Comparative Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening With Blood-Based Biomarkers (Liquid Biopsy) vs Fecal Tests or Colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is highly effective but underused. Blood-based biomarkers (liquid biopsy) could improve screening participation. METHODS: Using our established Markov model, screening every 3 years with a blood-based test that meets minimum Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' thresholds (CMSmin) (CRC sensitivity 74%, specificity 90%) was compared with established alternatives. Test attributes were varied in sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: CMSmin reduced CRC incidence by 40% and CRC mortality by 52% vs no screening. These reductions were less profound than the 68%-79% and 73%-81%, respectively, achieved with multi-target stool DNA (Cologuard; Exact Sciences) every 3 years, annual fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), or colonoscopy every 10 years. Assuming the same cost as multi-target stool DNA, CMSmin cost $28,500/quality-adjusted life-year gained vs no screening, but FIT, colonoscopy, and multi-target stool DNA were less costly and more effective. CMSmin would match FIT's clinical outcomes if it achieved 1.4- to 1.8-fold FIT's participation rate. Advanced precancerous lesion (APL) sensitivity was a key determinant of a test's effectiveness. A paradigm-changing blood-based test (sensitivity >90% for CRC and 80% for APL; 90% specificity; cost ≤$120-$140) would be cost-effective vs FIT at comparable participation. CONCLUSIONS: CMSmin could contribute to CRC control by achieving screening in those who will not use established methods. Substituting blood-based testing for established effective CRC screening methods will require higher CRC and APL sensitivities that deliver programmatic benefits matching those of FIT. High APL sensitivity, which can result in CRC prevention, should be a top priority for screening test developers. APL detection should not be penalized by a definition of test specificity that focuses on CRC only.

Colorectal cancer screening at age 45 years in Israel: Cost-effectiveness and global implications.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence at ages <50 years is increasing worldwide. Screening initiation was lowered to 45 years in the United States. The cost-effectiveness of initiating CRC screening at 45 years in Israel was assessed with the aim of informing national policy and addressing internationally relevant questions. METHODS: A validated CRC screening model was calibrated to Israeli data and examined annual fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) or colonoscopy every 10 years from 45 to 74 years (FIT45-74 or Colo45-74) versus from 50 to 74 years (FIT50-74 or Colo50-74). The addition of a fourth colonoscopy at 75 years was explored, subanalyses were performed by sex/ethnicity, and resource demands were estimated. RESULTS: FIT50-74 and Colo50-74 reduced CRC incidence by 57% and 70% and mortality by 70% and 77%, respectively, versus no screening, with greater absolute impact in Jews/Other versus Arabs but comparable relative impact. FIT45-74 further reduced CRC incidence and mortality by an absolute 3% and 2%, respectively. With Colo45-74 versus Colo50-74, CRC cases and deaths increased slightly as three colonoscopies per lifetime shifted to 5 years earlier but mean quality-adjusted life-years gained (QALYGs) per person increased. FIT45-74 and Colo45-74 cost 23,800-53,900 new Israeli shekels (NIS)/QALYG and 110,600-162,700 NIS/QALYG, with the lowest and highest values among Jewish/Other men and Arab women, respectively. A fourth lifetime colonoscopy cost 48,700 NIS/QALYG. Lowering FIT initiation to 45 years with modest participation required 19,300 additional colonoscopies in the first 3 years. CONCLUSIONS: Beginning CRC screening at 45 years in Israel is projected to yield modest clinical benefits at acceptable costs per QALYG. Despite different estimates by sex/ethnicity, a uniform national policy is favored. These findings can inform Israeli guidelines and serve as a case study internationally.

The steatosis-associated fibrosis estimator (SAFE) score: A tool to detect low-risk NAFLD in primary care.

