Projected effect of fecal immunochemical test threshold for colorectal cancer screening on outcomes and costs for Canada using the OncoSim microsimulation model

Coldman, Andrew J.; Flanagan, W. Michael; Nadeau, Claude; Wolfson, Michael; Memon, S.; Gauvreau, Cindy L.; Miller, Anthony B.; Earle, Craig C.

doi:10.1016/j.jcpo.2017.07.004

Cited by 13 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Most of the studies were conducted in Europe (n = 12; 36,4%) [20–31], followed by United States (n = 8; 24,2%) [32–39] and Asia (n = 8; 24,2%) [40–47]. Of the remaining studies, two (6,1%) were conducted in South America [48,49] two in Canada [50,51] and one in Australia (3%) [52]. In line with the scope of the review, the population included in the studies consisted of individuals at average risk of CRC, from the general population (naïve members of the general population, general average-risk population or asymptomatic members of the general population).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most of the studies used a health care payer (n = 14; 42,4%) [21,23–31,41,42,44,52] or a third-party payer perspective (n = 14; 42,4%) [20,22,34,36–39,43,45,46,48–51]; perspective was not reported in four studies (12,1%)[33,35,40,47]; while only one study used a societal perspective (3%)[33].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Regarding the reporting of setting and location, 39% (n = 13) of the studies did not state relevant aspects of the system in which the decision regarding the adoption of the CRC screening strategy had to be made. Only 30% (n = 10) of the studies adequately reported this item, complicating the interpretation of the study findings [21–24,28,31,37,39,43,51].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Only 52% (n = 17) of the studies adequately reported comparators assessed. The remaining 48% (n = 16), although providing information regarding the CRC screening strategies evaluated, did not state the reasons for their choice [22,27,29,30,32–36,38,44–46,48,49,51].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Economic evaluations of screening strategies for the early detection of colorectal cancer in the average-risk population: A systematic literature review

Mendívil

Appierto²,

Aceituno³

et al. 2019

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) screening has proven effective in reducing CRC mortality. This study aimed to systematically review, and evaluate the reporting quality, of the economic evidence regarding CRC screening in average-risk individuals.MethodsDatabases searched included Medline, EMBASE, National Health Service Economic Evaluation, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Cost-Effectiveness Analysis registry, EconLit, and Health Technology Assessment database. Eligible studies were cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses comparing CRC screening strategies in average-risk individuals, published in English or Spanish, between January 2012 and November 2018. Reporting quality was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist.ResultsOf 1,993 publications initially retrieved, 477 were excluded by duplicate review, 1,449 by title/abstract review, and 34 by full-text review. Finally, 33 publications were included in the qualitative synthesis. Most studies were conducted in Europe (36,4%), followed by United States (24,2%) and Asia (24,2%). The main screening modalities considered were fecal immunochemical tests (70%), colonoscopy (67%), guaiac fecal occult blood test (42%) and flexible sigmoidoscopy (30%). In most studies, CRC screening was deemed cost-effective compared to no screening. Sensitivity analyses indicated that cost of CRC screening tests, adherence to screening, screening test sensitivity, and cost of CRC treatment had the greatest impact on cost-effectiveness results across studies. The majority of studies (73%) adequately reported at least 50% of the items included in the CHEERS checklist. Least well reported items included setting, study perspective, discount rate, model choice, and methods to identify effectiveness data or to estimate resource use and costs.ConclusionsCRC screening is an efficient alternative to no screening. Nevertheless, it is not possible to conclude which strategy should be preferred for population-based screening programs. Although we observed an overall good adherence to CHEERS recommendations, there is still room for improvement in economic evaluations reporting in this field.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Economic evaluations of screening strategies for the early detection of colorectal cancer in the average-risk population: A systematic literature review

Mendívil

Appierto²,

Aceituno³

et al. 2019

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Additionally, peer-reviewed publication of model results, including comparisons with other modelling results, is encouraged from both internal and external users [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10] . As newer data emerge, the model is used to compare past projections to current real-world data, thus continually assessing its ability to accurately project future events.…”

Section: Validationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The OncoSim Model: Development and Use for Better Decision-Making in Canadian Cancer Control

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Canadian Partnership Against Cancer was created in 2007 by the federal government to accelerate cancer control across Canada. Its OncoSim microsimulation model platform, which consists of a suite of specific cancer models, was conceived as a tool to augment conventional resources for population-level policy-and decision-making. The Canadian Partnership Against Cancer manages the OncoSim program, with funding from Health Canada and model development by Statistics Canada.Microsimulation modelling allows for the detailed capture of population heterogeneity and health and demographic history over time. Extensive data from multiple Canadian sources were used as inputs or to validate the model. OncoSim has been validated through expert consultation; assessments of face validity, internal validity, and external validity; and model fit against observed data. The platform comprises three in-depth cancer models (lung, colorectal, cervical), with another in-depth model (breast) and a generalized model (25 cancers) being in development. Unique among models of its class, OncoSim is available online for public sector use free of charge. Users can customize input values and output display, and extensive user support is provided.OncoSim has been used to support decision-making at the national and jurisdictional levels. Although simulation studies are generally not included in hierarchies of evidence, they are integral to informing cancer control policy when clinical studies are not feasible. OncoSim can evaluate complex intervention scenarios for multiple cancers.Canadian decision-makers thus have a powerful tool to assess the costs, benefits, cost-effectiveness, and budgetary effects of cancer control interventions when faced with difficult choices for improvements in population health and resource allocation.

show abstract

Participatory simulation modeling to inform colorectal cancer screening in a complex remote northern health system: Canada’s Northwest Territories

Smith

Yong

Kandola³

et al. 2021

International Journal of Medical Informatics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Projected effect of fecal immunochemical test threshold for colorectal cancer screening on outcomes and costs for Canada using the OncoSim microsimulation model

Cited by 13 publications

References 53 publications

Economic evaluations of screening strategies for the early detection of colorectal cancer in the average-risk population: A systematic literature review

Economic evaluations of screening strategies for the early detection of colorectal cancer in the average-risk population: A systematic literature review

The OncoSim Model: Development and Use for Better Decision-Making in Canadian Cancer Control

Participatory simulation modeling to inform colorectal cancer screening in a complex remote northern health system: Canada’s Northwest Territories

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About