Cost-Effectiveness of Multitarget Stool DNA Testing vs Colonoscopy or Fecal Immunochemical Testing for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Alaska Native People

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of multitarget stool DNA testing (MT-sDNA) compared with colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) for Alaska Native adults. A Markov model was used to evaluate the 3 screening test effects over 40 years. Outcomes included colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Mayo Clinic proceedings 2021-05, Vol.96 (5), p.1203-1217
Hauptverfasser: Redwood, Diana G., Dinh, Tuan A., Kisiel, John B., Borah, Bijan J., Moriarty, James P., Provost, Ellen M., Sacco, Frank D., Tiesinga, James J., Ahlquist, David A.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1217
container_issue 5
container_start_page 1203
container_title Mayo Clinic proceedings
container_volume 96
creator Redwood, Diana G.
Dinh, Tuan A.
Kisiel, John B.
Borah, Bijan J.
Moriarty, James P.
Provost, Ellen M.
Sacco, Frank D.
Tiesinga, James J.
Ahlquist, David A.
description To estimate the cost-effectiveness of multitarget stool DNA testing (MT-sDNA) compared with colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) for Alaska Native adults. A Markov model was used to evaluate the 3 screening test effects over 40 years. Outcomes included colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality, costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). The study incorporated updated evidence on screening test performance and adherence and was conducted from December 15, 2016, through November 6, 2019. With perfect adherence, CRC incidence was reduced by 52% (95% CI, 46% to 56%) using colonoscopy, 61% (95% CI, 57% to 64%) using annual FIT, and 66% (95% CI, 63% to 68%) using MT-sDNA. Compared with no screening, perfect adherence screening extends life by 0.15, 0.17, and 0.19 QALYs per person with colonoscopy, FIT, and MT-sDNA, respectively. Colonoscopy is the most expensive strategy: approximately $110 million more than MT-sDNA and $127 million more than FIT. With imperfect adherence (best case), MT-sDNA resulted in 0.12 QALYs per person vs 0.05 and 0.06 QALYs per person by FIT and colonoscopy, respectively. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses supported the base-case analysis. Under varied adherence scenarios, MT-sDNA either dominates or is cost-effective (ICERs, $1740-$75,868 per QALY saved) compared with FIT and colonoscopy. Each strategy reduced costs and increased QALYs compared with no screening. Screening by MT-sDNA results in the largest QALY savings. In Markov model analysis, screening by MT-sDNA in the Alaska Native population was cost-effective compared with screening by colonoscopy and FIT for a wide range of adherence scenarios.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.mayocp.2020.07.035
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2511899139</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A664526367</galeid><els_id>S0025619620309319</els_id><sourcerecordid>A664526367</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c575t-e97de091a4e5682aaab6ff582174cd093636470278c497cf7420395bc57dedf13</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9ksFu1DAQhiMEokvhDRDyCXFJsBM7Xl-QVqGFSqUgtZwtrzPe9eLEi-2s2FfhaXG0LVIPIB8sj7_fM-P5i-I1wRXBpH2_qwZ19Hpf1bjGFeYVbtiTYkEErUvGaPu0WGBcs7Iloj0rXsS4wxhzIejz4qxplhSzGi-K352PqbwwBnSyBxghRuQN-jK5ZJMKG0joNnnv0MebFbqDmOy4QYeIOu_86KP2-yPyAV2CVg5dDcM0er2Fwc7HB9xkYOZDzpHDnRo1BHSrA8A439sRrZyKPxS6UXMR6Bv4vYOXxTOjXIRX9_t58f3y4q77XF5__XTVra5LzThLJQjeAxZEUWDtslZKrVtj2LImnOoei6ZtWspxzZeaCq4NpzVuBFtndQ-9Ic158e707j74n1OuWQ42anBOjeCnKGtGyFII0oiMVid0oxxIOxqfgtJ59XPLfgRjc3zVtpTVOS3PgrePBJlJ8Ctt1BSj_De4BeXSNno3JevH-BikJ1AHH2MAI_fBDiocJcFyNobcyZMx5GwMibnMxsiyN_dNTusB-r-iBydk4MMJgPzVBwtBRm0hT6q389xk7-3_M_wBaLPLXA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2511899139</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Cost-Effectiveness of Multitarget Stool DNA Testing vs Colonoscopy or Fecal Immunochemical Testing for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Alaska Native People</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Redwood, Diana G. ; Dinh, Tuan A. ; Kisiel, John B. ; Borah, Bijan J. ; Moriarty, James P. ; Provost, Ellen M. ; Sacco, Frank D. ; Tiesinga, James J. ; Ahlquist, David A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Redwood, Diana G. ; Dinh, Tuan A. ; Kisiel, John B. ; Borah, Bijan J. ; Moriarty, James P. ; Provost, Ellen M. ; Sacco, Frank D. ; Tiesinga, James J. ; Ahlquist, David A.