共 50 条
Very-low-dose aspirin and surveillance colonoscopy is cost-effective in secondary prevention of colorectal cancer in individuals with advanced adenomas: network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis
被引:3
|作者:
Veettil, Sajesh K.
[1
,2
]
Kew, Siang Tong
[3
]
Lim, Kean Ghee
[4
]
Phisalprapa, Pochamana
[5
]
Kumar, Suresh
[2
]
Lee, Yeong Yeh
[6
,7
]
Chaiyakunapruk, Nathorn
[1
,8
]
机构:
[1] Univ Utah, Dept Pharmacotherapy, Coll Pharm, 30 2000 E, Salt Lake City, UT 84112 USA
[2] Int Med Univ, Sch Pharm, Dept Pharm Practice, Kuala Lumpur 57000, Malaysia
[3] Int Med Univ, Dept Internal Med, Sch Med, Kuala Lumpur 57000, Malaysia
[4] Int Med Univ, Dept Surg, Jalan Rasah, Seremban 70300, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia
[5] Mahidol Univ, Fac Med, Dept Med, Div Ambulatory Med,Siriraj Hosp, Bangkok 10700, Thailand
[6] Univ Sains Malaysia, Sch Med Sci, Kota Baharu, Kelantan, Malaysia
[7] Natl Univ Malaysia, Fac Med, Gut Res Grp, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
[8] Monash Univ Malaysia, Sch Pharm, Subang Jaya 47500, Selangor, Malaysia
关键词:
Colorectal cancer;
Colorectal adenomas;
Chemoprevention;
Aspirin;
Surveillance colonoscopy;
Network meta-analysis;
Cost-effectiveness analysis;
TRIAL SEQUENTIAL-ANALYSIS;
TASK-FORCE;
CELECOXIB;
CALCIUM;
RISK;
CHEMOPREVENTION;
INTERVENTIONS;
RECURRENCE;
MORTALITY;
REVIEWS;
D O I:
10.1186/s12876-021-01715-7
中图分类号:
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号:
摘要:
BackgroundIndividuals with advanced colorectal adenomas (ACAs) are at high risk for colorectal cancer (CRC), and it is unclear which chemopreventive agent (CPA) is safe and cost-effective for secondary prevention. We aimed to determine, firstly, the most suitable CPA using network meta-analysis (NMA) and secondly, cost-effectiveness of CPA with or without surveillance colonoscopy (SC).MethodsSystematic review and NMA of randomised controlled trials were performed, and the most suitable CPA was chosen based on efficacy and the most favourable risk-benefit profile. The economic benefits of CPA alone, 3 yearly SC alone, and a combination of CPA and SC were determined using the cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) in the Malaysian health-care perspective. Outcomes were reported as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in 2018 US Dollars ($) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), and life-years (LYs) gained.ResultsAccording to NMA, the risk-benefit profile favours the use of aspirin at very-low-dose (ASAVLD,<= 100 mg/day) for secondary prevention in individuals with previous ACAs. Celecoxib is the most effective CPA but the cardiovascular adverse events are of concern. According to CEA, the combination strategy (ASAVLD with 3-yearly SC) was cost-saving and dominates its competitors as the best buy option. The probability of being cost-effective for ASAVLD alone, 3-yearly SC alone, and combination strategy were 22%, 26%, and 53%, respectively. Extending the SC interval to five years in combination strategy was more cost-effective when compared to 3-yearly SC alone (ICER of $484/LY gain and $1875/QALY). However, extending to ten years in combination strategy was not cost-effective.ConclusionASAVLD combined with 3-yearly SC in individuals with ACAs may be a cost-effective strategy for CRC prevention. An extension of SC intervals to five years can be considered in resource-limited countries.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文