Cost-effectiveness of Active Identification and Subsequent Colonoscopy Surveillance of Lynch Syndrome Cases.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The province of Ontario, Canada is considering immunohistochemical followed by cascade analyses of all patients who received a diagnosis of colorectal cancer (CRC) at an age younger than 70 years to identify individuals with Lynch syndrome. We evaluated the costs and benefits of testing for Lynch syndrome and determined the optimal surveillance interval for first-degree relatives (FDRs) found to have Lynch syndrome. METHODS: We developed a patient flow diagram to determine costs and yield of immunohistochemical testing for Lynch syndrome in CRC cases and, for those found to have Lynch syndrome, their FDRs, accounting for realistic uptake. Subsequently, we used the MISCAN-colon model to compare costs and benefits of annual, biennial, and triennial surveillance in FDRs identified with Lynch syndrome vs colonoscopy screening every 10 years (usual care for individuals without a diagnosis of Lynch syndrome). RESULTS: Testing 1000 CRC cases was estimated to identify 20 CRC index cases and 29 FDRs with Lynch syndrome at a cost of $310,274. Despite the high cost of Lynch syndrome tests, offering the FDRs with Lynch syndrome biennial colonoscopy surveillance was cost-effective at $8785 per life-year gained compared with usual care because of a substantial increase in life-years gained (+122%) and cost savings in CRC care. Triennial surveillance was more costly and less effective, and annual surveillance showed limited additional benefit compared with biennial surveillance. CONCLUSIONS: Immunohistochemical testing for Lynch syndrome in persons younger than 70 years who received a diagnosis of CRC and then testing FDRs of those found to have Lynch syndrome provide a good balance between costs and long-term benefits. Colonoscopy surveillance every 2 years is the optimal surveillance interval for patients with Lynch syndrome.

Harms, benefits and costs of fecal immunochemical testing versus guaiac fecal occult blood testing for colorectal cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: The ColonCancerCheck screening program for colorectal cancer (CRC) in Ontario, Canada, is considering switching from biennial guaiac fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) screening between age 50-74 years to the more sensitive, but also less specific fecal immunochemical test (FIT). The aim of this study is to estimate whether the additional benefits of FIT screening compared to gFOBT outweigh the additional costs and harms. METHODS: We used microsimulation modeling to estimate quality adjusted life years (QALYs) gained and costs of gFOBT and FIT, compared to no screening, in a cohort of screening participants. We compared strategies with various age ranges, screening intervals, and cut-off levels for FIT. Cost-efficient strategies were determined for various levels of available colonoscopy capacity. RESULTS: Compared to no screening, biennial gFOBT screening between age 50-74 years provided 20 QALYs at a cost of CAN$200,900 per 1,000 participants, and required 17 colonoscopies per 1,000 participants per year. FIT screening was more effective and less costly. For the same level of colonoscopy requirement, biennial FIT (with a high cut-off level of 200 ng Hb/ml) between age 50-74 years provided 11 extra QALYs gained while saving CAN$333,300 per 1000 participants, compared to gFOBT. Without restrictions in colonoscopy capacity, FIT (with a low cut-off level of 50 ng Hb/ml) every year between age 45-80 years was the most cost-effective strategy providing 27 extra QALYs gained per 1000 participants, while saving CAN$448,300. INTERPRETATION: Compared to gFOBT screening, switching to FIT at a high cut-off level could increase the health benefits of a CRC screening program without considerably increasing colonoscopy demand.

Performance and Cost-Effectiveness of Computed Tomography Lung Cancer Screening Scenarios in a Population-Based Setting: A Microsimulation Modeling Analysis in Ontario, Canada.

