Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening – An overview
There are several modalities available for a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program. When determining which CRC screening program to implement, the costs of such programs should be considered in comparison to the health benefits they are expected to provide. Cost-effectiveness analysis provides a...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Baillière's best practice & research. Clinical gastroenterology 2010-08, Vol.24 (4), p.439-449 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 449 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 439 |
| container_title | Baillière's best practice & research. Clinical gastroenterology |
| container_volume | 24 |
| creator | Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Iris, PhD Knudsen, Amy B., PhD Brenner, Hermann, MD, MPH |
| description | There are several modalities available for a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program. When determining which CRC screening program to implement, the costs of such programs should be considered in comparison to the health benefits they are expected to provide. Cost-effectiveness analysis provides a tool to do this. In this paper we review the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of CRC screening. Published studies universally indicate that when compared with no CRC screening, all screening modalities provide additional years of life at a cost that is deemed acceptable by most industrialized nations. Many recent studies even find CRC screening to be cost-saving. However, when the alternative CRC screening strategies are compared against each other in an incremental cost-effectiveness analysis, no single optimal strategy emerges across the studies. There is consensus that the new technologies of stool DNA testing, computed tomographic colonography and capsule endoscopy are not yet cost-effective compared with the established CRC screening tests. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.bpg.2010.04.004 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_2939039</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>1_s2_0_S1521691810000582</els_id><sourcerecordid>754005150</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c599t-b9be88eccd5453b7f245eb42b50ae519f6d6617592bde8c2d6be148c15d3678f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9Ustu1DAUjRCIlsIHsEGRWLDKcP1KbCFVGo0oIFViAayvEudm8JCxBzszVXf8A3_YL8HRlAJdsPLrnCOfe05RPGewYMDq15tFt1svOOQzyAWAfFCcMiV4xQyrH857zqraMH1SPElpA5BJxjwuTjhoIYTUp8VyFdJU0TCQndyBPKVUhqG0YQwxX7VjaVtvKZbJRiLv_Lq8-fGzXPoyHCgeHF09LR4N7Zjo2e16Vny5ePt59b66_Pjuw2p5WVllzFR1piOtydpeSSW6ZuBSUSd5p6AlxcxQ93XNGmV415O2vK87YlJbpnpRN3oQZ8X5UXe377bUW_JTbEfcRbdt4zWG1uG_L959xXU4IDfCgDBZ4NWtQAzf95Qm3LpkaRxbT2GfsFESQDEFGfnyHnIT9tFnd8hA8EYarnlGsSPKxpBSpOHuLwxwzgc3mPPBOR8EiTmfzHnxt4k7xu9AMuDNEUB5lHm8EZN1lBPo3ZwH9sH9V_78HtuOzjvbjt_omtIfF5g4An6aCzL3g-VqgMqefgFDO7Zr</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1032749282</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening – An overview</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Iris, PhD ; Knudsen, Amy B., PhD ; Brenner, Hermann, MD, MPH</creator><creatorcontrib>Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Iris, PhD ; Knudsen, Amy B., PhD ; Brenner, Hermann, MD, MPH</creatorcontrib><description>There are several modalities available for a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program. When determining which CRC screening program to implement, the costs of such programs should be considered in comparison to the health benefits they are expected to provide. Cost-effectiveness analysis provides a tool to do this. In this paper we review the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of CRC screening. Published studies universally indicate that when compared with no CRC screening, all screening modalities provide additional years of life at a cost that is deemed acceptable by most industrialized nations. Many recent studies even find CRC screening to be cost-saving. However, when the alternative CRC screening strategies are compared against each other in an incremental cost-effectiveness analysis, no single optimal strategy emerges across the studies. There is consensus that the new technologies of stool DNA testing, computed tomographic colonography and capsule endoscopy are not yet cost-effective compared with the established CRC screening tests.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1521-6918</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-1916</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.bpg.2010.04.004</identifier><identifier>PMID: 20833348</identifier><identifier>CODEN: BPRCB6</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Netherlands: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Capsule endoscopy ; Capsule Endoscopy - economics ; Colonography, Computed tomographic ; Colonography, Computed Tomographic - economics ; Colonoscopy ; Colonoscopy - economics ; Colorectal cancer ; Colorectal neoplasms ; Colorectal Neoplasms - diagnosis ; Colorectal Neoplasms - economics ; Colorectal Neoplasms - prevention & control ; Cost reduction ; Cost-benefit analysis ; Cost-Benefit Analysis - statistics & numerical data ; Cost-Benefit Analysis - trends ; Deoxyribonucleic acid ; DNA ; Early Detection of Cancer - economics ; Early Detection of Cancer - statistics & numerical data ; Early Detection of Cancer - trends ; Feces ; Female ; Gastroenterology and Hepatology ; Genetic testing ; Humans ; Intervention ; Male ; Mass screening ; Mass Screening - economics ; Mass Screening - methods ; Mass Screening - trends ; Mathematical models ; Medical screening ; Occult Blood ; Quality standards ; Quality-Adjusted Life Years ; Sigmoidoscopy ; Sigmoidoscopy - economics ; Stool DNA ; Studies</subject><ispartof>Baillière's best practice & research. Clinical gastroenterology, 2010-08, Vol.24 (4), p.439-449</ispartof><rights>Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>2010 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c599t-b9be88eccd5453b7f245eb42b50ae519f6d6617592bde8c2d6be148c15d3678f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c599t-b9be88eccd5453b7f245eb42b50ae519f6d6617592bde8c2d6be148c15d3678f3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bpg.2010.04.004$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20833348$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Iris, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Knudsen, Amy B., PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brenner, Hermann, MD, MPH</creatorcontrib><title>Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening – An overview</title><title>Baillière's best practice & research. Clinical gastroenterology</title><addtitle>Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol</addtitle><description>There are several modalities available for a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program. When determining which CRC screening program to implement, the costs of such programs should be considered in comparison to the health benefits they are expected to provide. Cost-effectiveness analysis provides a tool to do this. In this paper we review the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of CRC screening. Published studies universally indicate that when compared with no CRC screening, all screening modalities provide additional years of life at a cost that is deemed acceptable by most industrialized nations. Many recent studies even find CRC screening to be cost-saving. However, when the alternative CRC screening strategies are compared against each other in an incremental cost-effectiveness analysis, no single optimal strategy emerges across the studies. There is consensus that the new technologies of stool DNA testing, computed tomographic colonography and capsule endoscopy are not yet cost-effective compared with the established CRC screening tests.</description><subject>Capsule endoscopy</subject><subject>Capsule Endoscopy - economics</subject><subject>Colonography, Computed tomographic</subject><subject>Colonography, Computed Tomographic - economics</subject><subject>Colonoscopy</subject><subject>Colonoscopy - economics</subject><subject>Colorectal cancer</subject><subject>Colorectal neoplasms</subject><subject>Colorectal Neoplasms - diagnosis</subject><subject>Colorectal Neoplasms - economics</subject><subject>Colorectal Neoplasms - prevention & control</subject><subject>Cost reduction</subject><subject>Cost-benefit analysis</subject><subject>Cost-Benefit Analysis - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Cost-Benefit Analysis - trends</subject><subject>Deoxyribonucleic acid</subject><subject>DNA</subject><subject>Early Detection of Cancer - economics</subject><subject>Early Detection of Cancer - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Early Detection of Cancer - trends</subject><subject>Feces</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gastroenterology and Hepatology</subject><subject>Genetic testing</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Intervention</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Mass screening</subject><subject>Mass Screening - economics</subject><subject>Mass Screening - methods</subject><subject>Mass Screening - trends</subject><subject>Mathematical models</subject><subject>Medical screening</subject><subject>Occult Blood</subject><subject>Quality standards</subject><subject>Quality-Adjusted Life Years</subject><subject>Sigmoidoscopy</subject><subject>Sigmoidoscopy - economics</subject><subject>Stool DNA</subject><subject>Studies</subject><issn>1521-6918</issn><issn>1532-1916</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9Ustu1DAUjRCIlsIHsEGRWLDKcP1KbCFVGo0oIFViAayvEudm8JCxBzszVXf8A3_YL8HRlAJdsPLrnCOfe05RPGewYMDq15tFt1svOOQzyAWAfFCcMiV4xQyrH857zqraMH1SPElpA5BJxjwuTjhoIYTUp8VyFdJU0TCQndyBPKVUhqG0YQwxX7VjaVtvKZbJRiLv_Lq8-fGzXPoyHCgeHF09LR4N7Zjo2e16Vny5ePt59b66_Pjuw2p5WVllzFR1piOtydpeSSW6ZuBSUSd5p6AlxcxQ93XNGmV415O2vK87YlJbpnpRN3oQZ8X5UXe377bUW_JTbEfcRbdt4zWG1uG_L959xXU4IDfCgDBZ4NWtQAzf95Qm3LpkaRxbT2GfsFESQDEFGfnyHnIT9tFnd8hA8EYarnlGsSPKxpBSpOHuLwxwzgc3mPPBOR8EiTmfzHnxt4k7xu9AMuDNEUB5lHm8EZN1lBPo3ZwH9sH9V_78HtuOzjvbjt_omtIfF5g4An6aCzL3g-VqgMqefgFDO7Zr</recordid><startdate>20100801</startdate><enddate>20100801</enddate><creator>Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Iris, PhD</creator><creator>Knudsen, Amy B., PhD</creator><creator>Brenner, Hermann, MD, MPH</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><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>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20100801</creationdate><title>Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening – An overview</title><author>Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Iris, PhD ; Knudsen, Amy B., PhD ; Brenner, Hermann, MD, MPH</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c599t-b9be88eccd5453b7f245eb42b50ae519f6d6617592bde8c2d6be148c15d3678f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>Capsule endoscopy</topic><topic>Capsule Endoscopy - economics</topic><topic>Colonography, Computed tomographic</topic><topic>Colonography, Computed Tomographic - economics</topic><topic>Colonoscopy</topic><topic>Colonoscopy - economics</topic><topic>Colorectal cancer</topic><topic>Colorectal neoplasms</topic><topic>Colorectal Neoplasms - diagnosis</topic><topic>Colorectal Neoplasms - economics</topic><topic>Colorectal Neoplasms - prevention & control</topic><topic>Cost reduction</topic><topic>Cost-benefit analysis</topic><topic>Cost-Benefit Analysis - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Cost-Benefit Analysis - trends</topic><topic>Deoxyribonucleic acid</topic><topic>DNA</topic><topic>Early Detection of Cancer - economics</topic><topic>Early Detection of Cancer - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Early Detection of Cancer - trends</topic><topic>Feces</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gastroenterology and Hepatology</topic><topic>Genetic testing</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Intervention</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Mass screening</topic><topic>Mass Screening - economics</topic><topic>Mass Screening - methods</topic><topic>Mass Screening - trends</topic><topic>Mathematical models</topic><topic>Medical screening</topic><topic>Occult Blood</topic><topic>Quality standards</topic><topic>Quality-Adjusted Life Years</topic><topic>Sigmoidoscopy</topic><topic>Sigmoidoscopy - economics</topic><topic>Stool DNA</topic><topic>Studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Iris, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Knudsen, Amy B., PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brenner, Hermann, MD, MPH</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Baillière's best practice & research. Clinical gastroenterology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Iris, PhD</au><au>Knudsen, Amy B., PhD</au><au>Brenner, Hermann, MD, MPH</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening – An overview</atitle><jtitle>Baillière's best practice & research. Clinical gastroenterology</jtitle><addtitle>Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol</addtitle><date>2010-08-01</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>24</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>439</spage><epage>449</epage><pages>439-449</pages><issn>1521-6918</issn><eissn>1532-1916</eissn><coden>BPRCB6</coden><abstract>There are several modalities available for a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program. When determining which CRC screening program to implement, the costs of such programs should be considered in comparison to the health benefits they are expected to provide. Cost-effectiveness analysis provides a tool to do this. In this paper we review the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of CRC screening. Published studies universally indicate that when compared with no CRC screening, all screening modalities provide additional years of life at a cost that is deemed acceptable by most industrialized nations. Many recent studies even find CRC screening to be cost-saving. However, when the alternative CRC screening strategies are compared against each other in an incremental cost-effectiveness analysis, no single optimal strategy emerges across the studies. There is consensus that the new technologies of stool DNA testing, computed tomographic colonography and capsule endoscopy are not yet cost-effective compared with the established CRC screening tests.</abstract><cop>Netherlands</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>20833348</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.bpg.2010.04.004</doi><tpages>11</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1521-6918 |
| ispartof | Baillière's best practice & research. Clinical gastroenterology, 2010-08, Vol.24 (4), p.439-449 |
| issn | 1521-6918 1532-1916 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_2939039 |
| source | MEDLINE; ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present) |
| subjects | Capsule endoscopy Capsule Endoscopy - economics Colonography, Computed tomographic Colonography, Computed Tomographic - economics Colonoscopy Colonoscopy - economics Colorectal cancer Colorectal neoplasms Colorectal Neoplasms - diagnosis Colorectal Neoplasms - economics Colorectal Neoplasms - prevention & control Cost reduction Cost-benefit analysis Cost-Benefit Analysis - statistics & numerical data Cost-Benefit Analysis - trends Deoxyribonucleic acid DNA Early Detection of Cancer - economics Early Detection of Cancer - statistics & numerical data Early Detection of Cancer - trends Feces Female Gastroenterology and Hepatology Genetic testing Humans Intervention Male Mass screening Mass Screening - economics Mass Screening - methods Mass Screening - trends Mathematical models Medical screening Occult Blood Quality standards Quality-Adjusted Life Years Sigmoidoscopy Sigmoidoscopy - economics Stool DNA Studies |
| title | Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening – An overview |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T22%3A52%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Cost-effectiveness%20of%20colorectal%20cancer%20screening%20%E2%80%93%20An%20overview&rft.jtitle=Bailli%C3%A8re's%20best%20practice%20&%20research.%20Clinical%20gastroenterology&rft.au=Lansdorp-Vogelaar,%20Iris,%20PhD&rft.date=2010-08-01&rft.volume=24&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=439&rft.epage=449&rft.pages=439-449&rft.issn=1521-6918&rft.eissn=1532-1916&rft.coden=BPRCB6&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.bpg.2010.04.004&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E754005150%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1032749282&rft_id=info:pmid/20833348&rft_els_id=1_s2_0_S1521691810000582&rfr_iscdi=true |