BACKGROUND: NAFLD is common in primary care. Liver fibrosis stage 2 or higher (≥F2) increases future risk of morbidity and mortality. We developed and validated a score to aid in the initial assessment of liver fibrosis for NAFLD in primary care. METHODS: Data from patients with biopsy-proven NAFLD were extracted from the NASH Clinical Research Network observational study ( n = 676). Using logistic regression and machine-learning methods, we constructed prediction models to distinguish ≥F2 from F0/1. The models were tested in participants in a trial ("FLINT," n = 280) and local patients with NAFLD with magnetic resonance elastography data ( n = 130). The final model was applied to examinees in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) III ( n = 11,953) to correlate with long-term mortality. RESULTS: A multivariable logistic regression model was selected as the Steatosis-Associated Fibrosis Estimator (SAFE) score, which consists of age, body mass index, diabetes, platelets, aspartate and alanine aminotransferases, and globulins (total serum protein minus albumin). The model yielded areas under receiver operating characteristic curves ≥0.80 in distinguishing F0/1 from ≥F2 in testing data sets, consistently higher than those of Fibrosis-4 and NAFLD Fibrosis Scores. The negative predictive values in ruling out ≥F2 at SAFE of 0 were 88% and 92% in the two testing sets. In the NHANES III set, survival up to 25 years of subjects with SAFE < 0 was comparable to that of those without steatosis ( p = 0.34), whereas increasing SAFE scores correlated with shorter survival with an adjusted HR of 1.53 ( p < 0.01) for subjects with SAFE > 100. CONCLUSION: The SAFE score, which uses widely available variables to estimate liver fibrosis in patients diagnosed with NAFLD, may be used in primary care to recognize low-risk NAFLD.

Cost-Effectiveness of Earlier or More Intensive Colorectal Cancer Screening in Overweight and Obese Patients.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Overweight and obese persons have not only elevated rates of colorectal cancer (CRC), but also higher competing mortality and healthcare spending. We examined the cost-effectiveness of intensified CRC screening in overweight and obese persons. METHODS: We adapted our validated decision analytic model of CRC screening to compare screening starting at 45 or 40 years of age instead of at 50 years of age, or shortening screening intervals, in women and men with body mass index (BMI) ranging from normal to grade III obesity. Strategies included colonoscopy every 10 years (Colo10) or every 5 years (Colo5), or annual fecal immunochemical test. RESULTS: Without screening, sex-specific total CRC deaths were similar for persons with overweight or obesity I-III, reflecting the counterbalancing of higher CRC risk by lower life expectancy as BMI rises. For all BMI and sex groups, Colo10 starting at 45 years of age or FIT starting at 40 years of age were cost-effective at a threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year gained. Colo10 starting at 40 years of age was cost-effective only for men with obesity II-III, at $93,300 and $80,400 per quality-adjusted life year gained, respectively. Shifting Colo10 to earlier starting ages was always preferred over Colo5 starting at later ages. Results were robust in sensitivity analysis, including varying all-cause mortality, complication, and BMI-specific CRC risks. CONCLUSIONS: CRC screening starting at 45 years of age with colonoscopy, or at 40 years of age with FIT, appears cost-effective for women and men across the range of BMI. In men with obesity II-III, who have the highest CRC but also all-cause mortality risks, colonoscopy starting at 40 years of age appears cost-effective. It remains to be decided whether BMI should be used as a single predictor or incorporated into a multivariable tool to tailor CRC screening.

Adenoma and Sessile Serrated Lesion Detection Rates at Screening Colonoscopy for Ages 45-49 Years vs Older Ages Since the Introduction of New Colorectal Cancer Screening Guidelines.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: All major U.S. guidelines now endorse average-risk colorectal cancer (CRC) screening at 45-49 years of age. Concerns exist that endoscopic capacity may be strained, that low-risk persons may self-select for screening, and that calculations of the adenoma detection rate may be diluted. We analyzed age-specific screening colonoscopy volumes and lesion detection rates before vs after the endorsement of CRC screening at 45-49 years of age. METHODS: We compared colonoscopy volumes and lesion detection rates in our healthcare system during period 1 (October 2017 to December 2018), before the first change in guidelines, vs period 2 (January 2019 to August 2021), the era of new guidelines. RESULTS: The proportion of first-time screening colonoscopies performed in 45- to 49-year-olds increased from 3.5% to 11.6% (relative risk, 3.36; 95% CI, 2.45-4.61). The period 2 detection rates for adenoma, advanced adenoma, sessile serrated lesion, advanced sessile serrated lesion, adenomas per colonoscopy, and lesions per colonoscopy were very similar for 45- to 49-year-olds (34.3%, 6.3%, 8.6%, 2.9%, 0.58, and 0.69, respectively) and 50- to 54-year-olds (38.2%, 5.8%, 9.4%, 3.0%, 0.63, and 0.76, respectively) at first-time screening, and for 60- to 64-year-olds at rescreening (33.4%, 6.1%, 7.2%, 2.3%, 0.61, and 0.70, respectively). All detection rates, adenomas per colonoscopy, and lesions per colonoscopy increased from period 1 to period 2 (eg, overall adenoma detection rate 35.1% vs 42.6%; P < .0001), without any decreases among 45- to 49-year-olds. CONCLUSIONS: In our healthcare system, a lower CRC screening initiation age has modestly affected colonoscopy volume by age without compromising screening yield. Lesion detection rates, including for advanced adenomas, in average-risk 45- to 49-year-olds approximate those in 50- to 54-year-olds at first-time screening and 60- to 64-year-olds at rescreening. National monitoring is needed to assess fully the impact of lowering the CRC screening initiation age.

