Suppr超能文献

高危个体中结直肠癌替代筛查策略的成本效益分析。

Cost-effectiveness analysis of alternative colorectal cancer screening strategies in high-risk individuals.

作者信息

Benamouzig Robert, Barré Stéphanie, Saurin Jean-Christophe, Leleu Henri, Vimont Alexandre, Taleb Sabrine, De Bels Frédéric

机构信息

Department of Gastroenterology, Hôpital Avicenne (AP-HP), Bobigny, France.

Institut National du Cancer, Boulogne, France.

出版信息

Therap Adv Gastroenterol. 2021 Apr 10;14:17562848211002359. doi: 10.1177/17562848211002359. eCollection 2021.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Current guidelines recommend colonoscopy every 3-5 years for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening of individuals with a familial history of CRC. The objective of this study was to compare the cost effectiveness of screening alternatives in this population.

METHODS

Eight screening strategies were compared with no screening: immunochemical test (FIT), Stool DNA and blood-based screening every 2 years, colonoscopy, computed tomography colonography, colon capsules, and sigmoidoscopy every 5 years, and colonoscopy at 45 years followed, if negative, by FIT every 2 years. Screening test and procedures performance were obtained from the literature. A microsimulation model reproducing the natural history of CRC was used to estimate the cost (€2018) and effectiveness [quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs)] of each strategy. A lifetime horizon was used. Costs and effectiveness were discounted at 3.5% annually.

RESULTS

Compared with no screening, colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy at a 30% uptake were the most effective strategy (46.3 and 43.9 QALY/1000). FIT at a 30 µg/g threshold with 30% uptake was only half as effective (25.7 QALY). Colonoscopy was associated with a cost of €484,000 per 1000 individuals whereas sigmoidoscopy and FIT were associated with much lower costs (€123,610 and €66,860). Incremental cost-effectiveness rate for FIT and sigmoidoscopy were €2600/QALY ( no screening) and €3100/QALY ( FIT), respectively, whereas it was €150,000/QALY for colonoscopy ( sigmoidoscopy). With a lower threshold (10 µg/g) and a higher uptake of 45%, FIT was more effective and less costly than colonoscopy at a 30% uptake and was associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €4240/QALY no screening.

CONCLUSION

At 30% uptake, current screening is the most effective screening strategy for high-risk individuals but is associated with a high ICER. Sigmoidoscopy and FIT at lower thresholds (10 µg/g) and a higher uptake should be given consideration as cost-effective alternatives.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

Fecal occult blood testing with an immunochemical test (FIT) is generally considered as the most cost-effective alternative in colorectal cancer screening programs for average risk individuals without family history.Current screening guidelines for high-risk individuals with familial history recommend colonoscopy every 3-5 years.Colonoscopy every 3-5 years for individuals with familial history is the most effective strategy but is associated with a high incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.Compared with colonoscopy, if screening based on FIT is associated with a higher participation rate, it can achieve a similar effectiveness at a lower cost.

摘要

背景与目的

当前指南建议,有结直肠癌(CRC)家族史的个体每3至5年进行一次结肠镜检查以筛查CRC。本研究的目的是比较该人群中不同筛查方案的成本效益。

方法

将8种筛查策略与不筛查进行比较:免疫化学检测(FIT)、粪便DNA检测、每2年进行一次血液筛查、结肠镜检查、计算机断层扫描结肠成像、结肠胶囊内镜检查、每5年进行一次乙状结肠镜检查,以及45岁时进行结肠镜检查,若结果为阴性则每2年进行一次FIT检测。筛查试验和程序的性能数据来自文献。使用一个再现CRC自然病史的微观模拟模型来估计每种策略的成本(2018欧元)和效果[质量调整生命年(QALY)]。采用终身视角。成本和效果按每年3.5%进行贴现。

结果

与不筛查相比,30%接受率的结肠镜检查和乙状结肠镜检查是最有效的策略(每1000人46.3和43.9个QALY)。阈值为30μg/g且接受率为30%的FIT效果仅为前者的一半(25.7个QALY)。结肠镜检查每1000人成本为484,000欧元,而乙状结肠镜检查和FIT的成本则低得多(分别为123,610欧元和66,860欧元)。FIT和乙状结肠镜检查的增量成本效益比分别为2600欧元/QALY(相对于不筛查)和3100欧元/QALY(相对于FIT),而结肠镜检查(相对于乙状结肠镜检查)的增量成本效益比为150,000欧元/QALY。当阈值较低(10μg/g)且接受率较高(45%)时,FIT比接受率为30%的结肠镜检查更有效且成本更低,其增量成本效益比为4240欧元/QALY(相对于不筛查)。

结论

接受率为30%时,当前筛查是高危个体最有效的筛查策略,但增量成本效益比高。阈值较低(10μg/g)且接受率较高的乙状结肠镜检查和FIT应被视为具有成本效益的替代方案。

通俗易懂的总结

免疫化学检测(FIT)粪便潜血检测通常被认为是无家族史的平均风险个体结直肠癌筛查项目中最具成本效益的选择。当前针对有家族史的高危个体的筛查指南建议每3至5年进行一次结肠镜检查。对于有家族史的个体每3至5年进行一次结肠镜检查是最有效的策略,但增量成本效益比高。与结肠镜检查相比,如果基于FIT的筛查参与率更高,那么它可以以更低的成本实现相似的效果。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验