The impact of CT colonography for colorectal cancer screening on the UK nhs: Costs, healthcare resources and health outcomes

Applied Health Economics and Health Policy

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 51-64

  Sweet, Alison ^a   Lee, David ^b   Gairy, Kerry ^c   Phiri, Denver ^c   Reason, Timothy ^c   Lock, Kevin ^c  

^a GE HEALTHCARE   (United Kingdom)

^b GE HEALTHCARE   (United States)

^c Heron Evidence Development   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Budget impact analysis; Colorectal cancer, diagnosis; Colorectal cancer, prevention; Computed tomography; Screening.

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER INCIDENCE; CANCER SCREENING; COLORECTAL CANCER; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC COLONOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST CONTROL; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HIDDEN MARKOV MODEL; HISTORY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; UNITED KINGDOM;

AGE FACTORS; AGED; COLONOGRAPHY, COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, ECONOMETRIC; OCCULT BLOOD; OUTCOME AND PROCESS ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE);

EID: 78650641599     PISSN: 11755652     EISSN: 11791896     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2165/11588110-000000000-00000     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Office for National Statistics. Cancer statistics registrations: registrations of cancer diagnosed in 2005, England. Newport: Office for National Statistics, 2008 (Series MB1, No. 36) [online]. Available from URL: http://www.statistics.gov. uk/downloads/theme-health/MB1-36/MB1-No36-2005. pdf [Accessed 2010 Dec 4]
2. Jackman RJ, Mayo CW. The adenoma-carcinoma sequence in cancer of the colon. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1951; 93 (3): 327-30
3. Muto T, Bussey HJ, Morson BC. The evolution of cancer of the colon and rectum. Cancer 1975; 36 (6): 2251-70
4. Winawer SJ, ZauberAG,HoMN, et al. Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy: the National Polyp Study Workgroup. N Engl J Med 1993; 329 (27): 1977-81
5. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Improving outcomes in colorectal cancers: manual update. London: NICE, 2004 [online]. Available from URL: http:// www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/CSGCCfullguidance.pdf [Accessed 2010 Dec 4]
6. 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): 130-60
7. Tappenden P, Chilcott J, Eggington S, et al. Option appraisal of population-based colorectal cancer screening programmes in England. Gut 2007; 56 (5): 677-84
8. Hardcastle JD, Chamberlain JO, Robinson MH, et al. Randomised controlled trial of faecal-occult-blood screening for colorectal cancer. Lancet 1996; 348 (9040): 1472-7
9. Kronborg O, Fenger C, Olsen J, et al. Randomised study of screening for colorectal cancer with faecal-occult-blood test. Lancet 1996; 348 (9040): 1467-71
10. Towler B, Irwig L, Glasziou P, et al. A systematic review of the effects of screening for colorectal cancer using the faecal occult blood test, hemoccult. BMJ 1998; 317 (7158): 559-65
11. Soares-Weiser K, Bravo VY, Beynon S, et al. A systematic review and economic model of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of interventions for preventing relapse in people with bipolar disorder. Health Technol Assess 2007; 11 (39): iii-206
12. McFarland EG, Levin B, Lieberman DA, et al. Revised colorectal screening guidelines: joint effort of the American Cancer Society, US Multi-society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and American College of Radiology. Radiology 2008; 248 (3): 717-20
13. 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 (7): 2304-12
14. Nnoaham KE, Lines C. Modelling future capacity needs and spending on colonoscopy in the English bowel cancer screening programme. Gut 2008; 57 (9): 1238-45
15. Tappenden P, Eggington S, Nixon R, et al. Colorectal cancer screening options appraisal: cost-effectiveness, costutility 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 (ScHARR), 2004 Sep [online]. Available from URL: http://www.cancer screening.nhs.uk/bowel/scharr.pdf [Accessed 2010 Dec 4]
16. 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): 1207-17
17. 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): 464-71
18. Pickhardt PJ. Incidence of colonic perforation at CT colonography: review of existing data and implications for screening of asymptomatic adults. Radiology 2006; 239 (2): 313-6
