Long-Term Impact of Medicaid Expansion on Colorectal Cancer Screening in Its Targeted Population.

INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer screening continuously decreased its mortality and incidence. In 2010, the Affordable Care Act extended Medicaid eligibility to low-income and childless adults. Some states elected to adopt Medicaid at different times while others chose not to. Past studies on the effects of Medicaid expansion on colorectal cancer screening showed equivocal results based on short-term data following expansion. AIMS: To examine the long-term impact of Medicaid expansion on colorectal cancer screening among its targeted population at its decade mark. METHODS: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data were extracted for childless adults below 138% federal poverty level in states with different Medicaid expansion statuses from 2012 to 2020. States were stratified into very early expansion states, early expansion states, late expansion states, and non-expansion states. Colorectal cancer screening prevalence was determined for eligible respondents. Difference-in-differences analyses were used to examine the effect of Medicaid expansion on colorectal cancer screening in states with different expansion statuses. RESULTS: Colorectal cancer screening prevalence in very early, early, late, and non-expansion states all increased during the study period (40.45% vs. 48.14%, 47.52% vs 61.06%, 46.06% vs 58.92%, and 43.44% vs 56.70%). Difference-in-differences analysis showed significantly increased CRC screening prevalence in very early expansion states during 2016 compared to non-expansion states (Crude difference-in-differences + 16.45%, p = 0.02, Adjusted difference-in-differences + 15.9%, p = 0.03). No statistical significance was observed among other years and groups. CONCLUSIONS: Colorectal cancer screening increased between 2012 and 2020 in all states regardless of expansion status. However, Medicaid expansion is not associated with long-term increased colorectal cancer screening prevalence.

Global Health 101.

Global health is an evolving field that has been broadly defined as the promotion of health for all through transnational collaboration and research. It centers on the concepts of equity and collaboration. The focus of global health has recently undergone a major shift toward emphasizing the importance of a systems-based approach to healthcare delivery, which considers not only the target disease but also the many contextual factors, influencing the ability to deliver care equitably to a population to reduce the burden of any particular disease. Thus, an important global health delivery framework has been established to outline this inter- and multi-disciplinary systems-based to address major global health issues and improve health for all globally. The practice of global health, whether in research or in active intervention, necessitates guiding principles to ensure ethical conduct in the transnational partnerships and efforts to advance the field. With the introduction of the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals in 2015, there has been a major shift in response to epidemiologic transition to focus on reducing the burden of noncommunicable diseases, including cancer, which disproportionately impact low-to-middle income countries. This is true for colorectal cancer, with care challenged by significant gaps in screening, early detection, and referral systems.

Is Medicaid expansion associated with increases in palliative treatments for metastatic cancer?

Background: Medicaid expansion following the 2010 Affordable Care Act has an unknown impact on palliative treatments. Materials & methods: This registry-based study of individuals with metastatic cancer from 2010 to 2016 identified men and women with metastatic cancer in expansion and non-expansion states who received palliative treatments. A mixed effects logistic regression compared trends in expansion and non-expansion states and generated risk-adjusted probabilities or receiving palliative treatments each year. Results: Despite lower baseline use of palliative treatments, the rate of change was more rapid in expansion states (odds ratio [OR]: 1.02; 95% CI: 1.01-1.03; p < 0.001). The adjusted probability of receiving palliative treatments rose from 21.3 to 26.0% in non-expansion states, and from 19.7 to 26.9% in expansion states. Conclusion: Use of palliative treatments among metastatic cancer patients increased from 2010 to 2016 with a significantly greater increase in Medicaid expansion states, even when adjusting for demographic differences between states.

Lay abstract Palliative treatments are a crucial tool for improving quality of life among those with advanced and incurable cancer. Increases in palliative treatments have been seen from 2010 to 2016 with a greater rate of increase in states which expanded Medicaid insurance coverage. Increases in insurance coverage in concert with policies to increase coverage of palliative and end of life care may increase access to palliative services.

