|
1
|
Li C, Zhang W, Chen Q, Xiao F, Yang X, Xiao B, Cheng Y, Qin J, Li X, Wan D, Pan Z, Peng J, Wu X. Development and validation of a logistic regression model for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer. Sci Rep 2025; 15:14759. [PMID: 40295643 PMCID: PMC12037792 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-025-98968-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/24/2024] [Accepted: 04/16/2025] [Indexed: 04/30/2025] Open
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosis is challenging due to generalized symptoms. Various biomarker models exist, but their clinical application is limited by low sensitivity and heterogeneous cutoff values. This study aimed to develop and validate a diagnostic model for CRC. Data from 489 patients-337 with CRC and 152 with benign disease-were included. Patients were randomly assigned to training (n = 342) and validation (n = 147) cohorts. Logistic regression identified age (OR 1.06), CA153 (OR 0.26), CEA (OR 4.49), CYFRA 21-1 (OR 5.88), ferritin (OR 0.15), and hs-CRP (OR 0.05) as independent risk factors. Sensitivity and specificity were 88.61% and 82.86% in the training cohort and 90.00% and 76.60% in the validation cohort. Cutoff values for the biomarkers were: CA199, 9.809 U/mL; CA125, 7.743 U/mL; CA153, 6.295 U/mL; CEA, 3.982 ng/mL; CYFRA 21-1, 1.769 ng/mL; ferritin, 163.361 mg/L; hs-CRP, 0.196 mg/L; and serum albumin, 55.966 g/L. The model showed higher sensitivity for early-stage CRC (95.45%, 95% CI 87.2-98.6%) than late-stage CRC (87.27%, 95% CI 76.4-93.5%; P = 0.08). AUCs were 0.907 (training) and 0.872 (validation). The model demonstrated higher sensitivity for early-stage CRC (95.45%) than late-stage CRC (87.27%), underscoring its utility in early detection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cong Li
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, 651 East Dongfeng Road, Yuexiu District, Guangzhou, 510060, China
| | - Weili Zhang
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, 651 East Dongfeng Road, Yuexiu District, Guangzhou, 510060, China
| | - Qichen Chen
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, 651 East Dongfeng Road, Yuexiu District, Guangzhou, 510060, China
| | - Fei Xiao
- Department of Clinical Laboratory, People's Hospital of Maoming, Maoming, China
| | - Xia Yang
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, 651 East Dongfeng Road, Yuexiu District, Guangzhou, 510060, China
| | - Binyi Xiao
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, 651 East Dongfeng Road, Yuexiu District, Guangzhou, 510060, China
| | - Yanshuang Cheng
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, 651 East Dongfeng Road, Yuexiu District, Guangzhou, 510060, China
| | - Jiayi Qin
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, 651 East Dongfeng Road, Yuexiu District, Guangzhou, 510060, China
| | - Xueying Li
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, 651 East Dongfeng Road, Yuexiu District, Guangzhou, 510060, China
| | - Desen Wan
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, 651 East Dongfeng Road, Yuexiu District, Guangzhou, 510060, China
| | - Zhizhong Pan
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, 651 East Dongfeng Road, Yuexiu District, Guangzhou, 510060, China
| | - Jianhong Peng
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, 651 East Dongfeng Road, Yuexiu District, Guangzhou, 510060, China.
| | - Xiaojun Wu
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, 651 East Dongfeng Road, Yuexiu District, Guangzhou, 510060, China.
| |
Collapse
|
|
2
|
Maida M, Dahiya DS, Shah YR, Tiwari A, Gopakumar H, Vohra I, Khan A, Jaber F, Ramai D, Facciorusso A. Screening and Surveillance of Colorectal Cancer: A Review of the Literature. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:2746. [PMID: 39123473 PMCID: PMC11312202 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16152746] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/13/2024] [Accepted: 07/31/2024] [Indexed: 08/12/2024] Open
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) has the highest mortality rate among men and is the second highest among women under fifty, with incidence and mortality rates rising in younger populations. Studies indicate that up to one-third of patients diagnosed before fifty have a family history or genetic factors, highlighting the need for earlier screening. Contrariwise, diagnosis in healthy subjects through screening strategies enables early-stage detection of the tumor and better clinical outcomes. In recent years, mortality rates of CRC in Western countries have been on a steady decline, which is largely attributed to widespread screening programs and advancements in treatment modalities. Indeed, early detection through screening significantly improves prognosis, with stark differences in survival rates between localized and metastatic disease. This article aims to provide a comprehensive review of the existing literature, delving into the performance and efficacy of various CRC screening strategies. It navigates through available screening tools, evaluating their efficacy and cost-effectiveness. The discussion extends to delineating target populations for screening, emphasizing the importance of tailored approaches for individuals at heightened risk.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marcello Maida
- Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Enna ‘Kore’, 94100 Enna, Italy;
| | - Dushyant Singh Dahiya
- Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Motility, The University of Kansas School of Medicine, Kansas City, KS 66160, USA
| | - Yash R. Shah
- Department of Internal Medicine, Trinity Health Oakland/Wayne State University, Pontiac, MI 48341, USA
| | - Angad Tiwari
- Department of Internal Medicine, Maharani Laxmi Bai Medical College, Jhansi 284001, India;
| | - Harishankar Gopakumar
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Illinois College of Medicine at Peoria, Peoria, IL 61605, USA; (H.G.); (I.V.)
| | - Ishaan Vohra
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Illinois College of Medicine at Peoria, Peoria, IL 61605, USA; (H.G.); (I.V.)
| | - Aqsa Khan
- Department of Internal Medicine, Parkview Health, Fort Wayne, IN 46805, USA;
| | - Fouad Jaber
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Missouri-Kansas City, Kansas City, KS 64110, USA;
| | - Daryl Ramai
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, The University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT 84132, USA;
| | - Antonio Facciorusso
- Gastroenterology Unit, Department of Biomedical Science, Foggia University Hospital, 71122 Foggia, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
|
3
|
Meester RG, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Winawer SJ, Church TR, Allen JI, Feld AD, Mills G, Jordan PA, Corley DA, Doubeni CA, Hahn AI, Lobaugh SM, Fleisher M, O’Brien MJ, Zauber AG. Projected Colorectal Cancer Incidence and Mortality Based on Observed Adherence to Colonoscopy and Sequential Stool-Based Screening. Am J Gastroenterol 2024; 119:1392-1401. [PMID: 38318949 PMCID: PMC11222052 DOI: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000002693] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/11/2023] [Accepted: 12/28/2023] [Indexed: 02/07/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Modeling supporting recommendations for colonoscopy and stool-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tests assumes 100% sequential participant adherence. The impact of observed adherence on the long-term effectiveness of screening is unknown. We evaluated the effectiveness of a program of screening colonoscopy every 10 years vs annual high-sensitivity guaiac-based fecal occult blood testing (HSgFOBT) using observed sequential adherence data. METHODS The MIcrosimulation SCreening ANalysis (MISCAN) model used observed sequential screening adherence, HSgFOBT positivity, and diagnostic colonoscopy adherence in HSgFOBT-positive individuals from the National Colonoscopy Study (single-screening colonoscopy vs ≥4 HSgFOBT sequential rounds). We compared CRC incidence and mortality over 15 years with no screening or 10 yearly screening colonoscopy vs annual HSgFOBT with 100% and differential observed adherence from the trial. RESULTS Without screening, simulated incidence and mortality over 15 years were 20.9 (95% probability interval 15.8-26.9) and 6.9 (5.0-9.2) per 1,000 participants, respectively. In the case of 100% adherence, only screening colonoscopy was predicted to result in lower incidence; however, both tests lowered simulated mortality to a similar level (2.1 [1.6-2.9] for screening colonoscopy and 2.5 [1.8-3.4] for HSgFOBT). Observed adherence for screening colonoscopy (83.6%) was higher than observed sequential HSgFOBT adherence (73.1% first round; 49.1% by round 4), resulting in lower simulated incidence and mortality for screening colonoscopy (14.4 [10.8-18.5] and 2.9 [2.1-3.9], respectively) than HSgFOBT (20.8 [15.8-28.1] and 3.9 [2.9-5.4], respectively), despite a 91% adherence to diagnostic colonoscopy with FOBT positivity. The relative risk of CRC mortality for screening colonoscopy vs HSgFOBT was 0.75 (95% probability interval 0.68-0.80). Findings were similar in sensitivity analyses with alternative assumptions for repeat colonoscopy, test performance, risk, age, and projection horizon. DISCUSSION Where sequential adherence to stool-based screening is suboptimal and colonoscopy is accessible and acceptable-as observed in the national colonoscopy study, microsimulation, comparative effectiveness, screening recommendations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Sidney J. Winawer
- Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States
| | - Timothy R. Church
- Division of Environmental Health Sciences, University of Minnesota School of Public Health, and Masonic Cancer Center, Minneapolis, MN, United States
| | - John I. Allen
- Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Michigan School of Medicine
| | - Andrew D. Feld
- Gastroenterology Clinic, Kaiser Permanente Washington (KPWA), Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Glenn Mills
- Feist-Weiller Cancer Center, Health Department, Louisiana State University, Shreveport, LA, United States
| | - Paul A. Jordan
- Feist-Weiller Cancer Center, Health Department, Louisiana State University, Shreveport, LA, United States
| | - Douglas A. Corley
- Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente, San Francisco, CA, United States
| | | | - Anne I. Hahn
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States
| | - Stephanie M. Lobaugh
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States
| | - Martin Fleisher
- Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Michael J. O’Brien
- Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Ann G. Zauber
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States
| |
Collapse
|
|
4
|
Robertson DJ, Rex DK, Ciani O, Drummond MF. Colonoscopy vs the Fecal Immunochemical Test: Which is Best? Gastroenterology 2024; 166:758-771. [PMID: 38342196 DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2023.12.027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/21/2023] [Revised: 12/18/2023] [Accepted: 12/29/2023] [Indexed: 02/13/2024]
Abstract
Although there is no debate around the effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening in reducing disease burden, there remains a question regarding the most effective and cost-effective screening modality. Current United States guidelines present a panel of options that include the 2 most commonly used modalities, colonoscopy and stool testing with the fecal immunochemical test (FIT). Large-scale comparative effectiveness trials comparing colonoscopy and FIT for colorectal cancer outcomes are underway, but results are not yet available. This review will separately state the "best case" for FIT and colonoscopy as the screening tool of first choice. In addition, the review will examine these modalities from a health economics perspective to provide the reader further context about the relative advantages of these commonly used tests.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Douglas J Robertson
- VA Medical Center, White River Junction, Vermont; Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, New Hampshire.
