Can calcium chemoprevention of adenoma recurrence substitute or serve as an adjunct for colonoscopic surveillance?

Cost-Utility Analysis of Berberine Chemoprevention for Colorectal Cancer After Polypectomy

Background Chemoprevention, such as berberine, has been developed as an alternative or complementary strategy to colonoscopy surveillance and has shown promise in reducing the morbidity and mortality of colorectal cancer. This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of berberine for postpolypectomy patients from the US third-party payer. Methods A Markov microsimulation model was developed to compare the cost and efficacy of berberine to no intervention, colonoscopy, and the combination of berberine and colonoscopy in postpolypectomy patients. Results After simulating 1 million patients, the study found that colonoscopy alone had a mean cost of $16,391 and mean quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of 16.03 per patient, whereas adding berberine slightly reduced the mean cost to $15,609 with a mean QALY of 16.05, making it a dominant strategy. Berberine therapy alone was less effective than colonoscopy alone, with a higher mean cost of $37,480 and a mean QALY of 15.32 per patient. However, berberine therapy was found to be a dominant strategy over no intervention. Conclusions Adding berberine to colonoscopy is the most cost-saving and effective approach for postpolypectomy patients. For patients who refuse or have limited access to colonoscopy, berberine alone is likely to be a dominant strategy compared to no intervention.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of postpolypectomy colonoscopy surveillance using Japanese data

OBJECTIVE

Recommendations vary on postpolypectomy surveillance, and no consensus has been reached even regarding the necessity of risk stratification based on polyp characteristics for surveillance. We examined an optimal postpolypectomy surveillance program by performing a cost-effectiveness analysis.

METHODS

We performed a Markov model analysis using parameters based on Japanese data and evaluated four postpolypectomy surveillance programs with respect to their effectiveness in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), cost-effectiveness and required number of colonoscopies. Two were non-risk-stratified programs with 1-year (program 1) and 3-year (program 2) postpolypectomy surveillance colonoscopy, and the other two were risk-stratified programs. In program 3, surveillance colonoscopy was performed 3, 10 and 10 years after resection of advanced adenomas, low-risk adenomatous polyps, and no polyps, respectively. In program 4, those intervals were shortened to 1, 3 and 5 years, respectively.

RESULTS

Risk-stratified programs (3 and 4) yielded higher QALYs with lower costs than non-risk-stratified programs (1 and 2). Program 4 yielded higher QALYs (23.046) and lower required cost (107,717 JPY) than program 3. The required number of colonoscopies for program 4 was 1.2, 1.5 and 1.6 times that for programs 1, 2 and 3, respectively. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that the probability of program 4 being chosen as the most cost-effective was highest.

CONCLUSIONS

After polypectomy, risk-stratified colonoscopy surveillance based on the polyp characteristics should be considered. A risk-stratified program with relatively short examination intervals could be effective and cost-effective in Japan, although further investigation and consideration of colonoscopy capacity are required.

Evaluation of the Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Personalized Surveillance After Colorectal Adenomatous Polypectomy

Lifetime risk of developing colorectal cancer is 5%, and 5-year survival at early stage is 92%. Individuals with precancerous lesions removed at primary screening are typically recommended surveillance colonoscopy. Because greater benefits are anticipated for those with higher risk of colorectal cancer, scope for risk-specific surveillance recommendations exists. This review assesses published cost-effectiveness estimates of postpolypectomy surveillance to consider the potential for personalized recommendations by risk group. Meta-analyses of incidence of advanced neoplasia postpolypectomy for low-risk cases were comparable to those without adenoma, with both rates under the lifetime risk of 5%. This group may not benefit from intensive surveillance, which risks unnecessary harm and inefficient use of often scarce colonoscopy capacity. Therefore, greater personalization through deintensified strategies for low-risk individuals could be beneficial. The potential for noninvasive testing, such as fecal immunochemical tests, combined with primary prevention or chemoprevention may reserve colonoscopy for targeted use in personalized risk-stratified surveillance. This review appraised evidence supporting a program of personalized surveillance in patients with colorectal adenoma according to risk group and compared the effectiveness of surveillance colonoscopy with alternative prevention strategies. It assessed trade-offs among costs, benefits, and adverse effects that must be considered in a decision to adopt or reject personalized surveillance.