Access denied: The relationship between patient insurance status and access to high-volume hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Underinsured patients face significant barriers in accessing high-quality care. Evidence of whether access to high-volume surgical care is mediated by disparities in health insurance coverage remains wanting. METHODS: The authors used the National Cancer Data Base to identify all adult patients who had a confirmed diagnosis of breast, prostate, lung, or colorectal cancer during 2004 through 2016. The odds of receiving surgical care at a high-volume hospital were estimated according to the type of insurance using multivariable logistic regression analyses for each malignancy. Then, the interactions between study period and insurance status were assessed. RESULTS: In total, 1,279,738 patients were included in the study. Of these, patients with breast cancer who were insured by Medicare (odds ratio [OR], 0.75; P < .001), Medicaid (OR, 0.55; P < .001), or uninsured (OR, 0.50; P < .001); patients with prostate cancer who were insured by Medicare (OR, 0.87; P = .003), Medicaid (OR, 0.58; P = .001), or uninsured (OR, 0.36; P < .001); and patients with lung cancer who were insured by Medicare (OR, 0.84; P = .020), Medicaid (OR, 0.74; P = .001), or uninsured (OR, 0.48; P < .001) were less likely to receive surgical care at high-volume hospitals compared with patients who had private insurance. For patients with colorectal cancer, the effect of insurance differed by study period, and improved since 2011. For those on Medicaid, the odds of receiving care at a high-volume hospital were 0.51 during 2004 through 2007 and 0.99 during 2014 through 2016 (P for interaction = .001); for uninsured patients, the odds were 0.45 during 2004 through 2007 and 1.19 during 2014 through 2016 (P for interaction < .001) compared with patients who had private insurance. CONCLUSIONS: Uninsured, Medicare-insured, and Medicaid-insured patients are less likely to receive surgical care at high-volume hospitals. For uninsured and Medicaid-insured patients with colorectal cancer, the odds of receiving care at high-volume hospitals have improved since implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010.

Gender Disparity in Awards in General Surgery Residency Programs.

IMPORTANCE: Women are disproportionately underrecognized as award winners within medical societies. The presence of this disparity has not been investigated in training programs. OBJECTIVE: To determine the presence of a gender disparity in award winners in general surgery residency programs. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this retrospective survey study, 32 geographically diverse academic and independent general surgery residency programs were solicited for participation. The 24 participating programs (75.0%) submitted deidentified data regarding the gender distribution of residents and trainee award recipients for the period from July 1, 1996, to June 30, 2017. Data were analyzed from September 11, 2017, to December 21, 2018. EXPOSURES: Time and the proportion of female trainees. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was the percentage of female award winners. A multilevel logistic regression model accounting for the percentage of female residents in each program compared the odds of a female resident winning an award relative to a male resident. This analysis was repeated for the first and second decades of the study. Award winners were further analyzed by type of award (clinical excellence, nonclinical excellence, teaching, or research) and selection group (medical students, residents, or faculty members). RESULTS: A total of 5030 of 13 760 resident person-years (36.6%) and 455 of 1447 award winners (31.4%) were female. Overall, female residents were significantly less likely to receive an award compared with male residents (odds ratio [OR], 0.44; 95% CI, 0.37-0.54; P < .001). During the first decade of the study, female residents were 70.8% less likely to receive an award compared with male residents (OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.19-0.45; P < .001); this improved to 49.9% less likely in the second decade (OR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.42-0.61; P < .001). Female residents were less likely to receive an award for teaching (OR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.26-0.42; P < .001), clinical excellence (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.31-0.61; P < .001), or nonclinical excellence (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.48-0.98; P = .04). No statistical difference was observed for research award winners (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.42-1.12; P = .17). The largest discrepancies were observed when award recipients were chosen by residents (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.14-0.39; P < .001) and students (OR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.25-0.42; P < .001) compared with faculty members (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.42-0.66; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This study found that female residents were significantly underrepresented as award recipients. These findings suggest the presence of ongoing implicit bias in surgery departments and training programs.

Factors Associated With the Professional Success of Female Surgical Department Chairs: A Qualitative Study.

