Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24737634›Full record

ArticleCancer2014

Costs and benefits of an organized fecal immunochemical test-based colorectal cancer screening program in the United States.

Gery P Guy, Lisa C Richardson, Michael P Pignone, Marcus Plescia

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05661292 (Validation of Advanced Colorectal Neoplasm Risk Categories in Screening Colonoscopy and Identification of Biomarkers in a Prospective Cohort in Mexico.), which is not on this map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT05661292 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Validation of Advanced Colorectal Neoplasm Risk Categories in Screening Colonoscopy and Identification of Biomarkers in a Prospective Cohort in Mexico.

TypeobservationalSponsorInstituto Nacional de Ciencias Medicas y Nutricion Salvador ZubiranRan2019 to 2025Enrolled2,000ConditionsColorectal Cancer ScreeningArmsFecal inmunochemical test, Colonoscopy, Optional collection of tissue, blood and urine for future biomedical research
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Community-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening in a Rural Population: Who Returns Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) Kits?The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2017
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Gery P GuyDivision of Cancer Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
Lisa C Richardson
Michael P Pignone
Marcus Plescia

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite clear recommendations and evidence linking colorectal cancer screening to lower incidence and mortality, > 40% of adults are not up to date with screening. Existing domestic and international models of organized cancer screening programs have been effective in increasing screening rates. Implementing an organized, evidence-based, national screening program may be an effective approach to increasing screening rates.

methodsIn the current study, the authors estimated the initial investment required and the cost per person screened of a nationwide fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based colorectal cancer screening program among adults aged 50 years to 75 years.

resultsThe initial additional investment required was estimated at $277.9 to $318.2 million annually, with an estimated 8.7 to 9.4 million individuals screened at a cost of $32 to $39 per person screened. The program was estimated to prevent 2900 to 3100 deaths annually.

conclusionsThe results of the current study indicate that implementing a national screening program would make a substantial public health impact at a moderate cost per person screened. Results from this analysis may provide useful information for understanding the public health benefit of an organized screening delivery system and the potential resources required to implement a nationwide colorectal cancer screening program, and help guide decisions about program planning, design, and implementation.

Indexed as

AgedColorectal NeoplasmsCost-Benefit AnalysisEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansImmunochemistryMaleMiddle AgedOccult BloodUnited Statescolorectal cancerearly detectionhealth economicspublic healthscreening

Identifiers

PMID24737634
PMCPMC4593052

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.