将多种癌症早期检测 (MCED) 测试与标准癌症筛查相结合:系统动力学模型开发与可行性测试。

IF 2 Q2 ECONOMICS PharmacoEconomics Open Pub Date : 2024-10-18 DOI:10.1007/s41669-024-00533-3
Mussab Fagery, Hadi A Khorshidi, Stephen Q Wong, Özge Karanfil, Jon Emery, Maarten J IJzerman
{"title":"将多种癌症早期检测 (MCED) 测试与标准癌症筛查相结合:系统动力学模型开发与可行性测试。","authors":"Mussab Fagery, Hadi A Khorshidi, Stephen Q Wong, Özge Karanfil, Jon Emery, Maarten J IJzerman","doi":"10.1007/s41669-024-00533-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cancer screening plays a critical role in early disease detection and improving outcomes. In Australia, established screening protocols for colorectal, breast and cervical cancer have significantly contributed to timely cancer detection. However, the recent introduction of multi-cancer early detection (MCED) tests arguably can disrupt current screening, yet the extent to which these tests provide additional benefits remains uncertain. We present the development and initial validation of a system dynamics (SD) model that estimates the additional cancer detections and costs associated with MCED tests.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>This article describes the development of a simulation model built to evaluate the additional patient diagnoses and the economic impact of incorporating MCED testing alongside Australia's well-established standard of care (SOC) screening programs for colorectal, breast, cervical and lung cancers. The model was designed to estimate the additional number of patients diagnosed at each cancer stage (stage I, II, III, IV, or unknown) and the associated costs. This simulation model allows for the analysis of multiple scenarios under a plausible set of assumptions regarding population-level participation rates.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An SD model was developed to represent the existing SOC national cancer screening pathways and to integrate potential clinical pathways that could be introduced by MCED tests. The SD model was built to investigate three scenarios for the use of MCED testing: firstly, to explore the viability of MCED testing as a substitute among individuals who are not opting for SOC screening for any reason; secondly, to implement MCED testing exclusively for individuals ineligible for SOC screening, yet have high-risk characteristics; and thirdly, to employ MCED testing after SOC screening to serve as a triaging/confirmatory tool for individuals receiving inconclusive test results. The three primary scenarios were constructed by varying diagnostic accuracy and uptake rates of MCED tests.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The clinical utility and outcomes of MCED testing for screening and early detection still lack comprehensive evidence. Nonetheless, this simulation model facilitates a thorough analysis of MCED tests within the Australian healthcare context, providing insights into potential additional detections and costs to the healthcare system, which may help prioritise future evidence development. The adaptable yet novel SD model presented herein is anticipated to be of considerable interest to industry, policymakers, consumers and clinicians involved in informing clinical and economic decisions regarding integrating MCED tests as cancer screening and early detection tools. The expected results of applying this SD model will determine whether using MCED testing in conjunction with SOC screening offers any potential benefits, possibly guiding policy decisions and clinical practices towards the adoption of MCED tests.</p>","PeriodicalId":19770,"journal":{"name":"PharmacoEconomics Open","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Integrating Multi-Cancer Early Detection (MCED) Tests with Standard Cancer Screening: System Dynamics Model Development and Feasibility Testing.\",\"authors\":\"Mussab Fagery, Hadi A Khorshidi, Stephen Q Wong, Özge Karanfil, Jon Emery, Maarten J IJzerman\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s41669-024-00533-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cancer screening plays a critical role in early disease detection and improving outcomes. In Australia, established screening protocols for colorectal, breast and cervical cancer have significantly contributed to timely cancer detection. However, the recent introduction of multi-cancer early detection (MCED) tests arguably can disrupt current screening, yet the extent to which these tests provide additional benefits remains uncertain. We present the development and initial validation of a system dynamics (SD) model that estimates the additional cancer detections and costs associated with MCED tests.