Is Risk-Stratifying Patients with Colorectal Cancer Using a Deep Learning-Based Prognostic Biomarker Cost-Effective?

OBJECTIVES: Accurate risk stratification of patients with stage II and III colorectal cancer (CRC) prior to treatment selection enables limited health resources to be efficiently allocated to patients who are likely to benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. We aimed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of a recently developed deep learning-based prognostic method, Histotyping, from the perspective of the Norwegian healthcare system. METHODS: Two partitioned survival models were developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of Histotyping for two treatment cohorts: patients with CRC stage II and III. For each of the two cohorts, Histotyping was used for risk stratification to assign adjuvant chemotherapy and was compared with the standard of care (SOC) (adjuvant chemotherapy to all patients). Health outcomes measured in the model were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and life years (LYs) gained. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to determine the impact of uncertainty. Scenario analyses were performed to assess the impact of the parameters with the greatest uncertainty. RESULTS: Risk-stratifying patients with CRC stage II and III using Histotyping was dominant (less costly and more effective) compared to SOC. In patients with CRC stage II, the net monetary benefit of Histotyping was 270,934 Norwegian kroners (NOK) (year of valuation is 2021), and the net health benefit of Histotyping was 0.99. In stage III, the net monetary benefit of Histotyping was 195,419 NOK, and the net health benefit of Histotyping was 0.71. CONCLUSIONS:  Risk-stratifying patients with CRC using Histotyping prior to the administration of adjuvant chemotherapy is likely to be a cost-effective strategy in Norway.

Quantified trends in provider reimbursement and utilization volume in colorectal cancer screenings: analysis of Medicare claims from 2000 to 2019.

AIM: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates in the United States remain persistently below guideline targets, partly due to suboptimal patient utilization and provider reimbursement. To guide long-term national utilization estimates and set reasonable screening adherence targets, this study aimed to quantify trends in utilization of and reimbursement for CRC screenings using Medicare claims. METHOD: Inflation-adjusted reimbursements and utilization volume associated with each CRC screening code were abstracted from Medicare claims between 2000 and 2019. Screenings, screenings/100 000 enrolees and reimbursement/screening were analysed with linear regression and compared with the equality of slopes tests. Average reimbursement per screening was compared using analysis of variance with Dunnett's T3 multiple comparisons test. RESULTS: The growth rate of multitarget stool DNA tests (mt-sDNA)/100 000 was the highest at 170.4 screenings/year (R2 = 0.99, p ≤ 0.001), while that of faecal occult blood tests/100 000 was the lowest at -446.4 screenings/year (R2 = 0.90, p ≤ 0.001) (p ≤ 0.001). Provider reimbursements averaged $546.95 (95% CI $520.12-$573.78) per mt-sDNA screening, significantly higher than reimbursements for all invasive screenings. Only FOBTs significantly increased in reimbursement per screening at $0.62/year (R2 = 0.91, p ≤ 0.001). CONCLUSION: We derived forecastable trend numbers for utilization and provider reimbursement. Faecal immunochemical tests/100 000 and mt-sDNA screenings/100 000 increased most rapidly during the entire study period. The number of nearly all invasive screenings/100 000 decreased rapidly; the number of colonoscopies/100 000 increased slightly, probably due to superior diagnostic strength. These trends indicate the that replacement of other invasive modalities with accessible noninvasive screenings will account for much of future screening behaviour and thus reductions in CRC incidence and mortality, especially given providers' reimbursement incentive to screen average-risk patients with stool-based tests.

Cost-utility analysis of expanding the colorectal cancer screening policy in Flanders.

