Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32933928›Full record

ArticleBMJ open gastroenterology2020

Cost-effectiveness of surveillance with CT colonography after resection of colorectal cancer.

Karen M Kuntz, Jonah Popp, J Robert Beck, Ann G Zauber, David S Weinberg

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open gastroenterology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 87% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Karen M KuntzDivision of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA kmkuntz@umn.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-6335-7590
Jonah PoppDepartment of Health Services, Policy & Practice, School of Public Health, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.
J Robert BeckCancer Prevention and Control Program, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Ann G ZauberDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
David S WeinbergDepartment of Medicine, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Fox Chase Cancer Center · USBrown University · USMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USUniversity of Minnesota · US

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Hongbiao Carl Lekaye · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
Comparative Effectiveness of Virtual and Optical Colonoscopy for CRC SurveillanceR01CA155347 · NCI · RESEARCH INST OF FOX CHASE CAN CTR · PI WEINBERG, DAVID S · 2011 to 2015
$3.3M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748NCI NIH HHS R01 CA155347
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveSurveillance following colorectal cancer (CRC) resection uses optical colonoscopy (OC) to detect intraluminal disease and CT to detect extracolonic recurrence. CT colonography (CTC) might be an efficient use of resources in this situation because it allows for intraluminal and extraluminal evaluations with one test.

designWe developed a simulation model to compare lifetime costs and benefits for a cohort of patients with resected CRC. Standard of care involved annual CT for 3 years and OC for years 1, 4 and every 5 years thereafter. For the CTC-based strategy, we replace CT+OC at year 1 with CTC. Patients with lesions greater than 6 mm detected by CTC underwent OC. Detection of an adenoma 10 mm or larger was followed by OC at 1 year, then every 3 years thereafter. Test characteristics and costs for CTC were derived from a clinical study. Medicare costs were used for cancer care costs as well as alternative test costs. We discounted costs and effects at 3% per year.

resultsFor persons with resected stage III CRC, the standard-of-care strategy was more costly (US$293) and effective (2.6 averted CRC cases and 1.1 averted cancer deaths per 1000) than the CTC-based strategy, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of US$55 500 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Our analysis was most sensitive to the sensitivity of CTC for detecting polyps 10 mm or larger and assumptions about disease progression.

conclusionIn a simulation model, we found that replacing the standard-of-care approach to postdiagnostic surveillance with a CTC-based strategy is not an efficient use of resources in most situations.

Indexed as

AdenomaColonic NeoplasmsColonography, Computed TomographicColonoscopyColorectal NeoplasmsComputer SimulationCost-Benefit AnalysisDisease ProgressionFemaleHumansIncidenceMaleMarkov ChainsMass ScreeningMiddle AgedMultimodal Imagingcolorectal cancercost-effectivenessdecision analysiseconomic evaluationsurveillance

Identifiers

PMID32933928
PMCPMC7493100
OpenAlexW3084754083

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.