ArticleJournal of gastroenterology and hepatology2018
Costs and outcomes of Lynch syndrome screening in the Australian colorectal cancer population.
Article in Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and Interpretation of a Clinicopathological-Based Model for the Identification of Microsatellite Instability in Colorectal Cancer.Disease markers · 2023Trial
- Clinical utility and cost-effectiveness of universal tumor screening to identify Lynch syndrome in patients with stage II/III colorectal cancer: a prospective observational study in Japan.International journal of clinical oncology · 2026Observational
- Development and Real-World Evaluation of a Statewide Mainstream Model of Germline Genetic Testing for BRCA1/2 and Mismatch Repair Gene Variants (Lynch Syndrome).Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology · 2026Article
- Contemporary Surgical Management of Colorectal Cancer in Lynch Syndrome: Considering the Implications of Known Genotype.ANZ journal of surgery · 2025Review
- Biomarkers in Colorectal Cancer: Actual and Future Perspectives.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Cost-effectiveness of prophylactic hysterectomy in first-degree female relatives with Lynch syndrome of patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer in the United States: a microsimulation study.Cancer medicine · 2021Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Genetic Testing.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Development and validation of MMR prediction model based on simplified clinicopathological features and serum tumour markers.EBioMedicine · 2020Article
- The predicted impact and cost-effectiveness of systematic testing of people with incident colorectal cancer for Lynch syndrome.The Medical journal of Australia · 2020Article
- Costs and outcomes of Lynch syndrome screening in the Australian colorectal cancer population.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimIndividuals with Lynch syndrome (LS) are at increased risk of LS-related cancers including colorectal cancer (CRC). CRC tumor screening for mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency is recommended in Australia to identify LS, although its cost-effectiveness has not been assessed. We aim to determine the cost-effectiveness of screening individuals with CRC for LS at different age-at-diagnosis thresholds.
methodsWe developed a decision analysis model to estimate yield and costs of LS screening. Age-specific probabilities of LS diagnosis were based on Australian data. Two CRC tumor screening pathways were assessed (MMR immunohistochemistry followed by MLH1 methylation (MLH1-Pathway) or BRAF V600E testing (BRAF-Pathway) if MLH1 expression was lost) for four age-at-diagnosis thresholds-screening < 50, screening < 60, screening < 70, and universal screening.
resultsPer 1000 CRC cases, screening < 50 identified 5.2 LS cases and cost $A7041 per case detected in the MLH1-Pathway. Screening < 60 increased detection by 1.5 cases for an incremental cost of $A25 177 per additional case detected. Screening < 70 detected 1.6 additional cases at an incremental cost of $A40 278 per additional case detected. Compared with screening < 70, universal screening detected no additional LS cases but cost $A158 724 extra. The BRAF-Pathway identified the same number of LS cases for higher costs.
conclusionsThe MLH1-Pathway is more cost-effective than BRAF-Pathway for all age-at-diagnosis thresholds. MMR immunohistochemistry tumor screening in individuals diagnosed with CRC aged < 70 years resulted in higher LS case detection at a reasonable cost. Further research into the yield of LS screening in CRC patients ≥ 70 years is needed to determine if universal screening is justified.
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.