Incremental net benefit and acceptability of alternative health policies: a case study of mass screening for colorectal cancer

A Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Colorectal Cancer Screening in Europe: Have Studies Included Optimal Screening Intensities?

OBJECTIVE

To assess the range of strategies analysed in European cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with respect to the screening intervals, age ranges and test cut-offs used to define positivity, to examine how this might influence what strategies are found to be optimal, and compare them with the current screening policies with a focus on the screening interval.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus for peer-reviewed, model-based CEAs of CRC screening. We included studies on average-risk European populations using the guaiac faecal occult blood test (gFOBT) or faecal immunochemical test (FIT). We adapted Drummond's ten-point checklist to appraise study quality.

RESULTS

We included 39 studies that met the inclusion criteria. Biennial screening was the most frequently used interval which was analysed in 37 studies. Annual screening was assessed in 13 studies, all of which found it optimally cost-effective. Despite this, 25 of 26 European stool-based programmes use biennial screening. Many CEAs did not vary the age range, but the 14 that did generally found broader ranges optimal. Only 11 studies considered alternative FIT cut-offs, 9 of which found lower cut-offs superior. Conflicts between current policy and CEA evidence are less clear regarding age ranges and cut-offs.

CONCLUSIONS

The existing CEA evidence indicates that the widely adopted biennial frequency of stool-based testing in Europe is suboptimal. It is likely that many more lives could be saved throughout Europe if programmes could be offered with more intensive annual screening.

Estimating cost-effectiveness of screening for colorectal cancer in Vietnam

Background:Presently, there are no national screening programs for cancer in Vietnam. This study aimed to analyze the cost-effectiveness of an annual colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program from the healthcare service provider's perspective for the Vietnamese population.Methods:The economic model consisted of adecision tree and aMarkov model. Adecision tree was constructed for comparing two strategies, including ascreening group with aguaiac-based fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) and ano-screening group in general populations, aged 50 years and above. The Markov model projected outcomes over a25-year horizon. The cost-effectiveness outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) represented by costs per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).Results:When compared with no screening, ICER was $1,388per QALY with an increased cost of $ 43.98 and again of 0.032 QALY (Willingness to pay $2,590). The uptake rate of gFOBT, cost of colonoscopy, and the total cost of screening contributed to the largest impact on the ICER. PSA showed that results were robust to variation in parameter estimates, with annual screening remaining cost-effective compared with no screening.Conclusion:Our screening strategy could be considered cost-effective compared to ano screening strategy. Our findings could be potentially used to develop aCRC national screening program.

Economic evaluations of screening strategies for the early detection of colorectal cancer in the average-risk population: A systematic literature review

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening has proven effective in reducing CRC mortality. This study aimed to systematically review, and evaluate the reporting quality, of the economic evidence regarding CRC screening in average-risk individuals.

Methods

Databases searched included Medline, EMBASE, National Health Service Economic Evaluation, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Cost-Effectiveness Analysis registry, EconLit, and Health Technology Assessment database. Eligible studies were cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses comparing CRC screening strategies in average-risk individuals, published in English or Spanish, between January 2012 and November 2018. Reporting quality was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist.

Results

Of 1,993 publications initially retrieved, 477 were excluded by duplicate review, 1,449 by title/abstract review, and 34 by full-text review. Finally, 33 publications were included in the qualitative synthesis. Most studies were conducted in Europe (36,4%), followed by United States (24,2%) and Asia (24,2%). The main screening modalities considered were fecal immunochemical tests (70%), colonoscopy (67%), guaiac fecal occult blood test (42%) and flexible sigmoidoscopy (30%). In most studies, CRC screening was deemed cost-effective compared to no screening. Sensitivity analyses indicated that cost of CRC screening tests, adherence to screening, screening test sensitivity, and cost of CRC treatment had the greatest impact on cost-effectiveness results across studies. The majority of studies (73%) adequately reported at least 50% of the items included in the CHEERS checklist. Least well reported items included setting, study perspective, discount rate, model choice, and methods to identify effectiveness data or to estimate resource use and costs.

