Cost-effectiveness of a multitarget stool DNA test for colorectal cancer screening of Medicare beneficiaries

被引:35
|
作者
Naber, Steffie K. [1 ]
Knudsen, Amy B. [2 ]
Zauber, Ann G. [3 ]
Rutter, Carolyn M. [4 ]
Fischer, Sara E. [3 ,7 ]
Pabiniak, Chester J. [5 ]
Soto, Brittany [3 ,8 ]
Kuntz, Karen M. [6 ]
Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Iris [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Med Ctr Rotterdam, Erasmus MC, Dept Publ Hlth, Rotterdam, Netherlands
[2] Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Inst Technol Assessment, Boston, MA 02114 USA
[3] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dept Epidemiol & Biostat, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY 10021 USA
[4] RAND Corp, Santa Monica, CA USA
[5] Kaiser Permanente, Washington Hlth Res Inst, Seattle, WA USA
[6] Univ Minnesota, Div Hlth Policy & Management, Sch Publ Hlth, Minneapolis, MN USA
[7] Georgetown Univ, Washington, DC USA
[8] CVS Hlth, Woonsocket, RI USA
来源
PLOS ONE | 2019年 / 14卷 / 09期
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
OCCULT BLOOD-TEST; RANDOMIZED-CLINICAL-TRIAL; FLEXIBLE SIGMOIDOSCOPY; UNITED-STATES; TASK-FORCE; FOLLOW-UP; ROUNDS; COLONOSCOPY; POLYP; MORTALITY;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0220234
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Background In 2014, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) began covering a multitarget stool DNA (mtSDNA) test for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening of Medicare beneficiaries. In this study, we evaluated whether mtSDNA testing is a cost-effective alternative to other CRC screening strategies reimbursed by CMS, and if not, under what conditions it could be. Methods We use three independently-developed microsimulation models to simulate a cohort of previously unscreened US 65-year-olds who are screened with triennial mtSDNA testing, or one of six other reimbursed screening strategies. Main outcome measures are discounted life-years gained (LYG) and lifetime costs (CMS perspective), threshold reimbursement rates, and threshold adherence rates. Outcomes are expressed as the median and range across models. Results Compared to no screening, triennial mtSDNA screening resulted in 82 (range: 79-88) LYG per 1,000 simulated individuals. This was more than for five-yearly sigmoidoscopy (80 (range: 71-89) LYG), but fewer than for every other simulated strategy. At its 2017 reimbursement rate of $512, mtSDNA was the most costly strategy, and even if adherence were 30% higher than with other strategies, it would not be a cost-effective alternative. At a substantially reduced reimbursement rate ($6-18), two models found that triennial mtSDNA testing was an efficient and potentially cost-effective screening option. Conclusions Compared to no screening, triennial mtSDNA screening reduces CRC incidence and mortality at acceptable costs. However, compared to nearly all other CRC screening strategies reimbursed by CMS it is less effective and considerably more costly, making it an inefficient screening option.
引用
收藏
页数:20
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Colorectal Cancer Screening With the Multitarget Stool DNA Test
    Kisiel, John B.
    Limburg, Paul J.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2020, 115 (11): : 1737 - 1740
  • [2] A novel multitarget stool DNA test for colorectal cancer screening
    Malik, Pramod
    [J]. POSTGRADUATE MEDICINE, 2016, 128 (02) : 268 - 272
  • [3] COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF WAIVING ALL COPAYMENTS FOR COLORECTAL CANCER SCREENING AMONG MEDICARE BENEFICIARIES
    Peterse, Elisabeth F.
    Meester, Reinier
    Gini, Andrea
    Berger, Franklin G.
    Zauber, Ann G.
    Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Iris
    [J]. GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2017, 152 (05) : S174 - S175
  • [4] Stool DNA Testing to Screen for Colorectal Cancer in the Medicare Population A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
    Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Iris
    Kuntz, Karen M.
    Knudsen, Amy B.
    Wilschut, Janneke A.
    Zauber, Ann G.
    van Ballegooijen, Marjolein
    [J]. ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2010, 153 (06) : 368 - 377
  • [5] Comparative Effectiveness and Cost Effectiveness of a Multitarget Stool DNA Test to Screen for Colorectal Neoplasia
    Ladabaum, Uri
    Mannalithara, Ajitha
    [J]. GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2016, 151 (03) : 427 - +
  • [6] Early Adoption of a Multitarget Stool DNA Test for Colorectal Cancer Screening
    Rutten, Lila J. Finney
    Jacobson, Robert M.
    Wilson, Patrick M.
    Jacobson, Debra J.
    Fan, Chun
    Kisiel, John B.
    Sweetser, Seth
    Tulledge-Scheitel, Sidna M.
    St Sauver, Jennifer L.
    [J]. MAYO CLINIC PROCEEDINGS, 2017, 92 (05) : 726 - 733
  • [7] Retrospective Review of Multitarget Stool DNA as a Screening Test for Colorectal Cancer
    Kleinschmidt, Thomas K.
    Clements, Austin
    Parker, Mark A.
    Scarcliff, Steven D.
    [J]. AMERICAN SURGEON, 2023, 89 (04) : 603 - 606
  • [8] Multitarget Stool RNA Test for Colorectal Cancer Screening
    Barnell, Erica K.
    Wurtzler, Elizabeth M.
    La Rocca, Julie
    Fitzgerald, Thomas
    Petrone, Jessica
    Hao, Yansheng
    Kang, Yiming
    Holmes, Faith L.
    Lieberman, David A.
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2023, 330 (18): : 1760 - 1768
  • [9] Disparities in Rates of Multitarget Stool DNA Test Completion for Colorectal Cancer Screening
    Dong, Jeffrey
    Said, Hyder
    Miller, Samuel J.
    Systrom, Hannah K.
    Feuerstein, Joseph D.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2024, 58 (08) : 805 - 809
  • [10] Next-Generation Multitarget Stool DNA Test for Colorectal Cancer Screening
    Imperiale, Thomas F.
    Porter, Kyle
    Zella, Julia
    Gagrat, Zubin D.
    Olson, Marilyn C.
    Statz, Sandi
    Garces, Jorge
    Lavin, Philip T.
    Aguilar, Humberto
    Brinberg, Don
    Berkelhammer, Charles
    Kisiel, John B.
    Limburg, Paul J.
    [J]. NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2024, 390 (11): : 984 - 993