Economic evaluations of screening strategies for the early detection of colorectal cancer in the average-risk population: a systematic literature review
MetadataShow full item record
Background Colorectal 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. Methods Databases 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. Results Of 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. Conclusions CRC 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.
Is part ofPlos One, 2019, vol. 14, num. 12, e0227251
European research projects
The following license files are associated with this item:
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as cc-by (c) Mendivil, Joan et al., 2019
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
Assessment of the effects of decision aids about breast cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis Martínez Alonso, Montserrat; Carles Lavila, Misericordia; Pérez Lacasta, María José; Pons Rodríguez, Anna; Garcia, Montse; Rué i Monné, Montserrat (BMJ Publishing Group, 2017)The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies is to assess the effect of decision aids (DAs) in women aged 50 and below facing the decision to be ...
Blanch, Jordi; Sala i Serra, Maria; Román Expósito, Marta; Ederra, M.; Salas, Dolores; Zubizarreta, Raquel; Sánchez-Jacob, Mercedes; Rué i Monné, Montserrat; Castells, Xavier (Springer Verlag, 2013)Background There is little information on the individual risk of screen-detected cancer in women over successive participations. This study aimed to estimate the 10-year cumulative breast cancer detection risk ...
Impact of risk factors on different interval cancer subtypes in a population-based breast cancer screening programme Blanch, Jordi; Sala i Serra, Maria; Ibáñez, Josefa; Domingo, Laia; Fernández, Belén; Otegi, Arantza; Barata, Teresa; Zubizarreta, Raquel; Ferrer, Joana; Castells, Xavier; Rué i Monné, Montserrat; Salas, Dolores; Interval Cancer Study Group (Public Library of Science, 2014-10-21)Background: Interval cancers are primary breast cancers diagnosed in women after a negative screening test and before the next screening invitation. Our aim was to evaluate risk factors for interval cancer and their subtypes ...