| | - Douglas K Rex
- Division of Gastroenterology/Hepatology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana
| | - Oriana Ciani
- Centre for Research on Health and Social Care Management, SDA Bocconi School of Management, Milan, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
|
5
|
Christensen EW, Sanelli PC, Rula EY, Chang KJ, Moreno CC, Bruining DH, Yee J. Sociodemographic Factors and Screening CT Colonography Use Among Medicare Beneficiaries. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2024; 222:e2329703. [PMID: 37466190 DOI: 10.2214/ajr.23.29703] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/20/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND. Approximately one-third of the eligible U.S. population have not undergone guideline-compliant colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Guidelines recognize various screening strategies to increase adherence. CMS provides coverage for all recommended screening tests except CT colonography (CTC). OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to compare CTC and other CRC screening tests in terms of associations of utilization with income, race and ethnicity, and urbanicity in Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. METHODS. This retrospective study used CMS Research Identifiable Files from January 1, 2011, through December 31, 2020. These files contain claims information for 5% of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. Data were extracted for individuals 45-85 years old, and individuals with high CRC risk were excluded. Multivariable logistic regression models were constructed to determine the likelihood of undergoing CRC screening tests (as well as of undergoing diagnostic CTC, a CMS-covered test with similar physical access as screening CTC) as a function of income, race and ethnicity, and urbanicity while controlling for sex, age, Charlson comorbidity index, U.S. census region, screening year, and related conditions and procedures. RESULTS. For 12,273,363 beneficiary years (mean age, 70.5 ± 8.2 [SD] years; 2,436,849 unique beneficiaries: 6,774,837 female beneficiaries, 5,498,526 male beneficiaries), there were 785,103 CRC screenings events, including 645 for screening CTC. Compared with individuals living in communities with per capita income of less than US$25,000, individuals in communities with income of US$100,000 or more had OR for undergoing screening CTC of 5.73, optical colonoscopy (OC) of 1.36, sigmoidoscopy of 1.03, guaiac fecal occult blood test or fecal immunochemical test of 1.50, stool DNA of 1.43, and diagnostic CTC of 2.00. The OR for undergoing screening CTC was 1.00 for Hispanic individuals and 1.08 for non-Hispanic Black individuals compared with non-Hispanic White individuals. Compared with the OR for undergoing screening CTC for residents of metropolitan areas, the OR was 0.51 for residents of micropolitan areas and 0.65 for residents of small or rural areas. CONCLUSION. The association with income was substantially larger for screening CTC than for other CRC screening tests or for diagnostic CTC. CLINICAL IMPACT. Medicare's noncoverage for screening CTC may contribute to lower adherence with CRC screening guidelines for lower-income beneficiaries. Medicare coverage of CTC could reduce income-based disparities for individuals avoiding OC owing to invasiveness, need for anesthesia, or complication risk.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eric W Christensen
- Economic and Health Services Research, Harvey L. Neiman Health Policy Institute, 1892 Preston White Dr, Reston, VA 20191
- Health Services Management, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN
| | - Pina C Sanelli
- Imaging Clinical Effectiveness and Outcomes Research, Institute of Health System Science, The Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research, Manhasset, NY
- Department of Radiology, Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Hempstead, NY
| | - Elizabeth Y Rula
- Economic and Health Services Research, Harvey L. Neiman Health Policy Institute, 1892 Preston White Dr, Reston, VA 20191
| | - Kevin J Chang
- Department of Radiology, Boston Medical Center and Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston, MA
| | - Courtney C Moreno
- Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA
| | - David H Bruining
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Judy Yee
- Department of Radiology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Montefiore Health System, Bronx, NY
| |
Collapse
|
|
6
|
Diedrich L, Brinkmann M, Dreier M, Rossol S, Schramm W, Krauth C. Is there a place for sigmoidoscopy in colorectal cancer screening? A systematic review and critical appraisal of cost-effectiveness models. PLoS One 2023; 18:e0290353. [PMID: 37594967 PMCID: PMC10438011 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0290353] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/13/2023] [Accepted: 08/05/2023] [Indexed: 08/20/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) is effective in reducing both incidence and mortality. Colonoscopy and stool tests are most frequently used for this purpose. Sigmoidoscopy is an alternative screening measure with a strong evidence base. Due to its distinct characteristics, it might be preferred by subgroups. The aim of this systematic review is to analyze the cost-effectiveness of sigmoidoscopy for CRC screening compared to other screening methods and to identify influencing parameters. METHODS A systematic literature search for the time frame 01/2010-01/2023 was conducted using the databases MEDLINE, Embase, EconLit, Web of Science, NHS EED, as well as the Cost-Effectiveness Registry. Full economic analyses examining sigmoidoscopy as a screening measure for the general population at average risk for CRC were included. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated. All included studies were critically assessed based on a questionnaire for modelling studies. RESULTS Twenty-five studies are included in the review. Compared to no screening, sigmoidoscopy is a cost-effective screening strategy for CRC. When modelled as a single measure strategy, sigmoidoscopy is mostly dominated by colonoscopy or modern stool tests. When combined with annual stool testing, sigmoidoscopy in 5-year intervals is more effective and less costly than the respective strategies alone. The results of the studies are influenced by varying assumptions on adherence, costs, and test characteristics. CONCLUSION The combination of sigmoidoscopy and stool testing represents a cost-effective screening strategy that has not received much attention in current guidelines. Further research is needed that goes beyond a narrow focus on screening technology and models different, preference-based participation behavior in subgroups.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Leonie Diedrich
- Institute for Epidemiology, Social Medicine and Health Systems Research, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany
| | - Melanie Brinkmann
- Institute for Epidemiology, Social Medicine and Health Systems Research, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany
| | - Maren Dreier
- Institute for Epidemiology, Social Medicine and Health Systems Research, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany
| | - Siegbert Rossol
- Department of Internal Medicine, Krankenhaus Nordwest, Frankfurt/M, Germany
| | - Wendelin Schramm
- GECKO Institute for Medicine, Informatics and Economics, Heilbronn University, Heilbronn, Germany
| | - Christian Krauth
- Institute for Epidemiology, Social Medicine and Health Systems Research, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
|
7
|
Vivas-Valencia C, Zhou Y, Sai A, Imperiale TF, Kong N. A two-phase approach to re-calibrating expensive computer simulation for sex-specific colorectal neoplasia development modeling. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2022; 22:244. [PMID: 36117168 PMCID: PMC9482725 DOI: 10.1186/s12911-022-01991-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/19/2021] [Accepted: 09/01/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Medical evidence from more recent observational studies may significantly alter our understanding of disease incidence and progression, and would require recalibration of existing computational and predictive disease models. However, it is often challenging to perform recalibration when there are a large number of model parameters to be estimated. Moreover, comparing the fitting performances of candidate parameter designs can be difficult due to significant variation in simulated outcomes under limited computational budget and long runtime, even for one simulation replication. METHODS We developed a two-phase recalibration procedure. As a proof-of-the-concept study, we verified the procedure in the context of sex-specific colorectal neoplasia development. We considered two individual-based state-transition stochastic simulation models, estimating model parameters that govern colorectal adenoma occurrence and its growth through three preclinical states: non-advanced precancerous polyp, advanced precancerous polyp, and cancerous polyp. For the calibration, we used a weighted-sum-squared error between three prevalence values reported in the literature and the corresponding simulation outcomes. In phase 1 of the calibration procedure, we first extracted the baseline parameter design from relevant studies on the same model. We then performed sampling-based searches within a proper range around the baseline design to identify the initial set of good candidate designs. In phase 2, we performed local search (e.g., the Nelder-Mead algorithm), starting from the candidate designs identified at the end of phase 1. Further, we investigated the efficiency of exploring dimensions of the parameter space sequentially based on our prior knowledge of the system dynamics. RESULTS The efficiency of our two-phase re-calibration procedure was first investigated with CMOST, a relatively inexpensive computational model. It was then further verified with the V/NCS model, which is much more expensive. Overall, our two-phase procedure showed a better goodness-of-fit than the straightforward employment of the Nelder-Mead algorithm, when only a limited number of simulation replications were allowed. In addition, in phase 2, performing local search along parameter space dimensions sequentially was more efficient than performing the search over all dimensions concurrently. CONCLUSION The proposed two-phase re-calibration procedure is efficient at estimating parameters of computationally expensive stochastic dynamic disease models.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carolina Vivas-Valencia
- Weldon School of Biomedical Engineering, Martin C. Jischke Hall of Biomedical Engineering, Purdue University, 206 S. Martin Jischke Drive, West Lafayette, IN 47907-2032 USA
| | - You Zhou
- Weldon School of Biomedical Engineering, Martin C. Jischke Hall of Biomedical Engineering, Purdue University, 206 S. Martin Jischke Drive, West Lafayette, IN 47907-2032 USA
| | | | - Thomas F. Imperiale
- Indiana University School of Medicine, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN USA
- Richard A. Roudebush VA Medical Center, Indianapolis, IN USA
- Regenstrief Institute, Indianapolis, IN USA
| | - Nan Kong
- Weldon School of Biomedical Engineering, Martin C. Jischke Hall of Biomedical Engineering, Purdue University, 206 S. Martin Jischke Drive, West Lafayette, IN 47907-2032 USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
8
|
Vinchhi P, Patel MM. Triumph against cancer: invading colorectal cancer with nanotechnology. Expert Opin Drug Deliv 2021; 18:1169-1192. [PMID: 33567909 DOI: 10.1080/17425247.2021.1889512] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Recent statistics have reported colorectal cancer (CRC) as the second leading cause of cancer-associated deaths in the world. Early diagnosis of CRC may help to reduce the mortality and associated complications. However, the conventional diagnostic techniques often lead to misdiagnosis, fail to differentiate benign from malignant tissue or diagnose only at an advanced stage. For the treatment of CRC, surgery, chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and radiotherapy have been employed. However, the quality of living of the CRC patients is highly compromised after employing current therapeutic approaches owing to the toxicity issues and relapse. AREA COVERED This review accentuates the molecular mechanisms involved in the pathogenesis, stages of CRC, conventional approaches for diagnosis and therapy of CRC and the issues confronted thereby. It provides an outlook on the advantages of employing nanotechnology-based approaches for prevention, early diagnosis, and treatment of CRC. EXPERT OPINION Employing nanotechnology-based approaches has demonstrated promising outcomes in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of CRC. Nanotechnology-based approaches can surmount the major drawbacks of traditional diagnostic and therapeutic approaches. Nanotechnology bestows the advantage of early detection of CRC which helps to undertake instant steps for offering efficient therapy and reducing the mortality rates. For the treatment of CRC, nanocarriers offer the benefit of achieving controlled drug release, improved drug bioavailability, enhanced tumor targetability and reduced adverse effects.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Preksha Vinchhi
- Department of Pharmaceutics, Institute of Pharmacy, Nirma University, Ahmedabad, India
| | - Mayur M Patel
- Department of Pharmaceutics, Institute of Pharmacy, Nirma University, Ahmedabad, India
| |
Collapse
|
|
9
|
Peterse EFP, Meester RGS, de Jonge L, Omidvari AH, Alarid-Escudero F, Knudsen AB, Zauber AG, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I. Comparing the Cost-Effectiveness of Innovative Colorectal Cancer Screening Tests. J Natl Cancer Inst 2021; 113:154-161. [PMID: 32761199 PMCID: PMC7850547 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djaa103] [Citation(s) in RCA: 62] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/10/2019] [Revised: 05/18/2020] [Accepted: 07/21/2020] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with colonoscopy and the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is underused. Innovative tests could increase screening acceptance. This study determined which of the available alternatives is most promising from a cost-effectiveness perspective. METHODS The previously validated Microsimulation Screening Analysis-Colon model was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of screening with capsule endoscopy every 5 or 10 years, computed tomographic colonography every 5 years, the multi-target stool DNA test every 1 or 3 years, and the methylated SEPT9 DNA plasma assay (mSEPT9) every 1 or 2 years. We also compared these strategies with annual FIT screening and colonoscopy screening every 10 years. Quality-adjusted life-years gained (QALYG), number of colonoscopies, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were projected. We assumed a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALYG. RESULTS Among the alternative tests, computed tomographic colonography every 5 years, annual mSEPT9, and annual multi-target stool DNA screening had incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of $1092, $63 253, and $214 974 per QALYG, respectively. Other screening strategies were more costly and less effective than (a combination of) these 3. Under the assumption of perfect adherence, annual mSEPT9 screening resulted in more QALYG, CRC cases averted, and CRC deaths averted than annual FIT screening but led to a high rate of colonoscopy referral (51% after 3 years, 69% after 5 years). The alternative tests were not cost-effective compared with FIT and colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS This study suggests that for individuals not willing to participate in FIT or colonoscopy screening, mSEPT9 is the test of choice if the high colonoscopy referral rate is acceptable to them.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elisabeth F P Peterse
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Reinier G S Meester
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Lucie de Jonge
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Amir-Houshang Omidvari
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Fernando Alarid-Escudero
- Drug Policy Program, Center for Research and Teaching in Economics (CIDE)-CONACyT, Aguascalientes, AGS, Mexico
| | - Amy B Knudsen
- Institute for Technology Assessment, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Ann G Zauber
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
|
10
|
Piscitello A, Saoud L, Fendrick AM, Borah BJ, Hassmiller Lich K, Matney M, Ozbay AB, Parton M, Limburg PJ. Estimating the impact of differential adherence on the comparative effectiveness of stool-based colorectal cancer screening using the CRC-AIM microsimulation model. PLoS One 2020; 15:e0244431. [PMID: 33373409 PMCID: PMC7771985 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0244431] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/05/2020] [Accepted: 12/09/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Real-world adherence to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening strategies is imperfect. The CRC-AIM microsimulation model was used to estimate the impact of imperfect adherence on the relative benefits and burdens of guideline-endorsed, stool-based screening strategies. METHODS Predicted outcomes of multi-target stool DNA (mt-sDNA), fecal immunochemical tests (FIT), and high-sensitivity guaiac-based fecal occult blood tests (HSgFOBT) were simulated for 40-year-olds free of diagnosed CRC. For robustness, imperfect adherence was incorporated in multiple ways and with extensive sensitivity analysis. Analysis 1 assumed adherence from 0%-100%, in 10% increments. Analysis 2 longitudinally applied real-world first-round differential adherence rates (base-case imperfect rates = 40% annual FIT vs 34% annual HSgFOBT vs 70% triennial mt-sDNA). Analysis 3 randomly assigned individuals to receive 1, 5, or 9 lifetime (9 = 100% adherence) mt-sDNA tests and 1, 5, or 9 to 26 (26 = 100% adherence) FIT tests. Outcomes are reported per 1000 individuals compared with no screening. RESULTS Each screening strategy decreased CRC incidence and mortality versus no screening. In individuals screened between ages 50-75 and adherence ranging from 10%a-100%, the life-years gained (LYG) for triennial mt-sDNA ranged from 133.1-300.0, for annual FIT from 96.3-318.1, and for annual HSgFOBT from 99.8-320.6. At base-case imperfect adherence rates, mt-sDNA resulted in 19.1% more LYG versus FIT, 25.4% more LYG versus HSgFOBT, and generally had preferable efficiency ratios while offering the most LYG. Completion of at least 21 FIT tests is needed to reach approximately the same LYG achieved with 9 mt-sDNA tests. CONCLUSIONS Adherence assumptions affect the conclusions of CRC screening microsimulations that are used to inform CRC screening guidelines. LYG from FIT and HSgFOBT are more sensitive to changes in adherence assumptions than mt-sDNA because they require more tests be completed for equivalent benefit. At imperfect adherence rates, mt-sDNA provides more LYG than FIT or HSgFOBT at an acceptable tradeoff in screening burden.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Leila Saoud
- Exact Sciences Corporation, Madison, WI, United States of America
| | - A. Mark Fendrick
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States of America
| | - Bijan J. Borah
- Department of Health Services Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America
| | - Kristen Hassmiller Lich
- Department of Health Policy & Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States of America
| | - Michael Matney
- Exact Sciences Corporation, Madison, WI, United States of America
| | - A. Burak Ozbay
- Exact Sciences Corporation, Madison, WI, United States of America
| | - Marcus Parton
- Exact Sciences Corporation, Madison, WI, United States of America
| | - Paul J. Limburg
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
|
11
|
Circulating non-coding RNA cluster predicted the tumorigenesis and development of colorectal carcinoma. Aging (Albany NY) 2020; 12:23047-23066. [PMID: 33234723 PMCID: PMC7746361 DOI: 10.18632/aging.104055] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/15/2020] [Accepted: 08/27/2020] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) is the most significant plasma biomarker in colorectal cancer (CRC), which is mainly used to diagnose and monitor the recurrence of CRC. However, due to the low sensitivity of CEA, it is more recommended for postoperative surveillance rather than early diagnosis. It is necessary to find efficient biomarkers for CRC. In this study, the expression of plasma non-coding RNAs was confirmed in three independent cohorts with total 1201 participants. First, 12 non-coding RNAs were screened from 9 plasma samples by using microarray. The expression of selected non-coding RNAs was further validated by multiphase detection and risk score analysis. We found that miR-20b-5p, miR-329-3p, miR-374b-5p, miR-503-5p, XLOC_001120 and ENSG00000243766.2 were significantly elevated in CRC plasma, and the AUC in training and validation set was 0.996 and 0.954, respectively. Moreover, miR-20b-5p, miR-329-3p and miR-503-5p were found elevated in plasma from larger tumors (5 cm as the cutoff) in CRC patients, and the merged AUC in training and validation set was 0.896 and 0.881. In conclusion, a panel of 6 non-coding RNAs showed their important clinical value for the early diagnosis of CRC. Among, miR-20b-5p, miR-329-3p and miR-503-5p might be the potential markers for evaluating larger tumor size of CRC.
