Cost effectiveness of CT colonography for UK NHS colorectal cancer screening of asymptomatic adults aged 6069 years

Applied Health Economics and Health Policy

Volumn 8, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 141-154

  Lee, David ^a   Muston, Dominic ^b   Sweet, Alison ^c   Cunningham, Chris ^d   Slater, Andrew ^d   Lock, Kevin ^b  

^a GE HEALTHCARE   (United States)

^b Heron Evidence Development Ltd   (United Kingdom)

^c GE HEALTHCARE   (United Kingdom)

^d OXFORD UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER GROWTH; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER STAGING; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL CANCER; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC COLONOGRAPHY; COST CONTROL; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; COST OF ILLNESS; GROUPS BY AGE; HEALTH PROGRAM; HUMAN; LIFESPAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; OCCULT BLOOD; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; SIGMOIDOSCOPY; SYMPTOM; TECHNOLOGY; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED KINGDOM;

AGED; COLONOGRAPHY, COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; MALE; MARKOV CHAINS; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; OCCULT BLOOD; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STATE MEDICINE;

EID: 77951639784     PISSN: 11755652     EISSN: 11791896     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2165/11535650-000000000-00000     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Office of National Statistics. Cancer statistics: registrations of cancer diagnosed in 2005, England [series MB1, no. 36]. Newport: Office for National Statistics 2008 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/down loads/theme-health/MB1-36/MB1-No36-2005.pdf [Accessed 2010 Mar 22]
2. Office of National Statistics. Mortality statistics: cause [series DH2, no. 32]. Newport: Office for National Statistics 2006 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.statistics. gov.uk/downloads/theme-health/Dh2-32/DH2-No32-2005. pdf [Accessed 2010 Mar 22]
3. Trueman P, Lowson K, Bending M, et al. Bowel cancer services: costs and benefits. York: York Health Economics Consortium, 2007
4. Jackman RJ, Mayo CW. The adenoma-carcinoma sequence in cancer of the colon. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1951; 93 (3): 327-330
5. Muto T, Bussey HJ, Morson BC. The evolution of cancer of the colon and rectum. Cancer 1975; 36 (6): 2251-2270
6. Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN, et al. Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The Na-tional Polyp Study Workgroup. N Engl J Med 1993; 329 (27): 1977-1981
7. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Im-proving outcomes in colorectal cancers: a manual update. London: NICE, 2004
8. Burling D, Halligan S, Slater A, et al. Potentially serious adverse events at CT colonography in symptomatic patients: national survey of the United Kingdom. Radiology 2006; 239 (2): 464-471
9. Pickhardt PJ. Incidence of colonic perforation at CT colon-ography: review of existing data and implications for screening of asymptomatic adults. Radiology 2006; 239 (2): 313-316
10. Thomeer M, Bielen D, Vanbeckevoort D, et al. Patient ac-ceptance for CT colonography: what is the real issue? Eur Radiol 2002; 12 (6): 1410-1415
11. 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 (23): 2191-2200
12. Zalis ME, Perumpillichira JJ, Magee C, et al. Tagging-based, electronically cleansed CT colonography: evaluation of patient comfort and image readability. Radiology 2006; 239 (1): 149-159
13. Tappenden P, Chilcott J, Eggington S, et al. Option ap-praisal of population-based colorectal cancer screening programmes in England. Gut 2007; 56 (5): 677-684
14. Tappenden P, Eggington S, Nixon R, et al. Colorectal can-cer screening options appraisal: cost-effectiveness, cost-utility and resource impact of alternative screening options for colorectal cancer. Report to the English Bowel Cancer Screening Working Group. Sheffield: University of Sheffield, School of Health and Related Research, 2004 Sep
15. Hardcastle JD, Chamberlain JO, Robinson MH, et al. Ran-domised controlled trial of faecal-occult-blood screening for colorectal cancer. Lancet 1996; 348 (9040): 1472-1477
16. Kronborg O, Fenger C, Olsen J, et al. Randomised study of screening for colorectal cancer with faecal-occult-blood test. Lancet 1996; 348 (9040): 1467-1471
17. Faivre J, Dancourt V, Lejeune C, et al. Reduction in colorectal cancer mortality by fecal occult blood screening in a French controlled study. Gastroenterology 2004; 126 (7): 1674-1680 (Pubitemid 38736331)
18. Weller D, Moss S, Butler P, et al. English pilot of bowel cancer screening: an evaluation of the second round. 2006 Feb [online]. Available from URL: http://www.cancerscreening.nhs.uk/bowel/pilot-2nd-round-evaluation.pdf [Accessed 2010 Mar 22]
19. Vijan S, Hwang I, Inadomi J, et al. The cost-effectiveness of CT colonography in screening for colorectal neoplasia. Am J Gastroenterol 2007; 102 (2): 380-390
20. Pickhardt PJ, Hassan C, Laghi A, et al. Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening with computed tomography colonography: the impact of not reporting diminutive lesions. Cancer 2007; 109 (11): 2213-2221
