Novel Noninvasive Tests for Colorectal Cancer Screening - A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Pub Date : 2025-07-01 DOI:10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-24-1549
Mingjun Rui, Yingcheng Wang, Joyce H S You
{"title":"Novel Noninvasive Tests for Colorectal Cancer Screening - A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.","authors":"Mingjun Rui, Yingcheng Wang, Joyce H S You","doi":"10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-24-1549","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To compare cost-effectiveness of three novel noninvasive tests [multitarget stool RNA (mt-sRNA), multitarget stool DNA 2.0, and cell-free DNA] with guideline-recommended tests for colorectal cancer screening from payer's perspective.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Outcomes of a hypothetical cohort of 100,000 individuals aged 45 years with average colorectal cancer risk (no prior colorectal cancer diagnosis, adenomatous polyps, or other disorders associated with a high lifetime risk of colorectal cancer) in the United States were simulated by a lifelong Markov model. Screening strategies included guideline-recommended strategies (colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, computed tomographic colonography, fecal immunochemical test, high-sensitivity guaiac-based fecal occult blood testing, and multitarget stool DNA), three novel noninvasive tests, and no screening. Scenario analyses on perfect (100%) and test-specific adherence (reported real-world adherence) were conducted. Outcomes included direct cost, quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All screening strategies (vs. no screening) reduced colorectal cancer cases and deaths. In the perfect adherence scenario, every-10-year colonoscopy was the preferred strategy (ICER = US$261/QALY). In the test-specific adherence scenario, every-3-year mt-sRNA was the preferred cost-effective strategy (ICER = US $95,250/QALY). Testing cost, performance, adherence, and colorectal cancer prevalence, progression rate, and utility were influential factors. Every-3-year mt-sRNA showed the highest probability (37.6%) to be cost-effective in the test-specific adherence scenario at a willingness to pay US $100,000/QALY.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>All strategies were cost-effective compared with no screening. Every-3-year mt-sRNA (preferred strategy in the real-world adherence scenario) provides a cost-effective alternative when adherence to colorectal cancer screening or follow-up was not perfect in clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Impact: </strong>This is the first study to demonstrate cost-effectiveness of novel noninvasive tests versus all guideline-recommended colorectal cancer screening tests. See related In the Spotlight, p. 1053.</p>","PeriodicalId":9458,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention","volume":" ","pages":"1111-1121"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-24-1549","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: To compare cost-effectiveness of three novel noninvasive tests [multitarget stool RNA (mt-sRNA), multitarget stool DNA 2.0, and cell-free DNA] with guideline-recommended tests for colorectal cancer screening from payer's perspective.

Methods: Outcomes of a hypothetical cohort of 100,000 individuals aged 45 years with average colorectal cancer risk (no prior colorectal cancer diagnosis, adenomatous polyps, or other disorders associated with a high lifetime risk of colorectal cancer) in the United States were simulated by a lifelong Markov model. Screening strategies included guideline-recommended strategies (colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, computed tomographic colonography, fecal immunochemical test, high-sensitivity guaiac-based fecal occult blood testing, and multitarget stool DNA), three novel noninvasive tests, and no screening. Scenario analyses on perfect (100%) and test-specific adherence (reported real-world adherence) were conducted. Outcomes included direct cost, quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER).

Results: All screening strategies (vs. no screening) reduced colorectal cancer cases and deaths. In the perfect adherence scenario, every-10-year colonoscopy was the preferred strategy (ICER = US$261/QALY). In the test-specific adherence scenario, every-3-year mt-sRNA was the preferred cost-effective strategy (ICER = US $95,250/QALY). Testing cost, performance, adherence, and colorectal cancer prevalence, progression rate, and utility were influential factors. Every-3-year mt-sRNA showed the highest probability (37.6%) to be cost-effective in the test-specific adherence scenario at a willingness to pay US $100,000/QALY.

Conclusions: All strategies were cost-effective compared with no screening. Every-3-year mt-sRNA (preferred strategy in the real-world adherence scenario) provides a cost-effective alternative when adherence to colorectal cancer screening or follow-up was not perfect in clinical practice.

Impact: This is the first study to demonstrate cost-effectiveness of novel noninvasive tests versus all guideline-recommended colorectal cancer screening tests. See related In the Spotlight, p. 1053.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
新型无创结直肠癌筛查方法的成本-效果分析
背景:从付款人的角度比较3种新型无创检测(粪便多靶点RNA (mt-sRNA)、粪便多靶点DNA 2.0 (mt-sDNA 2.0)和无细胞DNA (cf-DNA))与指南推荐的结直肠癌(CRC)筛查的成本-效果。方法:通过终身马尔可夫模型模拟美国10万名年龄为45岁、平均CRC风险(无CRC诊断、腺瘤性息肉或其他与CRC高终生风险相关的疾病)的假设队列的结果。筛查策略包括:指南推荐的策略(结肠镜检查、乙状结肠镜检查、计算机断层结肠镜检查、粪便免疫化学检查、高灵敏度愈创木粪便隐血检查、多靶点粪便DNA检查),3种新型无创检查,不筛查。对完全依从性(100%)和特定测试依从性(报告的真实世界依从性)进行情景分析。结果包括直接成本、质量调整生命年(QALYs)和增量成本-效果比(ICERs)。结果:所有筛查策略(与不筛查相比)都减少了结直肠癌病例和死亡。在完全依从的情况下,每10年进行一次结肠镜检查是首选策略(ICER= 261美元/QALY)。在特定测试依从性情况下,每3年一次的mt-sRNA是首选的成本效益策略(ICER= 95,250美元/QALY)。检测成本、性能、依从性、CRC患病率、进展率和效用是影响因素。每3年一次的mt-sRNA显示,在愿意支付10万美元/QALY的特定测试依从性方案中,具有成本效益的可能性最高(37.6%)。结论:与不筛查相比,所有策略都具有成本效益。每3年一次的mt-sRNA(在现实依从情况下的首选策略)在临床实践中对CRC筛查或随访的依从性不完善时提供了一种具有成本效益的替代方案。影响:这是第一个证明新型非侵入性检查与所有指南推荐的CRC筛查检查的成本效益的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
2.60%
发文量
538
审稿时长
1.6 months
期刊介绍: Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention publishes original peer-reviewed, population-based research on cancer etiology, prevention, surveillance, and survivorship. The following topics are of special interest: descriptive, analytical, and molecular epidemiology; biomarkers including assay development, validation, and application; chemoprevention and other types of prevention research in the context of descriptive and observational studies; the role of behavioral factors in cancer etiology and prevention; survivorship studies; risk factors; implementation science and cancer care delivery; and the science of cancer health disparities. Besides welcoming manuscripts that address individual subjects in any of the relevant disciplines, CEBP editors encourage the submission of manuscripts with a transdisciplinary approach.
期刊最新文献
Urinary Levels of Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals and Breast Density in Young Women. Evaluating Efficacy of Cervical HPV-HR DNA Testing as Alternative to PET/CT Imaging for Posttreatment Cancer Surveillance: Retrospective Proof-of-Concept Study. Food Insecurity and Clinical Biomarkers of Inflammation among Cancer Survivors in the All of Us Research Program. Highly Sensitive DNA Testing of Fusobacterium nucleatum in Colorectal Tumors. Rurality of Residence and Distance to Clinic Are Risk Factors for Non-engagement in Childhood Cancer Survivor Care.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1