Cost-Effectiveness of Liquid Biopsy for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Patients Who Are Unscreened.

Importance: Despite recommendations for universal screening, adherence to colorectal cancer screening in the US is approximately 60%. Liquid biopsy tests are in development for cancer early detection, but it is unclear whether they are cost-effective for colorectal cancer screening. Objective: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of liquid biopsy for colorectal cancer screening in the US. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this economic evaluation, a Markov model was developed to compare no screening and 5 colorectal cancer screening strategies: colonoscopy, liquid biopsy, liquid biopsy following nonadherence to colonoscopy, stool DNA, and fecal immunochemical test. Adherence to first-line screening with colonoscopy, stool DNA, or fecal immunochemical test was assumed to be 60.6%, and adherence for liquid biopsy was assumed to be 100%. For colonoscopy, stool DNA, and fecal immunochemical test, patients who did not adhere to testing were not offered other screening. In colonoscopy-liquid biopsy hybrid, liquid biopsy was second-line screening for those who deferred colonoscopy. Scenario analyses were performed to include the possibility of polyp detection for liquid biopsy. Exposures: No screening, colonoscopy, fecal immunochemical test, stool DNA, liquid biopsy, and colonoscopy-liquid biopsy hybrid screening. Main Outcomes and Measures: Model outcomes included life expectancy, total cost, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. A strategy was considered cost-effective if it had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio less than the US willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per life-year gained. Results: This study used a simulated cohort of patients aged 45 years with average risk of colorectal cancer. In the base case, colonoscopy was the preferred, or cost-effective, strategy with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $28 071 per life-year gained. Colonoscopy-liquid biopsy hybrid had the greatest gain in life-years gained but had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $377 538. Colonoscopy-liquid biopsy hybrid had a greater gain in life-years if liquid biopsy could detect polyps but remained too costly. Conclusions and Relevance: In this economic evaluation of liquid biopsy for colorectal cancer screening, colonoscopy was a cost-effective strategy for colorectal cancer screening in the general population, and the inclusion of liquid biopsy as a first- or second-line screening strategy was not cost-effective at its current cost and screening performance. Liquid biopsy tests for colorectal cancer screening may become cost-effective if their cost is substantially lowered.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal, Version 1.2021.

Identifying individuals with hereditary syndromes allows for timely cancer surveillance, opportunities for risk reduction, and syndrome-specific management. Establishing criteria for hereditary cancer risk assessment allows for the identification of individuals who are carriers of pathogenic genetic variants. The NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal provides recommendations for the assessment and management of patients at risk for or diagnosed with high-risk colorectal cancer syndromes. The NCCN Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal panel meets annually to evaluate and update their recommendations based on their clinical expertise and new scientific data. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP)/attenuated familial adenomatous polyposis (AFAP) syndrome and considerations for management of duodenal neoplasia.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal, Version 2.2019.

Identifying individuals with hereditary syndromes allows for improved cancer surveillance, risk reduction, and optimized management. Establishing criteria for assessment allows for the identification of individuals who are carriers of pathogenic genetic variants. The NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal provide recommendations for the assessment and management of patients with high-risk colorectal cancer syndromes. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on criteria for the evaluation of Lynch syndrome and considerations for use of multigene testing in the assessment of hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes.

Clinical exome sequencing vs. usual care for hereditary colorectal cancer diagnosis: A pilot comparative effectiveness study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical exome sequencing (CES) provides the advantage of assessing genetic variation across the human exome compared to a traditional stepwise diagnostic approach or multi-gene panels. Comparative effectiveness research methods offer an approach to better understand the patient-centered and economic outcomes of CES. PURPOSE: To evaluate CES compared to usual care (UC) in the diagnostic work-up of inherited colorectal cancer/polyposis (CRCP) in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). METHODS: The primary outcome was clinical sensitivity for the diagnosis of inherited CRCP; secondary outcomes included psychosocial outcomes, family communication, and healthcare resource utilization. Participants were surveyed 2 and 4 weeks after results return and at 3-month intervals up to 1 year. RESULTS: Evolving outcome measures and standard of care presented critical challenges. The majority of participants in the UC arm received multi-gene panels [94.73%]. Rates of genetic findings supporting the diagnosis of hereditary CRCP were 7.5% [7/93] vs. 5.4% [5/93] in the CES and UC arms, respectively (P = 0.28). Differences in privacy concerns after receiving CRCP results were identified (0.88 in UC vs 0.38 in CES, P = 0.05); however, healthcare resource utilization, family communication and psychosocial outcomes were similar between the two arms. More participants with positive results (17.7%) intended to change their life insurance 1  month after the first return visit compared to participants returned a variant of uncertain significance (9.1%) or negative result (4.8%) (P = 0.09). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that CES provides similar clinical benefits to multi-gene panels in the diagnosis of hereditary CRCP.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal, Version 3.2017.

The NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal provide recommendations for the management of patients with high-risk syndromes associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). The NCCN Panel for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal meets at least annually to assess comments from reviewers within their institutions, examine relevant data, and reevaluate and update their recommendations. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on genes newly associated with CRC risk on multigene panels, the associated evidence, and currently recommended management strategies.

Processing cost and its consequences.

I focus on two challenges that processing-based theories of language must confront: the need to explain why language has the particular properties that it does, and the need to explain why processing pressures are manifested in the particular way that they are. I discuss these matters with reference to two illustrative phenomena: proximity effects in word order and a constraint on contraction.

Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal Version 1.2016, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

This is a focused update highlighting the most current NCCN Guidelines for diagnosis and management of Lynch syndrome. Lynch syndrome is the most common cause of hereditary colorectal cancer, usually resulting from a germline mutation in 1 of 4 DNA mismatch repair genes (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, or PMS2), or deletions in the EPCAM promoter. Patients with Lynch syndrome are at an increased lifetime risk, compared with the general population, for colorectal cancer, endometrial cancer, and other cancers, including of the stomach and ovary. As of 2016, the panel recommends screening all patients with colorectal cancer for Lynch syndrome and provides recommendations for surveillance for early detection and prevention of Lynch syndrome-associated cancers.

Initiation of universal tumor screening for Lynch syndrome in colorectal cancer patients as a model for the implementation of genetic information into clinical oncology practice.

BACKGROUND: Lynch syndrome confers a hereditary predisposition to colorectal and other cancers. Universal tumor screening (UTS) for Lynch syndrome is recommended by several professional societies, but the implementation can be complex. This article describes the evaluation, process development, and initiation of Lynch syndrome UTS at a tertiary referral cancer center. METHODS: A multidisciplinary team developed the new process design. Issues in 5 themes were noted: timing, funding, second-opinion patients, result processing, and the role of genetics providers. A committee approach was used to examine each issue for process-improvement development. RESULTS: The issues related to testing were addressed individually for the successful implementation of UTS at the institutional level. In the conventional-care period, 9 of 30 cases (30%) received Lynch syndrome screening, and 4 cases were referred to medical genetics. During the 6 months following the implementation of UTS, 32 of 44 patients (73%) received Lynch syndrome screening. The 13 unscreened patients all had identified reasons for nonscreening (eg, financial limitations). Ten patients were referred to medical genetics, which identified no new cases of Lynch syndrome, but a low-risk adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) variant was detected in 1 individual. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of effective Lynch syndrome UTS can feasibly alter practice at the institutional level. This experience with the assessment and management of issues relevant to the successful implementation of a new clinical care paradigm based on emerging technology has implications for the uptake of advances across molecular oncology into clinical practice, and this is highly relevant in the current era of rapidly evolving genomic technology.

Next-Generation Sequencing Panels for the Diagnosis of Colorectal Cancer and Polyposis Syndromes: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the cost effectiveness of next-generation sequencing (NGS) panels for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer and polyposis (CRCP) syndromes in patients referred to cancer genetics clinics. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We developed a decision model to evaluate NGS panel testing compared with current standard of care in patients referred to a cancer genetics clinic. We obtained data on the prevalence of genetic variants from a large academic laboratory and calculated the costs and health benefits of identifying relatives with a pathogenic variant, in life-years and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). We classified the CRCP syndromes according to their type of inheritance and penetrance of colorectal cancer. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess uncertainty. RESULTS: Evaluation with an NGS panel that included Lynch syndrome genes and other genes associated with highly penetrant CRCP syndromes led to an average increase of 0.151 year of life, 0.128 QALY, and $4,650 per patient, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $36,500 per QALY compared with standard care and a 99% probability that this panel was cost effective at a threshold of $100,000 per QALY. When compared with this panel, the addition of genes with low colorectal cancer penetrance resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $77,300 per QALY. CONCLUSION: The use of an NGS panel that includes genes associated with highly penetrant CRCP syndromes in addition to Lynch syndrome genes as a first-line test is likely to provide meaningful clinical benefits in a cost-effective manner at a $100,000 per QALY threshold.

