• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

单次与两次粪便免疫化学检测用于结直肠癌筛查的成本效益比较。

Cost-effectiveness of one versus two sample faecal immunochemical testing for colorectal cancer screening.

机构信息

Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, PO Box 2040, Rotterdam 3000 CA, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Gut. 2013 May;62(5):727-34. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2011-301917. Epub 2012 Apr 5.

DOI:10.1136/gutjnl-2011-301917
PMID:22490518
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3618685/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The sensitivity and specificity of a single faecal immunochemical test (FIT) are limited. The performance of FIT screening can be improved by increasing the screening frequency or by providing more than one sample in each screening round. This study aimed to evaluate if two-sample FIT screening is cost-effective compared with one-sample FIT.

DESIGN

The MISCAN-colon microsimulation model was used to estimate costs and benefits of strategies with either one or two-sample FIT screening. The FIT cut-off level varied between 50 and 200 ng haemoglobin/ml, and the screening schedule was varied with respect to age range and interval. In addition, different definitions for positivity of the two-sample FIT were considered: at least one positive sample, two positive samples, or the mean of both samples being positive.

RESULTS

Within an exemplary screening strategy, biennial FIT from the age of 55-75 years, one-sample FIT provided 76.0-97.0 life-years gained (LYG) per 1000 individuals, at a cost of € 259,000-264,000 (range reflects different FIT cut-off levels). Two-sample FIT screening with at least one sample being positive provided 7.3-12.4 additional LYG compared with one-sample FIT at an extra cost of € 50,000-59,000. However, when all screening intervals and age ranges were considered, intensifying screening with one-sample FIT provided equal or more LYG at lower costs compared with two-sample FIT.

CONCLUSION

If attendance to screening does not differ between strategies it is recommended to increase the number of screening rounds with one-sample FIT screening, before considering increasing the number of FIT samples provided per screening round.

摘要

目的

单次粪便免疫化学检测(FIT)的灵敏度和特异性有限。通过增加筛查频率或在每轮筛查中提供多个样本,可以提高 FIT 筛查的性能。本研究旨在评估两样本 FIT 筛查是否比单样本 FIT 更具成本效益。

设计

使用 MISCAN-colon 微观模拟模型来估计具有单样本或两样本 FIT 筛查的策略的成本和效益。FIT 截止值在 50 至 200ng 血红蛋白/ml 之间变化,筛查方案根据年龄范围和间隔进行变化。此外,还考虑了两种样本 FIT 阳性的不同定义:至少有一个阳性样本、两个阳性样本,或两个样本的平均值为阳性。

结果

在一个示例筛查策略中,从 55-75 岁开始每两年进行一次 FIT,单样本 FIT 为每 1000 人提供 76.0-97.0 个生命年增益(LYG),成本为 259000-264000 欧元(范围反映了不同的 FIT 截止值)。与单样本 FIT 相比,两样本 FIT 筛查中至少有一个样本呈阳性可提供 7.3-12.4 个额外的 LYG,额外成本为 50000-59000 欧元。然而,当考虑所有筛查间隔和年龄范围时,与两样本 FIT 相比,增加单样本 FIT 筛查的轮次数量可以以更低的成本提供相等或更多的 LYG。

结论

如果两种策略的筛查参与率没有差异,则建议在考虑增加每轮筛查提供的 FIT 样本数量之前,增加单样本 FIT 筛查的轮次数量。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/53c2/3618685/12181d498b7e/gutjnl-2011-301917f03.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/53c2/3618685/76313599d000/gutjnl-2011-301917f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/53c2/3618685/63604f1ce564/gutjnl-2011-301917f02.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/53c2/3618685/12181d498b7e/gutjnl-2011-301917f03.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/53c2/3618685/76313599d000/gutjnl-2011-301917f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/53c2/3618685/63604f1ce564/gutjnl-2011-301917f02.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/53c2/3618685/12181d498b7e/gutjnl-2011-301917f03.jpg