OBJECTIVE: Since 2013, Flanders has introduced a screening programme for colorectal cancer for all citizens aged between 50 and 74 years. The objective of this study was to assess the cost-utility of an expansion of the colorectal cancer screening policy in Flanders (Belgium) and to place these findings in the international context. METHODS: Cost-utility analysis using high-detail data about screening participation, screening results, and epidemiological data, a Markov cohort model has been constructed to study long-term costs and effects. A cost-utility analysis was performed as a three-way comparison between current, expanded (from age 45 years), and no screening scenarios, from a societal and healthcare perspective. Robustness was assessed by both one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Analyses show that both current and expanded screening result in quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gains and are mostly cost-saving. Overall, 97.5% of Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) remained well below € 2000 per QALY for all comparisons. Parameters related to the colonoscopy that follows a positive test result such as compliance and cost are especially impactful on the cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Screening participation and screening costs have remained comparatively stable, making colorectal cancer screening a cost-effective (dominant) policy. Expanding the screen age to 45 years is also cost-effective (dominant) compared with current screening, albeit with a slimmer margin.

The Intersection of Race and Rurality and its Effect on Colorectal Cancer Survival.

INTRODUCTION: Outcomes in colorectal cancer treatment are historically worse in Black people and residents of rural areas. Purported reasons include factors such as systemic racism, poverty, lack of access to care, and social determinants of health. We sought to determine whether outcomes worsened when race and rural residence intersected. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for individuals with stage II-III colorectal cancer (2004-2018). To examine the intersectionality of race/rurality on outcomes, race (Black/White) and rurality (based on county) were combined into a single variable. Main outcome of interest was 5-year survival. Cox hazard regression analysis was performed to determine variables independently associating with survival. Control variables included age at diagnosis, sex, race, Charlson-Deyo score, insurance status, stage, and facility type. RESULTS: Of 463 948 patients, 5717 were Black-Rural, 50 742 were Black-Urban, 72 241 were White-Rural, and 33 5271 were White-Urban. Five-year mortality rate was 31.6%. Univariate Kaplan-Meier survival analysis demonstrated race-rurality was associated with overall survival (P < .001), with White-Urban having the greatest mean survival length (47.9 months) and Black-Rural with the lowest (46.7 months). Multivariable analysis found that Black-Rural (1.26, 95% confidence interval [1.20-1.32]), Black-Urban (1.16, [1.16-1.18]), and White-Rural (HR: 1.05; (1.04-1.07) had increased mortality when compared to White-Urban individuals (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Although White-Rural individuals fared worse than White-Urban, Black individuals fared worst of all, with the poorest outcomes observed in Black individuals in rural areas. This suggests that both Black race and rurality negatively affect survival, and act synergistically to further worsen outcomes.

Cancer Screening after the Adoption of Paid-Sick-Leave Mandates.

BACKGROUND: By the end of 2022, nearly 20 million workers in the United States have gained paid-sick-leave coverage from mandates that require employers to provide benefits to qualified workers, including paid time off for the use of preventive services. Although the lack of paid-sick-leave coverage may hinder access to preventive care, current evidence is insufficient to draw meaningful conclusions about its relationship to cancer screening. METHODS: We examined the association between paid-sick-leave mandates and screening for breast and colorectal cancers by comparing changes in 12- and 24-month rates of colorectal-cancer screening and mammography between workers residing in metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) that have been affected by paid-sick-leave mandates (exposed MSAs) and workers residing in unexposed MSAs. The comparisons were conducted with the use of administrative medical-claims data for approximately 2 million private-sector employees from 2012 through 2019. RESULTS: Paid-sick-leave mandates were present in 61 MSAs in our sample. Screening rates were similar in the exposed and unexposed MSAs before mandate adoption. In the adjusted analysis, cancer-screening rates were higher among workers residing in exposed MSAs than among those in unexposed MSAs by 1.31 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28 to 2.34) for 12-month colorectal cancer screening, 1.56 percentage points (95% CI, 0.33 to 2.79) for 24-month colorectal cancer screening, 1.22 percentage points (95% CI, -0.20 to 2.64) for 12-month mammography, and 2.07 percentage points (95% CI, 0.15 to 3.99) for 24-month mammography. CONCLUSIONS: In a sample of private-sector workers in the United States, cancer-screening rates were higher among those residing in MSAs exposed to paid-sick-leave mandates than among those residing in unexposed MSAs. Our results suggest that a lack of paid-sick-leave coverage presents a barrier to cancer screening. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute.).

Understanding the role of access in Hispanic cancer screening disparities.