Collapse
|
|
12
|
DeYoreo M, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Knudsen AB, Kuntz KM, Zauber AG, Rutter CM. Validation of Colorectal Cancer Models on Long-term Outcomes from a Randomized Controlled Trial. Med Decis Making 2020; 40:1034-1040. [PMID: 33078673 PMCID: PMC7665984 DOI: 10.1177/0272989x20961095] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
Microsimulation models are often used to predict long-term outcomes and guide policy decisions regarding cancer screening. The United Kingdom Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening (UKFSS) Trial examines a one-time intervention of flexible sigmoidoscopy that was implemented before a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program was established. Long-term study outcomes, now a full 17 y following randomization, have been published. We use the outcomes from this trial to validate 3 microsimulation models for CRC to long-term study outcomes. We find that 2 of 3 models accurately predict the relative effect of screening (the hazard ratios) on CRC-specific incidence 17 y after screening. We find that all 3 models yield predictions of the relative effect of screening on CRC incidence and mortality (i.e., the hazard ratios) that are reasonably close to the UKFSS results. Two of the 3 models accurately predict the relative reduction in CRC incidence 17 y after screening. One model accurately predicted the absolute incidence and mortality rates in the screened group. The models differ in their estimates related to adenoma detection at screening. Although high-quality screening results help to inform models, trials are expensive, last many years, and can be complicated by ethical issues and technological changes across the duration of the trial. Thus, well-calibrated and validated models are necessary to predict outcomes for which data are not available. The results from this validation demonstrate the utility of models in predicting long-term outcomes and in collaborative modeling to account for uncertainty.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Amy B Knudsen
- Institute for Technology Assessment and Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Karen M Kuntz
- Department of Health Policy and Management, University of Minnesota, School of Public Health, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Ann G Zauber
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
|
13
|
Moreno CC, Yee J, Dachman AH, Duszak R, Goldman L, Horný M. Use of Screening CT Colonography by Age and Race: A Study of Potential Access Barriers Related to Medicare Noncoverage Based on Data From the ACR's National CT Colonography Registry. J Am Coll Radiol 2020; 18:19-26. [PMID: 33086049 DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2020.09.043] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/10/2020] [Revised: 09/12/2020] [Accepted: 09/15/2020] [Indexed: 01/08/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The primary objectives of this investigation were to evaluate the use of screening CT colonography (CTC) examinations by age comparing individuals of Medicare-eligible age to younger cohorts and to determine if the association between use of CTC and Medicare-eligible age varies by race. Although the Affordable Care Act requires commercial insurance coverage of screening CTC, Medicare does not cover screening CTC. MATERIALS AND METHODS Using the ACR's CTC registry, the distribution of procedures by age was evaluated using a negative binomial model with patient age (to capture overall trend), indicator of Medicare-eligible age (to capture immediate changes in trend at age 65), and their interaction (to capture gradual changes after age 65) as independent variables. The association between the number of screening CTCs and age was compared by racial identity. RESULTS The CTC registry contained data on 12,648 screening examinations. Between ages 52 and 64, the number of screening examinations increased; each additional age year was associated with a 5.3% (P < .001) increase in the number of screenings. However, after age 65, the number of screening examinations decreased by -6.9% per additional year of age above 65 compared with the trend between ages 52 and 64 (P < .001). The modal age group for CTC use was 65 to 69 years in white and 55 to 59 in black individuals. CONCLUSION After age 65, the number of screening CTC examinations decreased, likely due, at least in part, to lack of Medicare coverage. Medicare noncoverage may have a disproportionate impact on black patients and other racial minorities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Courtney C Moreno
- Chair, ACR CT Colonography Registry Committee; member, ACR National Radiology Data Registry Steering Committee; member, ACR Colon Cancer Committee; Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia.
| | - Judy Yee
- Chair, ACR Colon Cancer Committee; Montefiore Health System and Chair of Radiology at Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York
| | - Abraham H Dachman
- Member, ACR CT Colonography Registry Committee; member, ACR National Radiology Data Registry Steering Committee; member, ACR Colon Cancer Committee; The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Richard Duszak
- Professor and Vice Chair, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia
| | | | - Michal Horný
- Assistant Professor, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia; Assistant Professor, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, Georgia
| |
Collapse
|
|
14
|
Kuntz KM, Popp J, Beck JR, Zauber AG, Weinberg DS. Cost-effectiveness of surveillance with CT colonography after resection of colorectal cancer. BMJ Open Gastroenterol 2020; 7:e000450. [PMID: 32933928 PMCID: PMC7493100 DOI: 10.1136/bmjgast-2020-000450] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/21/2020] [Revised: 07/03/2020] [Accepted: 07/09/2020] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Surveillance following colorectal cancer (CRC) resection uses optical colonoscopy (OC) to detect intraluminal disease and CT to detect extracolonic recurrence. CT colonography (CTC) might be an efficient use of resources in this situation because it allows for intraluminal and extraluminal evaluations with one test. DESIGN We developed a simulation model to compare lifetime costs and benefits for a cohort of patients with resected CRC. Standard of care involved annual CT for 3 years and OC for years 1, 4 and every 5 years thereafter. For the CTC-based strategy, we replace CT+OC at year 1 with CTC. Patients with lesions greater than 6 mm detected by CTC underwent OC. Detection of an adenoma 10 mm or larger was followed by OC at 1 year, then every 3 years thereafter. Test characteristics and costs for CTC were derived from a clinical study. Medicare costs were used for cancer care costs as well as alternative test costs. We discounted costs and effects at 3% per year. RESULTS For persons with resected stage III CRC, the standard-of-care strategy was more costly (US$293) and effective (2.6 averted CRC cases and 1.1 averted cancer deaths per 1000) than the CTC-based strategy, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of US$55 500 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Our analysis was most sensitive to the sensitivity of CTC for detecting polyps 10 mm or larger and assumptions about disease progression. CONCLUSION In a simulation model, we found that replacing the standard-of-care approach to postdiagnostic surveillance with a CTC-based strategy is not an efficient use of resources in most situations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karen M Kuntz
- Division of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Jonah Popp
- Department of Health Services, Policy & Practice, School of Public Health, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA
| | - J Robert Beck
- Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Ann G Zauber
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - David S Weinberg
- Department of Medicine, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
15
|
Zhong GC, Sun WP, Wan L, Hu JJ, Hao FB. Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of fecal immunochemical test versus colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 91:684-697.e15. [PMID: 31790657 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2019.11.035] [Citation(s) in RCA: 42] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/29/2019] [Accepted: 11/19/2019] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and colonoscopy are the most commonly used strategies for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening worldwide. We aimed to compare their efficacy and cost-effectiveness in CRC screening in an average-risk population. METHODS PubMed, Embase, and National Health Services Economic Evaluation Database were searched. Risk ratio (RR) was used to evaluate the differences in detection rates of colorectal neoplasia between FIT and colonoscopy groups. A random-effects model was used to pool RRs. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of FIT versus colonoscopy. RESULTS Six randomized controlled trials and 17 cost-effectiveness studies were included. The participation rate in the FIT group was higher than that in the colonoscopy group (41.6% vs 21.9%). In the intention-to-treat analysis, FIT had a detection rate of CRC comparable with colonoscopy (RR, .73; 95% confidence interval, .37-1.42) and lower detection rates of any adenoma and advanced adenoma than 1-time colonoscopy. Most included cost-effectiveness studies showed that annual (13/15) or biennial (5/6) FIT was cost-saving (ICER < $0) or very cost-effective ($0 < ICER ≤ $25000/quality-adjusted life-year) compared with colonoscopy every 10 years. CONCLUSIONS FIT may be similar to 1-time colonoscopy in the detection rate of CRC, although it has lower detection rates of any adenoma and advanced adenoma than 1-time colonoscopy. Furthermore, annual or biennial FIT appears to be very cost-effective or cost-saving compared with colonoscopy every 10 years. These findings indicate, at least partly, that FIT is noninferior to colonoscopy in CRC screening in an average-risk population. Our findings should be treated with caution and need to be further confirmed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Guo-Chao Zhong
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Wei-Ping Sun
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Lun Wan
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, the People's Hospital of Dazu district, Chongqing, China
| | - Jie-Jun Hu
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Fa-Bao Hao
- Pediatric Surgery Center, Qingdao Women and Children's Hospital, Qingdao University, Qingdao, Shandong, China
| |
Collapse
|
|
16
|
Ibáñez-Sanz G, Garcia M, Milà N, Hubbard RA, Vidal C, Binefa G, Benito L, Moreno V. False-Positive Results in a Population-Based Colorectal Screening Program: Cumulative Risk from 2000 to 2017 with Biennial Screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2019; 28:1909-1916. [PMID: 31488415 DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-18-1368] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/24/2018] [Revised: 04/08/2019] [Accepted: 08/28/2019] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to estimate the cumulative risk of a false-positive (FP) result in a fecal occult blood test (FOBT) through 7 screening rounds and to identify its associated factors in a population-based colorectal cancer screening program. METHODS Retrospective cohort study, which included participants ages 50 to 69 years of a colorectal cancer screening program in Catalonia, Spain. During this period, 2 FOBTs were used (guaiac and immunochemical). A discrete-time survival model was performed to identify risk factors of receiving a positive FOBT with no high-risk adenoma or colorectal cancer in the follow-up colonoscopy. We estimated the probability of having at least 1 FP over 7 screening rounds. RESULTS During the period of 2000 to 2017, the cumulative FP risk was 16.3% (IC95%: 14.6%-18.3%), adjusted by age, sex, and type of test. The median number of screens was 2. Participants who began screening at age 50 years had a 7.3% [95% confidence interval (CI), 6.35-8.51] and a 12.4% (95% CI, 11.00-13.94) probability of an FP with 4 screening rounds of guaiac-based test and immunochemical test, respectively. Age, the fecal immunochemical test, first screening, and number of personal screens were factors associated with an FP result among screenees. CONCLUSIONS The cumulative risk of an FP in colorectal screening using FOBT seems acceptable as the colonoscopy, with its high accuracy, lengthens the time until additional colorectal screening is required, while complication rates remain low. IMPACT It is useful to determine the cumulative FP risk in cancer screening for both advising individuals and for health resources planning.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gemma Ibáñez-Sanz
- Cancer Prevention and Control Programme, Catalan Institute of Oncology, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
- Gastroenterology Department, Bellvitge University Hospital, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
- Colorectal Cancer Group, ONCOBELL Programme, Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
- Consortium for Biomedical Research in Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBEResp), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Montse Garcia
- Cancer Prevention and Control Programme, Catalan Institute of Oncology, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain.
