Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28733262›Full record

ArticleClinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association2018

Cost-effectiveness of High-performance Biomarker Tests vs Fecal Immunochemical Test for Noninvasive Colorectal Cancer Screening.

Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar, S Lucas Goede, Linda J W Bosch, Veerle Melotte, Beatriz Carvalho, Manon van Engeland, Gerrit A Meijer, Harry J de Koning, Marjolein van Ballegooijen

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. A Scoping Review on Calibration Methods for Cancer Simulation Models.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Surveillance in Hodgkin Lymphoma Survivors Treated with Procarbazine and/or Infradiaphragmatic Radiotherapy.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Iris Lansdorp-VogelaarDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: i.vogelaar@erasmusmc.nl.
S Lucas GoedeDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Linda J W BoschDepartment of Pathology, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Veerle MelotteDepartment of Pathology, GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Beatriz CarvalhoDepartment of Pathology, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Manon van EngelandDepartment of Pathology, GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Gerrit A MeijerDepartment of Pathology, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Harry J de KoningDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Marjolein van BallegooijenDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Erasmus University Rotterdam · NLThe Netherlands Cancer Institute · NLMaastricht University Medical Centre · NLErasmus MC · NL

Funding

Comparative Modeling of Colorectal Cancer: Informing Health Policies and Prioritizing Future ResearchU01CA199335 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INST CAN RESEARCH · PI KUNTZ, KAREN M, LANSDORP-VOGELAAR, IRIS · 2015 to 2019
$5.5M
Modeling Effective Health Policies for Colorectal CancerU01CA152959 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INST CAN RESEARCH · PI KUNTZ, KAREN M, LANSDORP-VOGELAAR, IRIS · 2010 to 2014
$5.4M
Modeling Effective Health Policies for Colorectal CancerU01CA097426 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI ZAUBER, ANN GRAHAM · 2002 to 2010
$2.2M
Coordinating Center for Colorectal MicrosimulationU01CA115953 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI ZAUBER, ANN GRAHAM · 2005 to 2009
$1.1M
NCI NIH HHS U01 CA097426NCI NIH HHS U01 CA115953NCI NIH HHS U01 CA152959NCI NIH HHS U01 CA199335
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND &

aimsBiomarker assays could increase the accuracy of noninvasive detection of colorectal cancer (CRC); fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) are estimated to miss 27%-47% of CRCs and 70%-80% of advanced adenomas per round of screening. We investigated the conditions under which biomarker screens would be cost-effective compared with FIT screens of average-risk individuals.

methodsWe used the MISCAN-Colon microsimulation model to estimate the effects of various CRC screening test characteristics on life-years gained (LYG) and; age-specific all-cause mortality was based on the 2010 Dutch life tables. Simulated CRC incidence rate and CRC stage distribution were calibrated to observed data in The Netherlands from 1999 through 2003 (before opportunities for screening). Survival rates after diagnosis of CRC at an age younger than 75 years were based on CRC relative survival data from 1985 through 2004; survival for individuals diagnosed at an age of 75 years or older was adjusted to fit the observed age-increasing mortality/incidence ratio. We modeled FIT along with hypothetical biomarker tests with different test performance levels. For each biomarker test we calculated the maximum unit cost for the test to be cost-effective compared with FIT, assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of €50,000 ($56,000) per LYG.

resultsBiennial FIT screening of subjects 55-75 years old provided 84.9 LYG at a cost of €122,000 ($137,000) per 1000 participants. Considering a unit cost of €7 ($8) for FIT (including kit and analysis only, excluding organizational costs), a biomarker test that detects CRC with higher levels of specificity and sensitivity (100%) and advanced adenomas at a proportionally higher level of sensitivity (53%) should never exceed a cost of €51 ($57). The threshold cost could increase to more than €200 ($224) for high-performing biomarker tests in cases of limited colonoscopy capacity or higher uptake of this test.

conclusionsBy using the MISCAN-Colon microsimulation model to estimate effects of CRC screening tests, we found that for a biomarker test with increased overall performance to be cost-effective, it should not exceed 7-fold the unit cost of FIT. This maximum would increase substantially if colonoscopy becomes more expensive or scarce, or if the new test has higher screening uptake. These values could be used to estimate the added value of new biomarkers compared with current FIT screening.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkers, TumorColorectal NeoplasmsDiagnostic Tests, RoutineEarly Detection of CancerFecesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedModels, StatisticalNetherlandsSurvival AnalysisBiomarkers, TumorColon CancerComputer SimulationEarly DetectionMolecular

Identifiers

PMID28733262
PMCPMC5773413
OpenAlexW2739064726

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.