Cost effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening interventions with their effects on health disparity being considered

Kwang Sig Lee, Eun Cheol Park

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening interventions with their effects on health disparity being considered. Materials and Methods Markov cohort simulation was conducted with the cycle/duration of 1/40 year(s). Data came from the results of randomized trials and others. Participants were hypothetical cohorts aged 50 years as of year 2013 in 16 Korean provinces. The interventions until the age of 80 were annual organized fecal occult blood test (FOBT) (standard screening), annual FOBT with basic reminders for provinces with higher mortalities than the national average (targeted reminder) and annual FOBT with basic/enhanced reminders for all provinces (universal reminder 1 and 2). The comparison was non-screening, the outcome was qualityadjusted life years, and only medical costs for screening and treatment were considered from a societal perspective. The Atkinson incremental cost effectiveness ratio (Atkinson ICER), the incremental cost effectiveness ratio adjusted by the Atkinson Inequality Index, was used to evaluate the cost effectiveness of the four interventions with their impacts on regional health disparity being considered. Results Health disparity was smallest (or greatest) in non-screening (or the standard screening). The targeted reminder had smaller health disparity, and smaller Atkinson ICER with respect to standard screening, than did the universal reminder 1 and 2. Conclusion The targeted reminder might be more cost effective than the universal reminders with their effects on health disparity being considered. This study helps to develop promotional effort for colorectal cancer screening with both the greatest cost effectiveness and the smallest health disparity.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1010-1019
Number of pages10
JournalCancer Research and Treatment
Volume48
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2016 Jan 1

Fingerprint

Early Detection of Cancer
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Colorectal Neoplasms
Occult Blood
Health
Hematologic Tests
Health Care Costs
Costs and Cost Analysis
Mortality

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Oncology
  • Cancer Research

Cite this

@article{030d89ec578947f8a0d4e8eb1db5a12a,
title = "Cost effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening interventions with their effects on health disparity being considered",
abstract = "Purpose The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening interventions with their effects on health disparity being considered. Materials and Methods Markov cohort simulation was conducted with the cycle/duration of 1/40 year(s). Data came from the results of randomized trials and others. Participants were hypothetical cohorts aged 50 years as of year 2013 in 16 Korean provinces. The interventions until the age of 80 were annual organized fecal occult blood test (FOBT) (standard screening), annual FOBT with basic reminders for provinces with higher mortalities than the national average (targeted reminder) and annual FOBT with basic/enhanced reminders for all provinces (universal reminder 1 and 2). The comparison was non-screening, the outcome was qualityadjusted life years, and only medical costs for screening and treatment were considered from a societal perspective. The Atkinson incremental cost effectiveness ratio (Atkinson ICER), the incremental cost effectiveness ratio adjusted by the Atkinson Inequality Index, was used to evaluate the cost effectiveness of the four interventions with their impacts on regional health disparity being considered. Results Health disparity was smallest (or greatest) in non-screening (or the standard screening). The targeted reminder had smaller health disparity, and smaller Atkinson ICER with respect to standard screening, than did the universal reminder 1 and 2. Conclusion The targeted reminder might be more cost effective than the universal reminders with their effects on health disparity being considered. This study helps to develop promotional effort for colorectal cancer screening with both the greatest cost effectiveness and the smallest health disparity.",
author = "Lee, {Kwang Sig} and Park, {Eun Cheol}",
year = "2016",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.4143/crt.2015.279",
language = "English",
volume = "48",
pages = "1010--1019",
journal = "Cancer Research and Treatment",
issn = "1598-2998",
publisher = "Korean Cancer Association",
number = "3",

}

Cost effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening interventions with their effects on health disparity being considered. / Lee, Kwang Sig; Park, Eun Cheol.

In: Cancer Research and Treatment, Vol. 48, No. 3, 01.01.2016, p. 1010-1019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening interventions with their effects on health disparity being considered

AU - Lee, Kwang Sig

AU - Park, Eun Cheol

PY - 2016/1/1

Y1 - 2016/1/1

N2 - Purpose The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening interventions with their effects on health disparity being considered. Materials and Methods Markov cohort simulation was conducted with the cycle/duration of 1/40 year(s). Data came from the results of randomized trials and others. Participants were hypothetical cohorts aged 50 years as of year 2013 in 16 Korean provinces. The interventions until the age of 80 were annual organized fecal occult blood test (FOBT) (standard screening), annual FOBT with basic reminders for provinces with higher mortalities than the national average (targeted reminder) and annual FOBT with basic/enhanced reminders for all provinces (universal reminder 1 and 2). The comparison was non-screening, the outcome was qualityadjusted life years, and only medical costs for screening and treatment were considered from a societal perspective. The Atkinson incremental cost effectiveness ratio (Atkinson ICER), the incremental cost effectiveness ratio adjusted by the Atkinson Inequality Index, was used to evaluate the cost effectiveness of the four interventions with their impacts on regional health disparity being considered. Results Health disparity was smallest (or greatest) in non-screening (or the standard screening). The targeted reminder had smaller health disparity, and smaller Atkinson ICER with respect to standard screening, than did the universal reminder 1 and 2. Conclusion The targeted reminder might be more cost effective than the universal reminders with their effects on health disparity being considered. This study helps to develop promotional effort for colorectal cancer screening with both the greatest cost effectiveness and the smallest health disparity.

AB - Purpose The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening interventions with their effects on health disparity being considered. Materials and Methods Markov cohort simulation was conducted with the cycle/duration of 1/40 year(s). Data came from the results of randomized trials and others. Participants were hypothetical cohorts aged 50 years as of year 2013 in 16 Korean provinces. The interventions until the age of 80 were annual organized fecal occult blood test (FOBT) (standard screening), annual FOBT with basic reminders for provinces with higher mortalities than the national average (targeted reminder) and annual FOBT with basic/enhanced reminders for all provinces (universal reminder 1 and 2). The comparison was non-screening, the outcome was qualityadjusted life years, and only medical costs for screening and treatment were considered from a societal perspective. The Atkinson incremental cost effectiveness ratio (Atkinson ICER), the incremental cost effectiveness ratio adjusted by the Atkinson Inequality Index, was used to evaluate the cost effectiveness of the four interventions with their impacts on regional health disparity being considered. Results Health disparity was smallest (or greatest) in non-screening (or the standard screening). The targeted reminder had smaller health disparity, and smaller Atkinson ICER with respect to standard screening, than did the universal reminder 1 and 2. Conclusion The targeted reminder might be more cost effective than the universal reminders with their effects on health disparity being considered. This study helps to develop promotional effort for colorectal cancer screening with both the greatest cost effectiveness and the smallest health disparity.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84981335345&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84981335345&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.4143/crt.2015.279

DO - 10.4143/crt.2015.279

M3 - Article

C2 - 26727714

AN - SCOPUS:84981335345

VL - 48

SP - 1010

EP - 1019

JO - Cancer Research and Treatment

JF - Cancer Research and Treatment

SN - 1598-2998

IS - 3

ER -