- Consortium for Biomedical Research in Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBEResp), Barcelona, Spain
- Cancer Prevention and Control Group, IDIBELL Programme, Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute, Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Núria Milà
- Cancer Prevention and Control Programme, Catalan Institute of Oncology, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
- Colorectal Cancer Group, ONCOBELL Programme, Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
- Consortium for Biomedical Research in Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBEResp), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Rebecca A Hubbard
- Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology & Informatics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Carmen Vidal
- Cancer Prevention and Control Programme, Catalan Institute of Oncology, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
- Cancer Prevention and Control Group, IDIBELL Programme, Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute, Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Gemma Binefa
- Cancer Prevention and Control Programme, Catalan Institute of Oncology, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
- Consortium for Biomedical Research in Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBEResp), Barcelona, Spain
- Cancer Prevention and Control Group, IDIBELL Programme, Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute, Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Llúcia Benito
- Cancer Prevention and Control Programme, Catalan Institute of Oncology, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Víctor Moreno
- Cancer Prevention and Control Programme, Catalan Institute of Oncology, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
- Colorectal Cancer Group, ONCOBELL Programme, Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
- Consortium for Biomedical Research in Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBEResp), Barcelona, Spain
- Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Barcelona, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
|
17
|
Ran T, Cheng CY, Misselwitz B, Brenner H, Ubels J, Schlander M. Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening Strategies-A Systematic Review. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019; 17:1969-1981.e15. [PMID: 30659991 DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2019.01.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 94] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/27/2018] [Revised: 01/08/2019] [Accepted: 01/08/2019] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS Widespread screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) has reduced its incidence and mortality. Previous studies investigated the economic effects of CRC screening. We performed a systematic review to provide up-to-date evidence of the cost effectiveness of CRC screening strategies by answering 3 research questions. METHODS We searched PubMed, National Institute for Health Research Economic Evaluation Database, Social Sciences Citation Index (via the Web of Science), EconLit (American Economic Association) and 3 supplemental databases for original articles published in English from January 2010 through December 2017. All monetary values were converted to US dollars (year 2016). For all research questions, we extracted, or calculated (if necessary), per-person costs and life years (LYs) and/or quality-adjusted LYs, as well as the incremental costs per LY gained or quality-adjusted LY gained compared with the baseline strategy. A cost-saving strategy was defined as one that was less costly and equally or more effective than the baseline strategy. The net monetary benefit approach was used to answer research question 2. RESULTS Our review comprised 33 studies (17 from Europe, 11 from North America, 4 from Asia, and 1 from Australia). Annual and biennial guaiac-based fecal occult blood tests, annual and biennial fecal immunochemical tests, colonoscopy every 10 years, and flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5 years were cost effective (even cost saving in most US models) compared to no screening. In addition, colonoscopy every 10 years was less costly and/or more effective than other common strategies in the United States. Newer strategies such as computed tomographic colonography, every 5 or 10 years, was cost effective compared with no screening. CONCLUSIONS In an updated review, we found that common CRC screening strategies and computed tomographic colonography continued to be cost effective compared to no screening. There were discrepancies among studies from different regions, which could be associated with the model types or model assumptions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tao Ran
- Division of Health Economics, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Chih-Yuan Cheng
- Division of Health Economics, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany; Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Benjamin Misselwitz
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Hermann Brenner
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jasper Ubels
- Division of Health Economics, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany; Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | | |
Collapse
|
|
18
|
Milluzzo SM, Bizzotto A, Cesaro P, Spada C. Colon capsule endoscopy and its effectiveness in the diagnosis and management of colorectal neoplastic lesions. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2018; 19:71-80. [DOI: 10.1080/14737140.2019.1538798] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Sebastian Manuel Milluzzo
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit and Gastroenterology, Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
- Department of Gastroenterology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS -Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italy
| | - Alessandra Bizzotto
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit and Gastroenterology, Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - Paola Cesaro
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit and Gastroenterology, Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - Cristiano Spada
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit and Gastroenterology, Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS -Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
|
19
|
Areia M, Fuccio L, Hassan C, Dekker E, Dias-Pereira A, Dinis-Ribeiro M. Cost-utility analysis of colonoscopy or faecal immunochemical test for population-based organised colorectal cancer screening. United European Gastroenterol J 2018; 7:105-113. [PMID: 30788122 DOI: 10.1177/2050640618803196] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/15/2018] [Accepted: 08/27/2018] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Organised programmes for colorectal cancer screening demand a high burden of medical and economic resources. The preferred methods are the faecal immunochemical test and primary colonoscopy. Objective The purpose of this study was to perform an economic analysis and comparison between these tests in Europe. Methods We used a Markov cost-utility analysis from a societal perspective comparing biennial faecal immunochemical test or colonoscopy every 10 years screening versus non-screening in Portugal. The population was screened, aged from 50-74 years, and efficacy was evaluated in quality-adjusted life years. For the base-case scenario, the faecal immunochemical test cost was €3 with 50% acceptance and colonoscopy cost was €397 with 38% acceptance. The threshold was set at €39,760/quality-adjusted life years and the primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Results Screening by biennial faecal immunochemical test and primary colonoscopy every 10 years resulted in incremental utilities of 0.00151 quality-adjusted life years and 0.00185 quality-adjusted life years at additional costs of €4 and €191, respectively. The faecal immunochemical test was the most cost-effective option providing an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €2694/quality-adjusted life years versus €103,633/quality-adjusted life years for colonoscopy. Colonoscopy capacity would have to increase 1.3% for a faecal immunochemical test programme or 31% for colonoscopy. Conclusion Biennial faecal immunochemical test screening is better than colonoscopy as it is cost-effective, allows more individuals to get screened, and provides a more rational use of the endoscopic capacity available.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Miguel Areia
- Center for Health Technology and Services Research (CINTESIS), University of Porto (FMUP), Porto, Portugal.,Gastroenterology Department, Portuguese Oncology Institute of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal
| | - Lorenzo Fuccio
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, S. Orsola-Malpighi University Hospital, Bologna, Italy
| | - Cesare Hassan
- Endoscopy Unit, Nuovo Regina Margherita Hospital, Rome, Italy
| | - Evelien Dekker
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - António Dias-Pereira
- Gastroenterology Department, Portuguese Oncology Institute of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Mário Dinis-Ribeiro
- Center for Health Technology and Services Research (CINTESIS), University of Porto (FMUP), Porto, Portugal.,Gastroenterology Department, Portuguese Oncology Institute of Porto, Porto, Portugal
| |
Collapse
|
|
20
|
Mantellini P, Lippi G, Sali L, Grazzini G, Delsanto S, Mallardi B, Falchini M, Castiglione G, Carozzi FM, Mascalchi M, Milani S, Ventura L, Zappa M. Cost analysis of colorectal cancer screening with CT colonography in Italy. THE EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS : HEPAC : HEALTH ECONOMICS IN PREVENTION AND CARE 2018; 19:735-746. [PMID: 28681075 DOI: 10.1007/s10198-017-0917-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/19/2017] [Accepted: 06/20/2017] [Indexed: 06/07/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Unit costs of screening CT colonography (CTC) can be useful for cost-effectiveness analyses and for health care decision-making. We evaluated the unit costs of CTC as a primary screening test for colorectal cancer in the setting of a randomized trial in Italy. METHODS Data were collected within the randomized SAVE trial. Subjects were invited to screening CTC by mail and requested to have a pre-examination consultation. CTCs were performed with 64- and 128-slice CT scanners after reduced or full bowel preparation. Activity-based costing was used to determine unit costs per-process, per-participant to screening CTC, and per-subject with advanced neoplasia. RESULTS Among 5242 subjects invited to undergo screening CTC, 1312 had pre-examination consultation and 1286 ultimately underwent CTC. Among 129 subjects with a positive CTC, 126 underwent assessment colonoscopy and 67 were ultimately diagnosed with advanced neoplasia (i.e., cancer or advanced adenoma). Cost per-participant of the entire screening CTC pathway was €196.80. Average cost per-participant for the screening invitation process was €17.04 and €9.45 for the pre-examination consultation process. Average cost per-participant of the CTC execution and reading process was €146.08 and of the diagnostic assessment colonoscopy process was €24.23. Average cost per-subject with advanced neoplasia was €3777.30. CONCLUSIONS Cost of screening CTC was €196.80 per-participant. Our data suggest that the more relevant cost of screening CTC, amenable of intervention, is related to CTC execution and reading process.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paola Mantellini
- Cancer Prevention and Research Institute - ISPO, Via Cosimo il Vecchio 2, 50139, Florence, Italy.
| | - Giuseppe Lippi
- Azienda USL Toscana Centro, P.za S. Maria Nuova 1, Florence, Italy
| | - Lapo Sali
- Department of Biomedical, Experimental and Clinical Sciences "Mario Serio", University of Florence, Viale Morgagni 50, Florence, Italy
| | - Grazia Grazzini
- Cancer Prevention and Research Institute - ISPO, Via Cosimo il Vecchio 2, 50139, Florence, Italy
| | | | - Beatrice Mallardi
- Cancer Prevention and Research Institute - ISPO, Via Cosimo il Vecchio 2, 50139, Florence, Italy
| | - Massimo Falchini
- Department of Biomedical, Experimental and Clinical Sciences "Mario Serio", University of Florence, Viale Morgagni 50, Florence, Italy
| | - Guido Castiglione
- Cancer Prevention and Research Institute - ISPO, Via Cosimo il Vecchio 2, 50139, Florence, Italy
| | - Francesca Maria Carozzi
- Cancer Prevention and Research Institute - ISPO, Via Cosimo il Vecchio 2, 50139, Florence, Italy
| | - Mario Mascalchi
- Department of Biomedical, Experimental and Clinical Sciences "Mario Serio", University of Florence, Viale Morgagni 50, Florence, Italy
| | - Stefano Milani
- Department of Biomedical, Experimental and Clinical Sciences "Mario Serio", University of Florence, Viale Morgagni 50, Florence, Italy
| | - Leonardo Ventura
- Cancer Prevention and Research Institute - ISPO, Via Cosimo il Vecchio 2, 50139, Florence, Italy
| | - Marco Zappa
- Cancer Prevention and Research Institute - ISPO, Via Cosimo il Vecchio 2, 50139, Florence, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
|
21
|
Arrospide A, Idigoras I, Mar J, de Koning H, van der Meulen M, Soto-Gordoa M, Martinez-Llorente JM, Portillo I, Arana-Arri E, Ibarrondo O, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I. Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses of a colorectal cancer screening programme in a high adenoma prevalence scenario using MISCAN-Colon microsimulation model. BMC Cancer 2018; 18:464. [PMID: 29695234 PMCID: PMC5918894 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-018-4362-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/09/2017] [Accepted: 04/11/2018] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Background The Basque Colorectal Cancer Screening Programme began in 2009 and the implementation has been complete since 2013. Faecal immunological testing was used for screening in individuals between 50 and 69 years old. Colorectal Cancer in Basque country is characterized by unusual epidemiological features given that Colorectal Cancer incidence is similar to other European countries while adenoma prevalence is higher. The object of our study was to economically evaluate the programme via cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses with microsimulation models. Methods We applied the Microsimulation Screening Analysis (MISCAN)-Colon model to predict trends in Colorectal Cancer incidence and mortality and to quantify the short- and long-term effects and costs of the Basque Colorectal Cancer Screening Programme. The model was calibrated to the Basque demographics in 2008 and age-specific Colorectal Cancer incidence data in the Basque Cancer Registry from 2005 to 2008 before the screening begun. The model was also calibrated to the high adenoma prevalence observed for the Basque population in a previously published study. The multi-cohort approach used in the model included all the cohorts in the programme during 30 years of implementation, with lifetime follow-up. Unit costs were obtained from the Basque Health Service and both cost-effectiveness analysis and budget impact analysis were carried out. Results The goodness-of-fit of the model adaptation to observed programme data was evidence of validation. In the cost-effectiveness analysis, the savings from treatment were larger than the added costs due to screening. Thus, the Basque programme was dominant compared to no screening, as life expectancy increased by 29.3 days per person. The savings in the budget analysis appeared 10 years after the complete implementation of the programme. The average annual budget was €73.4 million from year 2023 onwards. Conclusions This economic evaluation showed a screening intervention with a major health gain that also produced net savings when a long follow-up was used to capture the late economic benefit. The number of colonoscopies required was high but remain within the capacity of the Basque Health Service. So far in Europe, no other population Colorectal Cancer screening programme has been evaluated by budget impact analysis. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-018-4362-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arantzazu Arrospide
- Gipuzkoa Primary Care - Integrated Health Care Organizations Research Unit, Alto Deba Integrated Health Care Organisation, Avda Navarra 16, 20500, Arrasate-Mondragón, Gipuzkoa, Spain. .,Health Services Research on Chronic Patients Network (REDISSEC), Arrasate - Mondragón, Gipuzkoa, Spain. .,Biodonostia Health Research Institute, Donostia - San Sebastian, Gipuzkoa, Spain.
| | - Isabel Idigoras
- Basque Country Colorectal Cancer Screening Programme, Basque Health Service, Bilbao, Bizkaia, Spain
| | - Javier Mar
- Gipuzkoa Primary Care - Integrated Health Care Organizations Research Unit, Alto Deba Integrated Health Care Organisation, Avda Navarra 16, 20500, Arrasate-Mondragón, Gipuzkoa, Spain.,Health Services Research on Chronic Patients Network (REDISSEC), Arrasate - Mondragón, Gipuzkoa, Spain.,Biodonostia Health Research Institute, Donostia - San Sebastian, Gipuzkoa, Spain.,Clinical Management Unit, Alto Deba Integrated Health Care Organisation, Arrasate - Mondragón, Gipuzkoa, Spain
| | - Harry de Koning
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Miriam van der Meulen
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Myriam Soto-Gordoa
- Gipuzkoa Primary Care - Integrated Health Care Organizations Research Unit, Alto Deba Integrated Health Care Organisation, Avda Navarra 16, 20500, Arrasate-Mondragón, Gipuzkoa, Spain.,Health Services Research on Chronic Patients Network (REDISSEC), Arrasate - Mondragón, Gipuzkoa, Spain.,Biodonostia Health Research Institute, Donostia - San Sebastian, Gipuzkoa, Spain
| | | | - Isabel Portillo
- Basque Country Colorectal Cancer Screening Programme, Basque Health Service, Bilbao, Bizkaia, Spain
| | | | - Oliver Ibarrondo
- Gipuzkoa Primary Care - Integrated Health Care Organizations Research Unit, Alto Deba Integrated Health Care Organisation, Avda Navarra 16, 20500, Arrasate-Mondragón, Gipuzkoa, Spain
| | - Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
|
22
|
van der Meulen MP, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Goede SL, Kuipers EJ, Dekker E, Stoker J, van Ballegooijen M. Colorectal Cancer: Cost-effectiveness of Colonoscopy versus CT Colonography Screening with Participation Rates and Costs. Radiology 2018; 287:901-911. [PMID: 29485322 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2017162359] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
Purpose To compare the cost-effectiveness of computed tomographic (CT) colonography and colonoscopy screening by using data on unit costs and participation rates from a randomized controlled screening trial in a dedicated screening setting. Materials and Methods Observed participation rates and screening costs from the Colonoscopy or Colonography for Screening, or COCOS, trial were used in a microsimulation model to estimate costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained with colonoscopy and CT colonography screening. For both tests, the authors determined optimal age range and screening interval combinations assuming a 100% participation rate. Assuming observed participation for these combinations, the cost-effectiveness of both tests was compared. Extracolonic findings were not included because long-term follow-up data are lacking. Results The participation rates for colonoscopy and CT colonography were 21.5% (1276 of 5924 invitees) and 33.6% (982 of 2920 invitees), respectively. Colonoscopy was more cost-effective in the screening strategies with one or two lifetime screenings, whereas CT colonography was more cost-effective in strategies with more lifetime screenings. CT colonography was the preferred test for willingness-to-pay-thresholds of €3200 per QALY gained and higher, which is lower than the Dutch willingness-to-pay threshold of €20 000. With equal participation, colonoscopy was the preferred test independent of willingness-to-pay thresholds. The findings were robust for most of the sensitivity analyses, except with regard to relative screening costs and subsequent participation. Conclusion Because of the higher participation rates, CT colonography screening for colorectal cancer is more cost-effective than colonoscopy screening. The implementation of CT colonography screening requires previous satisfactory resolution to the question as to how best to deal with extracolonic findings. © RSNA, 2018 Online supplemental material is available for this article.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Miriam P van der Meulen
- From the Departments of Public Health (M.P.v.d.M., I.L.V., S.L.G., M.v.B.), Gastroenterology and Hepatology (E.J.K.), and Internal Medicine (E.J.K.), Erasmus Medical Centre, University Medical Center Rotterdam, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (E.D.) and Department of Radiology (J.S.), Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
- From the Departments of Public Health (M.P.v.d.M., I.L.V., S.L.G., M.v.B.), Gastroenterology and Hepatology (E.J.K.), and Internal Medicine (E.J.K.), Erasmus Medical Centre, University Medical Center Rotterdam, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (E.D.) and Department of Radiology (J.S.), Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - S Lucas Goede
- From the Departments of Public Health (M.P.v.d.M., I.L.V., S.L.G., M.v.B.), Gastroenterology and Hepatology (E.J.K.), and Internal Medicine (E.J.K.), Erasmus Medical Centre, University Medical Center Rotterdam, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (E.D.) and Department of Radiology (J.S.), Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Ernst J Kuipers