BACKGROUND: Hispanic populations in the United States experience numerous barriers to care access. It is unclear how cancer screening disparities between Hispanic and non-Hispanic White individuals are explained by access to care, including having a usual source of care and health insurance coverage. METHODS: A secondary analysis of the 2019 National Health Interview Survey was conducted and included respondents who were sex- and age-eligible for cervical (n = 8316), breast (n = 6025), or colorectal cancer screening (n = 11,313). The proportion of ever screened and up to date for each screening type was compared.  Regression models evaluated whether controlling for reporting a usual source of care and type of health insurance (public, private, none) attenuated disparities between Hispanics and non-Hispanic White individuals. RESULTS: Hispanic individuals were less likely than non-Hispanic White individuals to be up to date with cervical cancer screening (71.6% vs. 74.6%) and colorectal cancer screening (52.9% vs. 70.3%), but up-to-date screening was similar for breast cancer (78.8% vs. 76.3%). Hispanic individuals (vs. non-Hispanic White) were less likely to have a usual source of care (77.9% vs. 86.0%) and more likely to be uninsured (23.6% vs. 7.1%). In regressions, insurance fully attenuated cervical cancer disparities. Controlling for both usual source of care and insurance type explained approximately half of the colorectal cancer screening disparities (adjusted risk difference: -8.3 [-11.2 to -4.8]). CONCLUSION: Addressing the high rate of uninsurance among Hispanic individuals could mitigate cancer screening disparities. Future research should build on the relative successes of breast cancer screening and investigate additional barriers for colorectal cancer screening. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: This study uses data from a national survey to compare cancer screening use those who identify as Hispanic with those who identify as non-Hispanic White. Those who identify as Hispanic are much less likely to be up to date with colorectal cancer screening than those who identify as non-Hispanic White, slightly less likely to be up to date on cervical cancer screening, and similarly likely to receive breast cancer screening. Improving insurance coverage is important for health equity, as is further exploring what drives higher use of breast cancer screening and lower use of colorectal cancer screening.

The association of health insurance and race with treatment and survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Black patients and underinsured patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) present with more advanced disease and experience worse outcomes. The study aim was to evaluate the interaction of health insurance status and race with treatment and survival in metastatic CRC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients diagnosed with metastatic CRC within NCDB from 2006-2016 were included. Primary outcomes included receipt of chemotherapy and 3-year all-cause mortality. Multivariable logistic regression and Cox-regression (MVR) including a two-way interaction term of race and insurance were performed to evaluate the differential association of race and insurance with receipt of chemotherapy and mortality, respectively. RESULTS: 128,031 patients were identified; 70.6% White, 14.4% Black, 5.7% Hispanic, and 9.3% Other race. Chemotherapy use was higher among White compared to Black patients. 3-year mortality rate was higher for Blacks and lower for Hispanics, in comparison with White patients. By MVR, Black patients were less likely to receive chemotherapy. When stratified by insurance status, Black patients with private and Medicare insurance were less likely to receive chemotherapy than White patients. All-cause mortality was higher in Black patients and lower in Hispanic patients, and these differences persisted after controlling for insurance and receipt of chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Black patients and uninsured or under-insured patients with metastatic CRC are less likely to receive chemotherapy and have increased mortality. The effect of health insurance among Blacks and Whites differs, however, and improving insurance alone does not appear to fully mitigate racial disparities in treatment and outcomes.

Comparing Modeling Approaches for Discrete Event Simulations With Competing Risks Based on Censored Individual Patient Data: A Simulation Study and Illustration in Colorectal Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to provide detailed guidance on modeling approaches for implementing competing events in discrete event simulations based on censored individual patient data (IPD). METHODS: The event-specific distributions (ESDs) approach sampled times from event-specific time-to-event distributions and simulated the first event to occur. The unimodal distribution and regression approach sampled a time from a combined unimodal time-to-event distribution, representing all events, and used a (multinomial) logistic regression model to select the event to be simulated. A simulation study assessed performance in terms of relative absolute event incidence difference and relative entropy of time-to-event distributions for different types and levels of right censoring, numbers of events, distribution overlap, and sample sizes. Differences in cost-effectiveness estimates were illustrated in a colorectal cancer case study. RESULTS: Increased levels of censoring negatively affected the modeling approaches' performance. A lower number of competing events and higher overlap of distributions improved performance. When IPD were censored at random times, ESD performed best. When censoring occurred owing to a maximum follow-up time for 2 events, ESD performed better for a low level of censoring (ie, 10%). For 3 or 4 competing events, ESD better represented the probabilities of events, whereas unimodal distribution and regression better represented the time to events. Differences in cost-effectiveness estimates, both compared with no censoring and between approaches, increased with increasing censoring levels. CONCLUSIONS: Modelers should be aware of the different modeling approaches available and that selection between approaches may be informed by data characteristics. Performing and reporting extensive validation efforts remains essential to ensure IPD are appropriately represented.

