Aspirin as an adjunct to screening for prevention of sporadic colorectal cancer. A cost-effectiveness analysis - PubMed (original) (raw)

Aspirin as an adjunct to screening for prevention of sporadic colorectal cancer. A cost-effectiveness analysis

U Ladabaum et al. Ann Intern Med. 2001.

Abstract

Background: Aspirin may decrease colorectal cancer incidence, but its role as an adjunct to or substitute for screening has not been evaluated.

Objective: To examine the potential cost-effectiveness of aspirin chemoprophylaxis in relation to screening.

Design: Markov model.

Data sources: Literature on colorectal cancer epidemiology, screening, costs, and aspirin chemoprevention (1980-1999).

Target population: General U.S. population.

Time horizon: 50 to 80 years of age.

Perspective: Third-party payer.

Intervention: Aspirin therapy in patients screened with sigmoidoscopy every 5 years and fecal occult blood testing every year (FS/FOBT) or colonoscopy every 10 years (COLO).

Outcome measures: Discounted cost per life-year gained.

Results of base-case analysis: When a 30% reduction in colorectal cancer risk was assumed, aspirin increased costs and decreased life-years because of related complications as an adjunct to FS/FOBT and cost 149161perlife−yeargainedasanadjuncttoCOLO.Inpatientsalreadytakingaspirin,screeningwithFS/FOBTorCOLOcostlessthan149 161 per life-year gained as an adjunct to COLO. In patients already taking aspirin, screening with FS/FOBT or COLO cost less than 149161perlife−yeargainedasanadjuncttoCOLO.Inpatientsalreadytakingaspirin,screeningwithFS/FOBTorCOLOcostlessthan31 000 per life-year gained.

Results of sensitivity analysis: Cost-effectiveness estimates depended highly on the magnitude of colorectal cancer risk reduction with aspirin, aspirin-related complication rates, and the screening adherence rate in the population. However, when the model's inputs were varied over wide ranges, aspirin chemoprophylaxis remained generally non-cost-effective for patients who adhere to screening.

Conclusions: In patients undergoing colorectal cancer screening, aspirin use should not be based on potential chemoprevention. Aspirin chemoprophylaxis alone cannot be considered a substitute for colorectal cancer screening. Public policy should focus on improving screening adherence, even in patients who are already taking aspirin.

PubMed Disclaimer

Cited by

Patient preferences for the chemoprevention of colorectal cancer.
Hur C, Broughton DE, Kong CY, Ozanne EM, Richards EB, Truong T, Gazelle GS. Hur C, et al. Dig Dis Sci. 2009 Oct;54(10):2207-14. doi: 10.1007/s10620-008-0609-z. Epub 2008 Dec 5. Dig Dis Sci. 2009. PMID: 19057995 Free PMC article.
Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening in high-risk Spanish patients: use of a validated model to inform public policy.
Ladabaum U, Ferrandez A, Lanas A. Ladabaum U, et al. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2010 Nov;19(11):2765-76. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-10-0530. Epub 2010 Sep 1. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2010. PMID: 20810603 Free PMC article.
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG; PRISMA Group. Moher D, et al. PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000097. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097. Epub 2009 Jul 21. PLoS Med. 2009. PMID: 19621072 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
Calibration methods used in cancer simulation models and suggested reporting guidelines.
Stout NK, Knudsen AB, Kong CY, McMahon PM, Gazelle GS. Stout NK, et al. Pharmacoeconomics. 2009;27(7):533-45. doi: 10.2165/11314830-000000000-00000. Pharmacoeconomics. 2009. PMID: 19663525 Free PMC article. Review.
Oral bisphosphonates and colorectal cancer.
Vogtmann E, Corley DA, Almers LM, Cardwell CR, Murray LJ, Abnet CC. Vogtmann E, et al. Sci Rep. 2017 Mar 10;7:44177. doi: 10.1038/srep44177. Sci Rep. 2017. PMID: 28281559 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.

Aspirin as an adjunct to screening for prevention of sporadic colorectal cancer. A cost-effectiveness analysis - PubMed (original) (raw)