Estimated cost, resource use, and health benefits of an increased use of next-generation multi-target stool DNA test for colorectal cancer screening from an integrated delivery network perspective
Journal of Medical Economics | October 1, 2026 | Volume: 29 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 2228-2240
Background: Fecal immunochemical tests (FITs), fecal occult blood tests (FOBTs), and multitarget stool DNA (mt-sDNA) tests are convenient, noninvasive colorectal cancer (CRC) screening strategies. However, delays in or failure to complete follow-up colonoscopy (FU-CY) after a positive noninvasive test are associated with higher CRC incidence, complications, and mortality. We sought to evaluate FU-CY rates, time to colonoscopy, and compliance predictors. Patients and Methods: This retrospective cohort study linked 2 data sources: Komodo Health Data with Exact Sciences Laboratories. Data were collected from January 2016 to June 2023 and analyzed in 2024. Study participants (ages 45–75 years) were individuals with positive stool-based CRC screening tests (FIT, guaiac-based FOBT, or mt-sDNA tests). FU-CY compliance was assessed at 30-day intervals up to 365 days, and logistic regression was used to identify predictors of FU-CY. Results: Among 362,646 participants, colonoscopy compliance was 77.1% for mt-sDNA and 45.1% for FIT/FOBT ( P <.001). Overall FU-CY compliance was lowest among Asian and Black populations, but was significantly higher in these subgroups for mt-sDNA versus FIT (Asian: 74.2% vs 41.1%; Black: 71.3% vs 44.6%). The strongest predictor of compliance was use of mt-sDNA (odds ratio, 3.98; P <.001). More than half of participants across all race groups who completed FU-CY after mt-sDNA did so within the first 120 days, whereas none of the FIT/FOBT racial subgroups reached 50% completion within 365 days. Conclusions: Timely completion of colonoscopy after a noninvasive test is critical, as failure to undergo colonoscopy or delays in completion are associated with increased CRC incidence and more advanced-stage disease. These findings demonstrate that mt-sDNA use may help close CRC screening disparity gaps compared with FIT testing. FU-CY adherence is higher, and time to colonoscopy is shorter following a positive mt-sDNA test versus FIT across all racial and ethnic subgroups.
S352 Detection of Gastrointestinal Cancer in Individuals Without Clinical Suspicion of Cancer Using a Multi-Cancer Early Detection Test in the PATHFINDER Study
American Journal of Gastroenterology | October 18, 2023 | Volume: 118 | Issue: 10S | Pages: S255-S256
10529 Background: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) recommends covering blood-based biomarker tests with proposed minimum performance thresholds for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening test every 3 years for average-risk, asymptomatic Medicare beneficiaries ages 50–85 years. A blood-based test is a non-invasive screening method to detect CRC but is limited by low sensitivity to detect adenomas. Using the CRC-AIM microsimulation model, predicted life-years gained (LYG) and CRC incidence and mortality reduction were compared between a blood-based test meeting the CMS minimum thresholds and stool-based screening tests (fecal immunochemical test [FIT], fecal occult blood test [FOBT], and multitarget stool DNA [mt-sDNA]). Methods: Outcomes of blood- and stool-based tests were simulated for average-risk individuals free of diagnosed CRC at age 40 and screened between ages 45–75 years per USPSTF recommendations. Per CMS proposed criteria, CRC sensitivity and specificity for a blood-based test were set at 74% and 90%, respectively, and adenoma sensitivity was set at 10%. Published adenoma and CRC sensitivity and specificity were used for each stool test. For the primary analysis, adherence was assumed to be 100%. For secondary analysis, adherence was set at 30–70%, in 10% increments. Outcomes were per 1000 individuals. Results: At 100% adherence, LYG was 229 for a blood test and ≥305 for stool tests, corresponding to at least 25% lower LYG for a blood test relative to all stool tests (Table). Absolute CRC incidence and mortality reductions were at least 19% and 18% lower, respectively, for a blood test vs all stool tests. Secondary analysis indicates that at identical adherence rates that are less than 100%, a blood test had lower LYG vs all stool tests (Table). When the adherence of any test was 50%–70%, a blood test resulted in at least 20% lower LYG vs any stool test, and absolute reductions in CRC incidence and mortality were at least 9% and 10% lower, respectively, vs any stool test. Conclusions: This model suggests that if blood-based CRC screening tests do not sufficiently detect advanced adenomas, clinical outcomes will be inferior to stool-based testing due to lack of cancer prevention. Further discovery efforts to identify blood-based markers associated with both invasive and preinvasive neoplasia are needed to address this deficiency. [Table: see text]
Cost-Effectiveness of Outreach Strategies for Stool-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening in a Medicaid Population
Population Health Management | December 27, 2021 | Volume: 25 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 343-351
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.
S182 Cost-Effectiveness of Outreach Strategies for Stool-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening in a Medicaid Population
American Journal of Gastroenterology | October 24, 2021 | Volume: 116 | Issue: 1 | Pages: S81-S82
Abstract Colorectal cancer–screening models commonly assume 100% adherence, which is inconsistent with real-world experience. The influence of adherence to initial stool-based screening [fecal immunochemical test (FIT), multitarget stool DNA (mt-sDNA)] and follow-up colonoscopy (after a positive stool test) on colorectal cancer outcomes was modeled using the Colorectal Cancer and Adenoma Incidence and Mortality Microsimulation Model. Average-risk individuals without diagnosed colorectal cancer at age 40 undergoing annual FIT or triennial mt-sDNA screening from ages 50 to 75 were simulated. Primary analyses incorporated published mt-sDNA (71%) or FIT (43%) screening adherence, with follow-up colonoscopy adherence ranging from 40% to 100%. Secondary analyses simulated 100% adherence for stool-based screening and colonoscopy follow-up (S1), published adherence for stool-based screening with 100% adherence to colonoscopy follow-up (S2), and published adherence for both stool-based screening and colonoscopy follow-up after positive mt-sDNA (73%) or FIT (47%; S3). Outcomes were life-years gained (LYG) and colorectal cancer incidence and mortality reductions (per 1,000 individuals) versus no screening. Adherence to colonoscopy follow-up after FIT had to be 4%–13% higher than mt-sDNA to reach equivalent LYG. The theoretical S1 favored FIT versus mt-sDNA (LYG 316 vs. 297; colorectal cancer incidence reduction 68% vs. 64%; colorectal cancer mortality reduction 76% vs. 72%). The more realistic S2 and S3 favored mt-sDNA versus FIT (S2: LYG 284 vs. 245, colorectal cancer incidence reduction 61% vs. 50%, colorectal cancer mortality reduction 69% vs. 59%; S3: LYG 203 vs. 113, colorectal cancer incidence reduction 43% vs. 23%, colorectal cancer mortality reduction 49% vs. 27%, respectively). Incorporating realistic adherence rates for colorectal cancer screening influences modeled outcomes and should be considered when assessing comparative effectiveness. Prevention Relevance: Adherence rates for initial colorectal cancer screening by FIT or mt-sDNA and for colonoscopy follow-up of a positive initial test influence the comparative effectiveness of these screening strategies. Using adherence rates based on published data for stool-based testing and colonoscopy follow-up yielded superior outcomes with an mt-sDNA versus FIT-screening strategy.
Real-world cost-effectiveness of stool-based colorectal cancer screening in a Medicare population
Journal of Medical Economics | April 27, 2021 | Volume: 24 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 654-664