ArticleGastroenterology2018
Cost Effectiveness of Age-Specific Screening Intervals for People With Family Histories of Colorectal Cancer.
Article in Gastroenterology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- AGA Clinical Practice Update on Risk Stratification for Colorectal Cancer Screening and Post-Polypectomy Surveillance: Expert Review.Gastroenterology · 2023Guideline
- Pooled it
- Colorectal Cancer Screening in Hereditary and Familial High-Risk Populations: Best Practices and Future Directions.International journal of cancer · 2026Review
- Balancing early detection and over-screening: Evaluating colonoscopy's role in shaping colorectal cancer trends in Korea.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness of population-wide genomic screening for Lynch Syndrome and polygenic risk scores to inform colorectal cancer screening.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2025Article
- Age- and sex-stratified detection rates and associated factors of colorectal neoplasia in the Tianjin colorectal cancer screening program from 2012 to 2020.BMC gastroenterology · 2023Article
- Association between A Family History of Colorectal Cancer and the Risk of Colorectal Cancer: A Nationwide Population-Based Study.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Risk Stratification in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Cancer Screening: Intervention Eligibility, Strategy Choice, and Optimality.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2022Article
- Impact of the Sessile Serrated Polyp Pathway on Predicted Colorectal Cancer Outcomes.Gastro hep advances · 2022Article
- Colorectal Cancer Screening: An Updated Modeling Study for the US Preventive Services Task Force.JAMA · 2021Article
- Evidenced-Based Screening Strategies for a Positive Family History.Gastrointestinal endoscopy clinics of North America · 2020Review
- Potential impact of family history-based screening guidelines on the detection of early-onset colorectal cancer.Cancer · 2020Article
- 'Do no harm': an intuitive decision tool to assess the need for gastrointestinal endoscopy.Endoscopy international open · 2019Article
- A cost-effectiveness analysis of a colorectal cancer screening program in safety net clinics.Preventive medicine · 2019Article
- When Should Guidelines Change? A Clarion Call for Evidence Regarding the Benefits and Risks of Screening for Colorectal Cancer at Earlier Ages.Gastroenterology · 2018Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of colorectal cancer screening in a low incidence country: The case of Saudi Arabia.Saudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology AssociationArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 10 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND &
aimsRelative risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) decreases with age among individuals with a family history of CRC. However, no screening recommendations specify less frequent screening with increasing age. We aimed to determine whether such a refinement would be cost effective.
methodsWe determined the relative risk for CRC for individuals based on age and number of affected first-degree relatives (FDRs) using data from publications. For each number of affected FDRs, we used the Microsimulation Screening Analysis model to estimate costs and effects of colonoscopy screening strategies with different age ranges and intervals. Screening was then optimized sequentially, starting with the youngest age group, and allowing the interval of screening to change at certain ages. Strategies with an incremental cost effectiveness ratio below $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year were considered cost effective.
resultsFor people with 1 affected FDR (92% of those with a family history), screening every 3 years beginning at an age of 40 years is most cost effective. If no adenomas are found, the screening interval can gradually be extended to 5 and 7 years, at ages 45 and 55 years, respectively. From a cost-effectiveness perspective, individuals with more affected FDRs should start screening earlier and at shorter intervals. However, frequency can be reduced if no abnormalities are found.
conclusionsUsing a microsimulation model, we found that for individuals with a family history of CRC, it is cost effective to gradually increase the screening interval if several subsequent screening colonoscopies have negative results and no new cases of CRC are found in family members.
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.