Sjöström Olle, Lindholm Lars, Melin Beatrice
a Department of Radiation Sciences, Oncology , Umeå University , Umeå , Sweden.
b Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Epidemiology and Global Health , Umeå University , Umeå , Sweden.
Scand J Gastroenterol. 2017 Sep;52(9):1002-1007. doi: 10.1080/00365521.2017.1327615. Epub 2017 Jun 6.
Approximately 20-30% of all colorectal cancer (CRC) cases may have a familial contribution. The family history of CRC can be prominent (e.g., hereditary colorectal cancer (HCRC)) or more moderate (e.g., familial colorectal cancer (FCRC)). For family members at risk, colonoscopic surveillance is a well-established method to prevent both HCRC and FCRC, although the evidence for the exact procedures of the surveillance is limited. Surveillance can come at a high price if individuals are frequently examined, as this may result in unnecessary colonoscopies in relation to actual risk for CRC. This study analyses the cost-effectiveness of a surveillance programme implemented in the Northern Sweden Health Care Region.
The study includes 259 individuals prospectively recorded in the colonoscopic surveillance programme registry at the Cancer Prevention Clinic, Umeå University Hospital. We performed a cost-utility analysis with a contrafactual design: we compared observed costs and loss of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) due to CRC with the surveillance programme to an expected outcome without surveillance. The main measure was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) between surveillance and non-surveillance. Scenario analysis was used to explore uncertainty.
The ICER between surveillance and non-surveillance in the base model was 3596€/QALY. The ICER varied from -4620€ in the best-case scenario to 33,779€ in the worst-case scenario.
Colonoscopic surveillance is a very cost-effective method to prevent HCRC and FCRC compared to current thresholds for cost-effectiveness and other cancer preventive interventions.