Conclusions

CRC screening is an efficient alternative to no screening. Nevertheless, it is not possible to conclude which strategy should be preferred for population-based screening programs. Although we observed an overall good adherence to CHEERS recommendations, there is still room for improvement in economic evaluations reporting in this field.

Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening Strategies-A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Widespread screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) has reduced its incidence and mortality. Previous studies investigated the economic effects of CRC screening. We performed a systematic review to provide up-to-date evidence of the cost effectiveness of CRC screening strategies by answering 3 research questions.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, National Institute for Health Research Economic Evaluation Database, Social Sciences Citation Index (via the Web of Science), EconLit (American Economic Association) and 3 supplemental databases for original articles published in English from January 2010 through December 2017. All monetary values were converted to US dollars (year 2016). For all research questions, we extracted, or calculated (if necessary), per-person costs and life years (LYs) and/or quality-adjusted LYs, as well as the incremental costs per LY gained or quality-adjusted LY gained compared with the baseline strategy. A cost-saving strategy was defined as one that was less costly and equally or more effective than the baseline strategy. The net monetary benefit approach was used to answer research question 2.

RESULTS

Our review comprised 33 studies (17 from Europe, 11 from North America, 4 from Asia, and 1 from Australia). Annual and biennial guaiac-based fecal occult blood tests, annual and biennial fecal immunochemical tests, colonoscopy every 10 years, and flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5 years were cost effective (even cost saving in most US models) compared to no screening. In addition, colonoscopy every 10 years was less costly and/or more effective than other common strategies in the United States. Newer strategies such as computed tomographic colonography, every 5 or 10 years, was cost effective compared with no screening.

CONCLUSIONS

In an updated review, we found that common CRC screening strategies and computed tomographic colonography continued to be cost effective compared to no screening. There were discrepancies among studies from different regions, which could be associated with the model types or model assumptions.

Integration of PKPD relationships into benefit-risk analysis

AIM

Despite the continuous endeavour to achieve high standards in medical care through effectiveness measures, a quantitative framework for the assessment of the benefit-risk balance of new medicines is lacking prior to regulatory approval. The aim of this short review is to summarise the approaches currently available for benefit-risk assessment. In addition, we propose the use of pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PKPD) modelling as the pharmacological basis for evidence synthesis and evaluation of novel therapeutic agents.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search has been performed using MESH terms in PubMed, in which articles describing benefit-risk assessment and modelling and simulation were identified. In parallel, a critical review of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is presented as a tool for characterising a drug's safety and efficacy profile.

RESULTS

A definition of benefits and risks has been proposed by the European Medicines Agency (EMA), in which qualitative and quantitative elements are included. However, in spite of the value of MCDA as a quantitative method, decisions about benefit-risk balance continue to rely on subjective expert opinion. By contrast, a model-informed approach offers the opportunity for a more comprehensive evaluation of benefit-risk balance before extensive evidence is generated in clinical practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Benefit-risk balance should be an integral part of the risk management plan and as such considered before marketing authorisation. Modelling and simulation can be incorporated into MCDA to support the evidence synthesis as well evidence generation taking into account the underlying correlations between favourable and unfavourable effects. In addition, it represents a valuable tool for the optimization of protocol design in effectiveness trials.

Epidemiological trends of histopathologically WHO classified CNS tumors in developing countries: systematic review

BACKGROUND

Many developing countries are lagging behind in reporting epidemiological data for individual central nervous system (CNS) tumors. This paper aimed to elicit patterns for the epidemiology of individual World Health Organization (WHO) classified CNS tumors in countries registered by WHO as "developing".

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Cyber search was carried out through 66 cancer networks/registries and 181 PubMed published papers that reported counts of CNS tumors for the period of 2009-2012. The relationship between the natural log of incidence Age Standardized Rate (ASR) reported by Globocan and Latitude/ Longitude was investigated.

RESULTS

Registries for 21 countries displayed information related to CNS tumors. In contrast tends for classified CNS tumor cases were identified for 38 countries via 181 PubMed publications. Extracted data showed a majority of unclassified reported cases [PubMed (38 countries, 45.7%), registries (21 countries, 96.1%)]. For classified tumors, astrocytic tumors were the most frequently reported type [PubMed (38 countries, 1,245 cases, 15.7%), registries (21 countries, 627 cases, 1.99%]. A significant linear regression relationship emerged between latitudes and reported cases of CNS tumors.