National Trends and Waitlist Outcomes of Locoregional Therapy Among Liver Transplant Candidates With Hepatocellular Carcinoma in the United States.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Policy changes in the United States have lengthened overall waiting times for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We investigated temporal trends in utilization of locoregional therapy (LRT) and associated waitlist outcomes among liver transplant (LT) candidates in the United States. METHODS: Data for primary adult LT candidates listed from 2003 to 2018 who received HCC exception were extracted from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database. Explant histology was examined, and multivariable competing risk analysis was used to evaluate the association between LRT type and waitlist dropout. RESULTS: There were 31,609 eligible patients with at least 1 approved HCC exception, and 34,610 treatments among 24,145 LT candidates. The proportion with at least 1 LRT recorded increased from 42.3% in 2003 to 92.4% in 2018. Chemoembolization remains the most frequent type, followed by thermal ablation, with a notable increase in radioembolization from 3% in 2013 to 19% in 2018. An increased incidence of LRT was observed among patients with tumor burden beyond Milan criteria, higher α-fetoprotein level, and more compensated liver disease. Receipt of any type of LRT was associated with a lower risk of waitlist dropout; there was no significant difference by number of LRTs. In inverse probability of treatment weighting-adjusted analysis, radioembolization or ablation as the first LRT was associated with a reduced risk of waitlist dropout compared with chemoembolization. CONCLUSIONS: In a large nationwide cohort of LT candidates with HCC, LRT, and in particular radioembolization, increasingly was used to bridge to LT. Patients with greater tumor burden and those with more compensated liver disease received more treatments while awaiting LT. Bridging LRT was associated with a lower risk of waitlist dropout.

Age-Specific Rates and Time-Courses of Gastrointestinal and Nongastrointestinal Complications Associated With Screening/Surveillance Colonoscopy.

INTRODUCTION: The rates of serious cardiac, neurologic, and pulmonary events attributable to colonoscopy are poorly characterized, and background event rates are usually not accounted for. METHODS: We performed a multistate population-based study using changepoint analysis to determine the rates and timing of serious gastrointestinal and nongastrointestinal adverse events associated with screening/surveillance colonoscopy, including analyses by age (45 to <55, 55 to <65, 65 to <75, and ≥75 years). Among 4.5 million persons in the Ambulatory Surgery and Services Databases of California, Florida, and New York who underwent screening/surveillance colonoscopy in 2005-2015, we ascertained serious postcolonoscopy events in excess of background rates in Emergency Department (SEDD) and Inpatient Databases (SID). RESULTS: Most serious nongastrointestinal postcolonoscopy events were expected based on the background rate and not associated with colonoscopy itself. However, associated nongastrointestinal events predominated over gastrointestinal events at ages ≥65 years, including more myocardial infarctions plus ischemic strokes than perforations at ages ≥75 years (361 [95% confidence intervals {CI} 312-419] plus 1,279 [95% CI 1,182-1,384] vs 912 [95% CI 831-1,002] per million). At all ages, the observed-to-expected ratios for days 0-7, 0-30, and 0-60 after colonoscopy were substantially >1 for gastrointestinal bleeding and perforation, but minimally >1 for most nongastrointestinal complications. Risk periods ranged from 1 to 125 days depending on complication type and age. No excess postcolonoscopy in-hospital deaths were observed. DISCUSSION: Although crude counts substantially overestimate nongastrointestinal events associated with colonoscopy, nongastrointestinal complications exceed bleeding and perforation risk in older persons. The inability to ascertain modifications to antiplatelet therapy was a study limitation. Our results can inform benefit-to-risk determinations for preventive colonoscopy.

