Do men and women need to be screened differently with fecal immunochemical testing? A cost-effectiveness analysis

© 2017 American Association for Cancer Research. Background: Several studies suggest that test characteristics for the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) differ by gender, triggering a debate on whether men and women should be screened differently. We used the microsimulation model MISCAN-Colon to eval...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Van Der Meulen, M., Kapidzic, A., Van Leerdam, M., Van Der Steen, A., Kuipers, E., Spaander, M., De Koning, H., Hol, L., Lansdorp_Vogelaar, Iris
Format: Conference Paper
Published: 2017
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/56935
_version_ 1848759973857722368
author Van Der Meulen, M.
Kapidzic, A.
Van Leerdam, M.
Van Der Steen, A.
Kuipers, E.
Spaander, M.
De Koning, H.
Hol, L.
Lansdorp_Vogelaar, Iris
author_facet Van Der Meulen, M.
Kapidzic, A.
Van Leerdam, M.
Van Der Steen, A.
Kuipers, E.
Spaander, M.
De Koning, H.
Hol, L.
Lansdorp_Vogelaar, Iris
author_sort Van Der Meulen, M.
building Curtin Institutional Repository
collection Online Access
description © 2017 American Association for Cancer Research. Background: Several studies suggest that test characteristics for the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) differ by gender, triggering a debate on whether men and women should be screened differently. We used the microsimulation model MISCAN-Colon to evaluate whether screening stratified by gender is cost-effective. Methods: We estimated gender-specific FIT characteristics based on first-round positivity and detection rates observed in a FIT screening pilot (CORERO-1). Subsequent ly, we used the model to estimate harms, benefits, and costs of 480 genderspecific FIT screening strategies and compared them with uniform screening. Results: Biennial FIT screening from ages 50 to 75 was less effective in women than men [35.7 vs. 49.0 quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained, respectively] at higher costs (€42, 161 vs. -€5, 471, respectively). However, the incremental QALYs gained and costs of annual screening compared with biennial screening were more similar for both genders (8.7 QALYs gained and €26, 394 for women vs. 6.7 QALYs gained and €20, 863 for men). Considering all evaluated screening strategies, optimal gender-based screening yielded at most 7% more QALYs gained than optimal uniform screening and even resulted in equal costs and QALYs gained from a willingness- to-pay threshold of €1, 300. Conclusions: FIT screening is less effective in women, but the incremental cost-effectiveness is similar in men and women. Consequently, screening stratified by gender is not more costeffective than uniform FIT screening. Impact: Our conclusions support the current policy of uniform FIT screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 26(8); 1328-36.
first_indexed 2025-11-14T10:08:24Z
format Conference Paper
id curtin-20.500.11937-56935
institution Curtin University Malaysia
institution_category Local University
last_indexed 2025-11-14T10:08:24Z
publishDate 2017
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling curtin-20.500.11937-569352017-09-27T10:48:51Z Do men and women need to be screened differently with fecal immunochemical testing? A cost-effectiveness analysis Van Der Meulen, M. Kapidzic, A. Van Leerdam, M. Van Der Steen, A. Kuipers, E. Spaander, M. De Koning, H. Hol, L. Lansdorp_Vogelaar, Iris © 2017 American Association for Cancer Research. Background: Several studies suggest that test characteristics for the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) differ by gender, triggering a debate on whether men and women should be screened differently. We used the microsimulation model MISCAN-Colon to evaluate whether screening stratified by gender is cost-effective. Methods: We estimated gender-specific FIT characteristics based on first-round positivity and detection rates observed in a FIT screening pilot (CORERO-1). Subsequent ly, we used the model to estimate harms, benefits, and costs of 480 genderspecific FIT screening strategies and compared them with uniform screening. Results: Biennial FIT screening from ages 50 to 75 was less effective in women than men [35.7 vs. 49.0 quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained, respectively] at higher costs (€42, 161 vs. -€5, 471, respectively). However, the incremental QALYs gained and costs of annual screening compared with biennial screening were more similar for both genders (8.7 QALYs gained and €26, 394 for women vs. 6.7 QALYs gained and €20, 863 for men). Considering all evaluated screening strategies, optimal gender-based screening yielded at most 7% more QALYs gained than optimal uniform screening and even resulted in equal costs and QALYs gained from a willingness- to-pay threshold of €1, 300. Conclusions: FIT screening is less effective in women, but the incremental cost-effectiveness is similar in men and women. Consequently, screening stratified by gender is not more costeffective than uniform FIT screening. Impact: Our conclusions support the current policy of uniform FIT screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 26(8); 1328-36. 2017 Conference Paper http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/56935 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-16-0786 restricted
spellingShingle Van Der Meulen, M.
Kapidzic, A.
Van Leerdam, M.
Van Der Steen, A.
Kuipers, E.
Spaander, M.
De Koning, H.
Hol, L.
Lansdorp_Vogelaar, Iris
Do men and women need to be screened differently with fecal immunochemical testing? A cost-effectiveness analysis
title Do men and women need to be screened differently with fecal immunochemical testing? A cost-effectiveness analysis
title_full Do men and women need to be screened differently with fecal immunochemical testing? A cost-effectiveness analysis
title_fullStr Do men and women need to be screened differently with fecal immunochemical testing? A cost-effectiveness analysis
title_full_unstemmed Do men and women need to be screened differently with fecal immunochemical testing? A cost-effectiveness analysis
title_short Do men and women need to be screened differently with fecal immunochemical testing? A cost-effectiveness analysis
title_sort do men and women need to be screened differently with fecal immunochemical testing? a cost-effectiveness analysis
url http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/56935