Patterns of Medical Care Cost by Service Type for Patients With Recurrent and De Novo Advanced Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: There is limited knowledge about the cost patterns of patients who receive a diagnosis of de novo and recurrent advanced cancers in the United States. METHODS: Data on patients who received a diagnosis of de novo stage IV or recurrent breast, colorectal, or lung cancer between 2000 and 2012 from 3 integrated health systems were used to estimate average annual costs for total, ambulatory, inpatient, medication, and other services during (1) 12 months preceding de novo or recurrent diagnosis (preindex) and (2) diagnosis month through 11 months after (postindex), from the payer perspective. Generalized linear regression models estimated costs adjusting for patient and clinical factors. RESULTS: Patients who developed a recurrence <1 year after their initial cancer diagnosis had significantly higher total costs in the preindex period than those with recurrence ≥1 year after initial diagnosis and those with de novo stage IV disease across all cancers (all P < .05). Patients with de novo stage IV breast and colorectal cancer had significantly higher total costs in the postindex period than patients with cancer recurrent in <1 year and ≥1 year (all P < .05), respectively. Patients in de novo stage IV and those with recurrence in ≥1 year experienced significantly higher postindex costs than the preindex period (all P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings reveal distinct cost patterns between patients with de novo stage IV, recurrent <1-year, and recurrent ≥1-year cancer, suggesting unique care trajectories that may influence resource use and planning. Future cost studies among patients with advanced cancer should account for de novo versus recurrent diagnoses and timing of recurrence to obtain estimates that accurately reflect these care pattern complexities.

The Cost of Guideline Adherence: A Multicenter Analysis of the Financial Implications of Adopting the US Multi-Society Task Force Polypectomy Guidelines.

GOAL: The goal of this study was to determine the financial impact of adopting the US Multi-Society Task Force (USMSTF) polypectomy guidelines on physician reimbursement and disposable equipment costs for gastroenterologists in the academic medical center and community practice settings. BACKGROUND: In 2020, USMSTF guidelines on polypectomy were introduced with a strong recommendation for cold snare rather than cold forceps technique for removing diminutive and small polyps. Polypectomy with snare technique reimburses physicians at a higher rate compared with cold forceps and also requires different disposable equipment. The financial implications of adopting these guidelines is unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients that underwent screening colonoscopy where polypectomy was performed at an academic medical center (Loma Linda University Medical Center) and community practice medical center (Ascension Providence Hospital) between July 2018 and July 2019 were identified. The polypectomy technique performed during each procedure was determined (forceps alone, snare alone, forceps plus snare) along with the number and size of polyps as well as disposable equipment. Actual and projected provider reimbursement and disposable equipment costs were determined based on applying the new polypectomy guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 1167 patients underwent colonoscopy with polypectomy. Adhering to new guidelines would increase estimated physician reimbursement by 5.6% and 12.5% at academic and community practice sites, respectively. The mean increase in physician reimbursement per procedure was significantly higher at community practice compared with the academic setting ($29.50 vs. $14.13, P <0.00001). The mean increase in disposable equipment cost per procedure was significantly higher at the community practice setting ($6.11 vs. $1.97, P <0.00001). CONCLUSION: Adopting new polypectomy guidelines will increase physician reimbursement and equipment costs when colonoscopy with polypectomy is performed.