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>This article describes the development of a simulation model built to evaluate the additional patient diagnoses and the economic impact of incorporating MCED testing alongside Australia's well-established standard of care (SOC) screening programs for colorectal, breast, cervical and lung cancers. The model was designed to estimate the additional number of patients diagnosed at each cancer stage (stage I, II, III, IV, or unknown) and the associated costs. This simulation model allows for the analysis of multiple scenarios under a plausible set of assumptions regarding population-level participation rates.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An SD model was developed to represent the existing SOC national cancer screening pathways and to integrate potential clinical pathways that could be introduced by MCED tests. The SD model was built to investigate three scenarios for the use of MCED testing: firstly, to explore the viability of MCED testing as a substitute among individuals who are not opting for SOC screening for any reason; secondly, to implement MCED testing exclusively for individuals ineligible for SOC screening, yet have high-risk characteristics; and thirdly, to employ MCED testing after SOC screening to serve as a triaging/confirmatory tool for individuals receiving inconclusive test results. The three primary scenarios were constructed by varying diagnostic accuracy and uptake rates of MCED tests.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The clinical utility and outcomes of MCED testing for screening and early detection still lack comprehensive evidence. Nonetheless, this simulation model facilitates a thorough analysis of MCED tests within the Australian healthcare context, providing insights into potential additional detections and costs to the healthcare system, which may help prioritise future evidence development. The adaptable yet novel SD model presented herein is anticipated to be of considerable interest to industry, policymakers, consumers and clinicians involved in informing clinical and economic decisions regarding integrating MCED tests as cancer screening and early detection tools. The expected results of applying this SD model will determine whether using MCED testing in conjunction with SOC screening offers any potential benefits, possibly guiding policy decisions and clinical practices towards the adoption of MCED tests.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19770,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PharmacoEconomics Open\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PharmacoEconomics Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s41669-024-00533-3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PharmacoEconomics Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s41669-024-00533-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:癌症筛查在早期疾病检测和改善预后方面发挥着至关重要的作用。在澳大利亚,既定的结直肠癌、乳腺癌和宫颈癌筛查方案为及时发现癌症做出了巨大贡献。然而,最近推出的多种癌症早期检测(MCED)试验可能会扰乱目前的筛查工作,但这些试验能在多大程度上带来额外的益处仍不确定。本文介绍了一个系统动力学(SD)模型的开发和初步验证过程,该模型可估算出与MCED检测相关的额外癌症检测率和成本。目的:本文介绍了一个模拟模型的开发过程,该模型旨在评估在澳大利亚成熟的大肠癌、乳腺癌、宫颈癌和肺癌标准治疗(SOC)筛查项目中加入MCED检测所带来的额外患者诊断率和经济影响。该模型旨在估算在每个癌症阶段(I 期、II 期、III 期、IV 期或未知期)诊断出的新增患者人数及相关费用。该模拟模型允许在一组关于人口参与率的合理假设下对多种情况进行分析:开发了一个 SD 模型来代表现有的 SOC 国家癌症筛查路径,并整合了 MCED 检测可能引入的潜在临床路径。建立自毁模型的目的是研究使用MCED检测的三种情况:第一,探讨MCED检测作为因任何原因不选择SOC筛查的个体的替代品的可行性;第二,专门针对不符合SOC筛查条件但具有高风险特征的个体实施MCED检测;第三,在SOC筛查后使用MCED检测,作为对检测结果不确定的个体进行分流/确认的工具。通过改变 MCED 检测的诊断准确率和接受率,构建了三种主要方案:讨论:MCED 测试在筛查和早期检测方面的临床效用和结果仍缺乏全面的证据。尽管如此,该模拟模型有助于在澳大利亚医疗保健背景下对MCED测试进行全面分析,深入了解潜在的额外检测结果和医疗保健系统的成本,这可能有助于确定未来证据开发的优先次序。本文介绍的这一适应性强且新颖的可持续发展模型预计会引起业界、政策制定者、消费者和临床医生的浓厚兴趣,他们会参与到有关将 MCED 试验整合为癌症筛查和早期检测工具的临床和经济决策中来。应用该可持续发展模型的预期结果将确定将 MCED 检测与 SOC 筛查结合使用是否会带来任何潜在的益处,从而为采用 MCED 检测的政策决策和临床实践提供指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Integrating Multi-Cancer Early Detection (MCED) Tests with Standard Cancer Screening: System Dynamics Model Development and Feasibility Testing.

