Cost-effectiveness modeling of colorectal cancer: Computed tomography colonography vs colonoscopy or fecal occult blood tests

被引:8
|
作者
Lucidarme, Olivier [1 ,2 ]
Cadi, Mehdi [1 ,2 ]
Berger, Genevieve [1 ,2 ]
Taieb, Julien [3 ,4 ]
Poynard, Thierry [3 ,4 ]
Grenier, Philippe [1 ,2 ]
Beresniak, Ariel [5 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Hop La Pitie Salpetriere, AP HP, Dept Radiol, Paris, France
[2] Univ Paris 06, Paris, France
[3] Hop La Pitie Salpetriere, AP HP, Dept Gastroenterol, Paris, France
[4] Univ Paris 06, Paris, France
[5] Data Min Int, Geneva, Switzerland
[6] Paris Descartes Univ, LIRAES, Paris, France
关键词
Cost; Cost-effectiveness; Computed colonography; Colonoscopy; Fecal occult blood test; Colorectal cancer; Screening; Modeling; ADJUSTED LIFE-YEAR; CT COLONOGRAPHY; VIRTUAL COLONOSCOPY; ADVANCED NEOPLASIA; SCREENING-PROGRAM; DETECTION RATES; COLONIC POLYPS; LARGE BOWEL; MISS-RATE; POPULATION;
D O I
10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.03.027
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Objectives: To assess the cost-effectiveness of three colorectal-cancer (CRC) screening strategies in France: fecal-occult-blood tests (FOBT), computed-tomography-colonography (CTC) and optical-colonoscopy (OC). Methods: Ten-year simulation modeling was used to assess a virtual asymptomatic, average-risk population 50-74 years old. Negative OC was repeated 10 years later, and OC positive for advanced or non-advanced adenoma 3 or 5 years later, respectively. FOBT was repeated biennially. Negative CTC was repeated 5 years later. Positive CTC and FOBT led to triennial OC. Total cost and CRC rate after 10 years for each screening strategy and 0-100% adherence rates with 10% increments were computed. Transition probabilities were programmed using distribution ranges to account for uncertainty parameters. Direct medical costs were estimated using the French national health insurance prices. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses used 5000 Monte Carlo simulations generating model outcomes and standard deviations. Results: For a given adherence rate, CTC screening was always the most effective but not the most cost-effective. FOBT was the least effective but most cost-effective strategy. OC was of intermediate efficacy and the least cost-effective strategy. Without screening, treatment of 123 CRC per 10,000 individuals would cost (sic) 3,444,000. For 60% adherence, the respective costs of preventing and treating, respectively 49 and 74 FOBT-detected, 73 and 50 CTC-detected and 63 and 60 OC-detected CRC would be (sic) 2,810,000, (sic) 6,450,000 and (sic) 9,340,000. Conclusion: Simulation modeling helped to identify what would be the most effective (CTC) and cost-effective screening (FOBT) strategy in the setting of mass CRC screening in France. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1413 / 1419
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening with computed tomography colonography according to a polyp size threshold for polypectomy
    Heresbach, Denis
    Chauvin, Pauline
    Hess-Migliorretti, Aurelie
    Riou, Francoise
    Grolier, Jacques
    Josselin, Jean-Michel
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY, 2010, 22 (06) : 716 - 723
  • [22] Colon capsule versus computed tomography colonography for colorectal cancer screening in patients with positive fecal occult blood test who refuse colonoscopy: a randomized trial
    Pioche, Mathieu
    Ganne, Christell
    Gincul, Rodica
    De Leusse, Antoine
    Marsot, Julien
    Balique, Julien
    Fond, Alain
    Bretagnolle, Michel
    Henry, Luc
    Billaud, Yann
    Malezieux, Romain
    Lapalus, Marie-Georges
    Chambon-Augoyard, Christine
    Del Tedesco, Emilie
    Scalone, Olivia
    Montoy, Jean-Charles
    Russias, Benoit
    Detry, Antoine
    Veniat, Frederic
    Qiu, Jin
    Valette, Pierre-Jean
    Taillandier, Annabel
    Saurin, Jean-Christophe
    Tomczyk-Ferrero, Josiane
    Gandilhon, Clementine
    Vecchiato, Lea
    Soler-Michel, Patricia
    Ponchon, Thierry
    ENDOSCOPY, 2018, 50 (08) : 761 - 769
  • [23] Colonoscopy Versus Computed Tomography Colonography for Colorectal Cancer Screening
    Akhtar, Reza
    Lee, Michelle
    Itzkowitz, Steven H.
    MOUNT SINAI JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2010, 77 (02): : 214 - 224
  • [24] Cost-Effectiveness of Computed Tomographic Colonography Screening for Colorectal Cancer in the Medicare Population
    Knudsen, Amy B.
    Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Iris
    Rutter, Carolyn M.
    Savarino, James E.
    van Ballegooijen, Marjolein
    Kuntz, Karen M.
    Zauber, Ann G.
    JNCI-JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2010, 102 (16): : 1238 - 1252
  • [25] Cost-effectiveness analysis of colorectal cancer screening by immunochemical or biochemical faecal occult blood tests
    Aguiar, R
    Gimeno, A
    Parra-Blanco, A
    Nicolas, D
    Deniz, D
    Garcia, M
    Hernandez, A
    Leon, F
    Serrano, P
    Eishi, Y
    Sano, Y
    Quintero, E
    GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2004, 126 (04) : A344 - A344
  • [26] COLORECTAL-CANCER SCREENING - COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF THE FECAL OCCULT BLOOD-TEST WITH AND WITHOUT REHYDRATION
    LANG, CA
    RANSOHOFF, DF
    GASTROENTEROLOGY, 1994, 106 (04) : A15 - A15
  • [27] Cost-Effectiveness of Mass Screening for Colorectal Cancer: Choice of Fecal Occult Blood Test and Screening Strategy
    Sobhani, Iradj
    Alzahouri, Kazem
    Ghout, Idir
    Charles, Delchier Jean
    Durand-Zaleski, Isabelle
    DISEASES OF THE COLON & RECTUM, 2011, 54 (07) : 876 - 886
  • [28] COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF USING HEMOQUANT TO CONFIRM POSITIVE FECAL OCCULT BLOOD-TESTS
    BARNAS, GP
    MCKINNEY, WP
    YOUNG, MJ
    CLINICAL RESEARCH, 1989, 37 (04): : A979 - A979
  • [29] COLORECTAL CANCER SCREENING: COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF CT COLONOGRAPHY
    Sweet, A.
    Muston, D.
    Lock, K.
    Lee, D. W.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2009, 12 (07) : A275 - A275
  • [30] Colorectal Cancer: Cost-effectiveness of Colonoscopy versus CT Colonography Screening with Participation Rates and Costs
    van der Meulen, Miriam P.
    Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Iris
    Goede, S. Lucas
    Kuipers, Ernst J.
    Dekker, Evelien
    Stoker, Jaap
    van Ballegooijen, Marjolein
    RADIOLOGY, 2018, 287 (03) : 901 - 911