9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses of a colorectal cancer screening programme in a high adenoma prevalence scenario using MISCAN-Colon microsimulation model

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The Basque Colorectal Cancer Screening Programme began in 2009 and the implementation has been complete since 2013. Faecal immunological testing was used for screening in individuals between 50 and 69 years old. Colorectal Cancer in Basque country is characterized by unusual epidemiological features given that Colorectal Cancer incidence is similar to other European countries while adenoma prevalence is higher. The object of our study was to economically evaluate the programme via cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses with microsimulation models.

          Methods

          We applied the Microsimulation Screening Analysis (MISCAN)-Colon model to predict trends in Colorectal Cancer incidence and mortality and to quantify the short- and long-term effects and costs of the Basque Colorectal Cancer Screening Programme. The model was calibrated to the Basque demographics in 2008 and age-specific Colorectal Cancer incidence data in the Basque Cancer Registry from 2005 to 2008 before the screening begun. The model was also calibrated to the high adenoma prevalence observed for the Basque population in a previously published study. The multi-cohort approach used in the model included all the cohorts in the programme during 30 years of implementation, with lifetime follow-up. Unit costs were obtained from the Basque Health Service and both cost-effectiveness analysis and budget impact analysis were carried out.

          Results

          The goodness-of-fit of the model adaptation to observed programme data was evidence of validation. In the cost-effectiveness analysis, the savings from treatment were larger than the added costs due to screening. Thus, the Basque programme was dominant compared to no screening, as life expectancy increased by 29.3 days per person. The savings in the budget analysis appeared 10 years after the complete implementation of the programme. The average annual budget was €73.4 million from year 2023 onwards.

          Conclusions

          This economic evaluation showed a screening intervention with a major health gain that also produced net savings when a long follow-up was used to capture the late economic benefit. The number of colonoscopies required was high but remain within the capacity of the Basque Health Service. So far in Europe, no other population Colorectal Cancer screening programme has been evaluated by budget impact analysis.

          Electronic supplementary material

          The online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-018-4362-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references38

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Worldwide variations in colorectal cancer.

          Previous studies have documented significant international variations in colorectal cancer rates. However, these studies were limited because they were based on old data or examined only incidence or mortality data. In this article, the colorectal cancer burden and patterns worldwide are described using the most recently updated cancer incidence and mortality data available from the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). The authors provide 5-year (1998-2002), age-standardized colorectal cancer incidence rates for select cancer registries in IARC's Cancer Incidence in Five Continents, and trends in age-standardized death rates by single calendar year for select countries in the World Health Organization mortality database. In addition, available information regarding worldwide colorectal cancer screening initiatives are presented. The highest colorectal cancer incidence rates in 1998-2002 were observed in registries from North America, Oceania, and Europe, including Eastern European countries. These high rates are most likely the result of increases in risk factors associated with "Westernization," such as obesity and physical inactivity. In contrast, the lowest colorectal cancer incidence rates were observed from registries in Asia, Africa, and South America. Colorectal cancer mortality rates have declined in many longstanding as well as newly economically developed countries; however, they continue to increase in some low-resource countries of South America and Eastern Europe. Various screening options for colorectal cancer are available and further international consideration of targeted screening programs and/or recommendations could help alleviate the burden of colorectal cancer worldwide.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Screening for colorectal cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.

            (2008)
            Update of the 2002 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation statement on screening for colorectal cancer. To update its recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned 2 studies: 1) a targeted systematic evidence review on 4 selected questions relating to test characteristics and benefits and harms of screening technologies, and 2) a decision analytic modeling analysis using population modeling techniques to compare the expected health outcomes and resource requirements of available screening modalities when used in a programmatic way over time. The USPSTF recommends screening for colorectal cancer using fecal occult blood testing, sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy in adults, beginning at age 50 years and continuing until age 75 years. The risks and benefits of these screening methods vary. (A recommendation). The USPSTF recommends against routine screening for colorectal cancer in adults 76 to 85 years of age. There may be considerations that support colorectal cancer screening in an individual patient. (C recommendation). The USPSTF recommends against screening for colorectal cancer in adults older than age 85 years. (D recommendation). The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to assess the benefits and harms of computed tomographic colonography and fecal DNA testing as screening modalities for colorectal cancer. (I statement).
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Cost-effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening

              Colorectal cancer is an important public health problem. Several screening methods have been shown to be effective in reducing colorectal cancer mortality. The objective of this review was to assess the cost-effectiveness of the different colorectal cancer screening methods and to determine the preferred method from a cost-effectiveness point of view. Five databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry, the British National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, and the lists of technology assessments of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) were searched for cost-effectiveness analyses published in English between January 1993 and December 2009. Fifty-five publications relating to 32 unique cost-effectiveness models were identified. All studies found that colorectal cancer screening was cost-effective or even cost-saving compared with no screening. However, the studies disagreed as to which screening method was most effective or had the best incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for a given willingness to pay per life-year gained. There was agreement among studies that the newly developed screening tests of stool DNA testing, computed tomographic colonography, and capsule endoscopy were not yet cost-effective compared with the established screening options.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                0034 646 112 783 , arantzazu.arrospideelgarresta@osakidetza.eus
                mariaisabel.idigorasrubio@osakidetza.eus
                javier.marmedina@osakidetza.eus
                h.dekoning@erasmusmc.nl
                m.vandermeulen.1@erasmusmc.nl
                myriam.sotoruizdegordoa@osakidetza.eus
                JOSEMIGUEL.MARTINEZLLORENTE@osakidetza.net , josemiguel.martinezllorente@osakidetza.eus
                mariaisabel.portillovillares@osakidetza.eus
                eunate.aranaarri@osakidetza.eus
                oliver.ibarrondoolaguenaga@osakidetza.eus
                i.vogelaar@erasmusmc.nl
                Journal
                BMC Cancer
                BMC Cancer
                BMC Cancer
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2407
                25 April 2018
                25 April 2018
                2018
                : 18
                : 464
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Gipuzkoa Primary Care – Integrated Health Care Organizations Research Unit, Alto Deba Integrated Health Care Organisation, Avda Navarra 16, 20500 Arrasate-Mondragón, Gipuzkoa Spain
                [2 ]Health Services Research on Chronic Patients Network (REDISSEC), Arrasate - Mondragón, Gipuzkoa Spain
                [3 ]GRID grid.428061.9, Biodonostia Health Research Institute, ; Donostia - San Sebastian, Gipuzkoa Spain
                [4 ]Basque Country Colorectal Cancer Screening Programme, Basque Health Service, Bilbao, Bizkaia Spain
                [5 ]Clinical Management Unit, Alto Deba Integrated Health Care Organisation, Arrasate - Mondragón, Gipuzkoa Spain
                [6 ]ISNI 000000040459992X, GRID grid.5645.2, Department of Public Health, , Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, ; Rotterdam, The Netherlands
                [7 ]Accounting Department, Alto Deba Integrated Health Care Organisation, Arrasate - Mondragón, Gipuzkoa Spain
                [8 ]GRID grid.452310.1, BioCruces Health Research Institute, ; Barakaldo, Bizkaia Spain
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3537-6588
                Article
                4362
                10.1186/s12885-018-4362-1
                5918894
                29695234
                1b839367-9162-4771-87b0-eefb68b10de6
                © The Author(s). 2018

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 9 June 2017
                : 11 April 2018
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100003086, Eusko Jaurlaritza;
                Award ID: 2013111156
                Award Recipient :
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2018

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                colorectal cancer,mass screening,cost-effectiveness analysis,budget impact analysis

                Comments

                Comment on this article