Fendrick, A Mark

Background/Objectives: Modeling analyses for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening focusing solely on the costs of screening do not fully capture the value of screening programs. We evaluated the clinical and economic effects of CRC stool-based screening tests, including impacts on cancer-related outcomes. Methods: A cohort-based decision-analytic cost-estimator model estimated outcomes for a single round of screening with next-generation multi-target stool DNA (ng mt-sDNA) test or fecal immunochemical test (FIT) from a US payer perspective. Undiagnosed cancers were assumed to become symptomatic (and detected) within 10 years. Clinical assumptions, advanced precancerous lesion and CRC prevalence, and test performance inputs were from clinical trial data. Adherence rates for initial screening and follow-up colonoscopy after a positive result were from real-world data. Input costs included the screening tests, follow-up colonoscopy (with and without polypectomy), and CRC treatment. Results: Compared with FIT, more individuals completed ng mt-sDNA (321,000 vs. 713,000, respectively), leading to the detection of more CRC cases (436 with FIT vs. 2235 with ng mt-sDNA), more advanced precancerous lesions, and more CRC at earlier stages. The cost of screening per patient screened was USD 801 for ng mt-sDNA and USD 124 for FIT. Follow-up colonoscopy cost was USD 149 million with ng mt-sDNA versus USD 22 million with FIT, whereas CRC treatment costs were lower for ng mt-sDNA (USD 1423 million versus USD 1474 million, respectively). When accounting for both direct and CRC averted costs, the total cost of screening and treatment was USD 1383 million with ng mt-sDNA versus USD 1427 million with FIT. Conclusions: Higher screening costs with ng mt-sDNA versus FIT are counterbalanced by savings realized from enhanced CRC prevention and earlier detection due to the superior test performance and better adherence with ng mt-sDNA.

Abstract Background Recommended noninvasive strategies for average-risk colorectal cancer (CRC) screening include multitarget stool DNA and fecal immunochemical test from ages 45 to 75 years. With new clinical trials, performance data for next-generation multitarget stool DNA, multitarget stool RNA, and blood-based screening tests are now available. This decision analytical model study evaluated the estimated benefit-to-burden ratio by means of efficient frontiers for noninvasive established and emerging CRC screening strategies. Methods Outcomes were estimated using the Colorectal Cancer and Adenoma Incidence and Mortality microsimulation model for average-risk individuals in the United States. Screening strategies were next-generation multitarget stool DNA (an updated marker panel), fecal immunochemical tests, multitarget stool RNA, or blood-based tests every 1-3 years, over various age ranges. Test performance inputs were derived from recent large clinical trials. A strategy was deemed efficient if no other strategy provided more life-years gained with equivalent or fewer lifetime colonoscopies and near-efficient if within 3 days of life-years gained of the efficient frontier. Results All modeled screening strategies resulted in life-years gained vs no screening. No strategy using blood-based tests was efficient or near-efficient. Overall, 10 strategies were efficient (6 next-generation multitarget stool DNA and 4 fecal immunochemical tests), including 2 strategies among those ages 45-75 years (biennial and triennial next-generation multitarget stool DNA). Overall, 22 strategies were near-efficient, including 4 strategies among those ages 45-75 years (annual, biennial, or triennial fecal immunochemical test; annual next-generation multitarget stool DNA). Conclusion Based on this modeling study, next-generation multitarget stool DNA was the only noninvasive screening test at guideline-endorsed interval and age-recommended ranges that was deemed efficient. Blood-based and multitarget stool RNA strategies were deemed not efficient for primary screening.

Abstract The substantial carbon footprint imparted by medical services warrants increased attention to their environmental impact. National guideline organizations such as the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommend multiple modalities for average-risk colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with varying resource intensity. The aim of this study was to quantify the environmental burden for 2 of the most used CRC screening modalities, colonoscopy and the multi-target stool DNA (mt-sDNA) test. A validated CRC microsimulation model was used to estimate the number of screening and follow-up tests for a cohort of 1 million average-risk individuals who underwent screening between ages 45 and 75. Component resources used for mt-sDNA, including waste products, energy, and transportation for colonoscopy and mt-sDNA, were collected from January 1, 2023, to January 1, 2024, and converted to carbon-equivalent emissions. Resources used for colonoscopy were captured from the literature. Resources devoted to screening colonoscopy were substantially (59%) higher than those to mt-sDNA, even when including follow-up colonoscopy. Of note, follow-up colonoscopy accounted for the majority (64%) of total emissions for the mt-sDNA screening strategy. Compared with colonoscopy screening, mt-sDNA substantially reduces the carbon emissions attributable to population-level CRC screening. Environmental impact should be included as a factor when choosing among guideline-recommended CRC screening strategies.