Adenoma and Serrated Lesion Detection by Colonoscopy Indication: The ADR-ESS (ADR Extended to all Screening/Surveillance) Score.

BACKGROUND: The adenoma detection rate at screening (ADR) predicts interval colorectal cancer. Monitoring other lesion detection rates and colonoscopy indications has been proposed. We developed a comprehensive, automated colonoscopy audit program based on standardized clinical documentation, explored detection rates across indications, and developed the Adenoma Detection Rate - Extended to all Screening / Surveillance (ADR-ESS) score. METHODS: In a prospective cohort study, we calculated overall and advanced adenoma and sessile serrated lesion (SSL) detection rates among 15,253 colonoscopies by 35 endoscopists from 4 endoscopy units across all colonoscopy indications. We explored correlations between detection rates, and the precision and stability of ADR-ESS versus ADR. RESULTS: The overall "screening, first" ADR was 36.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 34.5%-38.1%). The adenoma detection rate was lower for "screening, not first" (relative rate [RR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.74-0.87) and "family history" (RR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.74-0.96), and higher for "surveillance" (RR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.15-1.31) and "follow-up, FIT" (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.07-1.37). For "screening, first," the detection rates for advanced adenoma, SSL, and advanced SSL were 6.7% (95% CI, 5.7%-7.7%), 7.2% (95% CI, 6.2%-8.2%), and 2.6% (95% CI, 2.0%-3.2%), respectively. Adenoma and SSL detection were correlated (r = 0.44; P = .008). ADR-ESS had substantially narrower confidence intervals and less period-to-period variability than ADR, and was not improved by weighting for indication volume and correction for detection by indication. CONCLUSIONS: Comprehensive, automated colonoscopy audit based on standardized clinical documentation is feasible. Adenoma detection is a fair but imperfect proxy for SSL detection. ADR-ESS increases the precision of adenoma detection assessments and emphasizes quality across colonoscopy indications.

Association of Anti-TNF Therapy With Increased Risk of Acute Cholangitis in Patients With Primary Sclerosing Cholangitis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) are at increased risk of developing acute cholangitis. The majority of patients with PSC have comorbid inflammatory bowel disease, and many take immunosuppressive medications. The epidemiological risks for the development of acute cholangitis in patients with PSC, including the impact of immunosuppressive therapy, are unknown. METHODS: We conducted a 2-center, retrospective cohort study using data from 228 patients at Stanford University Medical Center and Santa Clara Valley Medical Center (CA), a county health care system. Patient demographics, medications, PSC disease severity, and inflammatory bowel disease status were extracted. Using stepwise variable selection, we included demographic and covariate predictors in the multiple logistic regression model assessing risk factors for cholangitis. Time-to-event analysis was performed to evaluate specific immunosuppressive medications and development of cholangitis. RESULTS: Thirty-one percent of patients had at least 1 episode of acute cholangitis (n = 72). Anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy was associated with increased odds of acute cholangitis (odds ratio, 7.29; 95% confidence interval, 2.63-12.43), but immunomodulator use was protective against acute cholangitis (odds ratio, 0.23; 95% confidence interval, 0.05-0.76). Anti-TNF therapy was associated with decreased time-to-cholangitis, with a median time of 28.4 months; in contrast, only 11.1% of patients who were prescribed immunomodulators developed cholangitis over the same time period (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our observations suggest that classes of immunosuppressive medications differentially modify the odds of acute cholangitis. Biologic therapy, ie, anti-TNF therapy, was shown to have significantly higher odds for patients developing acute cholangitis whereas immunomodulator therapy was shown to have a potential protective effect. These findings may help guide physicians in decision-making for determining appropriate immunosuppressive therapy.

Posttransplant Outcomes in Older Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma Are Driven by Non-Hepatocellular Carcinoma Factors.

The incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is growing in the United States, especially among the elderly. Older patients are increasingly receiving transplants as a result of HCC, but the impact of advancing age on long-term posttransplant outcomes is not clear. To study this, we used data from the US Multicenter HCC Transplant Consortium of 4980 patients. We divided the patients into 4 groups by age at transplantation: 18 to 64 years (n = 4001), 65 to 69 years (n = 683), 70 to 74 years (n = 252), and ≥75 years (n = 44). There were no differences in HCC tumor stage, type of bridging locoregional therapy, or explant residual tumor between the groups. Older age was confirmed to be an independent and significant predictor of overall survival even after adjusting for demographic, etiologic, and cancer-related factors on multivariable analysis. A dose-response effect of age on survival was observed, with every 5-year increase in age older than 50 years resulting in an absolute increase of 8.3% in the mortality rate. Competing risk analysis revealed that older patients experienced higher rates of non-HCC-related mortality (P = 0.004), and not HCC-related death (P = 0.24). To delineate the precise cause of death, we further analyzed a single-center cohort of patients who received a transplant as a result of HCC (n = 302). Patients older than 65 years had a higher incidence of de novo cancer (18.1% versus 7.6%; P = 0.006) after transplantation and higher overall cancer-related mortality (14.3% versus 6.6%; P = 0.03). Even carefully selected elderly patients with HCC have significantly worse posttransplant survival rates, which are mostly driven by non-HCC-related causes. Minimizing immunosuppression and closer surveillance for de novo cancers can potentially improve the outcomes in elderly patients who received a transplant as a result of HCC.

A nationwide analysis of readmission rates after colorectal cancer surgery in the US in the Era of the Affordable Care Act.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP), which was instituted in 2012, may have affected readmission rates for non-target conditions, including colorectal cancer (CRC). We aimed to analyze the nationwide all-cause 30-day readmission rate following CRC surgery in a US nationwide database. METHODS: We queried the 2010-2015 Nationwide Readmissions Database to estimate readmission rates. All results were weighted for national estimates. RESULTS: Among 616,348 index cases, the overall 2010-2015 30-day readmission rate was 14.7% (95% confidence interval, 14.5%-14.9% [n = 90,555]), with a decreasing trend from 15.5% in 2010 and 2011 to 13.5% in 2015 (p-trend<0.001). Rectal resection, longer length of stay, non-invasive cancer, surgery at a metropolitan teaching hospital, non-routine discharge, elective admission, and higher Elixhauser comorbidity score were associated with subsequent readmission. CONCLUSIONS: In the US, 30-day readmission rates after CRC surgery showed a decreasing trend during 2010-2015, which could represent a spillover effect of the HRRP.

Effectiveness and Cost of Organized Outreach for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Randomized, Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening remains underused, especially in safety-net systems. The objective of this study was to determine the effectiveness, costs, and cost-effectiveness of organized outreach using fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) compared with usual care. METHODS: Patients age 50-75 years eligible for CRC screening from eight participating primary care safety-net clinics were randomly assigned to outreach intervention with usual care vs usual care alone. The intervention included a mailed postcard and call, followed by a mailed FIT kit, and a reminder phone call if the FIT kit was not returned. The primary outcome was screening participation at 1 year and a microcosting analysis of the outreach activities with embedded long-term cost-effectiveness of outreach. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: A total of 5386 patients were randomly assigned to the intervention group and 5434 to usual care. FIT screening was statistically significantly higher in the intervention group than in the control group (57.9% vs 37.4%, P < .001; difference = 20.5%, 95% confidence interval = 18.6% to 22.4%). In the intervention group, FIT completion rate was higher in patients who had previously completed a FIT vs those who had not (71.9% vs 35.7%, P < .001). There was evidence of effect modification of the intervention by language, and clinic. Outreach cost approximately $23 per patient and $112 per additional patient screened. Projecting long-term outcomes, outreach was estimated to cost $9200 per quality-adjusted life-year gained vs usual care. CONCLUSION: Population-based management with organized FIT outreach statistically significantly increased CRC screening and was cost-effective in a safety-net system. The sustainability of the program and any impact of economies of scale remain to be determined.

