Cargando…
Colorectal Cancer Screening within Colonoscopy Capacity Constraints: Can FIT-Based Programs Save More Lives by Trading off More Sensitive Test Cutoffs against Longer Screening Intervals?
Introduction. Colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention programs using fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) in screening rely on colonoscopy for secondary and surveillance testing. Colonoscopy capacity is an important constraint. Some European programs lack sufficient capacity to provide optimal screening in...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9091364/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35573867 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23814683221097064 |
_version_ | 1784704904691974144 |
---|---|
author | McFerran, Ethna O’Mahony, James F. Naber, Steffie Sharp, Linda Zauber, Ann G. Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Iris Kee, Frank |
author_facet | McFerran, Ethna O’Mahony, James F. Naber, Steffie Sharp, Linda Zauber, Ann G. Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Iris Kee, Frank |
author_sort | McFerran, Ethna |
collection | PubMed |
description | Introduction. Colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention programs using fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) in screening rely on colonoscopy for secondary and surveillance testing. Colonoscopy capacity is an important constraint. Some European programs lack sufficient capacity to provide optimal screening intensity regarding age ranges, intervals, and FIT cutoffs. It is currently unclear how to optimize programs within colonoscopy capacity constraints. Design. Microsimulation modeling, using the MISCAN-Colon model, was used to determine if more effective CRC screening programs can be identified within constrained colonoscopy capacity. A total of 525 strategies were modeled and compared, varying 3 key screening parameters: screening intervals, age ranges, and FIT cutoffs, including previously unevaluated 4- and 5-year screening intervals (using a lifetime horizon and 100% adherence). Results were compared with the policy decisions taken in Ireland to provide CRC screening within available colonoscopy capacity. Outcomes estimated net costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and required colonoscopies. The optimal strategies within finite colonoscopy capacity constraints were identified. Results. Combining a reduced FIT cutoff of 10 µg Hb/g, an extended screening interval of 4 y and an age range of 60–72 y requires 6% fewer colonoscopies, reduces net costs by 23% while preventing 15% more CRC deaths and saving 16% more QALYs relative to a strategy (FIT 40 µg Hb/g, 2-yearly, 60–70 year) approximating current policy. Conclusion. Previously overlooked longer screening intervals may optimize cancer prevention with finite colonoscopy capacity constraints. Changes could save lives, reduce costs, and relieve colonoscopy capacity pressures. These findings are relevant to CRC screening programs across Europe that employ FIT-based testing, which face colonoscopy capacity constraints. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9091364 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-90913642022-05-12 Colorectal Cancer Screening within Colonoscopy Capacity Constraints: Can FIT-Based Programs Save More Lives by Trading off More Sensitive Test Cutoffs against Longer Screening Intervals? McFerran, Ethna O’Mahony, James F. Naber, Steffie Sharp, Linda Zauber, Ann G. Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Iris Kee, Frank MDM Policy Pract Original Research Article Introduction. Colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention programs using fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) in screening rely on colonoscopy for secondary and surveillance testing. Colonoscopy capacity is an important constraint. Some European programs lack sufficient capacity to provide optimal screening intensity regarding age ranges, intervals, and FIT cutoffs. It is currently unclear how to optimize programs within colonoscopy capacity constraints. Design. Microsimulation modeling, using the MISCAN-Colon model, was used to determine if more effective CRC screening programs can be identified within constrained colonoscopy capacity. A total of 525 strategies were modeled and compared, varying 3 key screening parameters: screening intervals, age ranges, and FIT cutoffs, including previously