Importance: Only 7% of US surgical department chairs are occupied by women. While the proportion of women in the surgical workforce continues to increase, women remain significantly underrepresented across leadership roles within surgery. Objective: To identify commonality among female surgical chairs with attention toward moderators that appear to have contributed to their professional success. Design, Setting, and Participants: A grounded theory qualitative study was conducted in academic surgical departments within the US. Participants included current and emeritus female chairs of American academic surgical departments. The study was conducted between December 1, 2018, and March 31, 2019. An eligible cohort of 26 women was identified. Interventions and Exposures: Participants completed semistructured telephone interviews conducted with an interview guide. Main Outcomes and Measures: Common themes associated with career success. Results: Of the eligible cohort of 26 women, 20 individuals (77%) participated. Sixteen participants were serving as active department chairs and 4 were former department chairs. Mean (SD) length of time served in the chair position, either active or former, was calculated at 5.6 (2.6) years. Two major themes were identified. First, internal factors emerged prominently. Personality traits, including confidence, resilience, and selflessness, were shared among participants. Adaptability was described as a major facilitator to career success. Second, participants described 2 subtypes of external factors, overt and subtle, each of which included barriers and bolsters to career development. Overt support from mentors of both sexes was described as contributing to success. Subtle factors, such as gender norms, on institutional and cultural levels, affected behavior by creating environments that supported or detracted from career advancement. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, participants described both internal and external factors that have been associated with their advancement into leadership roles. Future attention toward encouraging intrinsic strengths, fostering environments that bolster career development, and emphasizing adaptability, along with work-system redesign, may be key components to career success and advancing diversity in surgical leadership roles.

Racial and Socioeconomic Disparities After Surgical Resection for Rectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: There are various racial, socioeconomic, and tumor-specific factors that can impact rectal cancer outcomes. The current systematic review and meta-analysis evaluate the effect socioeconomic and racial variables on overall survival of rectal cancer patients after surgical resection. METHODS: A literature search was performed via electronic databases according to Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. All studies were evaluated by three authors and validated for data extraction. Predictive variables and survival profiles (1-, 5-, and 10-y survival and overall survival) reported by the studies were recorded for the systematic review. Hazard ratios, odds ratios, and 95% confidence intervals were extracted for meta-analysis. Forest plots were used to interpret the results. The primary outcome was the effect size of the predictive variables on overall survival after surgical resection. RESULTS: Of the 265 articles collected, 22 met inclusion criteria. Sixteen studies were used for the systematic review, and 17 studies were considered for meta-analysis. Overall, 662,053 subjects with rectal cancer were studied (439,766 with race reported), of which 344,193 (78.3%) were White and 60,283 (13.7%) were Black. The median survival was 56.8% for White patients and 47.9% for Black patients. Meta-analysis revealed that race, socioeconomic variables (education level, income level, and insurance status), and facility characteristics (type and volume) were significantly associated with overall survival in rectal cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Racial and socioeconomic disparities are present in outcomes for rectal cancer patients undergoing surgical resection. It is important to consider these disparities in the management of patients with rectal cancer to minimize any consequent disparities in surgical outcomes.

Sociodemographic predictors of surgery refusal in patients with stage I-III colon cancer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Over 104 000 cases of colon cancer are estimated to be diagnosed in 2020. Surgical resection is a critical part of colon cancer treatment and adequate resection impacts prognosis. However, some patients refuse potentially curative surgery. We aimed to identify the rate and predictors of surgery refusal among patients with colon cancer. METHODS: The National Cancer Database (2004-2015) was queried for patients diagnosed with stage I-III colonic adenocarcinoma. Sociodemographic factors, clinical features, and treatment facility characteristics were collected. Patients who underwent surgery with curative intent were compared to those who refused surgery. Multivariable analysis was used to identify factors associated with surgery refusal. Adjusted survival analysis was performed on propensity-matched cohorts. RESULTS: A total of 151 020 patients were included and 1071 (0.71%) refused surgery. In multivariable analysis older age, Black race, higher Charlson comorbidity score, Medicaid, Medicare, or lack of insurance were predictive of refusing surgery. After propensity matching, there was a significant difference in 5-year survival for patients who refused surgery vs those who underwent surgery (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: There are racial and socioeconomic disparities in the refusal of surgery for colon cancer. Further studies are needed to better understand the drivers behind differences in refusing curative surgery for colon cancer.

Association of Affordable Care Act-related Medicaid expansion with variation in utilization of surgical services.