Clinical and Economic Impact of Tailoring Screening to Predicted Colorectal Cancer Risk: A Decision Analytic Modeling Study.

BACKGROUND: Global increases in colorectal cancer risk have spurred debate about optimal use of screening resources. We explored the potential clinical and economic impact of colorectal cancer screening tailored to predicted colorectal cancer risk. METHODS: We compared screening tailored to predicted risk versus uniform screening in a validated decision analytic model, considering the average risk population's actual colorectal cancer risk distribution, and a risk-prediction tool's discriminatory ability and cost. Low, moderate, and high risk tiers were identified as colorectal cancer risk after age 50 years of ≤3%, >3 to <12%, and ≥12%, respectively, based on threshold analyses with willingness-to-pay <$50,000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Tailored colonoscopy (once at age 60 years for low risk, every 10 years for moderate risk, and every 5 years for high risk) was compared with colonoscopy every 10 years for all. Tailored fecal immunochemical testing (FIT)/colonoscopy (annual FIT for low and moderate risk, colonoscopy every 5 years for high risk) was compared with annual FIT for all. RESULTS: Assuming no colorectal cancer risk misclassification or risk-prediction tool costs, tailored screening was preferred over uniform screening. Tailored colonoscopy was minimally less effective than uniform colonoscopy, but saved $90,200-$889,000/QALY; tailored FIT/colonoscopy yielded more QALYs/person than annual FIT at $10,600-$60,000/QALY gained. Relatively modest colorectal cancer risk misclassification rates or risk-prediction tool costs resulted in uniform screening as the preferred approach. CONCLUSIONS: Current risk-prediction tools may not yet be accurate enough to optimize colorectal cancer screening. IMPACT: Uniform screening is likely to be preferred over tailored screening if a risk-prediction tool is associated with even modest misclassification rates or costs.

Cost-Effectiveness and National Effects of Initiating Colorectal Cancer Screening for Average-Risk Persons at Age 45 Years Instead of 50 Years.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The American Cancer Society has recommended initiating colorectal cancer (CRC) screening at age 45 years instead of 50 years. We estimated the cost effectiveness and national effects of adopting this recommendation. METHODS: We compared screening strategies and alternative resource allocations in a validated Markov model. We based national projections on screening participation rates by age and census data. RESULTS: Screening colonoscopy initiation at age 45 years instead of 50 years in 1000 persons averted 4 CRCs and 2 CRC deaths, gained 14 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), cost $33,900/QALY gained, and required 758 additional colonoscopies. These 758 colonoscopies could instead be used to screen 231 currently unscreened 55-year-old persons or 342 currently unscreened 65-year-old persons, through age 75 years. These alternatives averted 13-14 CRC cases and 6-7 CRC deaths and gained 27-28 discounted QALYs while saving $163,700-$445,800. Improving colonoscopy completion rates after abnormal results from a fecal immunochemical test yielded greater benefits and savings. Initiation of fecal immunochemical testing at age 45 years instead of 50 years cost $7700/QALY gained. Shifting current age-specific screening rates to 5 years earlier could avert 29,400 CRC cases and 11,100 CRC deaths over the next 5 years but would require 10.7 million additional colonoscopies and cost an incremental $10.4 billion. Improving screening rates to 80% in persons who are 50-75 years old would avert nearly 3-fold more CRC deaths at one third the incremental cost. CONCLUSIONS: In a Markov model analysis, we found that starting CRC screening at age 45 years is likely to be cost effective. However, greater benefit, at lower cost, could be achieved by increasing participation rates for unscreened older and higher-risk persons.

