Literature DB >> 33684238

Comparative benefit and cost-effectiveness of mailed-out faecal immunochemical tests vs collection at the general practitioner.

Elisabeth F P Peterse1, Caroline B Osoro1, Marc Bardou2, Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Participation in the colorectal cancer screening programme in France has been well below the 45% considered acceptable by European guidelines, potentially attributable to the need to collect the faecal immunochemical test (FIT) at the general practitioner. AIM: To estimate the potential benefits and costs of including the FIT in the invitation letter.
METHODS: A well-established microsimulation model was used to simulate the French population 35 years and older in 2018. We estimated quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) gained, costs and cost-effectiveness of the current screening programme, and compared it to a variation of the programme where the FIT was mailed to participants and adherence was assumed to increase to 45%. We also estimated the threshold increase in participation needed to make this intervention cost-effective.
RESULTS: Under the current programme, 53.8 colorectal cancer (CRC) cases and 25.2 CRC deaths per 1000 individuals are expected to occur over a lifetime. If sending out the FIT increases screening participation to 45%, this intervention would result in 6% fewer CRC deaths and 3% fewer CRC cases, resulting in an estimated cost-effectiveness ratio of €2149 per QALY gained. Sending out the FIT would only need to increase participation by 0.7% point for this intervention to be considered cost-effective.
CONCLUSION: Including the FIT in the invitation letter is likely a very cost-effective intervention to increase participation in CRC screening. These results for France are also informative for many other countries around the world where FIT needs to be collected at pharmacies or general practitioners.
© 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33684238      PMCID: PMC8522169          DOI: 10.1111/apt.16317

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Aliment Pharmacol Ther        ISSN: 0269-2813            Impact factor:   8.171


  28 in total

1.  The MISCAN-COLON simulation model for the evaluation of colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  F Loeve; R Boer; G J van Oortmarssen; M van Ballegooijen; J D Habbema
Journal:  Comput Biomed Res       Date:  1999-02

2.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of fecal occult blood screening for colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Catherine Lejeune; Patrick Arveux; Vincent Dancourt; Sophie Béjean; Claire Bonithon-Kopp; Jean Faivre
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 2.188

3.  European guidelines for quality assurance in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis. First Edition--Executive summary.

Authors:  L von Karsa; J Patnick; N Segnan
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  2012-09-25       Impact factor: 10.093

4.  European guidelines for quality assurance in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis. First Edition--Colonoscopic surveillance following adenoma removal.

Authors:  W S Atkin; R Valori; E J Kuipers; G Hoff; C Senore; N Segnan; R Jover; W Schmiegel; R Lambert; C Pox
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  2012-09-25       Impact factor: 10.093

5.  Utility valuations for outcome states of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  R M Ness; A M Holmes; R Klein; R Dittus
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 10.864

6.  Additional mailing phase for FIT after a medical offer phase: The best way to improve compliance with colorectal cancer screening in France.

Authors:  Christine Piette; Gérard Durand; Jean-François Bretagne; Jean Faivre
Journal:  Dig Liver Dis       Date:  2016-10-06       Impact factor: 4.088

7.  Quality of life in survivors of colorectal carcinoma.

Authors:  S D Ramsey; M R Andersen; R Etzioni; C Moinpour; S Peacock; A Potosky; N Urban
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2000-03-15       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  Evaluation of Interventions Intended to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening Rates in the United States: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Michael K Dougherty; Alison T Brenner; Seth D Crockett; Shivani Gupta; Stephanie B Wheeler; Manny Coker-Schwimmer; Laura Cubillos; Teri Malo; Daniel S Reuland
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2018-12-01       Impact factor: 21.873

9.  Colorectal cancer screening by guaiac faecal occult blood test in France: Evaluation of the programme two years after launching.

Authors:  Klervi Leuraud; Delphine Jezewski-Serra; Jérôme Viguier; Emmanuelle Salines
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol       Date:  2013-09-12       Impact factor: 2.984

10.  Comparing the Cost-Effectiveness of Innovative Colorectal Cancer Screening Tests.

Authors:  Elisabeth F P Peterse; Reinier G S Meester; Lucie de Jonge; Amir-Houshang Omidvari; Fernando Alarid-Escudero; Amy B Knudsen; Ann G Zauber; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2021-02-01       Impact factor: 11.816

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.