- From the Departments of Public Health (M.P.v.d.M., I.L.V., S.L.G., M.v.B.), Gastroenterology and Hepatology (E.J.K.), and Internal Medicine (E.J.K.), Erasmus Medical Centre, University Medical Center Rotterdam, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (E.D.) and Department of Radiology (J.S.), Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Evelien Dekker
- From the Departments of Public Health (M.P.v.d.M., I.L.V., S.L.G., M.v.B.), Gastroenterology and Hepatology (E.J.K.), and Internal Medicine (E.J.K.), Erasmus Medical Centre, University Medical Center Rotterdam, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (E.D.) and Department of Radiology (J.S.), Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jaap Stoker
- From the Departments of Public Health (M.P.v.d.M., I.L.V., S.L.G., M.v.B.), Gastroenterology and Hepatology (E.J.K.), and Internal Medicine (E.J.K.), Erasmus Medical Centre, University Medical Center Rotterdam, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (E.D.) and Department of Radiology (J.S.), Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marjolein van Ballegooijen
- From the Departments of Public Health (M.P.v.d.M., I.L.V., S.L.G., M.v.B.), Gastroenterology and Hepatology (E.J.K.), and Internal Medicine (E.J.K.), Erasmus Medical Centre, University Medical Center Rotterdam, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (E.D.) and Department of Radiology (J.S.), Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
|
23
|
Krylov NN, Pyatenko EA, Komissarov AB. [Comparative analysis of colorectal cancer screening approaches]. Khirurgiia (Mosk) 2017:92-97. [PMID: 29186105 DOI: 10.17116/hirurgia20171192-97] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- N N Krylov
- First Moscow State medical University named after I.M. Sechenov, Moscow, Russia
| | - E A Pyatenko
- First Moscow State medical University named after I.M. Sechenov, Moscow, Russia
| | - A B Komissarov
- First Moscow State medical University named after I.M. Sechenov, Moscow, Russia
| |
Collapse
|
|
24
|
Maida M, Macaluso FS, Ianiro G, Mangiola F, Sinagra E, Hold G, Maida C, Cammarota G, Gasbarrini A, Scarpulla G. Screening of colorectal cancer: present and future. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2017; 17:1131-1146. [PMID: 29022408 DOI: 10.1080/14737140.2017.1392243] [Citation(s) in RCA: 120] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer in males and second in females, and the fourth most common cause of cancer death worldwide. Currently, about 60-70% of diagnosed cases in symptomatic patients are detected at an advanced stage of disease. Earlier stage detection through the use of screening strategies would allow for better outcomes in terms of reducing the disease burden. Areas covered: The aim of this paper is to review the current published evidence from literature which assesses the performance and effectiveness of different screening tests for the early detection of CRC. Expert commentary: Adequate screening strategies can reduce CRC incidence and mortality. In the last few decades, several tests have been proposed for CRC screening. To date, there is still insufficient evidence to identify which approach is definitively superior, and no screening strategy for CRC can therefore be defined as universally ideal. The best strategy would be the one that can be economically viable and to which the patient can adhere best to over time. The latest guidelines suggest colonoscopy every 10 years or annual fecal immuno-chemical test (FIT) for people with normal risk, while for individuals with high risk or hereditary syndromes specific recommendations are provided.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marcello Maida
- a Section of Gastroenterology , S.Elia - Raimondi Hospital , Caltanissetta , Italy
| | | | - Gianluca Ianiro
- c Internal Medicine, Gastroenterology & Liver Unit , Università Cattolica Sacro Cuore , Rome , Italy
| | - Francesca Mangiola
- c Internal Medicine, Gastroenterology & Liver Unit , Università Cattolica Sacro Cuore , Rome , Italy
| | - Emanuele Sinagra
- d Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Unit , Fondazione Istituto San Raffaele Giglio , Cefalù , Italy
| | - Georgina Hold
- e School of Medicine, Medical Sciences and Nutrition , University of Aberdeen , Aberdeen , UK
| | - Carlo Maida
- f Section of Internal Medicine , DIBIMIS, University of Palermo , Palermo , Italy
| | - Giovanni Cammarota
- c Internal Medicine, Gastroenterology & Liver Unit , Università Cattolica Sacro Cuore , Rome , Italy
| | - Antonio Gasbarrini
- c Internal Medicine, Gastroenterology & Liver Unit , Università Cattolica Sacro Cuore , Rome , Italy
| | - Giuseppe Scarpulla
- a Section of Gastroenterology , S.Elia - Raimondi Hospital , Caltanissetta , Italy
| |
Collapse
|
|
25
|
Arafa MA, Farhat KH. Recent diagnostic procedures for colorectal cancer screening: Are they cost-effective? Arab J Gastroenterol 2017; 18:136-139. [PMID: 28988790 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajg.2017.05.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/19/2017] [Accepted: 05/27/2017] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer worldwide and the fourth most common cause of death. Reduction in mortality rates in some countries worldwide are most likely ascribed to CRC screening and/or improved treatments. We reviewed the most relevant articles which discuss the cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening procedures, in particular, the recent ones through the last eight years. The effectiveness of screening estimated by discounted life years gained (LYGs) compared to no screening, differed considerably between the studies. Despite these differences, all studies consistently emphasized that screening for CRC was cost-effective compared with no screening for each of the recognized screening strategies. Newer technologies for colorectal cancer screening, including computed tomographic colonography (CTC), faecal DNA test, and Pillcam Colon are less invasive and accurate, however, they are not cost-effective, as their cost was higher than all other established screening strategies. When compliance and adherence to such new techniques are increased more than the established strategies they would be more cost-effective particularly CTC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mostafa Ahmed Arafa
- Cancer Research Chair, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Karim Hamda Farhat
- Cancer Research Chair, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
| |
Collapse
|
|
26
|
Inada R, Nagasaka T, Watanabe A, Yagi T, Mori Y, Kondo Y, Kishimoto H, Umeda Y, Fujiwara T. Comparison of outcomes between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with colorectal cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis of surgical invasiveness, medical costs and oncological outcomes. BMJ Open Gastroenterol 2017; 4:e000146. [PMID: 28944068 PMCID: PMC5609081 DOI: 10.1136/bmjgast-2017-000146] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/28/2017] [Revised: 05/22/2017] [Accepted: 06/03/2017] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Background and aims Whether asymptomatic patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) who are treated in hospitals show better outcomes than symptomatic patients with CRC still remains unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate differences in clinical benefits following treatment in asymptomatic and symptomatic patients with CRC. Methods This study was a retrospective cohort analysis with data obtained from records. A cohort of 145 asymptomatic and 123 symptomatic patients who underwent CRC surgery between January 2009 and December 2011 was enrolled. To reduce bias in comparing outcomes, propensity score (PS) analysis was used for matching of patients in the symptomatic and asymptomatic groups based on clinicopathological factors. Surgical invasiveness, medical costs and oncological outcomes were examined by unadjusted and PS-matched analysis. Results Tumours in the symptomatic group were more often diagnosed in advanced stages compared with tumours in the asymptomatic group. Therefore, fewer symptomatic group patients underwent minimally invasive surgery. Short-term outcomes, including amount of blood loss, duration of postoperative hospital stay and perioperative medical costs, were significantly better in the asymptomatic group. Although overall survival was significantly better in the asymptomatic group, there was no significant difference between the groups when the patients were adjusted on the basis of PS. Conclusions Though this study was limited by the retrospective nature and small sample size, favourable outcomes in asymptomatic patients were due to the higher proportion of patients in this group who were diagnosed with CRC in earlier stages, due to participation in CRC screening programmes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ryo Inada
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan.,Department of Surgery, Kansai Medical University, Osaka, Japan
| | - Takeshi Nagasaka
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan
| | - Ayako Watanabe
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan
| | - Tomohiko Yagi
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan
| | - Yoshiko Mori
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan
| | - Yoshitaka Kondo
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan
| | - Hiroyuki Kishimoto
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan
| | - Yuzo Umeda
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan
| | - Toshiyoshi Fujiwara
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
|
27
|
Rex DK, Boland CR, Dominitz JA, Giardiello FM, Johnson DA, Kaltenbach T, Levin TR, Lieberman D, Robertson DJ. Colorectal Cancer Screening: Recommendations for Physicians and Patients From the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology 2017; 153:307-323. [PMID: 28600072 DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2017.05.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 507] [Impact Index Per Article: 63.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
This document updates the colorectal cancer (CRC) screening recommendations of the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force of Colorectal Cancer (MSTF), which represents the American College of Gastroenterology, the American Gastroenterological Association, and The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. CRC screening tests are ranked in 3 tiers based on performance features, costs, and practical considerations. The first-tier tests are colonoscopy every 10 years and annual fecal immunochemical test (FIT). Colonoscopy and FIT are recommended as the cornerstones of screening regardless of how screening is offered. Thus, in a sequential approach based on colonoscopy offered first, FIT should be offered to patients who decline colonoscopy. Colonoscopy and FIT are recommended as tests of choice when multiple options are presented as alternatives. A risk-stratified approach is also appropriate, with FIT screening in populations with an estimated low prevalence of advanced neoplasia and colonoscopy screening in high prevalence populations. The second-tier tests include CT colonography every 5 years, the FIT-fecal DNA test every 3 years, and flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5 to 10 years. These tests are appropriate screening tests, but each has disadvantages relative to the tier 1 tests. Because of limited evidence and current obstacles to use, capsule colonoscopy every 5 years is a third-tier test. We suggest that the Septin9 serum assay (Epigenomics, Seattle, Wash) not be used for screening. Screening should begin at age 50 years in average-risk persons, except in African Americans in whom limited evidence supports screening at 45 years. CRC incidence is rising in persons under age 50, and thorough diagnostic evaluation of young persons with suspected colorectal bleeding is recommended. Discontinuation of screening should be considered when persons up to date with screening, who have prior negative screening (particularly colonoscopy), reach age 75 or have <10 years of life expectancy. Persons without prior screening should be considered for screening up to age 85, depending on age and comorbidities. Persons with a family history of CRC or a documented advanced adenoma in a first-degree relative age <60 years or 2 first-degree relatives with these findings at any age are recommended to undergo screening by colonoscopy every 5 years, beginning 10 years before the age at diagnosis of the youngest affected relative or age 40, whichever is earlier. Persons with a single first-degree relative diagnosed at ≥60 years with CRC or an advanced adenoma can be offered average-risk screening options beginning at age 40 years.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Douglas K Rex
- Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.
| | | | - Jason A Dominitz
- VA Puget Sound Health Care System, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
| | | | | | - Tonya Kaltenbach
- San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, California
| | | | | | - Douglas J Robertson
- VA Medical Center, White River Junction, Vermont, and Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, New Hampshire
| |
Collapse
|
|
28
|
Rex DK, Boland CR, Dominitz JA, Giardiello FM, Johnson DA, Kaltenbach T, Levin TR, Lieberman D, Robertson DJ. Colorectal Cancer Screening: Recommendations for Physicians and Patients from the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Am J Gastroenterol 2017; 112:1016-1030. [PMID: 28555630 DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2017.174] [Citation(s) in RCA: 465] [Impact Index Per Article: 58.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
This document updates the colorectal cancer (CRC) screening recommendations of the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force of Colorectal Cancer (MSTF), which represents the American College of Gastroenterology, the American Gastroenterological Association, and The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. CRC screening tests are ranked in 3 tiers based on performance features, costs, and practical considerations. The first-tier tests are colonoscopy every 10 years and annual fecal immunochemical test (FIT). Colonoscopy and FIT are recommended as the cornerstones of screening regardless of how screening is offered. Thus, in a sequential approach based on colonoscopy offered first, FIT should be offered to patients who decline colonoscopy. Colonoscopy and FIT are recommended as tests of choice when multiple options are presented as alternatives. A risk-stratified approach is also appropriate, with FIT screening in populations with an estimated low prevalence of advanced neoplasia and colonoscopy screening in high prevalence populations. The second-tier tests include CT colonography every 5 years, the FIT-fecal DNA test every 3 years, and flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5 to 10 years. These tests are appropriate screening tests, but each has disadvantages relative to the tier 1 tests. Because of limited evidence and current obstacles to use, capsule colonoscopy every 5 years is a third-tier test. We suggest that the Septin9 serum assay (Epigenomics, Seattle, Wash) not be used for screening. Screening should begin at age 50 years in average-risk persons, except in African Americans in whom limited evidence supports screening at 45 years. CRC incidence is rising in persons under age 50, and thorough diagnostic evaluation of young persons with suspected colorectal bleeding is recommended. Discontinuation of screening should be considered when persons up to date with screening, who have prior negative screening (particularly colonoscopy), reach age 75 or have <10 years of life expectancy. Persons without prior screening should be considered for screening up to age 85, depending on age and comorbidities. Persons with a family history of CRC or a documented advanced adenoma in a first-degree relative age <60 years or 2 first-degree relatives with these findings at any age are recommended to undergo screening by colonoscopy every 5 years, beginning 10 years before the age at diagnosis of the youngest affected relative or age 40, whichever is earlier. Persons with a single first-degree relative diagnosed at ≥60 years with CRC or an advanced adenoma can be offered average-risk screening options beginning at age 40 years.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Douglas K Rex
- Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
| | | | - Jason A Dominitz
- VA Puget Sound Health Care System, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | | | | | - Tonya Kaltenbach
- San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, California, USA
| | | | | | - Douglas J Robertson
- VA Medical Center, White River Junction, Vermont, and Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, New Hampshire, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
29
|
Rex DK, Boland CR, Dominitz JA, Giardiello FM, Johnson DA, Kaltenbach T, Levin TR, Lieberman D, Robertson DJ. Colorectal cancer screening: Recommendations for physicians and patients from the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 86:18-33. [PMID: 28600070 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2017.04.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 115] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/06/2017] [Accepted: 04/06/2017] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Douglas K Rex
- Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
| | | | - Jason A Dominitz
- VA Puget Sound Health Care System, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | | | | | - Tonya Kaltenbach
- San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, California, USA
| | | | | | - Douglas J Robertson
- VA Medical Center, White River Junction, Vermont, and Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, New Hampshire, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
30
|
Prakash MK, Lang B, Heinrich H, Valli PV, Bauerfeind P, Sonnenberg A, Beerenwinkel N, Misselwitz B. CMOST: an open-source framework for the microsimulation of colorectal cancer screening strategies. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2017; 17:80. [PMID: 28583127 PMCID: PMC5460500 DOI: 10.1186/s12911-017-0458-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/25/2016] [Accepted: 04/30/2017] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality. CRC incidence and mortality can be reduced by several screening strategies, including colonoscopy, but randomized CRC prevention trials face significant obstacles such as the need for large study populations with long follow-up. Therefore, CRC screening strategies will likely be designed and optimized based on computer simulations. Several computational microsimulation tools have been reported for estimating efficiency and cost-effectiveness of CRC prevention. However, none of these tools is publicly available. There is a need for an open source framework to answer practical questions including testing of new screening interventions and adapting findings to local conditions. METHODS We developed and implemented a new microsimulation model, Colon Modeling Open Source Tool (CMOST), for modeling the natural history of CRC, simulating the effects of CRC screening interventions, and calculating the resulting costs. CMOST facilitates automated parameter calibration against epidemiological adenoma prevalence and CRC incidence data. RESULTS Predictions of CMOST were highly similar compared to a large endoscopic CRC prevention study as well as predictions of existing microsimulation models. We applied CMOST to calculate the optimal timing of a screening colonoscopy. CRC incidence and mortality are reduced most efficiently by a colonoscopy between the ages of 56 and 59; while discounted life years gained (LYG) is maximal at 49-50 years. With a dwell time of 13 years, the most cost-effective screening is at 59 years, at $17,211 discounted USD per LYG. While cost-efficiency varied according to dwell time it did not influence the optimal time point of screening interventions within the tested range. CONCLUSIONS Predictions of CMOST are highly similar compared to a randomized CRC prevention trial as well as those of other microsimulation tools. This open source tool will enable health-economics analyses in for various countries, health-care scenarios and CRC prevention strategies. CMOST is freely available under the GNU General Public License at https://gitlab.com/misselwb/CMOST.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Meher K Prakash
- Division of Gastroenterology, University Hospital Zurich (USZ), Rämistrasse 100, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Brian Lang
- Department of Biosystems Science and Engineering, ETH Zurich, 4058, Basel, Switzerland.,SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, 4058, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Henriette Heinrich
- Division of Gastroenterology, University Hospital Zurich (USZ), Rämistrasse 100, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Piero V Valli
- Division of Gastroenterology, University Hospital Zurich (USZ), Rämistrasse 100, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Peter Bauerfeind
- Division of Gastroenterology, University Hospital Zurich (USZ), Rämistrasse 100, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Amnon Sonnenberg
- The Portland VA Medical Center, P3-GI, 3710 SW US Veterans Hospital Road, Portland, OR, 97239, USA
| | - Niko Beerenwinkel
- Department of Biosystems Science and Engineering, ETH Zurich, 4058, Basel, Switzerland.,SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, 4058, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Benjamin Misselwitz
- Division of Gastroenterology, University Hospital Zurich (USZ), Rämistrasse 100, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland.