unevaluated 4- and 5-year screening intervals (using a lifetime horizon and 100% adherence). Results were compared with the policy decisions taken in Ireland to provide CRC screening within available colonoscopy capacity. Outcomes estimated net costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and required colonoscopies. The optimal strategies within finite colonoscopy capacity constraints were identified. Results. Combining a reduced FIT cutoff of 10 µg Hb/g, an extended screening interval of 4 y and an age range of 60–72 y requires 6% fewer colonoscopies, reduces net costs by 23% while preventing 15% more CRC deaths and saving 16% more QALYs relative to a strategy (FIT 40 µg Hb/g, 2-yearly, 60–70 year) approximating current policy. Conclusion. Previously overlooked longer screening intervals may optimize cancer prevention with finite colonoscopy capacity constraints. Changes could save lives, reduce costs, and relieve colonoscopy capacity pressures. These findings are relevant to CRC screening programs across Europe that employ FIT-based testing, which face colonoscopy capacity constraints. SAGE Publications 2022-05-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9091364/ /pubmed/35573867 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23814683221097064 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any 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 Research Article McFerran, Ethna O’Mahony, James F. Naber, Steffie Sharp, Linda Zauber, Ann G. Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Iris Kee, Frank Colorectal Cancer Screening within Colonoscopy Capacity Constraints: Can FIT-Based Programs Save More Lives by Trading off More Sensitive Test Cutoffs against Longer Screening Intervals? |
title | Colorectal Cancer Screening within Colonoscopy Capacity Constraints:
Can FIT-Based Programs Save More Lives by Trading off More Sensitive Test
Cutoffs against Longer Screening Intervals? |
title_full | Colorectal Cancer Screening within Colonoscopy Capacity Constraints:
Can FIT-Based Programs Save More Lives by Trading off More Sensitive Test
Cutoffs against Longer Screening Intervals? |
title_fullStr | Colorectal Cancer Screening within Colonoscopy Capacity Constraints:
Can FIT-Based Programs Save More Lives by Trading off More Sensitive Test
Cutoffs against Longer Screening Intervals? |
title_full_unstemmed | Colorectal Cancer Screening within Colonoscopy Capacity Constraints:
Can FIT-Based Programs Save More Lives by Trading off More Sensitive Test
Cutoffs against Longer Screening Intervals? |
title_short | Colorectal Cancer Screening within Colonoscopy Capacity Constraints:
Can FIT-Based Programs Save More Lives by Trading off More Sensitive Test
Cutoffs against Longer Screening Intervals? |
title_sort | colorectal cancer screening within colonoscopy capacity constraints:
can fit-based programs save more lives by trading off more sensitive test
cutoffs against longer screening intervals? |
topic | Original Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9091364/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35573867 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23814683221097064 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mcferranethna colorectalcancerscreeningwithincolonoscopycapacityconstraintscanfitbasedprogramssavemorelivesbytradingoffmoresensitivetestcutoffsagainstlongerscreeningintervals AT omahonyjamesf colorectalcancerscreeningwithincolonoscopycapacityconstraintscanfitbasedprogramssavemorelivesbytradingoffmoresensitivetestcutoffsagainstlongerscreeningintervals AT nabersteffie colorectalcancerscreeningwithincolonoscopycapacityconstraintscanfitbasedprogramssavemorelivesbytradingoffmoresensitivetestcutoffsagainstlongerscreeningintervals AT sharplinda colorectalcancerscreeningwithincolonoscopycapacityconstraintscanfitbasedprogramssavemorelivesbytradingoffmoresensitivetestcutoffsagainstlongerscreeningintervals AT zauberanng colorectalcancerscreeningwithincolonoscopycapacityconstraintscanfitbasedprogramssavemorelivesbytradingoffmoresensitivetestcutoffsagainstlongerscreeningintervals AT lansdorpvogelaariris colorectalcancerscreeningwithincolonoscopycapacityconstraintscanfitbasedprogramssavemorelivesbytradingoffmoresensitivetestcutoffsagainstlongerscreeningintervals AT keefrank colorectalcancerscreeningwithincolonoscopycapacityconstraintscanfitbasedprogramssavemorelivesbytradingoffmoresensitivetestcutoffsagainstlongerscreeningintervals |