相似文献

1
Cost-effectiveness of one versus two sample faecal immunochemical testing for colorectal cancer screening.单次与两次粪便免疫化学检测用于结直肠癌筛查的成本效益比较。
Gut. 2013 May;62(5):727-34. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2011-301917. Epub 2012 Apr 5.
2
Cost-effectiveness of High-performance Biomarker Tests vs Fecal Immunochemical Test for Noninvasive Colorectal Cancer Screening.高性能生物标志物检测与粪便免疫化学检测用于非侵入性结直肠癌筛查的成本效益比较。
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018 Apr;16(4):504-512.e11. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.07.011. Epub 2017 Jul 18.
3
Cost-effectiveness analysis of single colonoscopy versus single fecal test for colorectal cancer diagnosis and treatment.结肠镜单一检查与粪便检测单一检查在结直肠癌诊断和治疗中的成本效益分析。
J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2024 Jul;39(7):1328-1335. doi: 10.1111/jgh.16509. Epub 2024 Feb 13.
4
Cost-effectiveness analysis of a quantitative immunochemical test for colorectal cancer screening.用于结直肠癌筛查的定量免疫化学检测的成本效益分析。
Gastroenterology. 2011 Nov;141(5):1648-55.e1. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2011.07.020. Epub 2011 Jul 22.
5
Screening for Colorectal Cancer With Fecal Immunochemical Testing With and Without Postpolypectomy Surveillance Colonoscopy: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.粪便免疫化学检测联合或不联合息肉切除术后监测结肠镜检查用于结直肠癌筛查的成本效果分析。
Ann Intern Med. 2017 Oct 17;167(8):544-554. doi: 10.7326/M16-2891. Epub 2017 Oct 3.
6
Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening With a Blood Test That Meets the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Coverage Decision.基于满足医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心覆盖范围决策的血液检测进行结直肠癌筛查的效果和成本效益。
Gastroenterology. 2024 Jul;167(2):368-377. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2024.02.012. Epub 2024 Mar 26.
7
Cost-effectiveness of population-based screening for colorectal cancer: a comparison of guaiac-based faecal occult blood testing, faecal immunochemical testing and flexible sigmoidoscopy.基于人群的结直肠癌筛查的成本效益:愈创木脂粪便隐血试验、粪便免疫化学试验和乙状结肠镜检查的比较。
Br J Cancer. 2012 Feb 28;106(5):805-16. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2011.580. Epub 2012 Feb 16.
8
Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening programmes using sigmoidoscopy and immunochemical faecal occult blood test.基于乙状结肠镜检查和免疫化学粪便隐血试验的结直肠癌筛查计划的成本效益。
J Med Screen. 2019 Jun;26(2):76-83. doi: 10.1177/0969141318789710. Epub 2018 Sep 4.
9
Estimation of Benefits, Burden, and Harms of Colorectal Cancer Screening Strategies: Modeling Study for the US Preventive Services Task Force.结直肠癌筛查策略的益处、负担及危害评估:美国预防服务工作组的建模研究
JAMA. 2016 Jun 21;315(23):2595-609. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.6828.
10
Multiple rounds of one sample versus two sample faecal immunochemical test-based colorectal cancer screening: a population-based study.单份样本与双份粪便免疫化学试验在基于人群的结直肠癌筛查中的多次检测:一项基于人群的研究。
Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019 Aug;4(8):622-631. doi: 10.1016/S2468-1253(19)30176-1. Epub 2019 Jun 10.

引用本文的文献

1
Interval Colorectal Cancers in a Fecal Immunochemical Test-Based Screening Program.基于粪便免疫化学检测的筛查项目中的间隔期结直肠癌
JAMA Netw Open. 2025 Jul 1;8(7):e2523441. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.23441.
2
The role of health economic evidence in clinical practice guidelines for colorectal cancer: a comparative analysis across countries.健康经济证据在结直肠癌临床实践指南中的作用:一项跨国比较分析。
J Comp Eff Res. 2025 Apr;14(4):e240226. doi: 10.57264/cer-2024-0226. Epub 2025 Feb 19.
3
A Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Colorectal Cancer Screening in Europe: Have Studies Included Optimal Screening Intensities?