BACKGROUND: The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) results indicate that computed tomography (CT) lung cancer screening for current and former smokers with three annual screens can be cost-effective in a trial setting. However, the cost-effectiveness in a population-based setting with >3 screening rounds is uncertain. Therefore, the objective of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening in a population-based setting in Ontario, Canada, and evaluate the effects of screening eligibility criteria. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This study used microsimulation modeling informed by various data sources, including the Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP), Ontario Cancer Registry, smoking behavior surveys, and the NLST. Persons, born between 1940 and 1969, were examined from a third-party health care payer perspective across a lifetime horizon. Starting in 2015, 576 CT screening scenarios were examined, varying by age to start and end screening, smoking eligibility criteria, and screening interval. Among the examined outcome measures were lung cancer deaths averted, life-years gained, percentage ever screened, costs (in 2015 Canadian dollars), and overdiagnosis. The results of the base-case analysis indicated that annual screening was more cost-effective than biennial screening. Scenarios with eligibility criteria that required as few as 20 pack-years were dominated by scenarios that required higher numbers of accumulated pack-years. In general, scenarios that applied stringent smoking eligibility criteria (i.e., requiring higher levels of accumulated smoking exposure) were more cost-effective than scenarios with less stringent smoking eligibility criteria, with modest differences in life-years gained. Annual screening between ages 55-75 for persons who smoked ≥40 pack-years and who currently smoke or quit ≤10 y ago yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $41,136 Canadian dollars ($33,825 in May 1, 2015, United States dollars) per life-year gained (compared to annual screening between ages 60-75 for persons who smoked ≥40 pack-years and who currently smoke or quit ≤10 y ago), which was considered optimal at a cost-effectiveness threshold of $50,000 Canadian dollars ($41,114 May 1, 2015, US dollars). If 50% lower or higher attributable costs were assumed, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of this scenario was estimated to be $38,240 ($31,444 May 1, 2015, US dollars) or $48,525 ($39,901 May 1, 2015, US dollars), respectively. If 50% lower or higher costs for CT examinations were assumed, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of this scenario was estimated to be $28,630 ($23,542 May 1, 2015, US dollars) or $73,507 ($60,443 May 1, 2015, US dollars), respectively. This scenario would screen 9.56% (499,261 individuals) of the total population (ever- and never-smokers) at least once, which would require 4,788,523 CT examinations, and reduce lung cancer mortality in the total population by 9.05% (preventing 13,108 lung cancer deaths), while 12.53% of screen-detected cancers would be overdiagnosed (4,282 overdiagnosed cases). Sensitivity analyses indicated that the overall results were most sensitive to variations in CT examination costs. Quality of life was not incorporated in the analyses, and assumptions for follow-up procedures were based on data from the NLST, which may not be generalizable to a population-based setting. CONCLUSIONS: Lung cancer screening with stringent smoking eligibility criteria can be cost-effective in a population-based setting.

Population-based assessment of the outcomes in patients with postcolonoscopy colorectal cancers.

OBJECTIVE: The potential for cancers to not be detected on colonoscopy is increasingly recognised, but little is known about patient outcomes. The objective of this study was to assess the outcomes of patients diagnosed with postcolonoscopy colorectal cancers (PCCRCs). DESIGN: We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study, including all patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC) in Ontario, Canada from 2003 to 2009. Patients were categorised into three groups: DETECTED (diagnosed within 6 months of first colonoscopy), PCCRC (diagnosed 6-36 months after first colonoscopy) or NOSCOPE (no colonoscopy within 36 months of diagnosis). Univariate and multivariable analyses were conducted to study overall survival, surgical treatment, emergency presentation and surgical complications. RESULTS: Overall, 45 104 patients were included, with 2804 being classified as having a PCCRC. Compared with the DETECTED group, PCCRC was associated with a significantly higher likelihood of stage IV disease (17.2% vs 12.9%), worse overall survival (5 year OS: 60.8% vs 68.3%, p<0.0001; adjusted HR: 1.25, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.32, p<0.0001), a higher likelihood of emergency presentation (OR: 2.86, 95% CI 2.56 to 3.13, p<0.001) and lower likelihood of surgical resection (OR: 0.61, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.67, p<0.001). However, patients with PCCRC had significantly better outcomes than those in the NOSCOPE group (stage IV: 37.1%, 5 year OS: 38.9%) CONCLUSIONS: Compared with CRC detected by colonoscopy, PCCRCs are associated with a higher risk of emergent presentation, a lower likelihood of surgical resection and most notably, significantly worse oncological outcomes. However, they have better outcomes than patients with no recent colonoscopy.

Open-access colonoscopy on Ontario: associated factors and quality.

BACKGROUND: Open-access (OA) colonoscopy may increase efficiency and decrease wait times; however, because the patient is seen for the first time at the endoscopy appointment, previous processes, such as information about the procedure, preparation and appropriate triage, may be suboptimal. OBJECTIVE: To identify factors associated with OA colonoscopy and to determine the relationship between OA colonoscopy and an important quality measure, incomplete colonoscopy. METHODS: A population-based analysis of all adult outpatients undergoing a first-time colonoscopy between 1997 and 2007 in Ontario was performed. Colonoscopy was considered to be OA if there were no visits in the preceding five years with the physician performing the colonoscopy. Using logistic regression, patient, physician and institution factors associated with OA colonoscopy were identified. Using propensity score matching, the relationship between OA colonoscopy and incomplete colonoscopy in 2006 was examined. RESULTS: A total of 1,079,259 colonoscopies were performed. Of these, 14% were OA in 1997 compared with 26% in 2007. Patients 50 to 69 years of age, those from higher-income neighbourhoods and those with less comorbidity were more likely to undergo OA colonoscopy. The odds of receiving OA colonoscopy were six times greater in a nonhospital clinic compared with a community hospital. Colonoscopy was more likely to be complete if the procedure was OA (OR 1.3 [95% CI 1.2 to 1.4]; P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Rates of OA colonoscopy have increased substantially since 1997. Institution type was most strongly associated with OA colonoscopy. Colonoscopy completeness, a recognized quality indicator, does not appear to be compromised by OA colonoscopy.

