Cost-effectiveness analyses of colorectal cancer screening: A systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force

Michael Pignone, Somnath (Som) Saha, Tom Hoerger, Jeanne Mandelblatt

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

476 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To perform a systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Data Sources: MEDLINE and the British National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, January 1993 through September 2001. Study Selection: Original economic evaluations of colorectal cancer screening in average-risk patients were reviewed. The authors sought studies addressing the incremental cost-effectiveness of different screening strategies compared with no screening, of different screening strategies compared with one another, and of different ages of screening initiation and cessation. Two investigators independently reviewed each abstract, and potentially eligible articles were retrieved. A four-member working group reached consensus regarding final inclusion or exclusion of articles. Data Extraction: One reviewer extracted data into evidence tables. The results were checked by other members and discrepancies resolved by consensus. Data Synthesis: Among 180 potential articles identified, 7 were retained in the final analysis. Compared with no screening, cost-effectiveness ratios for screening with any of the commonly considered methods were generally between $10 000 and $25 000 per life-year saved. No one strategy was consistently found to be the most effective or to have the best incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Currently available models provided insufficient evidence to determine optimal starting and stopping ages for screening. Conclusions: Screening for colorectal cancer appears cost-effective compared with no screening, but a single optimal strategy cannot be determined from the currently available data. Additional data regarding adherence with screening over time, complication rates in real-world settings, and colorectal cancer biology are needed. Additional analyses are necessary to determine optimal ages of initiation and cessation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)96-104
Number of pages9
JournalAnnals of Internal Medicine
Volume137
Issue number2
StatePublished - Jul 16 2002
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Advisory Committees
Early Detection of Cancer
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Colorectal Neoplasms
State Medicine
Information Storage and Retrieval
Health Services Research
MEDLINE
Research Personnel
Databases
Costs and Cost Analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Cost-effectiveness analyses of colorectal cancer screening : A systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. / Pignone, Michael; Saha, Somnath (Som); Hoerger, Tom; Mandelblatt, Jeanne.

In: Annals of Internal Medicine, Vol. 137, No. 2, 16.07.2002, p. 96-104.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{6798c8be317c4e1d91a1e79fbddd33fb,
title = "Cost-effectiveness analyses of colorectal cancer screening: A systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force",
abstract = "Purpose: To perform a systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Data Sources: MEDLINE and the British National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, January 1993 through September 2001. Study Selection: Original economic evaluations of colorectal cancer screening in average-risk patients were reviewed. The authors sought studies addressing the incremental cost-effectiveness of different screening strategies compared with no screening, of different screening strategies compared with one another, and of different ages of screening initiation and cessation. Two investigators independently reviewed each abstract, and potentially eligible articles were retrieved. A four-member working group reached consensus regarding final inclusion or exclusion of articles. Data Extraction: One reviewer extracted data into evidence tables. The results were checked by other members and discrepancies resolved by consensus. Data Synthesis: Among 180 potential articles identified, 7 were retained in the final analysis. Compared with no screening, cost-effectiveness ratios for screening with any of the commonly considered methods were generally between $10 000 and $25 000 per life-year saved. No one strategy was consistently found to be the most effective or to have the best incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Currently available models provided insufficient evidence to determine optimal starting and stopping ages for screening. Conclusions: Screening for colorectal cancer appears cost-effective compared with no screening, but a single optimal strategy cannot be determined from the currently available data. Additional data regarding adherence with screening over time, complication rates in real-world settings, and colorectal cancer biology are needed. Additional analyses are necessary to determine optimal ages of initiation and cessation.",
author = "Michael Pignone and Saha, {Somnath (Som)} and Tom Hoerger and Jeanne Mandelblatt",
year = "2002",
month = "7",
day = "16",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "137",
pages = "96--104",
journal = "Annals of Internal Medicine",
issn = "0003-4819",
publisher = "American College of Physicians",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost-effectiveness analyses of colorectal cancer screening

T2 - A systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force

AU - Pignone, Michael

AU - Saha, Somnath (Som)

AU - Hoerger, Tom

AU - Mandelblatt, Jeanne

PY - 2002/7/16

Y1 - 2002/7/16

N2 - Purpose: To perform a systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Data Sources: MEDLINE and the British National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, January 1993 through September 2001. Study Selection: Original economic evaluations of colorectal cancer screening in average-risk patients were reviewed. The authors sought studies addressing the incremental cost-effectiveness of different screening strategies compared with no screening, of different screening strategies compared with one another, and of different ages of screening initiation and cessation. Two investigators independently reviewed each abstract, and potentially eligible articles were retrieved. A four-member working group reached consensus regarding final inclusion or exclusion of articles. Data Extraction: One reviewer extracted data into evidence tables. The results were checked by other members and discrepancies resolved by consensus. Data Synthesis: Among 180 potential articles identified, 7 were retained in the final analysis. Compared with no screening, cost-effectiveness ratios for screening with any of the commonly considered methods were generally between $10 000 and $25 000 per life-year saved. No one strategy was consistently found to be the most effective or to have the best incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Currently available models provided insufficient evidence to determine optimal starting and stopping ages for screening. Conclusions: Screening for colorectal cancer appears cost-effective compared with no screening, but a single optimal strategy cannot be determined from the currently available data. Additional data regarding adherence with screening over time, complication rates in real-world settings, and colorectal cancer biology are needed. Additional analyses are necessary to determine optimal ages of initiation and cessation.

AB - Purpose: To perform a systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Data Sources: MEDLINE and the British National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, January 1993 through September 2001. Study Selection: Original economic evaluations of colorectal cancer screening in average-risk patients were reviewed. The authors sought studies addressing the incremental cost-effectiveness of different screening strategies compared with no screening, of different screening strategies compared with one another, and of different ages of screening initiation and cessation. Two investigators independently reviewed each abstract, and potentially eligible articles were retrieved. A four-member working group reached consensus regarding final inclusion or exclusion of articles. Data Extraction: One reviewer extracted data into evidence tables. The results were checked by other members and discrepancies resolved by consensus. Data Synthesis: Among 180 potential articles identified, 7 were retained in the final analysis. Compared with no screening, cost-effectiveness ratios for screening with any of the commonly considered methods were generally between $10 000 and $25 000 per life-year saved. No one strategy was consistently found to be the most effective or to have the best incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Currently available models provided insufficient evidence to determine optimal starting and stopping ages for screening. Conclusions: Screening for colorectal cancer appears cost-effective compared with no screening, but a single optimal strategy cannot be determined from the currently available data. Additional data regarding adherence with screening over time, complication rates in real-world settings, and colorectal cancer biology are needed. Additional analyses are necessary to determine optimal ages of initiation and cessation.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0037118705&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0037118705&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 12118964

AN - SCOPUS:0037118705

VL - 137

SP - 96

EP - 104

JO - Annals of Internal Medicine

JF - Annals of Internal Medicine

SN - 0003-4819

IS - 2

ER -