</creatorcontrib><description>To estimate the cost-effectiveness of multitarget stool DNA testing (MT-sDNA) compared with colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) for Alaska Native adults. A Markov model was used to evaluate the 3 screening test effects over 40 years. Outcomes included colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality, costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). The study incorporated updated evidence on screening test performance and adherence and was conducted from December 15, 2016, through November 6, 2019. With perfect adherence, CRC incidence was reduced by 52% (95% CI, 46% to 56%) using colonoscopy, 61% (95% CI, 57% to 64%) using annual FIT, and 66% (95% CI, 63% to 68%) using MT-sDNA. Compared with no screening, perfect adherence screening extends life by 0.15, 0.17, and 0.19 QALYs per person with colonoscopy, FIT, and MT-sDNA, respectively. Colonoscopy is the most expensive strategy: approximately $110 million more than MT-sDNA and $127 million more than FIT. With imperfect adherence (best case), MT-sDNA resulted in 0.12 QALYs per person vs 0.05 and 0.06 QALYs per person by FIT and colonoscopy, respectively. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses supported the base-case analysis. Under varied adherence scenarios, MT-sDNA either dominates or is cost-effective (ICERs, $1740-$75,868 per QALY saved) compared with FIT and colonoscopy. Each strategy reduced costs and increased QALYs compared with no screening. Screening by MT-sDNA results in the largest QALY savings. In Markov model analysis, screening by MT-sDNA in the Alaska Native population was cost-effective compared with screening by colonoscopy and FIT for a wide range of adherence scenarios.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0025-6196</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1942-5546</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2020.07.035</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33840520</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adenoma - diagnosis ; Adenoma - economics ; Adenoma - ethnology ; Adenoma - metabolism ; Adult ; Aged ; Alaska - epidemiology ; Alaska Natives ; Biomarkers - analysis ; Biomarkers - metabolism ; Colonoscopy ; Colonoscopy - economics ; Colorectal cancer ; Colorectal Neoplasms - diagnosis ; Colorectal Neoplasms - economics ; Colorectal Neoplasms - ethnology ; Colorectal Neoplasms - metabolism ; Comparative analysis ; Computer Simulation ; Cost-Benefit Analysis ; Diagnosis ; DNA - analysis ; Early Detection of Cancer - economics ; Early Detection of Cancer - methods ; Economic aspects ; Feces - chemistry ; Female ; Genetic screening ; Health aspects ; Humans ; Incidence ; Male ; Markov Chains ; Middle Aged ; Models, Economic ; Native Americans ; Occult Blood ; Patient Compliance - statistics &amp; numerical data ; Quality-Adjusted Life Years</subject><ispartof>Mayo Clinic proceedings, 2021-05, Vol.96 (5), p.1203-1217</ispartof><rights>2020 Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research</rights><rights>Copyright © 2020 Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2021 Elsevier, Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c575t-e97de091a4e5682aaab6ff582174cd093636470278c497cf7420395bc57dedf13</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c575t-e97de091a4e5682aaab6ff582174cd093636470278c497cf7420395bc57dedf13</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-0360-5729</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33840520$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Redwood, Diana G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dinh, Tuan A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kisiel, John B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Borah, Bijan J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moriarty, James P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Provost, Ellen M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sacco, Frank D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tiesinga, James J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ahlquist, David A.