Background: Cancer screening plays a critical role in early disease detection and improving outcomes. In Australia, established screening protocols for colorectal, breast and cervical cancer have significantly contributed to timely cancer detection. However, the recent introduction of multi-cancer early detection (MCED) tests arguably can disrupt current screening, yet the extent to which these tests provide additional benefits remains uncertain. We present the development and initial validation of a system dynamics (SD) model that estimates the additional cancer detections and costs associated with MCED tests.

Aim: This article describes the development of a simulation model built to evaluate the additional patient diagnoses and the economic impact of incorporating MCED testing alongside Australia's well-established standard of care (SOC) screening programs for colorectal, breast, cervical and lung cancers. The model was designed to estimate the additional number of patients diagnosed at each cancer stage (stage I, II, III, IV, or unknown) and the associated costs. This simulation model allows for the analysis of multiple scenarios under a plausible set of assumptions regarding population-level participation rates.

Methods: An SD model was developed to represent the existing SOC national cancer screening pathways and to integrate potential clinical pathways that could be introduced by MCED tests. The SD model was built to investigate three scenarios for the use of MCED testing: firstly, to explore the viability of MCED testing as a substitute among individuals who are not opting for SOC screening for any reason; secondly, to implement MCED testing exclusively for individuals ineligible for SOC screening, yet have high-risk characteristics; and thirdly, to employ MCED testing after SOC screening to serve as a triaging/confirmatory tool for individuals receiving inconclusive test results. The three primary scenarios were constructed by varying diagnostic accuracy and uptake rates of MCED tests.

Discussion: The clinical utility and outcomes of MCED testing for screening and early detection still lack comprehensive evidence. Nonetheless, this simulation model facilitates a thorough analysis of MCED tests within the Australian healthcare context, providing insights into potential additional detections and costs to the healthcare system, which may help prioritise future evidence development. The adaptable yet novel SD model presented herein is anticipated to be of considerable interest to industry, policymakers, consumers and clinicians involved in informing clinical and economic decisions regarding integrating MCED tests as cancer screening and early detection tools. The expected results of applying this SD model will determine whether using MCED testing in conjunction with SOC screening offers any potential benefits, possibly guiding policy decisions and clinical practices towards the adoption of MCED tests.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
64
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: PharmacoEconomics - Open focuses on applied research on the economic implications and health outcomes associated with drugs, devices and other healthcare interventions. The journal includes, but is not limited to, the following research areas:Economic analysis of healthcare interventionsHealth outcomes researchCost-of-illness studiesQuality-of-life studiesAdditional digital features (including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations) can be published with articles; these are designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. In addition, articles published in PharmacoEconomics -Open may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand important medical advances.All manuscripts are subject to peer review by international experts. Letters to the Editor are welcomed and will be considered for publication.
期刊最新文献
Costs of Adverse Events in Patients with Advanced or Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma with First-Line Treatment. Digital Versus Paper-Based Consent from the UK NHS Perspective: A Micro-costing Analysis. Correction: Cost-Effectiveness of Dupilumab and Oral Janus Kinase Inhibitors for the Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis in Singapore. Publisher Correction: Health Technology Assessment Reports for Non-Oncology Medications in Canada from 2018 to 2022: Methodological Critiques on Manufacturers' Submissions and a Comparison Between Manufacturer and Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) Analyses. Comparison of Two Financial Incentives to Encourage the Use of Adalimumab Biosimilars: Results of a French Experiment Close to Clinicians.
×
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:481959085
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