BACKGROUND: We aim to understand how Medicaid expansion under the ACA has affected utilization of surgical services. METHODS: The State Inpatient Databases were used to compare utilization of a broad array of surgical procedures among nonelderly adults (aged 19-64 years) in a multistate population that experienced ACA-related Medicaid expansion to one that did not. We performed a difference-in-differences (DID) analysis to determine the effect of Medicaid expansion on utilization of surgical services from 2012 to 2014. RESULTS: There were 259,061 cases identified in the Medicaid expansion population and 261,269 in the control population. In the expansion group, there was a smaller decrease in utilization - by a margin of 21.68 cases per 100,000 individuals (p < 0.001). Percent of surgical patients covered by Medicaid increased among the expansion group from 12.00% to 15.48% (DID = 3.93%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Year one of Medicaid expansion under the ACA was associated with a modest but statistically significant difference in utilization of surgical services as well as an increase in percent of surgery patients covered by Medicaid.

Does race impact survival for patients with anal squamous cell carcinoma?

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Racial disparities are known to impact cancer outcomes. The aim of this study was to assess current racial disparities in outcomes of anal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). METHODS: The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients with anal SCC. The primary outcome was 5-year overall survival. RESULTS: There were 32 255 (88.1%) White patients and 4342 (11.9%) Black patients identified with anal SCC. Compared to White patients, Black patients were more likely to be younger, have lower median income, and be insured with Medicaid (all P < .001). The 5-year overall survival of Black and White patients for stage I disease was 71.2% and 80.6% (P < .001), for stage II disease, was 64.6% and 69.3% (P = .001), for stage III disease was 50.9% and 58.1% (P < .001), and for stage IV disease was 22.1% and 21.9% (P = .20). In a cox regression analysis, Black race was associated with significantly worse survival in stage I (HR: 1.37, 95% CI: 1.07-1.76, P = .01), stage II (HR: 1.30, 95% CI: 1.14-1.48, P < .001), and stage III disease (HR: 1.31, 95% CI: 1.16-1.47, P < .001) but not for stage IV disease (HR: 1.09, 95% CI: 0.89-1.35, P = .41). CONCLUSIONS: Black race is correlated with worse survival in patients diagnosed with anal SCC. This disparity in survival is likely multifactorial and requires further study.

Gender disparities in award recipients from surgical specialty societies.

INTRODUCTION: Women are underrepresented as recognition award recipients across several medical specialties. This phenomenon has not been investigated in surgery. This study investigates the prevalence of female award recipients among the major American surgical societies. METHODS: Publicly available lists of surgical society award recipients from 1998 to 2017 were analyzed. Awards intended primarily for physicians presented a minimum of five times were included. The primary outcome was the percentage of award recipients who were female. Trainee-specific and nontrainee-specific percentages of female award winners were compared with national percentages of female surgeons. Analysis was performed for awards based on the type of award (achievement, research, and service). Society-specific analyses were performed. RESULTS: Of the 1,222 awards presented by 20 societies studied, 420 (25.6%) were awarded to women. A total of 37.7% of trainee-specific awards and 20.6% of nontrainee-specific awards were presented to women. Women received 12.9% of achievement, 29.9% of research, and 24.0% of service awards. Society-specific rates of female award recipients ranged from 5.3% to 50.0%. CONCLUSION: Overall, female trainees are proportionately represented as winners of awards from surgical societies, but nontrainees receive a disproportionately higher percentage of awards as compared with the national rates of female surgeons. However, there is significant variation among societies. Further research is warranted to elucidate why this variation exists and what can be done to remedy it.

Recommended Cancer Screening in Accountable Care Organizations: Trends in Colonoscopy and Mammography in the Medicare Shared Savings Program.