A Comparison Between Community and Academic Practices in the USA in the Management of Chronic Hepatitis B Patients Receiving Entecavir: Results of the ENUMERATE Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The management of chronic hepatitis B patients is not well characterized in real-world practice. We compared baseline characteristics of CHB patients on entecavir, the frequency of on-treatment monitoring, and the effectiveness of ETV treatment between academic and community practices. METHODS: Treatment-naïve CHB patients ≥18 years old, treated with ETV for ≥12 months from 2005 to 2013, in 26 community and academic practices throughout the USA were retrospectively evaluated. RESULTS: Of 841 patients enrolled, 658 (65% male, 83% Asian, median age 47, 9% with cirrhosis) met inclusion criteria. Half of the patients (52%) were from community practices. A lower percentage of patients in community practices had cirrhosis or liver cancer (5 vs. 14%). Community practices more often treated patients with baseline ALT < 2 × ULN. Over a median follow-up of 4 years, community practices were more likely to discontinue ETV with less frequent laboratory monitoring compared to academic practices. The 5-year cumulative probability of ALT normalization was greater among patients treated in community practices (70 vs. 50%, p < 0.001), but the 5-year cumulative probability of undetectable HBV DNA was lower (45 vs. 70%, p < 0.001) than those treated in academic practices. CONCLUSION: Academic practices saw CHB patients with more advanced liver disease, more often followed AASLD guidelines, and monitored patients on ETV treatment more frequently than community practices. While patients in community practices were less likely to achieve undetectable HBV DNA and more likely to achieve ALT normalization, the rates of HBeAg loss and seroconversion as well as HBsAg loss were similar.

Contrasting Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening Under Commercial Insurance vs. Medicare.

OBJECTIVES: Most cost-effectiveness analyses of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening assume Medicare payment rates and a lifetime horizon. Our aims were to examine the implications of differential payment levels and time horizons for commercial insurers vs. Medicare on the cost-effectiveness of CRC screening. METHODS: We used our validated Markov cohort simulation of CRC screening in the average risk US population to examine CRC screening at ages 50-64 under commercial insurance, and at ages 65-80 under Medicare, using a health-care sector perspective. Model outcomes included discounted quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs per person, and incremental cost/QALY gained. RESULTS: Lifetime costs/person were 20-44% higher when assuming commercial payment rates rather than Medicare rates for people under 65. Most of the substantial clinical benefit of screening at ages 50-64 was realized at ages ≥65. For commercial payers with a time horizon of ages 50-64, fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) and fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) were cost-effective (<$61,000/QALY gained), but colonoscopy was costly (>$185,000/QALY gained). Medicare experienced substantial clinical benefits and cost-savings from screening done at ages <65, even if screening was not continued. Among those previously screened, continuing FOBT and FIT under Medicare was cost-saving and continuing colonoscopy was highly cost-effective (<$30,000/QALY gained), and initiating any screening in those previously unscreened was highly effective and cost-saving. CONCLUSIONS: Modeling suggests that CRC screening is highly cost-effective over a lifetime even when considering higher payment rates by commercial payers vs. Medicare. Screening may appear relatively costly for commercial payers if only a time horizon of ages 50-64 is considered, but it is predicted to yield substantial clinical and economic benefits that accrue primarily at ages ≥65 under Medicare.

Impact of surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma on survival in patients with compensated cirrhosis.

Surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has been recommended in patients with cirrhosis. In this study, we examined the extent to which the competing risk of hepatic decompensation influences the benefit of HCC surveillance by investigating the impact of availability of liver transplantation (LTx) and the rate of progression of hepatic decompensation on survival gain from HCC surveillance. A multistate Markov model was constructed simulating a cohort of 50-year-old patients with compensated cirrhosis. The primary outcome of interest was all-cause and HCC-specific mortality. The main input data included incidence of HCC, sensitivity of screening test, and mortality from hepatic decompensation. Treatment modalities modeled included LTx, resection, and radiofrequency ablation. In the base case scenario, LTx would be available to prevent death in a certain proportion of patients. In the absence of surveillance, 68.2% of the cohort members died within 15 years; of these decedents, 25.1% died from HCC and 43.6% died from hepatic decompensation. With surveillance, the median survival improved from 10.4 years to 11.2 years. The number of subjects under surveillance needed to reduce one all-cause and one HCC-specific death over 15 years was 28 and 18, respectively. In sensitivity analyses, incidence of HCC and progression of cirrhosis had the strongest effect on the benefit of surveillance, whereas LTx availability had a negligible effect. CONCLUSION: HCC surveillance decreases all-cause and tumor-specific mortality in patients with compensated cirrhosis regardless of LTx availability. In addition, incidence of HCC and sensitivity of surveillance test also had a substantial impact on the benefits of surveillance. (Hepatology 2018;68:78-88).