Economic Evaluation of Monoclonal Antibodies in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the major causes of mortality and morbidity worldwide. The median overall survival (OS) of patients with metastatic CRC (mCRC) has doubled over the last 20 years partly due to the introduction of advanced biologic therapies. However, these treatment modalities bear significant costs on healthcare systems globally, and may jeopardize their fiscal sustainability. The aim of this systematic review was to critically appraise the economic evaluations of monoclonal antibodies in mCRC. METHODOLOGY: A literature search was performed in the electronic databases of: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, EMBASE, EMBASE Alert, PUBMED, NHS Economic Evaluation and Health Technology Assessment Database for full articles published from 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2020. RESULTS: Twenty economic analyses were identified in the literature that fulfilled the inclusion criteria and evaluated the cost-effectiveness of (a) bevacizumab as first-line treatment for mCRC and as maintenance treatment, (b) cetuximab as first-line treatment, (c) panitumumab versus bevacizumab and cetuximab versus bevacizumab as first-line treatment, (d) aflibercept and ramucirumab as second-line treatment, (e) cetuximab and panitumumab as third-line treatment, (f) cetuximab versus panitumumab as later lines of treatment, and (g) RAS testing prior to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy is cost-effective as neither first-line treatment nor maintenance treatment. Sequential treatment with bevacizumab in first-line and second-line treatment was also not cost-effective. Testing for KRAS and extended RAS mutations is cost-effective and should be performed prior to anti-EGFR treatment. In the RAS wild-type subgroup of mCRCs the use of anti-EGFR (panitumumab or cetuximab) in first-line treatment leads to a more favorable cost-effectiveness profile than the corresponding anti-VEGF (bevacizumab). Cetuximab is not cost-effective as a first-line treatment. Anti-EGFR administration is not a cost-effective strategy in third-line treatment, even for RAS wild-type mCRCs, compared to best supportive care. Aflibercept was superior to ramucirumab and costed less, but neither were cost-effective compared to standard care.

Health system costs and days in hospital for colorectal cancer patients in New South Wales, Australia.

INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer (CRC) care costs the Australian healthcare system more than any other cancer. We estimated costs and days in hospital for CRC cases, stratified by site (colon/rectal cancer) and disease stage, to inform detailed analyses of CRC-related healthcare. METHODS: Incident CRC patients were identified using the Australian 45 and Up Study cohort linked with cancer registry records. We analysed linked hospital admission records, emergency department records, and reimbursement records for government-subsidised medical services and prescription medicines. Cases' health system costs (2020 Australian dollars) and hospital days were compared with those for cancer-free controls (matched by age, sex, geography, smoking) to estimate excess resources by phase of care, analysed by sociodemographic, health, and disease characteristics. RESULTS: 1200 colon and 546 rectal cancer cases were diagnosed 2006-2013, and followed up to June 2016. Eighty-nine percent of cases had surgery, chemotherapy or radiotherapy, and excess costs were predominantly for hospitalisations. Initial phase (12 months post-diagnosis) mean excess health system costs were $50,434 for colon and $60,877 for rectal cancer cases, with means of 16 and 18.5 excess hospital days, respectively. The annual continuing mean excess costs were $6,779 (colon) and $8,336 (rectal), with a mean of 2 excess hospital days each. Resources utilised (costs and days) in these phases increased with more advanced disease, comorbidities, and younger age. Mean excess costs in the year before death were $74,952 (colon) and $67,733 (rectal), with means of 34 and 30 excess hospital days, respectively-resources utilised were similar across all characteristics, apart from lower costs for cases aged ≥75 at diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Health system costs and hospital utilisation for CRC care are greater for people with more advanced disease. These findings provide a benchmark, and will help inform future cost-effectiveness analyses of potential approaches to CRC screening and treatment.

Whole Grain Intakes Are Associated with Healthcare Cost Savings Following Reductions in Risk of Colorectal Cancer and Total Cancer Mortality in Australia: A Cost-of-Illness Model.