| |
Collapse
|
|
31
|
Sheehan DF, Criss SD, Gazelle GS, Pandharipande PV, Kong CY. Evaluating lung cancer screening in China: Implications for eligibility criteria design from a microsimulation modeling approach. PLoS One 2017; 12:e0173119. [PMID: 28273181 PMCID: PMC5342219 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0173119] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/21/2016] [Accepted: 02/15/2017] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
More than half of males in China are current smokers and evidence from western countries tells us that an unprecedented number of smoking-attributable deaths will occur as the Chinese population ages. We used the China Lung Cancer Policy Model (LCPM) to simulate effects of computed tomography (CT)-based lung cancer screening in China, comparing the impact of a screening guideline published in 2015 by a Chinese expert group to a version developed for the United States by the U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). The China LCPM, built using an existing lung cancer microsimulation model, can project population outcomes associated with interventions for smoking-related diseases. After calibrating the model to published Chinese smoking prevalence and lung cancer mortality rates, we simulated screening from 2016 to 2050 based on eligibility criteria from the CMS and Chinese guidelines, which differ by age to begin and end screening, pack-years smoked, and years since quitting. Outcomes included number of screens, mortality reduction, and life-years saved for each strategy. We projected that in the absence of screening, 14.98 million lung cancer deaths would occur between 2016 and 2050. Screening with the CMS guideline would prevent 0.72 million deaths and 5.8 million life-years lost, resulting in 6.58% and 1.97% mortality reduction in males and females, respectively. Screening with the Chinese guideline would prevent 0.74 million deaths and 6.6 million life-years lost, resulting in 6.30% and 2.79% mortality reduction in males and females, respectively. Through 2050, 1.43 billion screens would be required using the Chinese screening strategy, compared to 988 million screens using the CMS guideline. In conclusion, CT-based lung cancer screening implemented in 2016 and based on the Chinese screening guideline would prevent about 20,000 (2.9%) more lung cancer deaths through 2050, but would require about 445 million (44.7%) more screens than the CMS guideline.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Deirdre F. Sheehan
- Institute for Technology Assessment, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
| | - Steven D. Criss
- Institute for Technology Assessment, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
| | - G. Scott Gazelle
- Institute for Technology Assessment, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
- Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
| | - Pari V. Pandharipande
- Institute for Technology Assessment, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
| | - Chung Yin Kong
- Institute for Technology Assessment, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
- * E-mail:
| |
Collapse
|
|
32
|
Barzi A, Lenz HJ, Quinn DI, Sadeghi S. Comparative effectiveness of screening strategies for colorectal cancer. Cancer 2017; 123:1516-1527. [PMID: 28117881 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.30518] [Citation(s) in RCA: 39] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/07/2016] [Revised: 10/24/2016] [Accepted: 11/21/2016] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) has been successful in decreasing the incidence and mortality from CRC. Although new screening tests have become available, their relative impact on CRC outcomes remains unexplored. This study compares the outcomes of various screening strategies on CRC outcomes. METHODS A Markov model representing the natural history of CRC was built and validated against empiric data from screening trials as well as the Microstimulation Screening Analysis (MISCAN) model. Thirteen screening strategies based on colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, computed tomographic colonography, as well as fecal immunochemical, occult blood, and stool DNA testing were compared with no screening. A simulated sample of the US general population ages 50 to 75 years with an average risk of CRC was followed for up to 35 years or until death. Effectiveness was measured by discounted life years gained and the number of CRCs prevented. Discounted costs and cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated. A discount rate of 3% was used in calculations. The study took a societal perspective. RESULTS Colonoscopy emerged as the most effective screening strategy with the highest life years gained (0.022 life years) and CRCs prevented (n = 1068) and the lowest total costs ($2861). These values were 0.012 life years gained, 574 CRCs prevented, and a total cost of $3164, respectively, for FOBT; and 0.011 life years gained, 647 CRCs prevented, and a total cost of $4296, respectively, for DNA testing. Improved sensitivity or specificity of a screening test for CRC detection was not sufficient to close the outcomes gap compared with colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS Improvement in CRC-detection performance is not sufficient to improve screening outcomes. Special attention must be directed to detecting precancerous adenomas. Cancer 2017;123:1516-1527. © 2017 American Cancer Society.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Afsaneh Barzi
- Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California
| | - Heinz-Josef Lenz
- Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California
| | - David I Quinn
- Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California
| | - Sarmad Sadeghi
- Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California
| |
Collapse
|
|
33
|
Micro-Simulation Modeling. Health Serv Res 2017. [DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4939-6704-9_12-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/19/2022] Open
|
|
34
|
Meester RG, Zauber AG, Doubeni CA, Jensen CD, Quinn VP, Helfand M, Dominitz JA, Levin TR, Corley DA, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I. Consequences of Increasing Time to Colonoscopy Examination After Positive Result From Fecal Colorectal Cancer Screening Test. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2016; 14:1445-1451.e8. [PMID: 27211498 PMCID: PMC5028249 DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2016.05.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 73] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/03/2016] [Revised: 04/15/2016] [Accepted: 05/02/2016] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS Delays in diagnostic testing after a positive result from a screening test can undermine the benefits of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, but there are few empirical data on the effects of such delays. We used microsimulation modeling to estimate the consequences of time to colonoscopy after a positive result from a fecal immunochemical test (FIT). METHODS We used an established microsimulation model to simulate an average-risk United States population cohort that underwent annual FIT screening (from ages 50 to 75 years), with follow-up colonoscopy examinations for individuals with positive results (cutoff, 20 μg/g) at different time points in the following 12 months. Main evaluated outcomes were CRC incidence and mortality; additional outcomes were total life-years lost and net costs of screening. RESULTS For individuals who underwent diagnostic colonoscopy within 2 weeks of a positive result from an FIT, the estimated lifetime risk of CRC incidence was 35.5/1000 persons, and mortality was 7.8/1000 persons. Every month added until colonoscopy was associated with a 0.1/1000 person increase in cancer incidence risk (an increase of 0.3%/month, compared with individuals who received colonoscopies within 2 weeks) and mortality risk (increase of 1.4%/month). Among individuals who received colonoscopy examinations 12 months after a positive result from an FIT, the incidence of CRC was 37.0/1000 persons (increase of 4%, compared with 2 weeks), and mortality was 9.1/1000 persons (increase of 16%). Total years of life gained for the entire screening cohort decreased from an estimated 93.7/1000 persons with an almost immediate follow-up colonoscopy (cost savings of $208 per patient, compared with no colonoscopy) to 84.8/1000 persons with follow-up colonoscopies at 12 months (decrease of 9%; cost savings of $100/patient, compared with no colonoscopy). CONCLUSIONS By using a microsimulation model of an average-risk United States screening cohort, we estimated that delays of up to 12 months after a positive result from an FIT can produce proportional losses of up to nearly 10% in overall screening benefits. These findings indicate the importance of timely follow-up colonoscopy examinations of patients with positive results from FITs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Reinier G.S. Meester
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Ann G. Zauber
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States
| | - Chyke A. Doubeni
- Department of Family Medicine and Community Health in the Perelman School of Medicine, Department of Epidemiology in the Perelman School of Medicine, and the Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics and Center for Public Health Initiatives, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States
| | | | - Virginia P. Quinn
- Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Research & Evaluation, Pasadena, CA, United States
| | - Mark Helfand
- Veterans Affairs Portland Healthcare System, Portland, OR, United States
| | - Jason A. Dominitz
- Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Healthcare System, Seattle, WA, United States,Division of Gastroenterology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | | | | | - Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
|
35
|
Imperiale TF, Yu M, Monahan PO, Stump TE, Tabbey R, Glowinski E, Ransohoff DF. Risk of Advanced Neoplasia Using the National Cancer Institute's Colorectal Cancer Risk Assessment Tool. J Natl Cancer Inst 2016; 109:2905646. [PMID: 27582444 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djw181] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/01/2015] [Accepted: 06/20/2016] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Background There is no validated, discriminating, and easy-to-apply tool for estimating risk of colorectal neoplasia. We studied whether the National Cancer Institute's (NCI's) Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Risk Assessment Tool, which estimates future CRC risk, could estimate current risk for advanced colorectal neoplasia among average-risk persons. Methods This cross-sectional study involved individuals age 50 to 80 years undergoing first-time screening colonoscopy. We measured medical and family history, lifestyle information, and physical measures and calculated each person's future CRC risk using the NCI tool's logistic regression equation. We related quintiles of future CRC risk to the current risk of advanced neoplasia (sessile serrated polyp or tubular adenoma ≥ 1 cm, a polyp with villous histology or high-grade dysplasia, or CRC). All statistical tests were two-sided. Results For 4457 (98.5%) with complete data (mean age = 57.2 years, SD = 6.6 years, 51.7% women), advanced neoplasia prevalence was 8.26%. Based on quintiles of five-year estimated absolute CRC risk, current risks of advanced neoplasia were 2.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.3% to 3.3%), 4.8% (95% CI = 3.5% to 6.4%), 6.4% (95% CI = 4.9% to 8.2%), 10.0% (95% CI = 8.1% to 12.1%), and 17.6% (95% CI = 15.5% to 20.6%; P < .001). For quintiles of estimated 10-year CRC risk, corresponding current risks for advanced neoplasia were 2.2% (95% CI = 1.4% to 3.5%), 4.8% (95% CI = 3.5% to 6.4%), 6.5% (95% CI = 5.0% to 8.3%), 9.3% (95% CI = 7.5% to 11.4%), and 18.4% (95% CI = 15.9% to 21.1%; P < .001). Among persons with an estimated five-year CRC risk above the median, current risk for advanced neoplasia was 12.8%, compared with 3.7% among those below the median (relative risk = 3.4, 95 CI = 2.7 to 4.4). Conclusions The NCI's Risk Assessment Tool, which estimates future CRC risk, may be used to estimate current risk for advanced neoplasia, making it potentially useful for tailoring and improving CRC screening efficiency among average-risk persons.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas F Imperiale
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine; Regenstrief Institute, Inc. and Center for Innovation, Health Services Research and Development, Richard L. Roudebush VA Medical Center, Indianapolis, IN
| | - Menggang Yu
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Biostatistics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN
| | - Patrick O Monahan
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Biostatistics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN
| | - Timothy E Stump
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Biostatistics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN
| | - Rebeka Tabbey
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Biostatistics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN
| | | | - David F Ransohoff
- Department of Medicine University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC
| |
Collapse
|
|
36
|
Abstract
PURPOSE To compare the Medicare population cost of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening of average risk individuals by CT colonography (CTC) vs. optical colonoscopy (OC). METHODS The authors used Medicare claims data, fee schedules, established protocols, and other sources to estimate CTC and OC per-screen costs, including the costs of OC referrals for a subset of CTC patients. They then modeled and compared the Medicare costs of patients who complied with CTC and OC screening recommendations and tested alternative scenarios. RESULTS CTC is 29% less expensive than OC for the Medicare population in the base scenario. Although the CTC cost advantage is increased or reduced under alternative scenarios, it is always positive. CONCLUSION CTC is a cost-effective CRC screening option for the Medicare population and will likely reduce Medicare expenditures for CRC screening.
