The cost-effectiveness of screening for colorectal cancer

CMAJ. Canadian Medical Association Journal

Volumn 182, Issue 12, 2010, Pages 1307-1313

  Telford, Jennifer J ^a   Levy, Adrian R ^b,c   Sambrook, Jennifer C ^c   Zou, Denise ^c   Enns, Robert A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^b DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^c ICON PLC   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANADA; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER RISK; CANCER SCREENING; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL CANCER; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FECES ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; IMMUNOCHEMISTRY; LIFE EXPECTANCY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OCCULT BLOOD TEST; QUALITY OF LIFE; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; COST; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; MASS SCREENING; OCCULT BLOOD; PROBABILITY; PROCEDURES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STANDARDS; TIME;

CANADA; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COSTS AND COST ANALYSIS; HUMANS; LIFE EXPECTANCY; MARKOV CHAINS; MASS SCREENING; OCCULT BLOOD; QUALITY OF LIFE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 77956417899     PISSN: 08203946     EISSN: 14882329     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.090845     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Canadian cancer statistics 2008. Ottawa (ON): Canadian Cancer Society, National Cancer Institute of Canada, Statistics Canada, Public Health Agency of Canada; 2008. Available: www.cancer.ca/Canada-wide/About%20cancer/ Cancer%20statistics/~/media/CCS/Canada%20wide/Files%20List/English%20files% 20heading/pdf %20not %20in %20publications%20section/Canadian%20Cancer% 20Society%20Statistics%20PDF%202008-614137951.ashx (accessed 2008 Aug. 12).
2. Estimated new cancer cases and deaths for 2008. Bethesda (MD): National Cancer Institute; 2008. Available: http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975-2005/results- single/sect-01-table.01.pdf (accessed 2008 Aug. 12).
3. Mandel JS, Bond JH, Church TR, et al. Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. Minnesota Colon Cancer Control Study. N Engl J Med 1993;328:1365-71.
4. Kronborg O, Fenger C, Olsen J, et al. Randomised study of screening for colorectal cancer with faecal-occult-blood test. Lancet 1996;348:1467-71.
5. Hardcastle JD, Chamberlain JO, Robinson MH, et al. Randomised controlled trial of faecal-occult-blood screening for colorectal cancer. Lancet 1996;348:1472-7.
6. Selby JV, Friedman GD, Quesenberry CP Jr, et al. A case-control study of screening sigmoidoscopy and mortality from colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 1992;326: 653-7.
7. Mandel JS, Church TR, Bond JH, et al. The effect of fecal occult-blood screening on the incidence of colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 2000;343:1603-7.
8. 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; 329:1977-81.
9. Leddin D, Hunt R, Champion M, et al. Canadian Association of Gastroenterology and the Canadian Digestive Health Foundation: Guidelines on colon cancer screening. Can J Gastroenterol 2004;18:93-9.
10. 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 Colo rectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology. CA Cancer J Clin 2008; 58:130-60.
11. Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. Colorectal cancer screening. Recommendation statement from the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. CMAJ 2001;165:206-8.
12. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for colorectal cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 2008; 149: 627-37.
13. Sonnenberg A, Delco F, Inadomi JM. Cost-effectiveness of colonoscopy in screening for colorectal cancer. Ann Intern Med 2000;133:573-84.
14. Vijan S, Hwang EW, Hofer TP, et al. Which colon cancer screening test? A comparison of costs, effectiveness, and compliance. Am J Med 2001;111:593-601.
15. Heitman SJ, Manns BJ, Hilsden RJ, et al. Cost-effectiveness of computerized tomographic colonography versus colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening. CMAJ 2005;173:877-81.
16. Frazier AL, Colditz GA, Fuchs CS, et al. Cost-effectiveness of screening for colorectal cancer in the general population. JAMA 2000;284:1954-61.
17. McGrath JS, Ponich TP, Gregor JC. Screening for colorectal cancer: the cost to find an advanced adenoma. Am J Gastroenterol 2002;97:2902-7.
18. Ladabaum U, Song K, Fendrick AM. Colorectal neoplasia screening with virtual colonoscopy: when, at what cost, and with what national impact? Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2004;2:554-63.
19. Song K, Fendrick AM, Ladabaum U. Fecal DNA testing compared with conventional colorectal cancer screening methods: a decision analysis. Gastroenterology 2004; 126:1270-9.
20. 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.
21. Vijan S, Hwang I, Inadomi J, et al. The cost-effectiveness of CT colonography in screening for colorectal neoplasia. Am J Gastroenterol 2007;102:380-90.
22. Pignone M, Saha S, Hoerger T, et al. 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. (Pubitemid 34779153)
23. Life tables, Canada, provinces and territories. 2000 to 2002. Ottawa (ON): Statistics Canada. Available: www.statcan.gc.ca/cgi-bin/af-fdr.cgi?l= eng&loc=/pub/84-537-x/t/pdf/4198612-eng.pdf (accessed 2008 Aug. 12).
24. Ontario health insurance schedule of benefits and fees. Toronto (ON): Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care; 2007.
25. Stinnett AA, Mullahy J. Net health benefits: a new framework for the analysis of uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis. Med Decis Making 1998;18(Suppl):S68-80.
26. van Hout BA, Al MJ, Gordon GS, et al. Costs, effects and C/E-ratios alongside a clinical trial. Health Econ 1994;3:309-19.
27. Laupacis A, Feeny D, Detsky A, et al. How attractive does a new technology have to be to warrant adoption and utilization? Tentative guidelines for using clinical and economic evaluations. CMAJ 1992;146:473-81.
28. Tengs TO, Adams ME, Pliskin JS, et al. Five-hundred life-saving interventions and their cost-effectiveness. Risk Anal 1995;15:369-90.
29. Zauber AG, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Knudsen AB, et al. Evaluating test strategies for colorectal cancer screening: a decision analysis for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 2008;149:659-69.
30. Loeve F, Boer R, Zauber AG, et al. National Polyp Study data: evidence for regression of adenomas. Int J Cancer 2004;111:633-9.
31. Meropol NJ, Schulman KA. Cost of cancer care: issues and implications. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:180-6.