</creatorcontrib><title>Cost-Effectiveness of Multitarget Stool DNA Testing vs Colonoscopy or Fecal Immunochemical Testing for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Alaska Native People</title><title>Mayo Clinic proceedings</title><addtitle>Mayo Clin Proc</addtitle><description>To estimate the cost-effectiveness of multitarget stool DNA testing (MT-sDNA) compared with colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) for Alaska Native adults. A Markov model was used to evaluate the 3 screening test effects over 40 years. Outcomes included colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality, costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). The study incorporated updated evidence on screening test performance and adherence and was conducted from December 15, 2016, through November 6, 2019. With perfect adherence, CRC incidence was reduced by 52% (95% CI, 46% to 56%) using colonoscopy, 61% (95% CI, 57% to 64%) using annual FIT, and 66% (95% CI, 63% to 68%) using MT-sDNA. Compared with no screening, perfect adherence screening extends life by 0.15, 0.17, and 0.19 QALYs per person with colonoscopy, FIT, and MT-sDNA, respectively. Colonoscopy is the most expensive strategy: approximately $110 million more than MT-sDNA and $127 million more than FIT. With imperfect adherence (best case), MT-sDNA resulted in 0.12 QALYs per person vs 0.05 and 0.06 QALYs per person by FIT and colonoscopy, respectively. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses supported the base-case analysis. Under varied adherence scenarios, MT-sDNA either dominates or is cost-effective (ICERs, $1740-$75,868 per QALY saved) compared with FIT and colonoscopy. Each strategy reduced costs and increased QALYs compared with no screening. Screening by MT-sDNA results in the largest QALY savings. In Markov model analysis, screening by MT-sDNA in the Alaska Native population was cost-effective compared with screening by colonoscopy and FIT for a wide range of adherence scenarios.</description><subject>Adenoma - diagnosis</subject><subject>Adenoma - economics</subject><subject>Adenoma - ethnology</subject><subject>Adenoma - metabolism</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Alaska - epidemiology</subject><subject>Alaska Natives</subject><subject>Biomarkers - analysis</subject><subject>Biomarkers - metabolism</subject><subject>Colonoscopy</subject><subject>Colonoscopy - economics</subject><subject>Colorectal cancer</subject><subject>Colorectal Neoplasms - diagnosis</subject><subject>Colorectal Neoplasms - economics</subject><subject>Colorectal Neoplasms - ethnology</subject><subject>Colorectal Neoplasms - metabolism</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Computer Simulation</subject><subject>Cost-Benefit Analysis</subject><subject>Diagnosis</subject><subject>DNA - analysis</subject><subject>Early Detection of Cancer - economics</subject><subject>Early Detection of Cancer - methods</subject><subject>Economic aspects</subject><subject>Feces - chemistry</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Genetic screening</subject><subject>Health aspects</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Incidence</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Markov Chains</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Models, Economic</subject><subject>Native Americans</subject><subject>Occult Blood</subject><subject>Patient Compliance - statistics &amp; numerical data</subject><subject>Quality-Adjusted Life Years</subject><issn>0025-6196</issn><issn>1942-5546</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9ksFu1DAQhiMEokvhDRDyCXFJsBM7Xl-QVqGFSqUgtZwtrzPe9eLEi-2s2FfhaXG0LVIPIB8sj7_fM-P5i-I1wRXBpH2_qwZ19Hpf1bjGFeYVbtiTYkEErUvGaPu0WGBcs7Iloj0rXsS4wxhzIejz4qxplhSzGi-K352PqbwwBnSyBxghRuQN-jK5ZJMKG0joNnnv0MebFbqDmOy4QYeIOu_86KP2-yPyAV2CVg5dDcM0er2Fwc7HB9xkYOZDzpHDnRo1BHSrA8A439sRrZyKPxS6UXMR6Bv4vYOXxTOjXIRX9_t58f3y4q77XF5__XTVra5LzThLJQjeAxZEUWDtslZKrVtj2LImnOoei6ZtWspxzZeaCq4NpzVuBFtndQ-9Ic158e707j74n1OuWQ42anBOjeCnKGtGyFII0oiMVid0oxxIOxqfgtJ59XPLfgRjc3zVtpTVOS3PgrePBJlJ8Ctt1BSj_De4BeXSNno3JevH-BikJ1AHH2MAI_fBDiocJcFyNobcyZMx5GwMibnMxsiyN_dNTusB-r-iBydk4MMJgPzVBwtBRm0hT6q389xk7-3_M_wBaLPLXA</recordid><startdate>202105</startdate><enddate>202105</enddate><creator>Redwood, Diana G.