Collapse
|
|
37
|
Indeterminate but Likely Unimportant Extracolonic Findings at Screening CT Colonography (C-RADS Category E3): Incidence and Outcomes Data From a Clinical Screening Program. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2016; 207:996-1001. [PMID: 27505184 DOI: 10.2214/ajr.16.16275] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to analyze the incidence and outcomes of unsuspected indeterminate but likely unimportant extracolonic findings (CT Colonography Reporting and Data System [C-RADS] category E3) at screening CT colonography (CTC). MATERIALS AND METHODS Over 99 months (April 2004 through June 2012), 7952 consecutive adults without symptoms of colorectal cancer (4277 women, 3675 men; mean age ± SD, 56.7 ± 7.3 years) underwent first-time screening CTC. Findings prospectively placed into C-RADS category E3 were retrospectively reviewed, including follow-up (range, 2-10 years) and ultimate clinical outcome. RESULTS Unsuspected C-RADS category E3 extracolonic findings were detected in 9.1% (725/7952) of our patient population. A total of 751 category E3 findings were detected among these 725 patients; 25 patients had multiple findings. Commonly involved organ systems included gynecologic (24.4%, 183/751), genitourinary (20.9%, 157/751), lung (20.6%, 155/751), and gastrointestinal (16.1%, 121/751). Consideration for further imaging, if clinically warranted, was suggested in 83.8% (608/725). Sixty-five patients were lost to follow-up. Conditions requiring treatment or surveillance were ultimately diagnosed in 8.3% (55/660), including eight malignant neoplasms. In the remaining 605 patients, 25 (4.1%) underwent invasive biopsy or surgery to prove benignity (including 18 complex adnexal masses), and 278 (46.0%) received additional imaging follow-up. CONCLUSION Indeterminate but likely unimportant extracolonic findings (C-RADS category E3) occurred in less than 10% of adults without symptoms of colorectal cancer who underwent screening CTC. Over 90% of these findings ultimately proved to be clinically insignificant, with fewer than 5% requiring an invasive procedure to prove benign disease, the majority of which (> 70%) were complex adnexal lesions in women.
Collapse
|
|
38
|
Rutter CM, Knudsen AB, Marsh TL, Doria-Rose VP, Johnson E, Pabiniak C, Kuntz KM, van Ballegooijen M, Zauber AG, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I. Validation of Models Used to Inform Colorectal Cancer Screening Guidelines: Accuracy and Implications. Med Decis Making 2016; 36:604-14. [PMID: 26746432 PMCID: PMC5009464 DOI: 10.1177/0272989x15622642] [Citation(s) in RCA: 47] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/23/2015] [Accepted: 10/20/2015] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Microsimulation models synthesize evidence about disease processes and interventions, providing a method for predicting long-term benefits and harms of prevention, screening, and treatment strategies. Because models often require assumptions about unobservable processes, assessing a model's predictive accuracy is important. METHODS We validated 3 colorectal cancer (CRC) microsimulation models against outcomes from the United Kingdom Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening (UKFSS) Trial, a randomized controlled trial that examined the effectiveness of one-time flexible sigmoidoscopy screening to reduce CRC mortality. The models incorporate different assumptions about the time from adenoma initiation to development of preclinical and symptomatic CRC. Analyses compare model predictions to study estimates across a range of outcomes to provide insight into the accuracy of model assumptions. RESULTS All 3 models accurately predicted the relative reduction in CRC mortality 10 years after screening (predicted hazard ratios, with 95% percentile intervals: 0.56 [0.44, 0.71], 0.63 [0.51, 0.75], 0.68 [0.53, 0.83]; estimated with 95% confidence interval: 0.56 [0.45, 0.69]). Two models with longer average preclinical duration accurately predicted the relative reduction in 10-year CRC incidence. Two models with longer mean sojourn time accurately predicted the number of screen-detected cancers. All 3 models predicted too many proximal adenomas among patients referred to colonoscopy. CONCLUSION Model accuracy can only be established through external validation. Analyses such as these are therefore essential for any decision model. Results supported the assumptions that the average time from adenoma initiation to development of preclinical cancer is long (up to 25 years), and mean sojourn time is close to 4 years, suggesting the window for early detection and intervention by screening is relatively long. Variation in dwell time remains uncertain and could have important clinical and policy implications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Amy B Knudsen
- Institute for Technology Assessment, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA (ABK)
| | - Tracey L Marsh
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA (TLM)
| | - V Paul Doria-Rose
- National Cancer Institute, Health Systems & Intervention Research Branch, Bethesda, MD, USA (VPD)
| | - Eric Johnson
- Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA (EJ, CP)
| | | | - Karen M Kuntz
- Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA (KMK)
| | | | - Ann G Zauber
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA (AGZ)
| | | |
Collapse
|
|
39
|
The effectiveness of FOBT vs. FIT: A meta-analysis on colorectal cancer screening test. Med J Islam Repub Iran 2016; 30:366. [PMID: 27493910 PMCID: PMC4972062] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/18/2015] [Accepted: 11/16/2015] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND After lung and prostate cancers, colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer in men and the second most common cancer in women after breast cancer worldwide. Every year, more than one million people are diagnosed with colorectal cancer worldwide and half of these patients die from this disease, making it the fourth leading cause of death in the world. This systematic review aimed to assess the effectiveness of the two colorectal diagnostic tests of FOBT (fecal occult blood test) and FIT (fecal immunochemical test)) in terms of technical performance. METHODS To retrieve the relevant evidence, appropriate medical databases such as Cochrane library, NHSEED, Scopus and Google scholar were searched from February 2013 to July 2014, using free-texts and Mesh. In this study, inclusion/exclusion criteria of the papers, randomized controlled trials, economic evaluations, systematic reviews, meta-analyses and meta-syntheses of the effectiveness of FIT versus FOBT tests in moderate-risk populations (age: 50 to 70 years), which had reported the least of such outcomes as sensitivity, specificity and clinical outcomes were reviewed. The analyses of the effectiveness outcomes were performed in the form of meta-analysis. RESULTS Five papers were eligible to be included in the final phase of the study for synthesis. FIT showed a better performance in participation and positivity rate. Moreover, in terms of false positive and negative rate, FIT showed fewer rates compared to FOBT (RR:-4.06; 95% CI (-7.89-0.24), and NN-scope (Number need to scope) (2.2% vs. 1.6%), and NN-screen (Number need to screen) (84% vs. 31-49% in different cut off levels) showed significant differences in FOBT vs. FIT, respectively. CONCLUSION In the five included studies (3, 11-14), the acceptability of FIT was more than FOBT. However, in our meta-analysis, no difference was found between the two tests. FIT was significant in positivity rate and had a better performance in participation rate, and a fewer false negative numbers compared to FOBT.
Collapse
|
|
40
|
Patel SS, Kilgore ML. Cost Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening Strategies. Cancer Control 2016; 22:248-58. [PMID: 26068773 DOI: 10.1177/107327481502200219] [Citation(s) in RCA: 51] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Several screening tests are available to detect colorectal cancer (CRC) and reduce the incidence and mortality of CRC. The purpose of this review was to determine how current CRC screening strategies for CRC compare with no screening and whether agreement exists with regard to the cost effectiveness of different strategies. METHODS Databases were searched for cost-effectiveness analyses focused on CRC screening strategies in the United States and published between May 2007 and February 2014. We analyzed the uses of fecal occult blood, fecal immunochemistry, and stool DNA tests, as well as sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, and virtual colonoscopy. A paired comparison of each screening strategy with no screening across each of the studies reviewed was conducted. A series of paired comparisons of the results reported in each of the studies is also included. RESULTS When compared with no screening, all CRC screening strategies evaluated in this review were cost effective. There was disagreement as to which screening strategy was the most cost effective. However, sigmoidoscopy combined with fecal blood testing always dominated either strategy alone. Studies comparing colonoscopy with fecal blood testing, sigmoidoscopy, or both had mixed results. CONCLUSIONS Compared with no screening, all CRC screening strategies are more cost effective. Study results disagree as to which screening strategy should be the preferred method.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shaan S Patel
- Department of Health Care Organization and Policy, Birmingham, AL 35294-0022, USA.
| | | |
Collapse
|
|
41
|
van der Steen A, van Rosmalen J, Kroep S, van Hees F, Steyerberg EW, de Koning HJ, van Ballegooijen M, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I. Calibrating Parameters for Microsimulation Disease Models: A Review and Comparison of Different Goodness-of-Fit Criteria. Med Decis Making 2016; 36:652-65. [PMID: 26957567 DOI: 10.1177/0272989x16636851] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/16/2014] [Accepted: 01/20/2016] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Calibration (estimation of model parameters) compares model outcomes with observed outcomes and explores possible model parameter values to identify the set of values that provides the best fit to the data. The goodness-of-fit (GOF) criterion quantifies the difference between model and observed outcomes. There is no consensus on the most appropriate GOF criterion, because a direct performance comparison of GOF criteria in model calibration is lacking. METHODS We systematically compared the performance of commonly used GOF criteria (sum of squared errors [SSE], Pearson chi-square, and a likelihood-based approach [Poisson and/or binomial deviance functions]) in the calibration of selected parameters of the MISCAN-Colon microsimulation model for colorectal cancer. The performance of each GOF criterion was assessed by comparing the 1) root mean squared prediction error (RMSPE) of the selected parameters, 2) computation time of the calibration procedure of various calibration scenarios, and 3) impact on estimated cost-effectiveness ratios. RESULTS The likelihood-based deviance resulted in the lowest RMSPE in 4 of 6 calibration scenarios and was close to best in the other 2. The SSE had a 25 times higher RMSPE in a scenario with considerable differences in the values of observed outcomes, whereas the Pearson chi-square had a 60 times higher RMSPE in a scenario with multiple studies measuring the same outcome. In all scenarios, the SSE required the most computation time. The likelihood-based approach estimated the cost-effectiveness ratio most accurately (up to -0.15% relative difference versus 0.44% [SSE] and 13% [Pearson chi-square]). CONCLUSIONS The likelihood-based deviance criteria lead to accurate estimation of parameters under various circumstances. These criteria are recommended for calibration in microsimulation disease models in contrast with other commonly used criteria.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alex van der Steen
- Departments of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands (AvdS, SK, FvH, EWS, HJdK, MvB, IL-V)
| | | | - Sonja Kroep
- Departments of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands (AvdS, SK, FvH, EWS, HJdK, MvB, IL-V)
| | - Frank van Hees
- Departments of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands (AvdS, SK, FvH, EWS, HJdK, MvB, IL-V)
| | - Ewout W Steyerberg
- Departments of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands (AvdS, SK, FvH, EWS, HJdK, MvB, IL-V)
| | - Harry J de Koning
- Departments of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands (AvdS, SK, FvH, EWS, HJdK, MvB, IL-V)
| | - Marjolein van Ballegooijen
- Departments of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands (AvdS, SK, FvH, EWS, HJdK, MvB, IL-V)
| | - Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
- Departments of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands (AvdS, SK, FvH, EWS, HJdK, MvB, IL-V)
| |
Collapse
|
|
42
|
van Hees F, Zauber AG, van Veldhuizen H, Heijnen MLA, Penning C, de Koning HJ, van Ballegooijen M, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I. The value of models in informing resource allocation in colorectal cancer screening: the case of The Netherlands. Gut 2015; 64:1985-97. [PMID: 26063755 PMCID: PMC4672636 DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2015-309316] [Citation(s) in RCA: 58] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/03/2015] [Accepted: 05/17/2015] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
In May 2011, the Dutch government decided to implement a national programme for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening using biennial faecal immunochemical test screening between ages 55 and 75. Decision modelling played an important role in informing this decision, as well as in the planning and implementation of the programme afterwards. In this overview, we illustrate the value of models in informing resource allocation in CRC screening using the role that decision modelling has played in the Dutch CRC screening programme as an example.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Frank van Hees
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Ann G. Zauber
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States
| | - Harriët van Veldhuizen
- Department of Quality Improvement, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands from August 2014, before National Institute of Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, The Netherlands
| | | | - Corine Penning
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
43
|
Trilisky I, Wroblewski K, Vannier MW, Horne JM, Dachman AH. CT colonography with computer-aided detection: recognizing the causes of false-positive reader results. Radiographics 2015; 34:1885-905. [PMID: 25384290 DOI: 10.1148/rg.347130053] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
Abstract
Computed tomography (CT) colonography is a screening modality used to detect colonic polyps before they progress to colorectal cancer. Computer-aided detection (CAD) is designed to decrease errors of detection by finding and displaying polyp candidates for evaluation by the reader. CT colonography CAD false-positive results are common and have numerous causes. The relative frequency of CAD false-positive results and their effect on reader performance on the basis of a 19-reader, 100-case trial shows that the vast majority of CAD false-positive results were dismissed by readers. Many CAD false-positive results are easily disregarded, including those that result from coarse mucosa, reconstruction, peristalsis, motion, streak artifacts, diverticulum, rectal tubes, and lipomas. CAD false-positive results caused by haustral folds, extracolonic candidates, diminutive lesions (<6 mm), anal papillae, internal hemorrhoids, varices, extrinsic compression, and flexural pseudotumors are almost always recognized and disregarded. The ileocecal valve and tagged stool are common sources of CAD false-positive results associated with reader false-positive results. Nondismissable CAD soft-tissue polyp candidates larger than 6 mm are another common cause of reader false-positive results that may lead to further evaluation with follow-up CT colonography or optical colonoscopy. Strategies for correctly evaluating CAD polyp candidates are important to avoid pitfalls from common sources of CAD false-positive results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Igor Trilisky
- From the Department of Radiology, MC2026, University of Chicago Medical Center, 5841 S Maryland Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 (I.T., A.H.D., M.W.V.); Department of Health Studies, University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill (K.W.); and Department of Medicine, Creighton University, Omaha, Neb (J.M.H.)
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
44
|
Potentially Important Extracolonic Findings at Screening CT Colonography: Incidence and Outcomes Data From a Clinical Screening Program. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015; 206:313-8. [PMID: 26491809 DOI: 10.2214/ajr.15.15193] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The effect of detection of extracolonic findings at screening CT colonography (CTC) remains controversial. Our objective is to analyze the incidence and outcomes of unsuspected potentially significant (CT Colonography Reporting and Data System [C-RADS] extracolonic category E4) findings in a population undergoing clinical CTC screening. SUBJECTS AND METHODS Over the course of 99 months (April 1, 2004, through June 30, 2012), 7952 consecutive asymptomatic adults (3675 men and 4277 women; mean [± SD] age, 56.7 ± 7.3 years) underwent first-time screening CTC. Examinations were prospectively interpreted by radiologists within our abdominal imaging section, and extracolonic findings were recorded and categorized. Potentially significant (i.e., C-RADS extracolonic category E4) findings were retrospectively reviewed with additional analysis of follow-up (range, 2-10 years) and ultimate clinical outcome. RESULTS Overall, 2.5% (202/7952) of patients had a potentially significant (C-RADS category E4) extracolonic finding for which further imaging (56%; 113/202) or clinical follow-up (44%; 89/202) was recommended. No patients had multiple category E4 findings. Twenty-two patients were lost to follow-up. Of the remaining 180 patients, 68% (123/180) proved to have clinically significant disease, including 23% (42/180) with malignant or potentially malignant neoplasms and 32% (57/180) with abdominal aortic or other visceral artery aneurysms requiring treatment or surveillance. The most commonly involved organs and systems included the vascular system (26%; 53/202), the genitourinary system (18%; 36/202), the liver (15%; 30/202), the gastrointestinal system (9.9%; 20/202), the lungs (9.4%; 19/202), and the gynecologic system (6.9%; 14/202). CONCLUSION Potentially significant extracolonic findings in asymptomatic adults at screening CTC are uncommon (2-3% of cases). However, most of these findings (68%) will prove to be clinically significant, including a number of malignancies and aneurysms requiring treatment or surveillance.
