Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39699893›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2024

Optimal Stopping Ages for Colorectal Cancer Screening.

Matthias Harlass, Ronit R Dalmat, Jessica Chubak, Rosita van den Puttelaar, Natalia Udaltsova, Douglas A Corley, Christopher D Jensen, Nicholson Collier, Jonathan Ozik, Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

11 authors.

Matthias HarlassDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, South Holland, the Netherlands.
Ronit R DalmatDepartment of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle.
Jessica ChubakDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle.
Rosita van den PuttelaarDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, South Holland, the Netherlands.
Natalia UdaltsovaDivision of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland.
Douglas A CorleyDivision of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland.
Christopher D JensenDivision of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland.
Nicholson CollierDecision and Infrastructure Sciences, Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, Illinois.
Jonathan OzikDecision and Infrastructure Sciences, Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, Illinois.
Iris Lansdorp-VogelaarDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, South Holland, the Netherlands.
Reinier G S MeesterDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, South Holland, the Netherlands.

Funding

Optimizing Colorectal Cancer Screening PREcision and Outcomes in CommunIty-baSEd Populations (PRECISE)UM1CA222035 · NCI · KAISER FOUNDATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI CHUBAK, JESSICA, CORLEY, DOUGLAS ALLEN · 2018 to 2023
$15.6M
Comparative Modeling of Effective Policies for Colorectal Cancer ControlU01CA253913 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INST CAN RESEARCH · PI RUTTER, CAROLYN M, ZAUBER, ANN GRAHAM · 2020 to 2025
$6.5M
NCI NIH HHS U01 CA253913NCI NIH HHS UM1 CA222035
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Prior studies have shown that the benefits, harms, and costs of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening at older ages are associated with a patient's sex, health, and screening history. However, these studies were hypothetical exercises and not directly informed by data on CRC risk. Objective: To identify the optimal stopping ages for CRC screening by sex, comorbidity, and screening history from a cost-effectiveness perspective. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation first validated the MISCAN-Colon (Microsimulation Screening Analysis-Colon) model against community-based CRC incidence and mortality rates for 2 subcohorts of the PRECISE (Optimizing Colorectal Cancer Screening Precision and Outcomes in Community-Based Populations) cohort. Subsequently, different CRC screening scenarios were simulated in older individuals. Cohorts of US adults aged 76 to 90 years varied by sex and comorbidity status (none, low, moderate, or severe). Statistical and sensitivity analyses were performed from March 2023 to May 2024. Exposures: CRC screening histories including fecal immunochemical test (FIT) or colonoscopy, such as a negative colonoscopy result from 10, 15, 20, 25, or 30 years before the index age; 1 to 5 negative FIT results within 5 years of the index age, with different patterns of recency; or a combination of negative colonoscopy and negative FIT results. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes included estimated lifetime clinical outcomes, incremental costs, and quality-adjusted life-years gained (QALYG) associated with 1 additional FIT or colonoscopy. Optimal stopping age for screening, defined as the oldest age for which the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was still below the willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALYG, was evaluated. Results: The first of the 2 PRECISE subcohorts used in validating the simulation model included 25 974 adults (15 060 females [58.0%]; 54.7% aged 76 to 80 years) with a negative colonoscopy result 10 years before the index date. The second subcohort consisted of 118 269 adults (67 058 females [56.7%]; 90.5% aged 76 to 80 years) with a negative FIT result 1 year before the index date. Older age, male sex, higher comorbidity levels, and recent CRC screenings were associated with reduced incremental benefit and cost-effectiveness of additional screening. For the reference cohort of 76-year-old females without comorbidities and a negative colonoscopy result 10 years before the index age, 1 additional colonoscopy cost $38 226 per QALYG. For cohorts with otherwise equivalent characteristics, associated costs increased to $1 689 945 per QALYG for females at age 90 years without comorbidities and a negative colonoscopy results 10 years before the index age, $51 604 per QALYG for males at age 76 years without comorbidities and a negative colonoscopy result 10 years before the index age, and $108 480 per QALYG for females at age 76 years with severe comorbidities and a negative colonoscopy result 10 years before the index age and decreased to $16 870 per QALYG for females without comorbidities and a negative colonoscopy result 30 years before the index age. The optimal stopping ages across different cohorts ranged from younger than 76 to 86 years for colonoscopy and younger than 76 to 88 years for FIT. Conclusions and Relevance: In this economic evaluation, age, sex, screening history, comorbidity, and future screening modality were associated with the clinical outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and optimal stopping age for CRC screening. These results can inform guideline development and patient-directed informed decision-making.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsCost-Benefit AnalysisEarly Detection of CancerAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsColonoscopyFemaleHumansMaleMass ScreeningOccult BloodQuality-Adjusted Life YearsUnited States

Identifiers

PMID39699893
PMCPMC11659906

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.