PURPOSE: Accountable care organizations (ACOs) are a delivery and payment model designed to encourage integrated, high-value care. We designed a study to test the association between ACOs and two recommended cancer screening tests, colonoscopy for colorectal cancer and mammography for breast cancer. METHODS: Using the random 20% sample of Medicare claims, beneficiaries were attributed to ACO or non-ACO cohorts on the basis of providers' enrollment in the Medicare Shared Savings Program. An inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to balance patient characteristics between ACO and non-ACO cohorts. A propensity score-weighted, difference-in-differences analysis was then performed using the same provider groups in 2010-pre-ACO-as a baseline. A secondary analysis for older-nonrecommended-age ranges was performed. RESULTS: Prevalence of colonoscopy in recommended age ranges in ACOs from 2010 to 2014 increased from 15.3% (95% CI, 14.9% to 15.6%) to 17.9% (95% CI, 17.3% to 18.5%). This differed significantly from the change in non-ACOs (difference in differences, 1.2%; P < .001). Among women in ACOs, mammography prevalence rose from 53.7% (95% CI, 53.0% to 54.4%) to 54.9% (95% CI, 54.2% to 55.7%). In contrast to colonoscopy, the difference in mammography prevalence was not significantly different in ACO versus non-ACOs (difference in differences, 0.49%; P < .13). A similar pattern was also observed in older-nonrecommended-age ranges with significant difference in differences (ACO v non-ACO) in colonoscopy, but not mammography. CONCLUSION: The impact of ACOs on cancer screening varies between screening tests. Our results are consistent with a greater effect of ACOs on high-cost, high-complexity screening services, which may be more sensitive to integrated care delivery models.

A Decision Analysis for Rectal-Sparing Familial Adenomatous Polyposis: Total Colectomy With Ileorectal Anastomosis Versus Proctocolectomy With IPAA.

BACKGROUND: There are different approaches for the surgical management of rectal-sparing familial adenomatous polyposis with variable impacts on both quality of life and survival. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to quantify the trade-offs between total proctocolectomy with IPAA versus total colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis using decision analysis. DESIGN: We created a disease simulation Markov model to simulate the clinical events after IPAA and ileorectal anastomosis for rectal-sparing familial adenomatous polyposis in a cohort of individuals at the age 30 years. We used available literature to obtain different transition probabilities and health-states utilities. The output parameters were quality-adjusted life-years and life-years. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. SETTINGS: A decision analysis using a Markov model was conducted at a single center. PATIENTS: Patients with rectal-sparing familial adenomatous polyposis at age 30 years were included. Rectal-sparing familial adenomatous polyposis is defined as the presence of 0 to 20 polyps that can be removed endoscopically. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Quality-adjusted life-years were measured. RESULTS: Our model showed that the mean quality-adjusted life-years for IPAA was 25.12 and for ileorectal anastomosis was 27.12 in base-case analysis. Mean life-years for IPAA were 28.81 and 28.28 for ileorectal anastomosis. A 1-way sensitivity analysis was performed for all of the parameters in the model. None of the deterministic sensitivity analyses changed the model results across the range of plausible values. Probabilistic analysis identified that, in 86.9% of scenarios, ileorectal anastomosis had improved quality-adjusted life-years compared with IPAA. LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by characteristics inherent to modeling studies. CONCLUSIONS: Ileorectal anastomosis was found to be preferable for patients with rectal-sparing familial adenomatous polyposis when quality of life is taken into consideration. This model was robust based on both deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. These data should be taken into consideration when counseling patients regarding a surgical approach in rectal-sparing familial adenomatous polyposis. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A715.

