Comparative Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of a Urine Test versus Alternative Colorectal Cancer Screening Strategies

Barichello, Scott; Nguyen, Thanh Cong; Deng, Lu; Loomes, Dustin E.; Kirwin, Erin; Wang, Haili; Svenson, Larry; Fedorak, Richard N.

doi:10.14309/00000434-201810001-00268

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…An analysis of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of PolypDx™ test every 2 years, in comparison to screening strategies such as colonoscopy every 10 years, annual gFOBT, and annual FIT, was performed in 2018 by Barichello et al [ 113 ]. They found that despite the higher cost (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) at $46,783 vs. $51,616, $29,568, and $31,008 respectively), the metabolomics-based urine screening strategy compared with the other techniques was the most effective method.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards Novel Non-Invasive Colorectal Cancer Screening Methods: A Comprehensive Review

Ferrari

Neefs

Hoeck

et al. 2021

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the leading cancer-related causes of death in the world. Since the 70s, many countries have adopted different CRC screening programs, which has resulted in a decrease in mortality. However, current screening test options still present downsides. The commercialized stool-based tests present high false-positive rates and low sensitivity, which negatively affects the detection of early stage carcinogenesis. The gold standard colonoscopy has low uptake due to its invasiveness and the perception of discomfort and embarrassment that the procedure may bring. In this review, we collected and described the latest data about alternative CRC screening techniques that can overcome these disadvantages. Web of Science and PubMed were employed as search engines for studies reporting on CRC screening tests and future perspectives. The searches generated 555 articles, of which 93 titles were selected. Finally, a total of 50 studies, describing 14 different CRC alternative tests, were included. Among the investigated techniques, the main feature that could have an impact on CRC screening perception and uptake was the ease of sample collection. Urine, exhaled breath, and blood-based tests promise to achieve good diagnostic performance (sensitivity of 63–100%, 90–95%, and 47–97%, respectively) while minimizing stress and discomfort for the patient.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%