Cost effectiveness of surveillance for GI cancers

Gastrointestinal (GI) diseases are among the leading causes of death in the world. To reduce the burden of GI diseases, surveillance is recommended for some diseases, including for patients with inflammatory bowel diseases, Barrett's oesophagus, precancerous gastric lesions, colorectal adenoma, and pancreatic neoplasms. This review aims to provide an overview of the evidence on cost-effectiveness of surveillance of individuals with GI conditions predisposing them to cancer, specifically focussing on the aforementioned conditions. We searched the literature and reviewed 21 studies. Despite heterogeneity of studies in terms of settings, study populations, surveillance strategies and outcomes, most reviewed studies suggested at least some surveillance of patients with these GI conditions to be cost-effective. For some high-risk conditions frequent surveillance with 3-month intervals was warranted, while for other conditions, surveillance may only be cost-effective every 10 years. Further studies based on more robust effectiveness evidence are needed to inform and optimise surveillance programmes for GI cancers.

Combination aspirin and/or calcium chemoprevention with colonoscopy in colorectal cancer prevention: cost-effectiveness analyses

BACKGROUND

Clinical and cohort studies have shown that low-dose aspirin and calcium are effective low-risk strategies for primary prevention of colorectal cancer (CRC). We compared the cost-effectiveness of aspirin and calcium chemoprevention used with colonoscopy for primary prevention of CRCs.

METHODS

Markov chain Monte Carlo simulations for a population of 100,000 persons, with a colonoscopy compliance rate of 50%, were used for the analysis. If adenomas were detected, colonoscopy was repeated every 4 years until no adenomas were evident. Data sources included adenoma transition rates, initial adenoma and CRC incidences, and treatment complication rates from existing literature. Age-adjusted U.S. standard population mortality rates were used and costs were from Medicare reimbursement data. The target population was U.S. adults, undergoing CRC screening from ages 50 to 75 years.

RESULTS

Outcomes included incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER), life-years saved (LYS), and cancer-free years saved (CFYS). The ICER per LYS for colonoscopy alone dominated compared with no screening. Compared with colonoscopy alone, colonoscopies with aspirin (ICER = $12,950/LYS) or calcium (ICER = $13,041/LYS) were the next most cost-effective strategies. ICERs per CFYS were $3,061 and $2,317 for aspirin and calcium, respectively, when added to colonoscopy. Sensitivity analyses indicated that initial prevalence of adenomas was a main determinant of prevention cost-effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

Low-dose aspirin or calcium supplementation may be beneficial when added to colonoscopy, for optimum CRC prevention, at small incremental costs.

IMPACT

Cost-effectiveness analyses suggest that aspirin and calcium in combination with colonoscopies are cost-effective for CRC prevention in average-risk populations.

Surveillance colonoscopy is cost-effective for patients with adenomas who are at high risk of colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Guidelines recommend that patients with colon adenomas undergo periodic surveillance colonoscopy. The purpose of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of these recommendations.

METHODS

We developed a Markov model to study various surveillance strategies from the perspective of a long-term payer. We modeled a cohort of 50-year-old patients with newly diagnosed adenomas, following them until death. Thirty percent of the population was assumed to be at high risk for colorectal cancer. Costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were measured.

RESULTS

Performing colonoscopies every 3 years in high-risk patients and every 10 years in low-risk patients (3/10 strategy) was more costly but also more effective than no surveillance, with an ICER of $5,743 per QALY gained. Compared with this 3/10 strategy, a 3/5 strategy was considerably more costly but only marginally more effective, with an ICER of $296,266 per QALY. A 3/3 strategy was more costly and less effective than a 3/5 strategy (dominated). Results were most sensitive to the annual probability of advanced adenoma formation and the relative risk (RR) of advanced adenoma formation in high-risk versus low-risk patients. Assuming that the probability of advanced adenoma formation was 1.3% per year (base: 0.5%), the ICER of the 3/5 strategy was <$50,000 per QALY gained if the RR of advanced adenoma formation was <2.4 (base: 3.9).

CONCLUSIONS

Surveillance colonoscopy is cost-effective for patients who are at high risk for developing colorectal cancer. Aggressive surveillance can be expensive or even harmful; efforts should be made to improve risk models for colonic neoplasia.