Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of CT Colonography for Colorectal Cancer Screening Program to Working Age in Japan

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.

Colorectal Cancer in Brunei Darussalam: An Overview and Rationale for National Screening Programme

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer worldwide after lung and breast cancers, and ranks second in terms of cancer mortality globally. Brunei Darussalam reports high incidence of CRC in the Southeast Asian region and has no formal national screening programme for CRC. Screening for CRC in Brunei Darussalam is offered in an opportunistic fashion for individuals with average or above average risks for CRC, that is, the individual has a positive family history of CRC or neoplasms and is more than 50 years old. Opportunistic screening is widely practiced but this is not standardised. The Ministry of Health in Brunei Darussalam is currently in the process of implementing a CRC screening programme as part of a larger national health screening based on the increasing incidence of non-communicable diseases (NCDs). This review article assesses the situation of CRC in Brunei Darussalam from the 1980s to present day, including incidence of CRC in different age groups, ethnicities and genders; relevant non-modifiable and modifiable risk factors of CRC in Brunei Darussalam setting; and common CRC screening techniques used in Brunei Darussalam as well as other Asia-Pacific countries. The review also discusses the merits of a national CRC screening programme. With the increasing incidence of CRC worldwide and in Brunei Darussalam, national screening for CRC in Brunei Darussalam is an important strategy to lower morbidity and mortality rates. A review of the progress and outcome of the national screening programme will be available a few years after rollout.