Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020 Dec;18(13):3026-3039. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2020.07.031. Epub 2020 Jul 21.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Endoscopic screening for gastric cancer is routine in some countries with high incidence and is associated with reduced gastric cancer-related mortality. Immigrants from countries of high incidence to low incidence of gastric cancer retain their elevated risk, but no screening recommendations have been made for these groups in the United States. We aimed to determine the cost effectiveness of different endoscopic screening strategies for noncardia gastric cancer, compared with no screening, among Chinese, Filipino, Southeast Asian, Vietnamese, Korean, and Japanese Americans.
We generated a decision-analytic Markov model to simulate a cohort of asymptomatic 50-year-old Asian Americans. The cost effectiveness of 2 distinct strategies for endoscopic gastric cancer screening was compared with no screening for each group, stratified by sex. Outcome measures were reported in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), with a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Extensive sensitivity analyses were performed.
Compared with performing no endoscopic gastric cancer screening, performing a 1-time upper endoscopy with biopsies, with continued endoscopic surveillance if gastric intestinal metaplasia was identified, was cost effective, whereas performing ongoing biennial endoscopies, even for patients with normal findings from endoscopy and histopathology, was not. The lowest ICERs were observed for Chinese, Japanese, and Korean Americans (all <$73,748/QALY).
Endoscopic screening for gastric cancer with ongoing surveillance of gastric preneoplasia is cost effective for Asian Americans ages 50 years or older in the United States. The lowest ICERs were for Chinese, Japanese, and Korean Americans (all <$73,748/QALY).
在一些胃癌发病率较高的国家,常规进行内镜筛查,这与胃癌相关死亡率的降低有关。从胃癌高发国家移民到胃癌低发国家的人仍然存在较高的风险,但美国尚未针对这些人群提出筛查建议。我们旨在确定与不筛查相比,不同内镜筛查策略在非贲门胃癌方面对中国、菲律宾、东南亚、越南、韩国和日本裔美国人的成本效益。
我们生成了一个决策分析马尔可夫模型,以模拟一组无症状的 50 岁亚裔美国人队列。比较了 2 种不同的内镜胃癌筛查策略与各人群(按性别分层)不筛查的成本效益。报告了增量成本效益比(ICER)的结果,以 10 万美元/质量调整生命年(QALY)为意愿支付阈值。进行了广泛的敏感性分析。
与不进行内镜胃癌筛查相比,进行 1 次上消化道内镜检查加活检,并在发现胃肠上皮化生时进行内镜监测,具有成本效益,而进行持续的每两年 1 次内镜检查,即使内镜和组织病理学检查结果正常,也不具有成本效益。中国、日本和韩国裔美国人的 ICER 最低(均<73748 美元/QALY)。
对于 50 岁及以上的美国亚裔美国人,对胃癌进行内镜筛查并对胃前病变进行持续监测具有成本效益。中国、日本和韩国裔美国人的 ICER 最低(均<73748 美元/QALY)。