Comparative effectiveness of next generation genomic sequencing for disease diagnosis: design of a randomized controlled trial in patients with colorectal cancer/polyposis syndromes.

Whole exome and whole genome sequencing are applications of next generation sequencing transforming clinical care, but there is little evidence whether these tests improve patient outcomes or if they are cost effective compared to current standard of care. These gaps in knowledge can be addressed by comparative effectiveness and patient-centered outcomes research. We designed a randomized controlled trial that incorporates these research methods to evaluate whole exome sequencing compared to usual care in patients being evaluated for hereditary colorectal cancer and polyposis syndromes. Approximately 220 patients will be randomized and followed for 12 months after return of genomic findings. Patients will receive findings associated with colorectal cancer in a first return of results visit, and findings not associated with colorectal cancer (incidental findings) during a second return of results visit. The primary outcome is efficacy to detect mutations associated with these syndromes; secondary outcomes include psychosocial impact, cost-effectiveness and comparative costs. The secondary outcomes will be obtained via surveys before and after each return visit. The expected challenges in conducting this randomized controlled trial include the relatively low prevalence of genetic disease, difficult interpretation of some genetic variants, and uncertainty about which incidental findings should be returned to patients. The approaches utilized in this study may help guide other investigators in clinical genomics to identify useful outcome measures and strategies to address comparative effectiveness questions about the clinical implementation of genomic sequencing in clinical care.

Barrett's oesophagus: epidemiology, cancer risk and implications for management.

Although endoscopic surveillance of patients with Barrett's oesophagus has been widely implemented, its effectiveness is debateable. The recently reported low annual oesophageal adenocarcinoma risk in population studies, the failure to identify most Barrett's patients at risk of disease progression, the poor adherence to surveillance and biopsy protocols, and the significant risk of misclassification of dysplasia all tend to undermine the effectiveness of current management, in particular, endoscopic surveillance programmes, to prevent or improve the outcomes of patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma. The ongoing increase in incidence of Barrett's oesophagus and consequent growth of the surveillance population, together with the associated discomfort and costs of endoscopic surveillance, demand improved techniques for accurately determining individual risk of oesophageal adenocarcinoma. More accurate techniques are needed to run efficient surveillance programmes in the coming decades. In this review, we will discuss the current knowledge on the epidemiology of Barrett's oesophagus, and the challenging epidemiological dilemmas that need to be addressed when assessing the current screening and surveillance strategies.

Quality assessment and correlation of microsatellite instability and immunohistochemical markers among population- and clinic-based colorectal tumors results from the Colon Cancer Family Registry.

The detection of defective mismatch repair (MMR), as assessed by the presence of tumor microsatellite instability (MSI) and/or loss of MMR protein expression by IHC, has been useful for risk assessment, prognosis, and prediction of treatment in patients with colorectal cancer. We analyzed tumors for the presence of defective MMR from 5927 Colorectal Cancer Family Registry patients recruited at six international consortium sites. We evaluated the appropriate percentage instability cutoff used to distinguish the three MSI phenotypes [ie, stable (MSS), low instability (MSI-L), and high instability (MSI-H)]; the sensitivity, specificity, and performance characteristics of individual markers; and the concordance between MSI and IHC phenotypes. Guided by the results of the IHC testing, our findings indicate that the distinction between an MSI-H phenotype from a low-instability or MSS phenotype can best be accomplished by using a cutoff of 30% or greater of the markers showing instability. The sensitivity and specificity of the mononucleotide markers were higher than those of the dinucleotide markers. Specifically, BAT26 and BAT25 had the highest sensitivity (94%) and specificity (98%), and the use of mononucleotide markers alone identified 97% of the MSI-H cases correctly. As expected, the presence of MSI-H correlated with an older age of diagnosis, the presence of tumor in the proximal colon, and female sex.

