Cost-effectiveness of screening for colorectal cancer in the general population
- PMID: 11035892
- DOI: 10.1001/jama.284.15.1954
Cost-effectiveness of screening for colorectal cancer in the general population
Abstract
Context: A recent expert panel recommended that persons at average risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) begin screening for CRC at age 50 years using 1 of several strategies. However, many aspects of different CRC screening strategies remain uncertain.
Objective: To assess the consequences, costs, and cost-effectiveness of CRC screening in average-risk individuals.
Design: Cost-effectiveness analysis from a societal perspective using a Markov model.
Subjects: Hypothetical subjects representative of the 50-year-old US population at average risk for CRC.
Setting: Simulated clinical practice in the United States.
Main outcome measures: Discounted lifetime costs, life expectancy, and incremental cost-effectiveness (CE) ratio, compared used 22 different CRC screening strategies, including those recommended by the expert panel.
Results: In 1 base-case analysis, compliance was assumed to be 60% with the initial screen and 80% with follow-up or surveillance colonoscopy. The most effective strategy for white men was annual rehydrated fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) plus sigmoidoscopy (followed by colonoscopy if either a low- or high-risk polyp was found) every 5 years from age 50 to 85 years, which resulted in a 60% reduction in cancer incidence and an 80% reduction in CRC mortality compared with no screening, and an incremental CE ratio of $92,900 per year of life gained compared with annual unrehydrated FOBT plus sigmoidoscopy every 5 years. In a base-case analysis in which compliance with screening and follow-up is assumed to be 100%, screening more often than every 10 years was prohibitively expensive; annual rehydrated FOBT plus sigmoidoscopy every 5 years had an incremental CE ratio of $489,900 per life-year gained compared with the same strategy every 10 years. Other strategies recommended by the expert panel were either less effective or cost more per year of life gained than the alternatives. Colonoscopy every 10 years was less effective than the combination of annual FOBT plus sigmoidoscopy every 5 years. However, a single colonoscopy at age 55 years achieves nearly half of the reduction in CRC mortality obtainable with colonoscopy every 10 years. Because of increased life expectancy among white women and increased cancer mortality among blacks, CRC screening was even more cost-effective in these groups than in white men.
Conclusions: Screening for CRC, even in the setting of imperfect compliance, significantly reduces CRC mortality at costs comparable to other cancer screening procedures. However, compliance rates significantly affect the incremental CE ratios. In this model of CRC, 60% compliance with an every 5-year schedule of screening was roughly equivalent to 100% compliance with an every 10-year schedule. Mathematical modeling used to inform clinical guidelines needs to take into account expected compliance rates. JAMA. 2000;284:1954-1961.
Comment in
-
Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening.JAMA. 2001 Jan 24-31;285(4):407; author reply 408. JAMA. 2001. PMID: 11242411 No abstract available.
-
Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening.JAMA. 2001 Jan 24-31;285(4):407; author reply 408. JAMA. 2001. PMID: 11242412 No abstract available.
-
Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening.JAMA. 2001 Jan 24-31;285(4):407-8. doi: 10.1001/jama.285.4.407. JAMA. 2001. PMID: 11242413 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Cost-effectiveness of colonoscopy in screening for colorectal cancer.Ann Intern Med. 2000 Oct 17;133(8):573-84. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-133-8-200010170-00007. Ann Intern Med. 2000. PMID: 11033584
-
Cost-effectiveness analysis on screening for colorectal neoplasm and management of colorectal cancer in Asia.Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2008 Aug 1;28(3):353-63. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2008.03726.x. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2008. PMID: 18638075
-
Comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of screening colonoscopy vs. sigmoidoscopy and alternative strategies.Am J Gastroenterol. 2013 Jan;108(1):120-32. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2012.380. Epub 2012 Dec 18. Am J Gastroenterol. 2013. PMID: 23247579
-
Cutting cost and increasing access to colorectal cancer screening: another approach to following the guidelines.Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2006 Jan;15(1):108-13. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-05-0198. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2006. PMID: 16434595 Review.
-
A Comparison of the Cost-Effectiveness of Fecal Occult Blood Tests with Different Test Characteristics in the Context of Annual Screening in the Medicare Population [Internet].Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2003 Aug 9. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2003 Aug 9. PMID: 25905156 Free Books & Documents. Review.
Cited by
-
Refining the targeted population and achieving better for colorectal cancer screening.World J Gastroenterol. 2024 Jul 7;30(25):3140-3142. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v30.i25.3140. World J Gastroenterol. 2024. PMID: 39006381 Free PMC article.
-
Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Colorectal Cancer Screening Strategies Using Active Learning and Monte Carlo Simulation.Med Decis Making. 2024 Jul;44(5):554-571. doi: 10.1177/0272989X241258224. Epub 2024 Jun 22. Med Decis Making. 2024. PMID: 38907706 Free PMC article.
-
Signaling pathways in colorectal cancer implications for the target therapies.Mol Biomed. 2024 Jun 7;5(1):21. doi: 10.1186/s43556-024-00178-y. Mol Biomed. 2024. PMID: 38844562 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Investigation of the relationship between colonoscopy insertion difficulty factors and endoscope shape using an endoscopic position detection unit.J Clin Biochem Nutr. 2024 May;74(3):245-252. doi: 10.3164/jcbn.23-109. Epub 2023 Dec 15. J Clin Biochem Nutr. 2024. PMID: 38799137 Free PMC article.
-
Colorectal cancer screening: A review of current knowledge and progress in research.World J Gastrointest Oncol. 2024 Apr 15;16(4):1119-1133. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v16.i4.1119. World J Gastrointest Oncol. 2024. PMID: 38660635 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
