Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review

References

• Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(6):394–424. doi:10.3322/caac.2149230207593
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vekic B, Dragojevic-Simic V, Jakovljevic M, et al. A correlation study of the colorectal cancer statistics and economic indicators in selected Balkan countries. Front Public Health. 2020;8:29. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2020.0002932133335
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Albreht T, Conroy F, Dalmas M, et al. European Guide for Quality National Cancer Control Programmes. Ljubljana, Slovenia: National Institute of Public Health; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• European Council. Council recommendation of 2 December 2003 on cancer screening (2003/878/EC). Off J Eur Union. 2003;327.
   Google Scholar
• Keshvari-Shad F, Hajebrahimi S, Laguna Pes M, et al. A systematic review of screening tests for chronic kidney disease: an accuracy analysis. Galen Medical J. 2020;9:e1573. doi:10.31661/gmj.v9i0.1573
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schoenfeld P. Quality in colorectal cancer screening with colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2020;30(3):541–551. doi:10.1016/j.giec.2020.02.01432439087
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ouyang DL, Getzenberg RH, Schoen RE. Noninvasive testing for colorectal cancer: a review. Am J Gastroenterol. 2005;100(6):1393–1403. doi:10.1111/j.1572-0241.2005.41427.x15929776
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Redwood D, Asay E, Roberts D, et al. Comparison of fecal occult blood tests for colorectal cancer screening in an Alaska Native population with high prevalence of Helicobacter pylori infection, 2008–2012. Prev Chronic Dis. 2014;11. doi:10.5888/pcd11.130281
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Imperiale TF, Itzkowitz SH, Levin TR, et al. Multitarget stool DNA testing for colorectal-cancer screening. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(14):1287–1297. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa131119424645800
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Administration USFaD. FDA approves first non-invasive DNA screening test for colorectal cancer. 2014 Available from: http://wwwfdagov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm409021htm.
   Google Scholar
• Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4:1. doi:10.1186/2046-4053-4-125554246
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions [Internet]. 2018 Available from: http://handbook–5–1.cochrane.org/webcite.
   Google Scholar
• International prospective register of systematic reviews. 11 February 2018. ID:CRD42018081676V. Available from: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/.
   Google Scholar
• Smith H, Varshoei P, Boushey R, Kuziemsky C. Use of simulation modeling to inform decision making for health care systems and policy in colorectal cancer screening: protocol for a systematic review. JMIR Res Protoc. 2020;9(5):e16103–e16103. doi:10.2196/1610332401223
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heydari M, Yousefi M, Derakhshani N, Khodayari-Zarnaq R. Factors affecting the satisfaction of medical tourists: a systematic review. Health Scope. 2019;8(3):e80359. doi:10.5812/jhealthscope.80359
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pignone M, Saha S, Hoerger T, Mandelblatt J. Cost-effectiveness analyses of colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137:96–104.12118964
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology (NCCN guidelines). CNS Cancer Ver. 2011;2:19–21.
   Google Scholar
• Table W. Threshold values for intervention cost-effectiveness by region. 2014 Available from: http://www.who.int/choice/costs/CER_levels/en/.
   Google Scholar
• Ladabaum U. Cost-effectiveness of current colorectal cancer screening tests. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2020;30(3):479–497. doi:10.1016/j.giec.2020.02.00532439083
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Institute for Clinical and Economic Review. Overview of the ICER value assessment framework and update for 2017–2019. 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Mf D. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. 3rd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Wong CK, Lam CL, Wan YF, Fong DY. Cost-effectiveness simulation and analysis of colorectal cancer screening in Hong Kong Chinese population: comparison amongst colonoscopy, guaiac and immunologic fecal occult blood testing. BMC Cancer. 2015;15:705. doi:10.1186/s12885-015-1730-y26471036
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dinh T, Ladabaum U, Alperin P, Caldwell C, Smith R, Levin TR. Health benefits and cost-effectiveness of a hybrid screening strategy for colorectal cancer. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013;11(9):1158–1166. doi:10.1016/j.cgh.2013.03.01323542330
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ladabaum U, Mannalithara A. Comparative effectiveness and cost effectiveness of a multitarget stool DNA test to screen for colorectal neoplasia. Gastroenterology. 2016;151:427–439. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2016.06.00327311556
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharaf RN, Ladabaum U. Comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of screening colonoscopy vs. sigmoidoscopy and alternative strategies. Am J Gastroenterol. 2013;108:120–132. doi:10.1038/ajg.2012.38023247579
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharp L, Tilson L, Whyte S, et al. Cost-effectiveness of population-based screening for colorectal cancer: a comparison of guaiac-based faecal occult blood testing, faecal immunochemical testing and flexible sigmoidoscopy. Br J Cancer. 2012;106:805–816. doi:10.1038/bjc.2011.58022343624
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dan YY, Chuah BY, Koh DC, Yeoh KG. Screening based on risk for colorectal cancer is the most cost-effective approach. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012;10(3):266–271.e261–266. doi:10.1016/j.cgh.2011.11.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kingsley J, Karanth S, Revere FL, Agrawal D. Cost effectiveness of screening colonoscopy depends on adequate bowel preparation rates - A modeling study. PLoS One. 2016;11(12):e0167452. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.016745227936028
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wong MC, Ching JY, Chan VC, et al. Colorectal cancer screening based on age and gender: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Medicine. 2016;95(10):e2739. doi:10.1097/MD.000000000000273926962772
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097
   Google Scholar