Value-of-information analysis to guide future research in colorectal cancer screening

Radiology

Volumn 253, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 745-752

  Hassan, Cesare ^a,g   Hunink, M G Myriam ^b,c   Laghi, Andrea ^d   Pickhardt, Perry J ^e,f   Zullo, Angelo ^g   Kim, David H ^f   Iafrate, Franco ^d   Di Giulio, Emilio ^a  

^a SAPIENZA UNIVERSITY OF ROME   (Italy)

^b ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^d University Polo Pontino   (Italy)

^e UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^f UNIFORMED SERVICES UNIVERSITY OF THE HEALTH SCIENCES   (United States)

^g NUOVO REGINA MARGHERITA HOSPITAL   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BARIUM; BARIUM SULFATE; CONTRAST MEDIUM; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT;

ADULT; AGED; ANALYSIS; ARTICLE; BARIUM ENEMA; CANCER RESEARCH; CANCER SCREENING; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL CANCER; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC COLONOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST CONTROL; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DISEASE COURSE; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MINIMALLY INVASIVE PROCEDURE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SIGMOIDOSCOPY; UNCERTAINTY; VALUE OF INFORMATION ANALYSIS; COLORECTAL TUMOR; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; MASS SCREENING; MEDICAL RESEARCH; METHODOLOGY; UNITED STATES;

BARIUM SULFATE; BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; COLONOGRAPHY, COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; CONTRAST MEDIA; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; HUMANS; MARKOV CHAINS; MASS SCREENING; SIGMOIDOSCOPY; UNITED STATES;