</creator><creator>Dinh, Tuan A.</creator><creator>Kisiel, John B.</creator><creator>Borah, Bijan J.</creator><creator>Moriarty, James P.</creator><creator>Provost, Ellen M.</creator><creator>Sacco, Frank D.</creator><creator>Tiesinga, James J.</creator><creator>Ahlquist, David A.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier, Inc</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0360-5729</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202105</creationdate><title>Cost-Effectiveness of Multitarget Stool DNA Testing vs Colonoscopy or Fecal Immunochemical Testing for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Alaska Native People</title><author>Redwood, Diana G. ; Dinh, Tuan A. ; Kisiel, John B. ; Borah, Bijan J. ; Moriarty, James P. ; Provost, Ellen M. ; Sacco, Frank D. ; Tiesinga, James J. ; Ahlquist, David A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c575t-e97de091a4e5682aaab6ff582174cd093636470278c497cf7420395bc57dedf13</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Adenoma - diagnosis</topic><topic>Adenoma - economics</topic><topic>Adenoma - ethnology</topic><topic>Adenoma - metabolism</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Alaska - epidemiology</topic><topic>Alaska Natives</topic><topic>Biomarkers - analysis</topic><topic>Biomarkers - metabolism</topic><topic>Colonoscopy</topic><topic>Colonoscopy - economics</topic><topic>Colorectal cancer</topic><topic>Colorectal Neoplasms - diagnosis</topic><topic>Colorectal Neoplasms - economics</topic><topic>Colorectal Neoplasms - ethnology</topic><topic>Colorectal Neoplasms - metabolism</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Computer Simulation</topic><topic>Cost-Benefit Analysis</topic><topic>Diagnosis</topic><topic>DNA - analysis</topic><topic>Early Detection of Cancer - economics</topic><topic>Early Detection of Cancer - methods</topic><topic>Economic aspects</topic><topic>Feces - chemistry</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Genetic screening</topic><topic>Health aspects</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Incidence</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Markov Chains</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Models, Economic</topic><topic>Native Americans</topic><topic>Occult Blood</topic><topic>Patient Compliance - statistics &amp; numerical data</topic><topic>Quality-Adjusted Life Years</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Redwood, Diana G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dinh, Tuan A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kisiel, John B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Borah, Bijan J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moriarty, James P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Provost, Ellen M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sacco, Frank D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tiesinga, James J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ahlquist, David A.</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Mayo Clinic proceedings</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Redwood, Diana G.</au><au>Dinh, Tuan A.</au><au>Kisiel, John B.</au><au>Borah, Bijan J.</au><au>Moriarty, James P.</au><au>Provost, Ellen M.</au><au>Sacco, Frank D.</au><au>Tiesinga, James J.