本文引用的文献

1
Cost-effectiveness analysis of a quantitative immunochemical test for colorectal cancer screening.用于结直肠癌筛查的定量免疫化学检测的成本效益分析。
Gastroenterology. 2011 Nov;141(5):1648-55.e1. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2011.07.020. Epub 2011 Jul 22.
2
Cost-effectiveness of mass screening for colorectal cancer: choice of fecal occult blood test and screening strategy.结直肠癌大规模筛查的成本效益:粪便潜血试验和筛查策略的选择。
Dis Colon Rectum. 2011 Jul;54(7):876-86. doi: 10.1007/DCR.0b013e31820fd2bc.
3
Global cancer statistics.全球癌症统计数据。
欧洲结直肠癌筛查成本效益分析的系统评价:研究是否纳入了最佳筛查强度?
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2023 Sep;21(5):701-717. doi: 10.1007/s40258-023-00819-3. Epub 2023 Jun 28.
4
Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Surveillance in Hodgkin Lymphoma Survivors Treated with Procarbazine and/or Infradiaphragmatic Radiotherapy.结直肠癌监测在接受丙卡巴肼和/或膈下放疗的霍奇金淋巴瘤幸存者中的成本效益。
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2022 Dec 5;31(12):2157-2168. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-22-0019.
5
Cost-effectiveness analysis of colorectal cancer screening in Shanghai, China: A modelling study.中国上海结直肠癌筛查的成本效益分析:一项建模研究。
Prev Med Rep. 2022 Jul 4;29:101891. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2022.101891. eCollection 2022 Oct.
6
Optimising colorectal cancer screening in Shanghai, China: a modelling study.优化中国上海结直肠癌筛查:模型研究。
BMJ Open. 2022 May 16;12(5):e048156. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-048156.
7
Colorectal Cancer Screening within Colonoscopy Capacity Constraints: Can FIT-Based Programs Save More Lives by Trading off More Sensitive Test Cutoffs against Longer Screening Intervals?结肠镜检查能力受限情况下的结直肠癌筛查:基于粪便免疫化学检测(FIT)的项目能否通过权衡更敏感的检测临界值与更长的筛查间隔来挽救更多生命?
MDM Policy Pract. 2022 May 7;7(1):23814683221097064. doi: 10.1177/23814683221097064. eCollection 2022 Jan-Jun.
8
Treatment pathways and associated costs of metastatic colorectal cancer in Greece.希腊转移性结直肠癌的治疗途径及相关费用。
Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2022 Feb 14;20(1):7. doi: 10.1186/s12962-022-00339-2.
9
Colorectal cancer in patients with single versus double positive faecal immunochemical test results: A retrospective cohort study from a public tertiary hospital.单阳性与双阳性粪便免疫化学试验结果的患者中的结直肠癌:来自一家公立医院的回顾性队列研究。
PLoS One. 2021 Jun 4;16(6):e0250460. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0250460. eCollection 2021.
10
Can Cost-effectiveness Analysis Inform Genotype-Guided Aspirin Use for Primary Colorectal Cancer Prevention?可否基于成本效益分析结果,推荐使用基因型指导的阿司匹林用于结直肠癌一级预防?
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2021 Jun;30(6):1106-1113. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-19-1580. Epub 2021 Apr 13.
CA Cancer J Clin. 2011 Mar-Apr;61(2):69-90. doi: 10.3322/caac.20107. Epub 2011 Feb 4.
4
Diagnostic yield improves with collection of 2 samples in fecal immunochemical test screening without affecting attendance.粪便免疫化学检测筛查中采集 2 份样本可提高诊断率,且不影响就诊率。
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011 Apr;9(4):333-9. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2010.12.012. Epub 2010 Dec 23.
5
Comparison of guaiac-based and quantitative immunochemical fecal occult blood testing in a population at average risk undergoing colorectal cancer screening.在平均风险的结直肠癌筛查人群中,基于愈创木脂的和定量免疫化学粪便隐血检测的比较。
Am J Gastroenterol. 2010 Sep;105(9):2017-25. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2010.179. Epub 2010 May 25.
6
Trends in colorectal cancer in the south of the Netherlands 1975-2007: rectal cancer survival levels with colon cancer survival.荷兰南部 1975-2007 年结直肠癌发病趋势:直肠癌生存率与结肠癌生存率比较。
Acta Oncol. 2010 Aug;49(6):784-96. doi: 10.3109/02841861003733713.
7
Effect of rising chemotherapy costs on the cost savings of colorectal cancer screening.化疗费用上涨对结直肠癌筛查成本节约的影响。
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009 Oct 21;101(20):1412-22. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djp319. Epub 2009 Sep 24.
8
Screening for colorectal cancer: randomised trial comparing guaiac-based and immunochemical faecal occult blood testing and flexible sigmoidoscopy.结直肠癌筛查:基于愈创木脂和免疫化学粪便潜血检测与柔性乙状结肠镜检查的随机试验比较。
Gut. 2010 Jan;59(1):62-8. doi: 10.1136/gut.2009.177089.
9
The impact of healthcare costs in the last year of life and in all life years gained on the cost-effectiveness of cancer screening.临终前一年的医疗保健费用以及所有获得的生命年数对癌症筛查成本效益的影响。
Br J Cancer. 2009 Apr 21;100(8):1240-4. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605018.
10
Screening for colorectal cancer: random comparison of guaiac and immunochemical faecal occult blood testing at different cut-off levels.结直肠癌筛查:不同临界值下愈创木脂法与免疫化学法粪便潜血检测的随机比较
Br J Cancer. 2009 Apr 7;100(7):1103-10. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6604961.