Prevention, screening and treatment of colorectal cancer: a global and regional generalized cost effectiveness analysis

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Regional generalized cost-effectiveness estimates of prevention, screening and treatment interventions for colorectal cancer are presented.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Standardised WHO-CHOICE methodology was used. A...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Johns Benjamin P, Lauer Jeremy A, Lim Stephen S, Ginsberg Gary M, Sepulveda Cecilia R
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2010-03-01
Series:Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
Online Access:http://www.resource-allocation.com/content/8/1/2
id doaj-3614a4f7c31d4a33aea4aa3cc7d843e4
record_format Article
spelling doaj-3614a4f7c31d4a33aea4aa3cc7d843e42020-11-25T01:13:43ZengBMCCost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation1478-75472010-03-0181210.1186/1478-7547-8-2Prevention, screening and treatment of colorectal cancer: a global and regional generalized cost effectiveness analysisJohns Benjamin PLauer Jeremy ALim Stephen SGinsberg Gary MSepulveda Cecilia R<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Regional generalized cost-effectiveness estimates of prevention, screening and treatment interventions for colorectal cancer are presented.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Standardised WHO-CHOICE methodology was used. A colorectal cancer model was employed to provide estimates of screening and treatment effectiveness. Intervention effectiveness was determined via a population state-transition model (PopMod) that simulates the evolution of a sub-regional population accounting for births, deaths and disease epidemiology. Economic costs of procedures and treatment were estimated, including programme overhead and training costs.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In regions characterised by high income, low mortality and high existing treatment coverage, the addition of screening to the current high treatment levels is very cost-effective, although no particular intervention stands out in cost-effectiveness terms relative to the others.</p> <p>In regions characterised by low income, low mortality with existing treatment coverage around 50%, expanding treatment with or without screening is cost-effective or very cost-effective. Abandoning treatment in favour of screening (no treatment scenario) would not be cost effective.</p> <p>In regions characterised by low income, high mortality and low treatment levels, the most cost-effective intervention is expanding treatment.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>From a cost-effectiveness standpoint, screening programmes should be expanded in developed regions and treatment programmes should be established for colorectal cancer in regions with low treatment coverage.</p> http://www.resource-allocation.com/content/8/1/2
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Johns Benjamin P
Lauer Jeremy A
Lim Stephen S
Ginsberg Gary M
Sepulveda Cecilia R
spellingShingle Johns Benjamin P
Lauer Jeremy A
Lim Stephen S
Ginsberg Gary M
Sepulveda Cecilia R
Prevention, screening and treatment of colorectal cancer: a global and regional generalized cost effectiveness analysis
Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
author_facet Johns Benjamin P
Lauer Jeremy A
Lim Stephen S
Ginsberg Gary M
Sepulveda Cecilia R
author_sort Johns Benjamin P
title Prevention, screening and treatment of colorectal cancer: a global and regional generalized cost effectiveness analysis
title_short Prevention, screening and treatment of colorectal cancer: a global and regional generalized cost effectiveness analysis
title_full Prevention, screening and treatment of colorectal cancer: a global and regional generalized cost effectiveness analysis
title_fullStr Prevention, screening and treatment of colorectal cancer: a global and regional generalized cost effectiveness analysis
title_full_unstemmed Prevention, screening and treatment of colorectal cancer: a global and regional generalized cost effectiveness analysis
title_sort prevention, screening and treatment of colorectal cancer: a global and regional generalized cost effectiveness analysis
publisher BMC
series Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
issn 1478-7547
publishDate 2010-03-01
description <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Regional generalized cost-effectiveness estimates of prevention, screening and treatment interventions for colorectal cancer are presented.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Standardised WHO-CHOICE methodology was used. A colorectal cancer model was employed to provide estimates of screening and treatment effectiveness. Intervention effectiveness was determined via a population state-transition model (PopMod) that simulates the evolution of a sub-regional population accounting for births, deaths and disease epidemiology. Economic costs of procedures and treatment were estimated, including programme overhead and training costs.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In regions characterised by high income, low mortality and high existing treatment coverage, the addition of screening to the current high treatment levels is very cost-effective, although no particular intervention stands out in cost-effectiveness terms relative to the others.</p> <p>In regions characterised by low income, low mortality with existing treatment coverage around 50%, expanding treatment with or without screening is cost-effective or very cost-effective. Abandoning treatment in favour of screening (no treatment scenario) would not be cost effective.</p> <p>In regions characterised by low income, high mortality and low treatment levels, the most cost-effective intervention is expanding treatment.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>From a cost-effectiveness standpoint, screening programmes should be expanded in developed regions and treatment programmes should be established for colorectal cancer in regions with low treatment coverage.</p>
url http://www.resource-allocation.com/content/8/1/2
work_keys_str_mv AT johnsbenjaminp preventionscreeningandtreatmentofcolorectalcanceraglobalandregionalgeneralizedcosteffectivenessanalysis
AT lauerjeremya preventionscreeningandtreatmentofcolorectalcanceraglobalandregionalgeneralizedcosteffectivenessanalysis
AT limstephens preventionscreeningandtreatmentofcolorectalcanceraglobalandregionalgeneralizedcosteffectivenessanalysis
AT ginsberggarym preventionscreeningandtreatmentofcolorectalcanceraglobalandregionalgeneralizedcosteffectivenessanalysis
AT sepulvedaceciliar preventionscreeningandtreatmentofcolorectalcanceraglobalandregionalgeneralizedcosteffectivenessanalysis
_version_ 1725160515183837184