Effect of Medicaid Expansion on Colorectal Cancer Screening Rates.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer screening decreases incidence and improves survival. Minorities and low-income patients have lower screening rates. The Affordable Care Act increased insurance coverage for low-income Americans by funding Medicaid expansion. Not all states expanded Medicaid. The effect of Medicaid expansion on colorectal cancer screening is unknown. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate if Medicaid expansion improved colorectal cancer screening for minorities and low-income patients. DESIGN: We used the Behavior Risk Factor Surveillance System, a nationally representative health-related telephone survey, to compare colorectal cancer screening rates from 2012 to 2016 based on Medicaid expansion status. A difference-in-difference analysis was used to compare the trends. SETTINGS: All states were included in this survey. PATIENTS: Respondents aged 50 to 64 from the early expansion, 2014 expansion, and nonexpansion states were selected. INTERVENTIONS: Medicaid expansion was funded by the Affordable Care Act. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measured was the screening rate based on US Preventive Services Task Force guidelines. RESULTS: Overall screening in expansion states increased (early, +4.5%, p < 0.001; 2014, +1.3%, p = 0.17) compared with nonexpansion states. Screening among low-income respondents increased in early expansion states (+5.7%; p = 0.003), whereas there was no change in 2014 expansion states compared with nonexpansion states (2014, -0.3%, p = 0.89). For blacks, there was a significant increase in early expansion states, but no change in 2014 expansion states (early, +8.1%, p = 0.045; 2014, -1.5%, p = 0.64). There was no significant change for Hispanic respondents in early or 2014 expansion states compared with nonexpansion states (early, +6.5%, p = 0.11; 2014, +1.2%, p = 0.77). LIMITATIONS: Survey data are subject to response and recall bias. Factors other than Medicaid expansion may have influenced the screening rate. CONCLUSIONS: The colorectal cancer screening rate has increased in all settings, but expansion accelerated the increases in early expansion states and among low-income and black respondents; however, there was no similar increase for Hispanic respondents. It will be important to continue to monitor the effects of Medicaid expansion on colorectal cancer care, especially the incidence by stage and mortality. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A792.

Colorectal Cancer in Ukraine: Regional Disparities and National Trends in Incidence, Management, and Mortality.

Purpose: The incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) is increasing worldwide, and the greatest increase is in low- to middle-income countries, such as Ukraine. Better knowledge of epidemiology of CRC in Ukraine is needed to understand how best to decrease the burden of disease. Methods: The National Cancer Registry of Ukraine (NCRU) was queried for CRC incidence, mortality, stage, and treatment in Ukraine and assessed for regional variation from 1999 to 2015. Joinpoint analysis was used to analyze the trends. Results: The incidence of colon cancer increased from 10.6 to 13.3 occurrences per 100,000, which provided an average annual percent change (AAPC) of 1.48 (95% CI, 1.3 to 1.7; P < .05). The incidence of rectal and anal cancers also increased from 9.9 to 11.5 occurrences per 100,000, which provided an AAPC of 1.0 (95% CI, 0.8 to 1.3; P < .05). Mortality remained the same (AAPC, 0.1; 95% CI, -0.3 to 0.2; P = .4). The proportion of patients who received cancer-specific treatment increased from 54.6% to 68.5% for colon cancer and from 61% to 74.4% for rectal and anal cancers. Overall, 34.5% of patients with colon cancer and 27.5% of patients with rectal cancer died within a year of diagnosis in 2015. Great regional variations in 1-year mortality and treatment received were identified. Conclusion: The incidence of CRC in Ukraine is increasing. Despite stable mortality rates, many do not receive cancer-specific treatment, and a large proportion of patients die within a year of diagnosis. These findings illustrate the need to promote establishment of a screening program and to improve access to cancer-specific therapy in Ukraine.

Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening in Ukraine.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer is one of the most common cancers worldwide and is associated with high mortality when detected at a later stage. There is a paucity of studies from low and middle income countries to support the cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening. We aim to analyze the cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening compared to no screening in Ukraine, a lower-middle income country. METHODS: We developed a deterministic Markov cohort model to assess the cost-effectiveness of three colorectal cancer screening strategies [fecal occult blood test (FOBT) every year, flexible sigmoidoscopy with FOBT every 5 years, and colonoscopy every 10 years] compared to no screening. We modeled outcomes in terms of cost per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) over a lifetime time horizon. We performed sensitivity analyses on treatment adherence, test characteristics and costs. Analyses were conducted from the perspective of the Ministry of Health of Ukraine. RESULTS: The base-case lifetime cost-effectiveness analysis showed that all three screening strategies were cost saving compared to no screening, and among the three strategies, colonoscopy every 10 years was the dominant strategy compared to no screening with standard adherence to treatment. When decreased adherence to treatment was modeled, colonoscopy every 10 years was the most cost-effective strategy with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $843 per QALY compared with no screening. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that colorectal cancer screening can save money and improve health compared to no screening in Ukraine. Colonoscopy every 10 years is superior to the other screening modalities evaluated in this study. This knowledge can be used to concentrate efforts on developing a national screening program in Ukraine.