Assessment of familiality, obesity, and other risk factors for early age of cancer diagnosis in adenocarcinomas of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction.

OBJECTIVES: Adenocarcinomas of the esophagus and adenocarcinomas of the gastroesophageal junction are postulated to be complex genetic diseases. Combined influences of environmental factors and genetic susceptibility likely influence the age at which these cancers develop. The aim of this study was to determine whether familiality and other recognized risk factors are associated with the development of these cancers at an earlier age. METHODS: A structured validated questionnaire was utilized to collect self-reported data on gastro-esophageal reflux symptoms, risk factors for Barrett's esophagus (BE) and family history, including age of cancer diagnosis in affected relatives from probands with BE, adenocarcinoma of the esophagus, or adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction, at five tertiary care academic hospitals. Medical records of all relatives reported to be affected were requested from hospitals providing this cancer care to confirm family histories. Familiality of BE/cancer, obesity (defined as body mass index >30), gastroesophageal reflux symptoms, and other risk factors were assessed for association with a young age of cancer diagnosis. RESULTS: A total of 356, 216 non-familial and 140 familial, cancers were studied. The study population consisted of 292 (82%) men and 64 (18%) women. Mean age of cancer diagnosis was no different in a comparison of familial and non-familial cancers, 62.6 vs. 61.9 years, P=0.70. There were also no significant differences in symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux, body mass index, race, gender, and smoking history between familial and non-familial cancers. Mean age of cancer diagnosis was significantly younger in those who were obese 1 year before diagnosis as compared to those who were non-obese, mean age 58.99 vs. 63.6 years, P=0.008. Multivariable modeling of age at cancer diagnosis showed that obesity 1 year before diagnosis was associated with a younger age of cancer diagnosis (P=0.005) after adjustment for heartburn and regurgitation duration. CONCLUSIONS: Obesity is associated with the development of esophageal and gastroesophageal junctional adenocarcinomas at an earlier age. Familial cancers arise at the same age as non-familial cancers and have a similar risk factor profile.

Assessment of factors affecting the validity of self-reported health-risk behavior among adolescents: evidence from the scientific literature.

We reviewed the existing empirical literature to assess cognitive and situational factors that may affect the validity of adolescents' self-reports of alcohol and other drug use, tobacco use, behaviors related to unintentional injuries and violence, dietary behaviors, physical activity, and sexual behavior. Specifically, we searched for peer-reviewed journal articles published in 1980 or later that examined the factors affecting self-report of the six categories of behavior listed above. We also searched for studies describing objective measures for each behavior. Self-reports of each of six types of health-risk behaviors are affected by both cognitive and situational factors. These factors, however, do not threaten the validity of self-reports of each type of behavior equally. The importance of assessing health-risk behaviors as part of research activities involving adolescents necessitates the use of self-report measures. Researchers should familiarize themselves with the threats to validity inherent in this type of assessment and design research that minimizes these threats as much as possible.

Contraceptive method switching in the United States.

CONTEXT: Switching among contraceptive method types is the primary determinant of the prevalence of use of specific contraceptive methods, and it has direct implications for women's ability to avoid unintended pregnancies. Yet, method switching among U.S. women has received little attention from researchers. METHODS: Data from the 1995 National Survey of Family Growth were used to construct multiple-decrement life tables to explore the gross switching rates of married and unmarried women. Within each group, discrete-time hazard models were estimated to determine how women's characteristics affect their switching behavior. RESULTS: Overall rates of method switching are high among both married and unmarried women (40% and 61%, respectively). Married women's two-year switching rates vary from 30% among women who use the implant, injectable, IUD or other reversible methods to 43% among nonusers, while unmarried women's rates vary from 33% among women who use the implant, injectable or IUD to 70% among nonusers. Multivariate analyses of method switching according to women's characteristics indicate that among married women, women without children are less likely than other women to adopt sterilization or a long-term reversible contraceptive (the implant, injectable or IUD). Older married women have a higher rate than their younger counterparts of switching to sterilization, but are also more likely to continue using no method. Among unmarried women, younger and more highly educated women have high rates of switching to the condom and to dual methods. CONCLUSIONS: Women's method switching decisions may be driven primarily by concerns related to level and duration of contraceptive effectiveness, health risks associated with contraceptive use and, among single women, sexually transmitted disease prevention.