title: Cost-effectiveness of family history-based colorectal cancer screening in Australia.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  With 14.234 diagnoses and over 4047 deaths reported in 2007, colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common cancer and second most common cause of cancer-related mortality in Australia. The direct treatment cost has recently been estimated to be around AU$1.2 billion for the year 2011, which corresponds to a four-fold increase, compared the cost reported in 2001. Excluding CRCs due to known rare genetic disorders, 20% to 25% of all CRCs occur in a familial aggregation setting due to genetic variants or shared environmental risk factors that are yet to be characterised. A targeted screening strategy addressed to this segment of the population is a potentially valuable tool for reducing the overall burden of CRC.
  
  
  METHODS
  We developed a Markov model to assess the cost-effectiveness of three screening strategies offered to people at increased risk due to a strong family history of CRC. The model simulated the evolution of a cohort of 10,000 individuals from age 50 to 90 years. We compared screening with biennial iFOBT, five-yearly colonoscopy and ten-yearly colonoscopy versus the current strategy of the Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (i.e. base case).
  
  
  RESULTS
  Under the NBCSP scenario, 6,491 persons developed CRC with an average screening lifetime cost of AU$3,441 per person. In comparison, screening with biennial iFOBT, colonoscopy every ten years, and colonoscopy every five years reduced CRC incidence by 27%, 35% and 60%, and mortality by 15%, 26% and 46% respectively. All three screening strategies had a cost under AU$50,000 per life year gained, which is regarded as the upper limit of acceptable cost-effectiveness in the Australian health system. At AU$12,405 per life year gained and an average lifetime expectancy of 16.084 years, five-yearly colonoscopy screening was the most cost-effective strategy.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The model demonstrates that intensive CRC screening strategies targeting people at increased risk would be cost-effective in the Australian context. Our findings provide evidence that substantial health benefits can be generated from risk-based CRC screening at a relatively modest incremental cost.
authors.affiliation: Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia. drissao@unimelb.edu.au.
authors.forename: Driss A
authors.initials: DA
authors.lastname: Ouakrim
authors.forename: Alex
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Boussioutas
authors.forename: Trevor
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Lockett
authors.forename: John L
authors.initials: JL
authors.lastname: Hopper
authors.forename: Mark A
authors.initials: MA
authors.lastname: Jenkins
mesh_terms: D001315:Australia; D003113:Colonoscopy; D015179:Colorectal Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000191:economics / Q000473:pathology; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D055088:Early Detection of Cancer / Q000191:economics*; D006801:Humans; D008390:Markov Chains; D008403:Mass Screening; D012307:Risk Factors
references.citation: Gastroenterology. 2008 May;134(5):1570-95
references.pmid: 18384785
references.citation: Fam Cancer. 2013 Sep;12(3):459-72
references.pmid: 23700069
references.citation: JAMA. 2000 Oct 18;284(15):1954-61
references.pmid: 11035892
references.citation: Gut. 2010 May;59(5):666-89
references.pmid: 20427401
references.citation: Cancer Causes Control. 2010 Dec;21(12):2287-93
references.pmid: 20981482
references.citation: Eur J Cancer Prev. 2003 Feb;12(1):77-84
references.pmid: 12548114
references.citation: Gastroenterology. 2010 Mar;138(3):877-85
references.pmid: 19932107
references.citation: Pharmacoeconomics. 2001;19(11):1103-9
references.pmid: 11735677
references.citation: Genet Med. 2006 Sep;8(9):571-5
references.pmid: 16980813
references.citation: Am J Gastroenterol. 2010 Aug;105(8):1861-9
references.pmid: 20461066
references.citation: Intern Med J. 2012 Jul;42(7):794-800
references.pmid: 21883782
references.citation: Comput Biomed Res. 1999 Feb;32(1):13-33
references.pmid: 10066353
references.citation: Gastrointest Endosc. 2009 Jul;70(1):96-108, 108.e1-24
references.pmid: 19467539
references.citation: Ann Intern Med. 2008 Nov 4;149(9):627-37
references.pmid: 18838716
references.citation: Ann Intern Med. 2000 Oct 17;133(8):573-84
references.pmid: 11033584
references.citation: Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2008 Aug 1;28(3):353-63
references.pmid: 18638075
references.citation: Am J Gastroenterol. 2001 Oct;96(10):2992-3003
references.pmid: 11693338
references.citation: Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 2002 Dec;31(4):1069-91
references.pmid: 12489279
references.citation: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2010 Nov;19(11):2765-76
references.pmid: 20810603
references.citation: J Clin Oncol. 2009 Feb 10;27(5):686-93
references.pmid: 19114701
references.citation: Fam Cancer. 2005;4(3):239-44
references.pmid: 16136384
references.citation: Med J Aust. 2011 Feb 21;194(4):180-5
references.pmid: 21401458
references.citation: Cancer Causes Control. 2012 Nov;23(11):1853-64
references.pmid: 23011536
references.citation: Med J Aust. 2009 Oct 5;191(7):378-81
references.pmid: 19807627
references.citation: Clin Cancer Res. 2007 Jan 1;13(1):356-61
references.pmid: 17200375
references.citation: Gastroenterology. 2010 Jun;138(6):2044-58
references.pmid: 20420945