Literature DB >> 28224411

Personalized medicine for prevention: can risk stratified screening decrease colorectal cancer mortality at an acceptable cost?

Sujha Subramanian1,2, Georgiy Bobashev3, Robert J Morris3, Sonja Hoover3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Tailored health care interventions are expected to transform clinical practice. The objective of this study was to develop an innovative model to assess the effectiveness, cost, and harms of risk stratified colorectal cancer screening.
METHODS: We updated a previously validated microsimulation model consisting of three interlinked components: risk assessment, natural history, and screening/treatment modules. We used data from representative national surveys and the literature to create a synthetic population that mimics the family history and genetic profile of the US population. We applied risk stratification based on published risk assessment tools to triage individuals into five risk categories: high, increased, medium, decreased, and low.
RESULTS: On average, the incremental cost of risk stratified screening for colorectal cancer compared to the current approach at 60% and 80% compliance rates is $18,342 and $23,961 per life year gained. The harms in terms of false positives and perforations are consistently lower for personalized scenarios across all compliance rates. False positives are reduced by more than 47.0% and perforations by at least 9.9%. There is considerable uncertainty in the life years gained, but the reduction in harms remains stable under all scenarios.
CONCLUSION: A key finding is that risk stratified screening can reduce harms at all levels of compliance. Therefore, selection of screening scenarios should include comprehensive comparisons of mortality, harms from screening, and cost. This study provides guidance for evaluating risk stratified cancer screening and further research is required to identify optimal implementation approaches in the real-world setting.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Colorectal cancer; Cost-effectiveness; Precision medicine; Prevention; Risk stratification

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28224411     DOI: 10.1007/s10552-017-0864-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Causes Control        ISSN: 0957-5243            Impact factor:   2.506


  8 in total

Review 1.  Family health history: underused for actionable risk assessment.

Authors:  Geoffrey S Ginsburg; R Ryanne Wu; Lori A Orlando
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2019-08-05       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  Effect of Sociodemographic Factors on Uptake of a Patient-Facing Information Technology Family Health History Risk Assessment Platform.

Authors:  R Ryanne Wu; Rachel A Myers; Adam H Buchanan; David Dimmock; Kimberly G Fulda; Irina V Haller; Susanne B Haga; Melissa L Harry; Catherine McCarty; Joan Neuner; Teji Rakhra-Burris; Nina Sperber; Corrine I Voils; Geoffrey S Ginsburg; Lori A Orlando
Journal:  Appl Clin Inform       Date:  2019-03-13       Impact factor: 2.342

Review 3.  A scoping review of risk-stratified bowel screening: current evidence, future directions.

Authors:  J M Cairns; S Greenley; O Bamidele; D Weller
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2022-03-20       Impact factor: 2.532

4.  A conceptual framework and metrics for evaluating multicomponent interventions to increase colorectal cancer screening within an organized screening program.

Authors:  Sujha Subramanian; Sonja Hoover; Florence K L Tangka; Amy DeGroff; Cynthia S Soloe; Laura C Arena; Dara F Schlueter; Djenaba A Joseph; Faye L Wong
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2018-10-25       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  Role of an Implementation Economics Analysis in Providing the Evidence Base for Increasing Colorectal Cancer Screening.

Authors:  Sujha Subramanian; Florence K L Tangka; Sonja Hoover
Journal:  Prev Chronic Dis       Date:  2020-06-25       Impact factor: 2.830

6.  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

7.  Advancing precision public health using human genomics: examples from the field and future research opportunities.

Authors:  Megan C Roberts; Alison E Fohner; Latrice Landry; Dana Lee Olstad; Amelia K Smit; Erin Turbitt; Caitlin G Allen
Journal:  Genome Med       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 11.117

8.  The prognosis analysis of RFWD2 inhibiting the expression of ETV1 in colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Wei Huang; Xiumei Tian; Xiaoying Guan
Journal:  Transl Cancer Res       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 1.241

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.