Cost-effectiveness of computed tomography colonography in colorectal cancer screening: A systematic review

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care

Volumn 28, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 415-423

  Hanly, Paul ^a   Skally, Mairead ^a   Fenlon, Helen ^b   Sharp, Linda ^a  

^a NATIONAL CANCER REGISTRY IRELAND   (Ireland)

^b MATER MISERICORDIAE UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Ireland)

Author keywords

Colonography; Colorectal neoplasms; Computed tomographic; Cost benefit analysis; Mass screening

Indexed keywords

BLOOD TESTING; COCHRANE LIBRARY; COLONOGRAPHY; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL CANCER; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY COLONOGRAPHY; COST-UTILITY ANALYSIS; INDIRECT COSTS; MEDICAL COMPLICATIONS; MEDLINE; MICROSIMULATION; PARAMETER VALUES; SCREENING TESTS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TOMOGRAPHIC; UNITED KINGDOM;

COMPARATORS (OPTICAL); COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; COST EFFECTIVENESS; COSTS; DISEASES; ENDOSCOPY;

COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS;

CANCER SCREENING; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL CANCER; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC COLONOGRAPHY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; COST UTILITY ANALYSIS; FECES ANALYSIS; HUMAN; INTESTINE PERFORATION; OCCULT BLOOD TEST; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; QUALITY OF LIFE; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SIGMOIDOSCOPY; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

AGE FACTORS; COLONOGRAPHY, COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; HUMANS; INTERNATIONALITY; IRELAND; MODELS, ECONOMIC; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; SURVIVORS;

EID: 84867523127     PISSN: 02664623     EISSN: 14716348     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0266462312000542     Document Type: Review

References (33)

1. Brenner DJ, Georgsson MA. Mass screening with CT colonogra-phy: Should the radiation exposure be of concern? Gastroenterology. 2005;129:328-337.
2. Burling D, Halligan S, Slater A, Noakes MJ, Taylor SA. Potentially serious adverse events at CT colonography in symptomatic patients: National survey of the United Kingdom. Radiology. 2006;239:464-471.
3. Ferlay J, Parkin DM, Steliarova-Foucher E. Estimates of cancer incidence and mortality in Europe in 2008. Eur J Cancer. 2010;46:765-781.
4. Halligan S, Taylor SA. CT colonography: Results and limitations. Eur J Radiol. 2007;61:400-408.
5. Hassan C, Hunink MG, Laghi A, et al. Value-of-information analysis to guide future research in colorectal cancer screening. Radiology. 2009;253:745-752.
6. Hassan C, Pickhardt P, Laghi A, et al. Computed tomographic colonog-raphy to screen for colorectal cancer, extra-colonic cancer, and aortic aneurysm: Model simulated with cost-effectiveness analysis. Arch Intern Med. 2008;168:696-705.
7. Hassan C, Pickhardt PJ, Laghi A, et al. Impact of the whole-body CT screening on the cost-effectiveness of CT colonography. Radiology. 2009;251:156-165.
8. 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;39:242-250.
9. Health Information and Quality Authority. Health technology assessment (HTA) of a population-based colorectal cancer screening programme in Ireland. Dublin, Ireland: Health Information and Quality Authority; 2009.
10. Heitman SJ, Manns BJ, Hilsden RJ, et al. Cost-effectiveness of computerized tomographic colonography versus colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening. CMAJ. 2005;173:877-881.
11. Heresbach D, Chauvin P, Hess-Migliorretti A, et al. Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening with computed tomography colonography according to a polyp size threshold for polypectomy. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010;22:716-723.
12. Kanavos P, Schurer W. The dynamics of colorectal cancer management in 17 countries. Eur J Health Econ. 2010;10(Suppl 1):S115-S129.
13. Knudsen AB, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Rutter CM, et al. Cost-effectiveness of computed tomographic colonography screening for colorectal cancer in the Medicare population. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102:1-15.
14. 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;2:554-563.
15. Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, van Ballegooijen M, Zauber AG, et al. At what cost will screening with CT colonography be competitive? A cost-effectiveness approach. Int J Cancer. 2009;124:1161-1168.
16. 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;8:141-154.
17. Lefere P, Dachman AH, Gryspeerdt S. Computed tomographic colonog-raphy: Clinical value. Abdom Imaging. 2007;32:541-551.
18. Matek W, Guggenmoos-Holzmann I, Demling L. Follow-up of patients with colorectal adenomas. Endoscopy. 1985;17:175-181.
19. Mulhall BP, Veerappan GR, Jackson JL. Meta-analysis: Computed tomo-graphic colonography. Ann Intern Med. 2005;142:635, W-133.
20. Ness RM, Holmes AM, Klein R, Dittus R. Utility valuations for outcome states of colorectal cancer. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94:1650-1657.
21. Pickhardt PJ, Hanson ME, Vanness DJ, et al. Unsuspected extracolonic findings at screening CT colonography: Clinical and economic impact. Radiology. 2008;249:151-159.
22. Pickhardt PJ, Hassan C, Laghi A, Kim DH. CT colonography to screen for colorectal cancer and aortic aneurysm in the Medicare population: Cost-effectiveness analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;192:1-9.
23. Pickhardt PJ, Hassan C, Laghi A, et al. Cost-effectiveness of colorec-tal cancer screening with computed tomography colonography: The impact of not reporting diminutive lesions. Cancer. 2007;109:2213-2221.
24. Pox CP, Schmiegel W. Role of CT colonography in colorectal cancer screening: Risks and benefits. Gut. 2010;59:692-700.
25. 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.
26. 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.
27. Sosna J, Blachar A, Amitai M, et al. Colonic perforation at CT colonog-raphy: Assessment of risk in a multicenter large cohort. Radiology. 2006;239:457-463.
28. Summers RM. Polyp size measurement at CT colonography: What do we know and what do we need to know? Radiology. 2010;255:707-720.
29. Telford JJ, Levy AR, Sambrook JC, Zou D, Enns RA. The cost-effectiveness of screening for colorectal cancer. CMAJ. 2010;182:1307-1313.
30. van Gelder RE, Birnie E, Florie J, et al. CT colonography and colonoscopy: Assessment of patient preference in a 5-week follow-up study. Radiology. 2004;233:328-337.
31. 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.
32. Von Wagner C, Knight K, Halligan S, et al. Patient experiences of colonoscopy, barium enema and CT colonography: A qualitative study. Br J Radiol. 2009;82:13-19.
33. Zalis ME, Barish MA, Choi JR, et al. CT colonography reporting and data system: A consensus proposal. Radiology. 2005;236:3-9.