Abstract Commercial insurance covers a follow-up colonoscopy after a positive colorectal cancer–screening test with no patient cost-sharing. Instituting a similar policy for Medicare beneficiaries may increase screening adherence and improve outcomes. The cost-effectiveness of stool-based colorectal cancer screening was compared across adherence scenarios that assumed Medicare coinsurance status quo (20% for follow-up colonoscopy) or waived coinsurance. The CRC-AIM model simulated previously unscreened eligible Medicare beneficiaries undergoing stool-based colorectal cancer screening at age 65 for 10 years. Medicare costs, colorectal cancer cases, colorectal cancer–related deaths, life-years gained (LYG), and quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) were estimated versus no screening. Scenario 1 (S1) assumed 20% coinsurance for follow-up colonoscopy. Scenario 2 (S2) assumed waived coinsurance without adherence changes. Scenarios 3–7 (S3–S7) assumed that waiving coinsurance increased real-world stool-based screening and/or follow-up colonoscopy adherence by 5% or 10%. Sensitivity analyses assumed 1%–4% increased adherence. Cost-effectiveness threshold was ≤$100,000/QALY. Waiving coinsurance without adherence changes (S2) did not affect outcomes versus S1. S3–S7 versus S1 over 10 years estimated up to 3.6 fewer colorectal cancer cases/1,000 individuals, up to 2.1 fewer colorectal cancer deaths, up to 20.7 more LYG, and had comparable total costs per-patient (≤$6,478 vs. $6,449, respectively) as reduced colorectal cancer medical costs offset increased screening and colonoscopy costs. In sensitivity analyses, any increase in adherence after waiving coinsurance was cost-effective and increased LYG. In simulated Medicare beneficiaries, waiving coinsurance for follow-up colonoscopy after a positive stool-based test improved outcomes and was cost-effective when assumed to modestly increase colorectal cancer screening and/or follow-up colonoscopy adherence. Prevention Relevance: Follow-up colonoscopy after a positive stool-based test is necessary to complete the colorectal cancer-screening process. This analysis demonstrated that in a simulated Medicare population, waiving coinsurance for a follow-up colonoscopy improved estimated outcomes and was cost-effective when it was assumed that waiving the coinsurance modestly increased screening adherence. See related Spotlight, p. 641

Outreach, including patient navigation, has been shown to increase the uptake of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in underserved populations. This analysis evaluates the cost-effectiveness of triennial multi-target stool DNA (mt-sDNA) versus outreach, with or without a mailed annual fecal immunochemical test (FIT), in a Medicaid population. A microsimulation model estimated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio using quality-adjusted life years (QALY), direct costs, and clinical outcomes in a cohort of Medicaid beneficiaries aged 50–64 years, over a lifetime time horizon. The base case model explored scenarios of either 100% adherence or real-world reported adherence (51.3% for mt-sDNA, 21.1% for outreach with FIT and 12.3% for outreach without FIT) with or without real-world adherence for follow-up colonoscopy (66.7% for all). Costs and outcomes were discounted at 3.0%. At 100% adherence to both screening tests and follow-up colonoscopy, mt-sDNA costed more and was less effective compared with outreach with or without FIT. When real-world adherence rates were considered for screening strategies (with 100% adherence for follow-up colonoscopy), mt-sDNA resulted in the greatest reduction in incidence and mortality from CRC (41.5% and 45.8%, respectively) compared with outreach with or without FIT; mt-sDNA also was cost-effective versus outreach with and without FIT ($32,150/QALY and $22,707/QALY, respectively). mt-sDNA remained cost-effective versus FIT, with or without outreach, under real-world adherence rates for follow-up colonoscopy. Outreach or navigation interventions, with associated real-world adherence rates to screening tests, should be considered when evaluating the cost-effectiveness of CRC screening strategies in underserved populations.