CONCLUSIONS

Previously unreported trends of frequencies for individually classified CNS tumors were elucidated and a possible link of CNS tumors occurrence with geographical location emerged.

The influence of waiting times on cost-effectiveness: a case study of colorectal cancer mass screening

When a cost-effectiveness analysis is implemented, the health-care system is usually assumed to adjust smoothly to the proposed new strategy. However, technological innovations in health care may often induce friction in the organization of care supply, implying the congestion of services and subsequent waiting times. Our objective here is to measure how these short run rigidities can challenge cost-effectiveness recommendations favorable to an innovative mass screening test for colorectal cancer. Using Markov modeling, we compare the standard Guaiac fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) with an innovative screening test for colorectal cancer, namely the immunological fecal occult blood test (iFOBT). Waiting time can occur between a positive screening test and the subsequent confirmation colonoscopy. Five scenarios are considered for iFOBT: no further waiting time compared with gFOBT, twice as much waiting time for a period of 5 or 10 years, and twice as much waiting time for a period of 5 or 10 years combined with a 25% decrease in participation to confirmation colonoscopies. According to our modeling, compared with gFOBT, iFOBT would approximately double colonoscopy demand. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis enables concluding that the waiting time significantly increases the uncertainty surrounding recommendations favorable to iFOBT if it induces a decrease in the adherence rate for confirmation colonoscopy.

Clinical significance of fecal lactoferrin in screening of colorectal carcinoma

AIM: To investigate the clinical significance of fecal lactoferrin in the screening of colorectal carcinoma (CRC).

METHODS: Thirty-five healthy people as controls, 63 patients with CRC, 59 patients with intestinal polyps, and 50 patients with functional gastroenteropathy were recruited. All of the patients were asked to collect 5-10 g fecal sample during three days after colonoscopy. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was used to determine fecal lactoferrin level.

RESULTS: The median fecal lactoferrin levels in CRC patients, healthy people, patients with intestinal polyps and those with functional gastroenteropathy were 59.30, 2.94, 17.63 and 3.22 μg/g, respectively; there was no significant difference in fecal lactoferrin levels between patients with functional gastroenteropathy and healthy people (P > 0.05), but statistical significances were observed between patients with functional gastroenteropathy and those with CRC or intestinal polyps (P < 0.01), between healthy people and patients with CRC or intestinal polyps (P < 0.01), and between patients with CRC and those with intestinal polyps (P < 0.01). The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, Youden index, positive likelihood ratio and negative likelihood ratio of fecal lactoferrin for screening of CRC were 88.9%, 85.7%, 87.8%, 0.75, 6.22 and 0.13, respectively.

CONCLUSION: Fecal lactoferrin detection is a simple, non-invasive method for screening CRC, with a high sensitivity and specificity.

Review of economic evidence in the prevention and early detection of colorectal cancer

This paper aims to systematically review the cost-effectiveness evidence, and to provide a critical appraisal of the methods used in the model-based economic evaluation of CRC screening and subsequent surveillance. A search strategy was developed to capture relevant evidence published 1999-November 2012. Databases searched were MEDLINE, EMBASE, National Health Service Economic Evaluation (NHS EED), EconLit, and HTA. Full economic evaluations that considered costs and health outcomes of relevant intervention were included. Sixty-eight studies which used either cohort simulation or individual-level simulation were included. Follow-up strategies were mostly embedded in the screening model. Approximately 195 comparisons were made across different modalities; however, strategies modelled were often simplified due to insufficient evidence and comparators chosen insufficiently reflected current practice/recommendations. Studies used up-to-date evidence on the diagnostic test performance combined with outdated information on CRC treatments. Quality of life relating to follow-up surveillance is rare. Quality of life relating to CRC disease states was largely taken from a single study. Some studies omitted to say how identified adenomas or CRC were managed. Besides deterministic sensitivity analysis, probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was undertaken in some studies, but the distributions used for PSA were rarely reported or justified. The cost-effectiveness of follow-up strategies among people with confirmed adenomas are warranted in aiding evidence-informed decision making in response to the rapidly evolving technologies and rising expectations.