Whole grain consumption has been associated with the reduced risk of several chronic diseases with significant healthcare monetary burden, including cancer. Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common cancers globally, with the highest rates reported in Australia. Three servings of whole grains provide a 15% reduction in total cancer and 17% reduction in CRC risk; however, 70% of Australians fall short of this level of intake. The aim of this study was to assess the potential savings in healthcare costs associated with reductions in the relative risk of CRC and total cancer mortality following the whole grain Daily Target Intake (DTI) of 48 g in Australia. A three-step cost-of-illness analysis was conducted using input parameters from: (1) estimates of current and targeted whole grain intakes among proportions (5%, 15%, 50%, and 100%) of the Australian adult (≥20 years) population; (2) estimates of reductions in relative risk (with 95% confidence intervals) of CRC and total cancer mortality associated with specific whole grain intake from meta-analysis studies; and (3) estimates of annual healthcare costs of CRC and all cancers from disease expenditure national databases. A very pessimistic (5% of population) through to universal (100% of population) adoption of the recommended DTI in Australia were shown to potentially yield savings in annual healthcare costs equal to AUD 1.9 (95% CI 1.2-2.4) to AUD 37.2 (95% CI 24.1-48.1) million for CRC and AUD 20.3 (95% CI 12.2-27.0) to AUD 405.1 (95% CI 243.1-540.1) million for total cancers. As treatment costs for CRC and other cancers are increasing, and dietary measures exchanging whole grains for refined grains are not cost preclusive nor does the approach increase energy intake, there is an opportunity to facilitate cost-savings along with reductions in disease for Australia. These results suggest specific benefits of encouraging Australians to swap refined grains for whole grains, with greater overall adherence to suggestions in dietary guidelines.

Out-of-pocket medical expenses compared across five years for patients with one of five common cancers in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Patient medical out-of-pocket expenses are thought to be rising worldwide yet data describing trends over time is scant. We evaluated trends of out-of-pocket expenses for patients in Australia with one of five major cancers in the first-year after diagnosis. METHODS: Participants from the QSKIN Sun and Health prospective cohort Study with a histologically confirmed breast, colorectal, lung, melanoma, or prostate cancer diagnosed between 2011 and 2015 were included (n = 1965). Medicare claims data on out-of-pocket expenses were analysed using a two-part model adjusted for year of diagnosis, health insurance status, age and education level. Fisher price and quantity indexes were also calculated to assess prices and volumes separately. RESULTS: On average, patients with cancer diagnosed in 2015 spent 70% more out-of-pocket on direct medical expenses than those diagnosed in 2011. Out-of-pocket expenses increased significantly for patients with breast cancer (mean AU$2513 in 2011 to AU$6802 in 2015). Out-of-pocket expenses were higher overall for individuals with private health insurance. For prostate cancer, expenses increased for those without private health insurance over time (mean AU$1586 in 2011 to AU$4748 in 2014) and remained stable for those with private health insurance (AU$4397 in 2011 to AU$5623 in 2015). There were progressive increases in prices and quantities of medical services for patients with melanoma, breast and lung cancer. For all cancers, prices increased for medicines and doctor attendances but fluctuated for other medical services. CONCLUSION: Out-of-pocket expenses for patients with cancer have increased substantially over time. Such increases were more pronounced for women with breast cancer and those without private health insurance. Increased out-of-pocket expenses arose from both higher prices and higher volumes of health services but differ by cancer type. Further efforts to monitor patient out-of-pocket costs and prevent health inequities are required.

Economic Evaluation of Web- versus Telephone-based Interventions to Simultaneously Increase Colorectal and Breast Cancer Screening Among Women.