EID: 73949105183     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2533090234     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Ferlay J, Autier P, Boniol M, et al. Estimates of the cancer incidence and mortality in Europe in 2006. Ann Oncol 2007;18:581-592.
2. Levin B, Lieberman DA, McFarland B, et al. Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology. Gastroenterology 2008;134:1570-1595.
3. Atkin WS, Morson BC, Cuzick J. Long-term risk of colorectal cancer after excision of rectosigmoid adenomas. N Engl J Med 1992;326:658-662.
4. Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN, et al. Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. N Engl J Med 1993;329:1977-1981.
5. Citarda F, Tomaselli G, Capocaccia R, et al. Efficacy in standard clinical practice of colonoscopic polypectomy in reducing colorectal cancer incidence. Gut 2001;48:812-815.
6. Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Hwang I, et al. Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. N Engl J Med 2003;349:2191-2200.
7. Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ, Taylor AJ, et al. CT colonography versus colonoscopy for the detection of advanced neoplasia. N Engl J Med 2007;357:1403-1412.
8. Muller AD, Sonnenberg A. Prevention of colorectal cancer by flexible endoscopy: a case-control study of 32,702 veterans. Ann Intern Med 1995;123:904-910.
9. Sonnenberg A, Delco F, Bauerfeind P. Is virtual colonoscopy a cost-effective option to screen for colorectal cancer? Am J Gastroenterol 1999;94:2268-2274.
10. Vijan S, Hwang I, Inadomi J, et al. The cost-effectiveness of CT colonography in screening for colorectal neoplasia. Am J Gastroenterol 2007;102:380-390.
11. Pickhardt PJ, Hassan C, Laghi A, Zullo A, Kim DH, Morini S. Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening with CT colonography: the impact of not reporting diminutive lesions. Cancer 2007;109:2213-2221.
12. Pignone M, Saha S, Hoerger T, Mandelblatt J. Cost-effectiveness analyses of colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 2002;137:96-104.
13. Hunink MG. Decision making in the face of uncertainty and resource constraints: examples from trauma imaging. Radiology 2005;235:375-383.
14. Groot Koerkamp B, Nikken JJ, Oei EH, Stijnen T, Ginai AZ, Hunink MG. Value of information analysis used to determine the necessity of additional research: MR imaging in acute knee trauma as an example. Radiology 2008;246:420-425.
15. Claxton KP, Sculpher MJ. Using value of information analysis to prioritise health research: some lessons from recent UK experience. Pharmacoeconomics 2006;24:1055-1068.
16. Chen CD, Yen MF, Wang WM, Wong JM, Chen TH. A case-cohort study for the disease natural history of adenoma-carcinoma and de novo carcinoma and surveillance of colon and rectum after polypectomy: implication for efficacy of colonoscopy. Br J Cancer 2003;88:1866-1873.
17. Church JM. Clinical significance of small colorectal polyps. Dis Colon Rectum 2004;47:481-485.
18. Odom SR, Duffy SD, Barone JE, Ghevariya V, McClane SJ. The rate of adenocarcinoma in endoscopically removed colorectal polyps. Am Surg 2005;71:1024-1026.
19. Butterly LF, Chase MP, Pohl H, Fiarman GS. Prevalence of clinically important histology in small adenomas. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2006;4:343-348.
20. Gschwantler M, Kriwanek S, Langner E, et al. High-grade dysplasia and invasive carcinoma in colorectal adenomas: a multivariate analysis of the impact of adenoma and patient characteristics. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2002;14:183-188.
21. National Center for Health Statistics. National Vital Statistics Report, 2003. http://www.cdc.gov/. Accessed April 24, 2007.
22. Life tables. Vital statistics of the United States. Preprint of Vol II, Mortality, part A, section 6. Hyattsville, Md: National Center for Health Statistics, 1998.
23. Pickhardt PJ, Lee AD, McFarland EG, Taylor AJ. Linear polyp measurement at CT colonography: in vitro and in vivo comparison of two-dimensional and three-dimensional displays. Radiology 2005;236:872-878.
24. Pickhardt PJ, Hassan C, Laghi A, et al. Small and diminutive polyps detected at screening CT colonography: a decision analysis for referral to colonoscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;190:136-144.
25. Imperiale TF, Wagner DR, Lin CY, Larkin GN, Rogge JD, Ransohoff DF. Risk of advanced proximal neoplasms in asymptomatic adults according to the distal colorectal findings. N Engl J Med 2000;343:169-174.
26. Hassan C, Pickhardt PJ, Laghi A, et al. CT colonography to screen for colorectal cancer, extracolonic cancer, and aortic aneurysm: model simulation with cost-effectiveness analysis. Arch Intern Med 2008;168:696-705.
27. Hassan C, Zullo A, Winn S, Morini S. Cost-effectiveness of capsule endoscopy in screening for colorectal cancer. Endoscopy 2008;40:414-421.
28. Regge D, Hassan C, Pickhardt PJ, et al. Impact of computer-aided detection on the cost-effectiveness of CT colonography. Radiology 2009;250:488-497.
29. Shapiro JA, Seeff LC, Thompson TD, Nadel MR, Klabunde CN, Vernon SW. Colorectal cancer test use from the 2005 National Health Interview Survey. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2008;17:1623-1630.
30. Hawley ST, Volk RJ, Krishnamurthy P, Jibaja-Weiss M, Vernon SW, Kneuper S. Preferences for colorectal cancer screening among racially/ethnically diverse primary care patients. Med Care 2008;46(9 suppl 1):S10-S16.
31. Marshall DA, Johnson FR, Phillips KA, Marshall JK, Thabane L, Kulin NA. Measuring patient preferences for colorectal cancer screening using a choice-format survey. Value Health 2007;10:415-430.
32. Hur C, Gazelle GS, Zalis ME, Podolsky DK. An analysis of the potential impact of computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy) on colonoscopy demand. Gastroenterology 2004;127:1312-1321.
33. Rex DK, Lieberman D; ACG. ACG colorectal cancer prevention action plan: update on CT-colonography. Am J Gastroenterol 2006;101:1410-1413.
34. Segnan N, Senore C, Andreoni B, et al. Comparing attendance and detection rate of colonoscopy with sigmoidoscopy and FIT for colorectal cancer screening. Gastroenterology 2007;132:2304-2312.
35. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Consumer price index for all urban consumers (CPI-U), U.S. city average, medical care. http://www.bls.gov/cpi/home.htm. Accessed September 14, 2008.
36. Parekh M, Fendrick AM, Ladabaum U. As tests evolve and costs of cancer care rise: reappraising stool-based screening for colorectal neoplasia. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2008;27:697-712.
37. National compensation survey: occupational wages in the United States, June 2005. http://www.bls.gov/. Accessed April 14, 2007.
38. Heitman SJ, Manns BJ, Hilsden RJ, Fong A, Dean S, Romagnuolo J. Cost-effectiveness of computerized tomographic colonography versus colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening. CMAJ 2005;173:877-881.
39. Tengs TO, Wallace A. One thousand health-related quality-of-life estimates. Med Care 2000;38:583-637.
40. Claxton K. The irrelevance of inference: a decision-making approach to the stochastic evaluation of health care technologies. J Health Econ 1999;18:341-364.
41. Felli JC, Hazen GB. Sensitivity analysis and the expected value of perfect information. Med Decis Making 1998;18:95-109.
42. Groot Koerkamp B, Myriam Hunink MG, Stijnen T, Weinstein MC. Identifying key parameters in cost-effectiveness analysis using value of information: a comparison of methods. Health Econ 2006;15:383-392.
43. Hunink MGM, Glasziou P. Decision making in health and medicine. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 2001.
44. Pickhardt PJ, Hassan C, Laghi A, et al. Is there sufficient MDCT capacity to provide colorectal cancer screening with CT colonography for the U.S. population? AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;190:1044-1049.
45. Hoomans T, Fenwick EA, Palmer S, Claxton K. Value of information and value of implementation: application of an analytic framework to inform resource allocation decisions in metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer. Value Health. Published online July 24, 2008.
46. Fenwick E, Marshall DA, Blackhouse G, et al. Assessing the impact of censoring of costs and effects on health-care decision-making: an example using the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) study. Value Health 2008;11:365-375.
47. Claxton K, Eggington S, Ginnelly L, et al. A pilot study of value of information analysis to support research recommendations for the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. http: //www.york.ac.uk/inst/che/ pdf/rp4.pdf. Published 2005. Accessed March 24, 2009.
48. Boyle P, Autier P, Bartelink H, et al. European Code Against Cancer and scientific justification: third version (2003). Ann Oncol 2003;14:973-1005.
49. Lisi D, Hassan C, Crespi M; AMOD Study Group. Participation to colorectal cancer screening with FOBT and colonoscopy: an Italian multicenter, randomized population study. Dig Liver Dis (in press).
50. Schultz SE, Vinden C, Rabeneck L. Colonoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy practice patterns in Ontario: a population-based study. Can J Gastroenterol 2007;21:431-434.
51. McGregor SE, Hilsden RJ, Li FX, Bryant HE, Murray A. Low uptake of colorectal cancer screening 3 yr after release of national recommendations for screening. Am J Gastroenterol 2007;102:1727-1735.
52. Kamposioras K, Mauri D, Golfinopoulos V, et al. Colorectal cancer screening coverage in Greece. PACMeR 02.01 study collaboration. Int J Colorectal Dis 2007;22:475-481.
53. Kamposioras K, Mauri D, Valachis A, Tsali L, Polyzos NP. Low colorectal cancer screening rates and primary care physicians' behavior. Am J Gastroenterol 2008;103:804-805.
54. Inadomi J, Kuhn L, Vijan S, et al. Adherence to competing colorectal cancer screening strategies [abstr]. Am J Gastroenterol 2005;100:S387-S388.