HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER		Author Keyword(s) Vol Page [Advanced]

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) web only appendix All Versions of this Article: gut.2006.095109v1 56/5/677    most recent Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this link to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Add article to my folders Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Tappenden, P. Articles by Patnick, J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Tappenden, P. Articles by Patnick, J. Topic Collections Relevant Article

Option appraisal of population-based colorectal cancer screening programmes in England

¹ The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
² NHS Cancer Screening Programmes, Sheffield, UK

Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
Paul Tappenden
School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), The University of Sheffield, Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield S1 4DA, UK; P.Tappenden{at}Sheffield.ac.uk

ABSTRACT
Objectives: To estimate the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and resource impact of faecal occult blood testing (FOBT) and flexible sigmoidoscopy (FSIG) screening options for colorectal cancer to inform the Department of Health’s policy on bowel cancer screening in England.

Methods: We developed a state transition model to simulate the life experience of a cohort of individuals without polyps or cancer through to the development of adenomatous polyps and malignant carcinoma and subsequent death in the general population of England. The costs, effects and resource impact of five screening options were evaluated: (a) FOBT for individuals aged 50–69 (biennial screening); (b) FOBT for individuals aged 60–69 (biennial screening); (c) once-only FSIG for individuals aged 55; (d) once-only FSIG for individuals aged 60; and (e) once-only FSIG for individuals aged 60, followed by FOBT for individuals aged 61–70 (biennial screening).

Results: The model suggests that screening using FSIG with or without FOBT may be cost-saving and may produce additional benefits compared with a policy of no screening. The marginal cost-effectiveness of FOBT options compared to a policy of no screening is estimated to be below £3000 per quality adjusted life year gained.

Conclusions: Screening using FOBT and/or FSIG is potentially a cost-effective strategy for the early detection of colorectal cancer. However, the practical feasibility of alternative screening programmes is inevitably limited by current pressures on endoscopy services.

Abbreviations: CRC, colorectal cancer; FOBT, faecal occult blood test; FSIG, flexible sigmoidoscopy; LYG, life year gained; ONS, Office for National Statistics; QALY, quality adjusted life year; RCT, randomised controlled trial

Keywords: colorectal neoplasms; costs and cost analysis; economics; mass screening

Relevant Article

Digest

Robin Spiller and Emad El-Omar
Gut 2007 56: 601. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. Karnon, R. Jones, C. Czoski-Murray, and K. J. Smith Cost-utility analysis of screening high-risk groups for anal cancer J. Public Health Med., September 1, 2008; 30(3): 293 - 304. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J E East, N Suzuki, M Stavrinidis, T Guenther, H J W Thomas, and B P Saunders Narrow band imaging for colonoscopic surveillance in hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer Gut, January 1, 2008; 57(1): 65 - 70. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Other articles noted Evid. Based Med., October 1, 2007; 12(5): 159 - 160. [Full Text] [PDF]