Cargando…

Yield and Cost-effectiveness of Computed Tomography Colonography Versus Colonoscopy for Post Colorectal Cancer Surveillance

Purpose. As part of a clinical trial comparing the utility of computed tomographic colonography (CTC) and optical colonoscopy (OC) for post colorectal cancer resection surveillance, we explored the diagnostic yield and costs of a strategy of CTC followed by OC if a polyp is observed (abbreviated CTC...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Beck, J. Robert, Ross, Eric A., Kuntz, Karen M., Popp, Jonah, Zauber, Ann G., Bland, Joseph, Weinberg, David S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8855404/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35187245
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2381468318810515
_version_ 1784653645167460352
author Beck, J. Robert
Ross, Eric A.
Kuntz, Karen M.
Popp, Jonah
Zauber, Ann G.
Bland, Joseph
Weinberg, David S.
author_facet Beck, J. Robert
Ross, Eric A.
Kuntz, Karen M.
Popp, Jonah
Zauber, Ann G.
Bland, Joseph
Weinberg, David S.
author_sort Beck, J. Robert
collection PubMed
description Purpose. As part of a clinical trial comparing the utility of computed tomographic colonography (CTC) and optical colonoscopy (OC) for post colorectal cancer resection surveillance, we explored the diagnostic yield and costs of a strategy of CTC followed by OC if a polyp is observed (abbreviated CTC_S), versus OC 1 year following curative bowel resection, using the detection of actionable polyps on OC as the criterion. Methods. Using data from 231 patients who underwent same-day CTC followed by OC, we created a decision tree that outlined the choices and outcomes at 1-year clinical follow-up. Colorectal polyp prevalence, sensitivity, and specificity of CTC were compared with five exemplary studies and meta-analyses. Detection criteria were derived for ≥6 mm or ≥10 mm polyps. OC was the gold standard. Costs were gleaned from cataloging components of the cases at the principal investigator’s institution. Analyses included marginal cost of the OC strategy to detect additional actionable polyps and number of polyps missed per 10,000 patients. Results. At our prevalence of 0.156 for ≥6 mm (0.043 ≥10 mm), CTC_S would miss 779 ≥6 mm actionable polyps per 10,000 patients (≥10 mm: 173 per 10,000). Cost to detect an additional ≥6 mm polyp in this cohort is $5,700 (≥10 mm: $28,000). Sensitivity analyses demonstrate that any improvement in performance characteristics would raise the cost of OC to detect more actionable polyps. Similar results were seen using Medicare costs, or when literature values were used for performance characteristics. Conclusion. At an action threshold of ≥6 mm, OC costs at least $5,700 per extra polyp detected relative to CTC_S in patients undergoing surveillance after colorectal cancer surgery, on the order of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios found for other clinical problems involving short-term events.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8855404
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88554042022-02-19 Yield and Cost-effectiveness of Computed Tomography Colonography Versus Colonoscopy for Post Colorectal Cancer Surveillance Beck, J. Robert Ross, Eric A. Kuntz, Karen M. Popp, Jonah Zauber, Ann G. Bland, Joseph Weinberg, David S. MDM Policy Pract Original Article Purpose. As part of a clinical trial comparing the utility of computed tomographic colonography (CTC) and optical colonoscopy (OC) for post colorectal cancer resection surveillance, we explored the diagnostic yield and costs of a strategy of CTC followed by OC if a polyp is observed (abbreviated CTC_S), versus OC 1 year following curative bowel resection, using the detection of actionable polyps on OC as the criterion. Methods. Using data from 231 patients who underwent same-day CTC followed by OC, we created a decision tree that outlined the choices and outcomes at 1-year clinical follow-up. Colorectal polyp prevalence, sensitivity, and specificity of CTC were compared with five exemplary studies and meta-analyses. Detection criteria were derived for ≥6 mm or ≥10 mm polyps. OC was the gold standard. Costs were gleaned from cataloging components of the cases at the principal investigator’s institution. Analyses included marginal cost of the OC strategy to detect additional actionable polyps and number of polyps missed per 10,000 patients. Results. At our prevalence of 0.156 for ≥6 mm (0.043 ≥10 mm), CTC_S would miss 779 ≥6 mm actionable polyps per 10,000 patients (≥10 mm: 173 per 10,000). Cost to detect an additional ≥6 mm polyp in this cohort is $5,700 (≥10 mm: $28,000). Sensitivity analyses demonstrate that any improvement in performance characteristics would raise the cost of OC to detect more actionable polyps. Similar results were seen using Medicare costs, or when literature values were used for performance characteristics. Conclusion. At an action threshold of ≥6 mm, OC costs at least $5,700 per extra polyp detected relative to CTC_S in patients undergoing surveillance after colorectal cancer surgery, on the order of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios found for other clinical problems involving short-term events. SAGE Publications 2018-11-22 /pmc/articles/PMC8855404/ /pubmed/35187245 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2381468318810515 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Original Article
Beck, J. Robert
Ross, Eric A.
Kuntz, Karen M.
Popp, Jonah
Zauber, Ann G.
Bland, Joseph
Weinberg, David S.
Yield and Cost-effectiveness of Computed Tomography Colonography Versus Colonoscopy for Post Colorectal Cancer Surveillance
title Yield and Cost-effectiveness of Computed Tomography Colonography Versus Colonoscopy for Post Colorectal Cancer Surveillance
title_full Yield and Cost-effectiveness of Computed Tomography Colonography Versus Colonoscopy for Post Colorectal Cancer Surveillance
title_fullStr Yield and Cost-effectiveness of Computed Tomography Colonography Versus Colonoscopy for Post Colorectal Cancer Surveillance
title_full_unstemmed Yield and Cost-effectiveness of Computed Tomography Colonography Versus Colonoscopy for Post Colorectal Cancer Surveillance
title_short Yield and Cost-effectiveness of Computed Tomography Colonography Versus Colonoscopy for Post Colorectal Cancer Surveillance
title_sort yield and cost-effectiveness of computed tomography colonography versus colonoscopy for post colorectal cancer surveillance
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8855404/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35187245
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2381468318810515
work_keys_str_mv AT beckjrobert yieldandcosteffectivenessofcomputedtomographycolonographyversuscolonoscopyforpostcolorectalcancersurveillance
AT rosserica yieldandcosteffectivenessofcomputedtomographycolonographyversuscolonoscopyforpostcolorectalcancersurveillance
AT kuntzkarenm yieldandcosteffectivenessofcomputedtomographycolonographyversuscolonoscopyforpostcolorectalcancersurveillance
AT poppjonah yieldandcosteffectivenessofcomputedtomographycolonographyversuscolonoscopyforpostcolorectalcancersurveillance
AT zauberanng yieldandcosteffectivenessofcomputedtomographycolonographyversuscolonoscopyforpostcolorectalcancersurveillance
AT blandjoseph yieldandcosteffectivenessofcomputedtomographycolonographyversuscolonoscopyforpostcolorectalcancersurveillance
AT weinbergdavids yieldandcosteffectivenessofcomputedtomographycolonographyversuscolonoscopyforpostcolorectalcancersurveillance