</au><au>Ahlquist, David A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Cost-Effectiveness of Multitarget Stool DNA Testing vs Colonoscopy or Fecal Immunochemical Testing for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Alaska Native People</atitle><jtitle>Mayo Clinic proceedings</jtitle><addtitle>Mayo Clin Proc</addtitle><date>2021-05</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>96</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>1203</spage><epage>1217</epage><pages>1203-1217</pages><issn>0025-6196</issn><eissn>1942-5546</eissn><abstract>To estimate the cost-effectiveness of multitarget stool DNA testing (MT-sDNA) compared with colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) for Alaska Native adults. A Markov model was used to evaluate the 3 screening test effects over 40 years. Outcomes included colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality, costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). The study incorporated updated evidence on screening test performance and adherence and was conducted from December 15, 2016, through November 6, 2019. With perfect adherence, CRC incidence was reduced by 52% (95% CI, 46% to 56%) using colonoscopy, 61% (95% CI, 57% to 64%) using annual FIT, and 66% (95% CI, 63% to 68%) using MT-sDNA. Compared with no screening, perfect adherence screening extends life by 0.15, 0.17, and 0.19 QALYs per person with colonoscopy, FIT, and MT-sDNA, respectively. Colonoscopy is the most expensive strategy: approximately $110 million more than MT-sDNA and $127 million more than FIT. With imperfect adherence (best case), MT-sDNA resulted in 0.12 QALYs per person vs 0.05 and 0.06 QALYs per person by FIT and colonoscopy, respectively. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses supported the base-case analysis. Under varied adherence scenarios, MT-sDNA either dominates or is cost-effective (ICERs, $1740-$75,868 per QALY saved) compared with FIT and colonoscopy. Each strategy reduced costs and increased QALYs compared with no screening. Screening by MT-sDNA results in the largest QALY savings. In Markov model analysis, screening by MT-sDNA in the Alaska Native population was cost-effective compared with screening by colonoscopy and FIT for a wide range of adherence scenarios.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>33840520</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.mayocp.2020.07.035</doi><tpages>15</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0360-5729</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0025-6196
ispartof Mayo Clinic proceedings, 2021-05, Vol.96 (5), p.1203-1217
issn 0025-6196
1942-5546
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2511899139
source MEDLINE; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Adenoma - diagnosis
Adenoma - economics
Adenoma - ethnology
Adenoma - metabolism
Adult
Aged
Alaska - epidemiology
Alaska Natives
Biomarkers - analysis
Biomarkers - metabolism
Colonoscopy
Colonoscopy - economics
Colorectal cancer
Colorectal Neoplasms - diagnosis
Colorectal Neoplasms - economics
Colorectal Neoplasms - ethnology
Colorectal Neoplasms - metabolism
Comparative analysis
Computer Simulation
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Diagnosis
DNA - analysis
Early Detection of Cancer - economics
Early Detection of Cancer - methods
Economic aspects
Feces - chemistry
Female
Genetic screening
Health aspects
Humans
Incidence
Male
Markov Chains
Middle Aged
Models, Economic
Native Americans
Occult Blood
Patient Compliance - statistics & numerical data
Quality-Adjusted Life Years
title Cost-Effectiveness of Multitarget Stool DNA Testing vs Colonoscopy or Fecal Immunochemical Testing for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Alaska Native People
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-23T12%3A46%3A55IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Cost-Effectiveness%20of%20Multitarget%20Stool%20DNA%20Testing%20vs%20Colonoscopy%20or%20Fecal%20Immunochemical%20Testing%20for%20Colorectal%20Cancer%20Screening%20in%20Alaska%20Native%20People&rft.jtitle=Mayo%20Clinic%20proceedings&rft.au=Redwood,%20Diana%20G.&rft.date=2021-05&rft.volume=96&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=1203&rft.epage=1217&rft.pages=1203-1217&rft.issn=0025-6196&rft.eissn=1942-5546&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.mayocp.2020.07.035&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA664526367%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2511899139&rft_id=info:pmid/33840520&rft_galeid=A664526367&rft_els_id=S0025619620309319&rfr_iscdi=true