19. 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): 2191-200
20. Marshall DA, Johnson FR, Kulin NA, et al. How do physician assessments of patient preferences for colorectal cancer screening tests differ from actual preferences? A comparison in Canada and the United States using a stated-choice survey. Health Econ 2009Dec; 18 (12): 1420-39
21. Lee D, Muston D, Sweet A, et al. Cost effectiveness of CT colonography for UK NHS colorectal cancer screening of asymptomatic adults aged 60-69 years. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 2010; 8 (3): 141-54
22. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Developing costing tools: methods guide. London: NICE, 2008
23. NHS Cancer Screening Programmes. NHS bowel cancer screening programme [online]. Available from URL: http:// www.cancerscreening.nhs.uk/bowel/index. html [Accessed 2010 Dec 4]
24. Weller D, Moss S, Butler P, et al. English pilot of bowel cancer screening: an evaluation of the second round. Final report to theDepartment ofHealth. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh, 2006 Feb [online]. Available from URL: http://www.cancerscreening.nhs.uk/bowel/pilot-2nd-roundevaluation. pdf [Accessed 2010 Dec 4]
25. AtkinWS. Single flexible sigmoidoscopy screening to prevent colorectal cancer: baseline findings of a UK multicentre randomised trial. Lancet 2002; 359 (9314): 1291-300
26. 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
27. Brown S, Redgwell G, editors. Key population and vital statistics (series VS No. 33, PPI No. 29). Newport: Office for National Statistics, 2006 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/theme-population/ KPVS33-2006/FINAL-KPVS2006-web.pdf [Accessed 2010 Dec 4]
28. Curtis L. Unit costs of health and social care 2007. Kent: Personal Social Services Research Unit, University ofKent, 2007 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.pssru.ac. uk/pdf/uc/uc2007/uc2007.pdf [Accessed 2010 Dec 4]
29. UK Department of Health. NHS Payment by Results (PbR) in 2007-08 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.dh.gov. uk/en/ Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/Publications PolicyAndGuidance/DH-062914 [Accessed 2008 Feb 16]
30. UK Department of Health. NHS reference costs 2006-2007. London: Department of Health, 2008 [online] Available from URL: http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/ Publicationsandstatis tics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH- 082571 [Accessed 2010 Dec 4]
31. Mauskopf J, Sullivan S, Annemans L, et al. Principles of good practice for budget impact analysis: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Good Research Practices. Value Health 2007; 10: 336-47
32. Liedenbaum MH, van Rijn AF, de Vries AH, et al. Using CT colonography as a triage technique after a positive faecal occult blood test in colorectal cancer screening. Gut 2009; 58 (9): 1242-9
33. Taylor SA, Halligan S, Saunders BP, et al. Acceptance by patients of multidetector CT colonography compared with barium enema examinations, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and colonoscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 181 (4): 913-21
34. Iannaccone R, Laghi A, Catalano C, et al. Computed tomographic colonography without cathartic preparation for the detection of colorectal polyps. Gastroenterology 2004; 127 (5): 1300-11
35. UK Department of Health. The NHS cancer plan: a plan for investment, a plan for reform (product no. 22293). London: Department ofHealth, 2000 Sep 27 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandsta tistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH- 4009609 [Accessed 2010 Dec 4]
36. Xiong T, RichardsonM,WoodroffeR, et al. Incidental lesions found on CT colonography: their nature and frequency. Br J Radiol 2005; 78 (925): 22-9
37. Brenner DJ, Georgsson MA. Mass screening with CT colonography: should the radiation exposure be of concern? Gastroenterology 2005; 129 (1): 328-37
38. Office for National Statistics. Mortality statistics: cause. Review of the Registrar General on deaths by cause, sex and age, in England and Wales, 2005. Newport: Office for National Statistics, 2006 (Series DH2, No. 32) [online]. Available from URL: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/down loads/theme-health/Dh2-32/DH2-No32-2005.pdf [Accessed 2010 Dec 4]