ArticleGastroenterology2015
Personalizing colonoscopy screening for elderly individuals based on screening history, cancer risk, and comorbidity status could increase cost effectiveness.
Article in Gastroenterology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02027545 (Promoting Veteran-Centered Colorectal Cancer Screening), which is not on this map. Cited by 37 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Promoting Veteran-Centered Colorectal Cancer Screening
Who cites it
37 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The role of health economic evidence in clinical practice guidelines for colorectal cancer: a comparative analysis across countries.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2025Pooled it
- AGA Clinical Practice Update on Risk Stratification for Colorectal Cancer Screening and Post-Polypectomy Surveillance: Expert Review.Gastroenterology · 2023Guideline
- Pooled it
- Effect of a Patient Decision Aid on Preferences for Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Older Adults: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2022Trial
- The influence of multi-morbidities on colorectal cancer screening recommendations and completion.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2021Trial
- Article
- Optimal Stopping Ages for Colorectal Cancer Screening.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Surveillance colonoscopy findings in asymptomatic participants over 75 years of age.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2024Article
- Article
- Incident Cancer Risk and Signatures Among Older MUTYH Carriers: Analysis of Population-Based and Genomic Cohorts.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2022Article
- Risk-stratified strategies in population screening for colorectal cancer.International journal of cancer · 2022Review
- Factors Associated With Low-Value Cancer Screenings in the Veterans Health Administration.JAMA network open · 2021Article
- Gene-Specific Variation in Colorectal Cancer Surveillance Strategies for Lynch Syndrome.Gastroenterology · 2021Article
- The Optimal Age to Stop Endoscopic Surveillance of Patients With Barrett's Esophagus Based on Sex and Comorbidity: A Comparative Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.Gastroenterology · 2021Article
- What Should We Recommend for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Adults Aged 75 and Older?Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2021Review
- Screening History and Comorbidities Help Refine Stop Ages for Colorectal Cancer Screening.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2021Article
- Calculation of Stop Ages for Colorectal Cancer Screening Based on Comorbidities and Screening History.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2021Article
- Comparing the Cost-Effectiveness of Innovative Colorectal Cancer Screening Tests.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2021Article
- Right sided colorectal cancer increases with age and screening should be tailored to reflect this: a national cancer database study.Techniques in coloproctology · 2021Article
- Root-cause analyses of missed opportunities for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer in patients with inflammatory bowel disease.Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND &
aimsColorectal cancer (CRC) screening decisions for elderly individuals are often made primarily on the basis of age, whereas other factors that influence the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of screening are often not considered. We investigated the relative importance of factors that could be used to identify elderly individuals most likely to benefit from CRC screening and determined the maximum ages at which screening remains cost effective based on these factors.
methodsWe used a microsimulation model (Microsimulation Screening Analysis-Colon) calibrated to the incidence of CRC in the United States and the prevalence of adenomas reported in autopsy studies to determine the appropriate age at which to stop colonoscopy screening in 19,200 cohorts (of 10 million individuals), defined by sex, race, screening history, background risk for CRC, and comorbidity status. We applied a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained.
resultsLess intensive screening history, higher background risk for CRC, and fewer comorbidities were associated with cost-effective screening at older ages. Sex and race had only a small effect on the appropriate age to stop screening. For some individuals likely to be screened in current practice (for example, 74-year-old white women with moderate comorbidities, half the average background risk for CRC, and negative findings from a screening colonoscopy 10 years previously), screening resulted in a loss of QALYs, rather than a gain. For some individuals unlikely to be screened in current practice (for example, 81-year-old black men with no comorbidities, an average background risk for CRC, and no previous screening), screening was highly cost effective. Although screening some previously screened, low-risk individuals was not cost effective even when they were 66 years old, screening some healthy, high-risk individuals remained cost effective until they reached the age of 88 years old.
conclusionsThe current approach to CRC screening in elderly individuals, in which decisions are often based primarily on age, is inefficient, resulting in underuse of screening for some and overuse of screening for others. CRC screening could be more effective and cost effective if individual factors for each patient are considered.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.