Screening for colorectal and breast cancer is considered cost effective, but limited evidence exists on cost-effectiveness of screening promotion interventions that simultaneously target both cancers. Increasing Colorectal and Breast Cancer Screening (Project COBRA), a randomized controlled trial conducted in the community, examined the cost-effectiveness of an innovative tailored web-based intervention compared with tailored telephone counseling and usual care. Screening status at 6 months was obtained by participant surveys plus medical record reviews. Cost was prospectively measured from the patient and provider perspectives using time logs and project invoices. Relative efficiency of the interventions was quantified by the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Nonparametric bootstrapping and net benefit regression analysis were used to assess statistical uncertainty of the results. The average cost per participant to implement the Phone counseling, Web-based, and Web + Phone counseling interventions were $277, $314, and $337, respectively. Comparing Phone counseling with usual care resulted in an additional cost of $300 (95% confidence interval [CI]: $283-$320) per cancer screening test and $421 (95% CI: $400-$441) per additional person screened in the target population. Phone counseling alone was more cost-effective than the Web + Phone intervention. Web-based intervention alone was more costly but less effective than the Phone counseling. When simultaneously promoting screening for both colorectal and breast cancer the Web-based intervention was less cost-effective compared with Phone and Web + Phone strategies. The results suggest that targeting multiple cancer screening may improve the cost-effectiveness of cancer screening interventions. PREVENTION RELEVANCE: This study informs researchers, decision makers, healthcare providers, and payers about the improved cost-effectiveness of targeting multiple cancer screenings for cancer early detection programs.

Impact of assumptions on future costs, disutility and mortality in cost-effectiveness analysis; a model exploration.

INTRODUCTION: In cost-effectiveness analyses, the future costs, disutility and mortality from alternative causes of morbidity are often not completely taken into account. We explored the impact of different assumed values for each of these factors on the cost-effectiveness of screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). METHODS: Twenty different CRC screening strategies and two EAC screening strategies were evaluated using microsimulation. Average health-related expenses, disutility and mortality by age for the U.S. general population were estimated using surveys and lifetables. First, we evaluated strategies under default assumptions, with average mortality, and no accounting for health-related costs and disutility. Then, we varied costs, disutility and mortality between 100% and 150% of the estimated population averages, with 125% as the best estimate. Primary outcome was the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained among efficient strategies. RESULTS: The set of efficient strategies was robust to assumptions on future costs, disutility and mortality from other causes of morbidity. However, the incremental cost per QALY gained increased with higher assumed values. For example, for CRC, the ratio for the recommended strategy increased from $15,600 with default assumptions, to $32,600 with average assumption levels, $61,100 with 25% increased levels, and $111,100 with 50% increased levels. Similarly, for EAC, the incremental costs per QALY gained for the recommended EAC screening strategy increased from $106,300 with default assumptions to $198,300 with 50% increased assumptions. In sensitivity analyses without discounting or including only above-average expenses, the impact of assumptions was relatively smaller, but best estimates of the cost per QALY gained remained substantially higher than default estimates. CONCLUSIONS: Assumptions on future costs, utility and mortality from other causes of morbidity substantially impact cost-effectiveness outcomes of cancer screening. More empiric evidence and consensus are needed to guide assumptions in future analyses.

Medical costs according to the stages of colorectal cancer: an analysis of health insurance claims in Hachioji, Japan.

BACKGROUND: Although the effect of the early detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) on medical costs needs to be clarified, there are few reports on the actual medical costs of CRC patients in Japan. We aimed to identify medical costs according to CRC stage, using health insurance claims. METHODS: This observational study included CRC patients who had received specific treatment for CRC, which was defined by the procedure code and the claim computer processing system code associated with the treatment of CRC. CRC patients who underwent endoscopic or radical surgical treatment were defined as the curable group and those with palliative treatment, including palliative chemotherapy, as the non-curable group. Total medical costs and medical costs of specific treatments for CRC for 3 years were measured using the claims held by Hachioji City from May 2014 to July 2019. RESULTS: This study included 442 patients in the curable group, including 267 patients who underwent endoscopic treatment, and 175 patients who underwent radical surgical treatment, and 161 patients in the non-curable group. The mean (standard deviation) total medical costs in the curable and non-curable groups were 2,130 (2,494) and 8,279 (5,600) thousand Japanese Yen (JPY), respectively. The mean (standard deviation) medical costs for the specific treatment of CRC in the curable and non-curable groups were 408 (352) and 3,685 (3,479) thousand JPY, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We clarified the actual medical costs of CRC in curable and non-curable groups. These results suggest the effect of early detection of CRC in reducing medical costs.

