total

Review 1.  Screening for colorectal cancer using the faecal occult blood test, Hemoccult.

Authors:  P Hewitson; P Glasziou; L Irwig; B Towler; E Watson
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2007-01-24

Review 2.  Cochrane systematic review of colorectal cancer screening using the fecal occult blood test (hemoccult): an update.

Authors:  Paul Hewitson; Paul Glasziou; Eila Watson; Bernie Towler; Les Irwig
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2008-05-13       Impact factor: 10.864

Review 3.  In the clinic. Screening for colorectal cancer.

Authors:  David S Weinberg; Robert E Schoen
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2014-05-06       Impact factor: 25.391

4.  Individual and population benefits of daily aspirin therapy: a proposal for personalizing national guidelines.

Authors:  Jeremy B Sussman; Sandeep Vijan; HwaJung Choi; Rodney A Hayward
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2011-04-12

5.  How much colonoscopy screening should be recommended to individuals with various degrees of family history of colorectal cancer?

Authors:  Janneke A Wilschut; Ewout W Steyerberg; Monique E van Leerdam; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; J Dik F Habbema; Marjolein van Ballegooijen
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2011-03-08       Impact factor: 6.860

6.  Colorectal cancer screening in older men and women: qualitative research findings and implications for intervention.

Authors:  C Beeker; J M Kraft; B G Southwell; C M Jorgensen
Journal:  J Community Health       Date:  2000-06

7.  Comparing risks and benefits of colorectal cancer screening in elderly patients.

Authors:  Cynthia W Ko; Amnon Sonnenberg
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 22.682

8.  Association of colonoscopy and death from colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Nancy N Baxter; Meredith A Goldwasser; Lawrence F Paszat; Refik Saskin; David R Urbach; Linda Rabeneck
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2008-12-15       Impact factor: 25.391

9.  Evaluating test strategies for colorectal cancer screening: a decision analysis for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

Authors:  Ann G Zauber; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Amy B Knudsen; Janneke Wilschut; Marjolein van Ballegooijen; Karen M Kuntz
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2008-10-06       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 10.  Effect of flexible sigmoidoscopy-based screening on incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  B Joseph Elmunzer; Rodney A Hayward; Philip S Schoenfeld; Sameer D Saini; Amar Deshpande; Akbar K Waljee
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2012-12-04       Impact factor: 11.069

View more
  1 in total

1.  Assessing Patient Interest in Individualized Preventive Care Recommendations.

Authors:  Glen B Taksler; Mary Beth Mercer; Angela Fagerlin; Michael B Rothberg
Journal:  MDM Policy Pract       Date:  2019-05-27
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.