21. Ladabaum U, Song K, Fendrick AM. Colorectal neoplasia screening with virtual colonoscopy: when, at what cost, and with what national impact? Clin Gastroenterol Hepa-tol 2004; 2 (7): 554-563
22. Hassan C, Zullo A, Laghi A, et al. Colon cancer prevention in Italy: cost-effectiveness analysis with CT colonography and endoscopy. Dig Liver Dis 2007; 39 (3): 242-250
23. Hassan C, Pickhardt PJ, Laghi A, et al. Computed tomo-graphic colonography to screen for colorectal cancer, ex-tracolonic cancer, and aortic aneurysm: model simulation with cost-effectiveness analysis. Arch Intern Med 2008; 168 (7): 696-705
24. Williams AR, Balasooriya BA, Day DW. Polyps and cancer of the large bowel: a necropsy study in Liverpool. Gut 1982; 23 (10): 835-842
25. Ness RM, Holmes AM, Klein R, et al. Utility valuations for outcome states of colorectal cancer. Am J Gastroenterol 1999; 94 (6): 1650-1657
26. Torgerson D, Raftery J. Economics notes: measuring out-comes in economic evaluations. BMJ 1999; 318 (7195): 1413
27. Bressler B, Paszat L, Vinden C, et al. Colonoscopic miss rates for right-sided colon cancer: a population-based analysis. Gastroenterology 2004; 127 (2): 452-456
28. Johnson CD, Chen MH, Toledano AY, et al. Accuracy of CT colonography for detection of large adenomas and cancers. N Engl J Med 2008; 359 (12): 1207-1217
29. Curtis L. Unit costs of health and social care 2007. Kent: Personal Social Services Research Unit, 2007
30. Sosna J, Blachar A, Amitai M, et al. Colonic perforation at CT colonography: assessment of risk in a multicenter large cohort. Radiology 2006; 239 (2): 457-463
31. Gatto NM, Frucht H, Sundararajan V, et al. Risk of per-foration after colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy: a population-based study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003; 95 (3): 230-236
32. Briggs A, Sculpher M, Claxton K. Decision modelling for health economic evaluation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006
33. UK NHS Department of Health. Payment by results (PbR) in 2007-2008 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/ Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH-062914 [Accessed 2010 Mar 22]
34. Audit study of patients with colorectal cancer undertaken in the Wessex region 1991-1995. Bristol: South West Cancer Intelligence Service, 2005 (Data on file)
35. Smith JJ, Cornish J, Tekkis PP, et al. The national bowel cancer audit project 2007. Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, 2008 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.nbocap.org.uk/resources/ reports/report2007.pdf [Accessed 2010 Mar 22]
36. Atkin WS, Saunders BP. Surveillance guidelines after removal of colorectal adenomatous polyps. Gut 2002; 51 Suppl. 5: V6-9
37. Chaparro M, Gisbert JP, Del CL, et al. Accuracy of com-puted tomographic colonography for the detection of polyps and colorectal tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Digestion 2009; 80 (1): 1-17
38. Rosman AS, Korsten MA. Meta-analysis comparing CT colonography, air contrast barium enema, and colon-oscopy. Am J Med 2007; 120 (3): 203-210
39. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. London: NICE, 2008
40. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. De-veloping costing tools: methods guide. London: NICE, 2008
41. UK NHS. NHS reference costs 2006-2007. London: NHS, 2008 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/ Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH-082571 [Accessed 2010 Mar 22]
42. Cotton PB, Durkalski VL, Pineau BC et al. Computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy): a multicenter comparison with standard colonoscopy for detection of colorectal neoplasia. JAMA 2004; 291 (14): 1713-1719
43. Iannaccone R, Laghi A, Catalano C, et al. Computed tomographic colonography without cathartic preparation for the detection of colorectal polyps. Gastroenterology 2004; 127 (5): 1300-1311
44. Miao YM, Amin Z, Healy J, et al. A prospective single centre study comparing computed tomography pneumo-colon against colonoscopy in the detection of colorectal neoplasms. Gut 2000; 47 (6): 832-837
45. 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. CA Cancer J Clin 2008; 58 (3): 130-160 (Pubitemid 351830299)
46. Xiong T, Richardson M, Woodroffe R, et al. Incidental lesions found on CT colonography: their nature and frequency. Br J Radiol 2005; 78 (925): 22-29
47. Brenner DJ, Georgsson MA. Mass screening with CT colo-nography: should the radiation exposure be of concern? Gastroenterology 2005; 129 (1): 328-337
48. Halloran SP, Snowball J. How good is the guaiac-based faecal occult blood test for population screening of colo-rectal cancer? [abstract OP170]. Gastro 2009; 2009 Nov 21-25; London
49. West NJ, Poullis AP, Leicester RJ. The NHS bowel cancer screening programme: a realistic approach with additional benefits. Colorectal Dis 2008; 10 (7): 708-714
50. UK NHS Department of Health. Cancer reform strategy [product no. 283524]. London: Department of Health 2007 Dec 3 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/Publications PolicyAndGuidance/DH-081006 [Accessed 2010 Mar 22]