The economic burden of colorectal cancer across Europe: a population-based cost-of-illness study.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer morbidity and mortality in Europe. We aimed to ascertain the economic burden of colorectal cancer across Europe using a population-based cost-of-illness approach. METHODS: In this population-based cost-of-illness study, we obtained 2015 activity and costing data for colorectal cancer in 33 European countries (EUR-33) from global and national sources. Country-specific aggregate data were acquired for health-care, mortality, morbidity, and informal care costs. We calculated primary, outpatient, emergency, and hospital care, and systemic anti-cancer therapy (SACT) costs, as well as the costs of premature death, temporary and permanent absence from work, and unpaid informal care due to colorectal cancer. Colorectal cancer health-care costs per case were compared with colorectal cancer survival and colorectal cancer personnel, equipment, and resources across EUR-33 using univariable and multivariable regression. We also compared hospital care and SACT costs against 2009 data for the 27 EU countries. FINDINGS: The economic burden of colorectal cancer across Europe in 2015 was €19·1 billion. The total non-health-care cost of €11·6 billion (60·6% of total economic burden) consisted of loss of productivity due to disability (€6·3 billion [33·0%]), premature death (€3·0 billion [15·9%]), and opportunity costs for informal carers (€2·2 billion [11·6%]). The €7·5 billion (39·4% of total economic burden) of direct health-care costs consisted of hospital care (€3·3 billion [43·4%] of health-care costs), SACT (€1·9 billion [25·6%]), and outpatient care (€1·3 billion [17·7%]), primary care (€0·7 billion [9·3%]), and emergency care (€0·3 billion [3·9%]). The mean cost for managing a patient with colorectal cancer varied widely between countries (€259-36 295). Hospital-care costs as a proportion of health-care costs varied considerably (24·1-84·8%), with a decrease of 21·2% from 2009 to 2015 in the EU. Overall, hospital care was the largest proportion (43·4%) of health-care expenditure, but pharmaceutical expenditure was far higher than hospital-care expenditure in some countries. Countries with similar gross domestic product per capita had widely varying health-care costs. In the EU, overall expenditure on pharmaceuticals increased by 213·7% from 2009 to 2015. INTERPRETATION: Although the data analysed include non-homogenous sources from some countries and should be interpreted with caution, this study is the most comprehensive analysis to date of the economic burden of colorectal cancer in Europe. Overall spend on health care in some countries did not seem to correspond with patient outcomes. Spending on improving outcomes must be appropriately matched to the challenges in each country, to ensure tangible benefits. Our results have major implications for guiding policy and improving outcomes for this common malignancy. FUNDING: Department for Employment and Learning of Northern Ireland, Medical Research Council, Cancer Research UK, Health Data Research UK, and DATA-CAN.

Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in Europe: Results of 1000 Neoplastic Lesions From the German Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection Registry.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) enables the curative resection of early malignant lesions and is associated with reduced recurrence risk. Due to the lack of comprehensive ESD data in the West, the German ESD registry was set up to evaluate relevant outcomes of ESD. METHODS: The German ESD registry is a prospective uncontrolled multicenter study. During a 35-month period, 20 centers included 1000 ESDs of neoplastic lesions. The results were evaluated in terms of en bloc, R0, curative resection rates, and recurrence rate after a 3-month and 12-month follow-up. Additionally, participating centers were grouped into low-volume (≤20 ESDs/y), middle-volume (20-50/y), and high-volume centers (>50/y). A multivariate analysis investigating risk factors for noncurative resection was performed. RESULTS: Overall, en bloc, R0, and curative resection rates of 92.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90-0.94), 78.8% (95% CI, 0.76-0.81), and 72.3% (95% CI, 0.69-0.75) were achieved, respectively. The overall complication rate was 8.3% (95% CI, 0.067-0.102), whereas the recurrence rate after 12 months was 2.1%. High-volume centers had significantly higher en bloc, R0, curative resection rates, and recurrence rates and lower complication rates than middle- or low-volume centers. The lesion size, hybrid ESD, age, stage T1b carcinoma, and treatment outside high-volume centers were identified as risk factors for noncurative ESD. CONCLUSION: In Germany, ESD achieves excellent en bloc resection rates but only modest curative resection rates. ESD requires a high level of expertise, and results vary significantly depending on the center's yearly case volume.