Collapse
|
|
45
|
Pooler BD, Kim DH, Weiss JM, Matkowskyj KA, Pickhardt PJ. Colorectal Polyps Missed with Optical Colonoscopy Despite Previous Detection and Localization with CT Colonography. Radiology 2015; 278:422-9. [PMID: 26280354 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2015150294] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To retrospectively evaluate and characterize nondiminutive colorectal polyps prospectively detected by using computed tomographic (CT) colonography but not confirmed with subsequent nonblinded optical colonoscopy (OC). MATERIALS AND METHODS This study was institutional review board approved; the need for signed informed consent was waived. Over 113 months, 9336 adults (mean age, 57.1 years) underwent CT colonography, which yielded 2606 nondiminutive (≥6 mm) polyps. Of 1731 polyps that underwent subsequent nonblinded OC (ie, endoscopists provided advanced knowledge of specific polyp size, location, and morphologic appearance at CT colonography), 181 (10%) were not confirmed with initial endoscopy (ie, discordant), of which 37 were excluded (awaiting or lost to follow-up). After discordant polyp review, 66 of the 144 lesions were categorized as likely CT colonography false-positive findings (no further action) and 78 were categorized as potential OC false-negative (FN) findings. RESULTS Thirty-one of 144 (21.5%) of all discordant lesions were confirmed as FN findings at OC, including 40% (31 of 78) of those with OC and/or CT colonography follow-up. OC FN lesions were an average of 8.5 mm ± 3.3 in diameter and were identified with higher confidence at prospective CT colonography (on a 3-point confidence scale: mean, 2.8 vs 2.3; P = .001). OC FN findings were more likely than concordant polyps to be located in the right colon (respectively, 71% [22 of 31] vs 47% [723 of 1535]; P = .010). Most (81% [21 of 26]) OC FN lesions that were ultimately resected were neoplastic (adenomas or serrated lesions), of which 43% (nine of 21) were characterized as advanced lesions, and 89% (eight of nine) of advanced lesions occurred in the right colon. CONCLUSION In clinical practice, polyps prospectively identified with CT colonography but not confirmed with subsequent nonblinded (ie, despite a priori knowledge of the CT colonography findings) OC require additional review because a substantial proportion may be FN findings. Most FN findings found with OC demonstrated clinically significant histopathologic results, and a majority of advanced lesions occurred in the right colon.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- B Dustin Pooler
- From the Department of Radiology (B.D.P., D.H.K., P.J.P.), Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (J.M.W.), and Department of Pathology (K.A.M.), University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, 750 Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53705
| | - David H Kim
- From the Department of Radiology (B.D.P., D.H.K., P.J.P.), Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (J.M.W.), and Department of Pathology (K.A.M.), University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, 750 Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53705
| | - Jennifer M Weiss
- From the Department of Radiology (B.D.P., D.H.K., P.J.P.), Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (J.M.W.), and Department of Pathology (K.A.M.), University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, 750 Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53705
| | - Kristina A Matkowskyj
- From the Department of Radiology (B.D.P., D.H.K., P.J.P.), Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (J.M.W.), and Department of Pathology (K.A.M.), University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, 750 Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53705
| | - Perry J Pickhardt
- From the Department of Radiology (B.D.P., D.H.K., P.J.P.), Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (J.M.W.), and Department of Pathology (K.A.M.), University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, 750 Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53705
| |
Collapse
|
|
46
|
Tinmouth J, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Allison JE. Faecal immunochemical tests versus guaiac faecal occult blood tests: what clinicians and colorectal cancer screening programme organisers need to know. Gut 2015; 64:1327-37. [PMID: 26041750 DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2014-308074] [Citation(s) in RCA: 145] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/03/2014] [Accepted: 03/21/2015] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
Although colorectal cancer (CRC) is a common cause of cancer-related death, it is fortunately amenable to screening with faecal tests for occult blood and endoscopic tests. Despite the evidence for the efficacy of guaiac-based faecal occult blood tests (gFOBT), they have not been popular with primary care providers in many jurisdictions, in part because of poor sensitivity for advanced colorectal neoplasms (advanced adenomas and CRC). In order to address this issue, high sensitivity gFOBT have been recommended, however, these tests are limited by a reduction in specificity compared with the traditional gFOBT. Where colonoscopy is available, some providers have opted to recommend screening colonoscopy to their patients instead of faecal testing, as they believe it to be a better test. Newer methods for detecting occult human blood in faeces have been developed. These tests, called faecal immunochemical tests (FIT), are immunoassays specific for human haemoglobin. FIT hold considerable promise over the traditional guaiac methods including improved analytical and clinical sensitivity for CRC, better detection of advanced adenomas, and greater screenee participation. In addition, the quantitative FIT are more flexible than gFOBT as a numerical result is reported, allowing customisation of the positivity threshold. When compared with endoscopy, FIT are less sensitive for the detection of advanced colorectal neoplasms when only one time testing is applied to a screening population; however, this is offset by improved participation in a programme of annual or biennial screens and a better safety profile. This review will describe how gFOBT and FIT work and will present the evidence that supports the use of FIT over gFOBT, including the cost-effectiveness of FIT relative to gFOBT. Finally, specific issues related to FIT implementation will be discussed, particularly with respect to organised CRC screening programmes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jill Tinmouth
- Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre and University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - James E Allison
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
47
|
|
|
48
|
Cost Differences After Initial CT Colonography Versus Optical Colonoscopy in the Elderly. Acad Radiol 2015; 22:807-13. [PMID: 25890873 DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2015.03.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/21/2015] [Revised: 02/20/2015] [Accepted: 03/08/2015] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES To compare differences in Medicare costs 1 year after initial computed tomographic colonography (CTC) or initial optical colonoscopy (OC). MATERIALS AND METHODS We performed a retrospective cohort study of asymptomatic Medicare outpatients aged ≥ 66 years who received initial CTC (n = 531) or OC (n = 17,593) between January 2007 and December 2008; initial OC patients were matched on county of residence and year of screening. Outcomes included differences in total inpatient and outpatient Medicare costs 1 year after initial CTC or OC and differences in outpatient testing of potential findings in the colon, abdomen, pelvis, and lungs. RESULTS Higher adjusted costs per patient were revealed in the year after initial CTC compared to initial OC for outpatient testing related to potential colonic ($50; 95% confidence interval [CI], $12-$88; P = .010) and extracolonic findings ($64; 95% CI, $23-$106; P = .002). However, there were no differences in adjusted total costs per patient in the year after either modality ($2065; 95% CI, $1672-$5803; P = .28). Similarly, adjusted costs did not differ between cohorts for inpatient ($267; 95% CI, $1017-$1550; P = .68) or outpatient care ($2828; 95% CI, $311-$5966; P = .08). CONCLUSIONS Despite higher adjusted costs of outpatient testing potentially related to colonic and extracolonic findings among asymptomatic elderly patients 1 year after initial CTC compared to OC, we found no differences in adjusted total, inpatient, or outpatient costs between cohorts. Although Medicare does not cover screening CTC, our results suggest that these modalities generate comparable downstream costs to payers.
Collapse
|
|
49
|
Halligan S, Dadswell E, Wooldrage K, Wardle J, von Wagner C, Lilford R, Yao GL, Zhu S, Atkin W. Computed tomographic colonography compared with colonoscopy or barium enema for diagnosis of colorectal cancer in older symptomatic patients: two multicentre randomised trials with economic evaluation (the SIGGAR trials). Health Technol Assess 2015; 19:1-134. [PMID: 26198205 PMCID: PMC4781284 DOI: 10.3310/hta19540] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) is a relatively new diagnostic test that may be superior to existing alternatives to investigate the large bowel. OBJECTIVES To compare the diagnostic efficacy, acceptability, safety and cost-effectiveness of CTC with barium enema (BE) or colonoscopy. DESIGN Parallel randomised trials: BE compared with CTC and colonoscopy compared with CTC (randomisation 2 : 1, respectively). SETTING A total of 21 NHS hospitals. PARTICIPANTS Patients aged ≥ 55 years with symptoms suggestive of colorectal cancer (CRC). INTERVENTIONS CTC, BE and colonoscopy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES For the trial of CTC compared with BE, the primary outcome was the detection rate of CRC and large polyps (≥ 10 mm), with the proportion of patients referred for additional colonic investigation as a secondary outcome. For the trial of CTC compared with colonoscopy, the primary outcome was the proportion of patients referred for additional colonic investigation, with the detection rate of CRC and large polyps as a secondary outcome. Secondary outcomes for both trials were miss rates for cancer (via registry data), all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, patient acceptability, extracolonic pathology and cost-effectiveness. RESULTS A total of 8484 patients were registered and 5384 were randomised and analysed (BE trial: 2527 BE, 1277 CTC; colonoscopy trial: 1047 colonoscopy, 533 CTC). Detection rates in the BE trial were 7.3% (93/1277) for CTC, compared with 5.6% (141/2527) for BE (p = 0.0390). The difference was due to better detection of large polyps by CTC (3.6% vs. 2.2%; p = 0.0098), with no significant difference for cancer (3.7% vs. 3.4%; p = 0.66). Significantly more patients having CTC underwent additional investigation (23.5% vs. 18.3%; p = 0.0003). At the 3-year follow-up, the miss rate for CRC was 6.7% for CTC (three missed cancers) and 14.1% for BE (12 missed cancers). Significantly more patients randomised to CTC than to colonoscopy underwent additional investigation (30% vs. 8.2%; p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in detection rates for cancer or large polyps (10.7% for CTC vs. 11.4% for colonoscopy; p = 0.69), with no difference when cancers (p = 0.94) and large polyps (p = 0.53) were analysed separately. At the 3-year follow-up, the miss rate for cancer was nil for colonoscopy and 3.4% for CTC (one missed cancer). Adverse events were uncommon for all procedures. In 1042 of 1748 (59.6%) CTC examinations, at least one extracolonic finding was reported, and this proportion increased with age (p < 0.0001). A total of 149 patients (8.5%) were subsequently investigated, and extracolonic neoplasia was diagnosed in 79 patients (4.5%) and malignancy in 29 (1.7%). In the short term, CTC was significantly more acceptable to patients than BE or colonoscopy. Total costs for CTC and colonoscopy were finely balanced, but CTC was associated with higher health-care costs than BE. The cost per large polyp or cancer detected was £4235 (95% confidence interval £395 to £9656). CONCLUSIONS CTC is superior to BE for detection of cancers and large polyps in symptomatic patients. CTC and colonoscopy detect a similar proportion of large polyps and cancers and their costs are also similar. CTC precipitates significantly more additional investigations than either BE or colonoscopy, and evidence-based referral criteria are needed. Further work is recommended to clarify the extent to which patients initially referred for colonoscopy or BE undergo subsequent abdominopelvic imaging, for example by computed tomography, which will have a significant impact on health economic estimates. TRIAL REGISTRATION Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN95152621.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Steve Halligan
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK
| | - Edward Dadswell
- Cancer Screening and Prevention Research Group, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Kate Wooldrage
- Cancer Screening and Prevention Research Group, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Jane Wardle
- Health Behaviour Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Christian von Wagner
- Health Behaviour Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Richard Lilford
- School of Health and Population Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
- Population Evidence and Technologies, University of Warwick, Warwick, UK
| | - Guiqing L Yao
- School of Health and Population Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
- Primary Care and Population Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Shihua Zhu
- School of Health and Population Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Wendy Atkin
- Cancer Screening and Prevention Research Group, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
|
50
|
Haug U, Knudsen AB, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Kuntz KM. Development of new non-invasive tests for colorectal cancer screening: the relevance of information on adenoma detection. Int J Cancer 2015; 136:2864-74. [PMID: 25403937 PMCID: PMC4397119 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.29343] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/28/2014] [Accepted: 11/03/2014] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
Researchers are actively pursuing the development of a new non-invasive test (NIT) for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening as an alternative to fecal occult blood tests (FOBTs). The majority of pilot studies focus on the detection of invasive CRC rather than precursor lesions (i.e., adenomas). We aimed to explore the relevance of adenoma detection for the viability of an NIT for CRC screening by considering a hypothetical test that does not detect adenomas beyond chance. We used the Simulation Model of Colorectal Cancer (SimCRC) to estimate the effectiveness of CRC screening and the lifetime costs (payers' perspective) for a cohort of US 50-years-old persons to whom CRC screening is offered from age 50-75. We compared annual screening with guaiac and immunochemical FOBTs (with sensitivities up to 70 and 24% for CRC and adenomas, respectively) to annual screening with a hypothetical NIT (sensitivity of 90% for CRC, no detection of adenomas beyond chance, specificity and cost similar to FOBTs). Screening with the NIT was not more effective, but was 29-44% more costly than screening with FOBTs. The findings were robust to varying the screening interval, the NIT's sensitivity for CRC, adherence rates favoring the NIT, and the NIT's unit cost. A comparative modelling approach using a model that assumes a shorter adenoma dwell time (MISCAN-COLON) confirmed the superiority of the immunochemical FOBT over an NIT with no ability to detect adenomas. Information on adenoma detection is crucial to determine whether a new NIT is a viable alternative to FOBTs for CRC screening. Current evidence thus lacks an important piece of information to identify marker candidates that hold real promise and deserve further (large-scale) evaluation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ulrike Haug
- Epidemiological Cancer Registry Baden-Wuerttemberg, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Amy B. Knudsen
- Institute for Technology Assessment, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Karen M. Kuntz
- Division of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| |
Collapse
|