Reactions to a targeted intervention to increase fecal occult blood testing among average-risk adults waiting for screening colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND: Increasing demand combined with limited capacity has resulted in long wait times for average-risk adults referred for screening colonoscopy for colorectal cancer. Management of patients on these growing wait lists is an emerging clinical issue. OBJECTIVE: To inform the content and design of a mailed targeted invitation for patients to undergo annual fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) while awaiting colonoscopy. METHODS: Focus groups (FGs) with average-risk patients on a wait list for screening colonoscopy at a high-throughput academic outpatient colonoscopy facility were conducted. During each FG session, feedback regarding a range of materials under consideration for the planned intervention was elicited using a semistructured facilitator guide. The FG sessions were recorded and transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using the constant comparative method to identify key themes. RESULTS: Findings from the three FGs (n=28) suggested that average risk patients on a wait list for screening colonoscopy would be receptive to a targeted intervention recommending they undergo FOBT while waiting. Participants indicated that the invitation to undergo FOBT was an important acknowledgement that they were on an actively managed list, and that a mechanism to ensure that they were correctly triaged while waiting was in place. Several specific suggestions to improve the design of the targeted intervention were obtained. CONCLUSIONS: Results of the present study provide useful information for developing effective strategies to manage average-risk individuals facing long wait times for screening colonoscopy.

A population-based analysis of outpatient colonoscopy in adults assisted by an anesthesiologist.

BACKGROUND: The use of propofol to sedate patients for colonoscopy, generally administered by an anesthesiologist in North America, is increasingly popular. In the United States, regional use of anesthesiologist-assisted endoscopy appears to correlate with local payor policy. This study's objective was to identify nonpayor factors (patient, physician, institution) associated with anesthesiologist assistance at colonoscopy. METHODS: The authors performed a population-based cross-sectional analysis using Ontario health administrative data, 1993-2005. All outpatient colonoscopies performed on adults were identified. Hierarchical multivariable modeling was used to identify patient (age, sex, income quintile, comorbidity), physician (specialty, colonoscopy volume), and institution (type, volume) factors associated with receipt of anesthesiologist-assisted colonoscopy. RESULTS: During the study period, 1,838,879 colonoscopies were performed on 1,202,548 patients. The proportion of anesthesiologist-assisted colonoscopies rose from 8.4% in 1993 to 19.1% in 2005 (P < 0.0001). In the hierarchical model, patients in low-volume community hospitals were five times more likely to receive anesthesiologist-assisted colonoscopy than patients in high-volume community hospitals (odds ration 4.9; 95% confidence interval 4.4-5.5). Less than 1% of colonoscopies in academic hospitals were anesthesiologist-assisted. Compared to gastroenterologists, surgeons were more likely to perform anesthesiologist-associated colonoscopy (odds ratio 1.7; 95% confidence interval 1.1-2.6). CONCLUSIONS: In Ontario, rates of anesthesiologist-assisted colonoscopy have risen dramatically. Institution type was most strongly associated with this practice. Further investigation is needed to determine the most appropriate criteria for the use of anesthesiology services during colonoscopy.

Rates of complete colonic evaluation after incomplete colonoscopy and their associated factors: a population-based study.

BACKGROUND: With the increasing use of colonoscopy there is growing concern about the quality of these procedures. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the rates of complete colonic evaluation after an incomplete colonoscopy and their associated factors. METHODS: Men and women > or =50 years old living in Ontario on January 1, 1997 who did not have a prior history of colorectal cancer, inflammatory bowel disease, or colonic resection comprised the inception cohort. Receipt of an incomplete colonoscopy between January 1, 1997 and December 31, 2002 was determined. Individuals were followed over 1 year and the time from incomplete colonoscopy to complete colonic evaluation was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. A generalized estimating equations model was used to evaluate the association between patient, physician, and setting factors and complete colonic evaluation. RESULTS: Twenty thousand one hundred sixty-six individuals had an incomplete colonoscopy, of whom 29.4% underwent complete colonic evaluation within 1 year after the procedure. Women > or =80 years were less likely to undergo complete colonic evaluation (odds ratio: 0.89; 95% confidence interval: 0.79-0.99), as were those who had their colonoscopy in a private office or clinic (odds ratio: 0.77; 95% confidence interval: 0.67-0.89). CONCLUSIONS: Only 29.4% of individuals with an incomplete colonoscopy underwent complete colonic evaluation within 1 year after the procedure. Women > or =80 years and those who had their colonoscopy in a private office or clinic were less likely to undergo complete colonic evaluation. The quality of care provided to older women and colonoscopy practice in office settings may be suboptimal.

Are there regional differences in gynecologic cancer outcomes in the context of a single-payer, publicly-funded health care system? A population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Canada has a single-payer, publicly-funded health care system that provides comprehensive health care, and therefore significant disparities in health outcomes are not expected in our population. The objective of this study was to determine if differences exist in endometrial cancer outcomes across regions in Ontario. METHODS: This was a population-based study of all endometrial (uterine) cancer cases diagnosed from 1996 to 2000 in Ontario and linked to various administrative databases. Univariate analyses examined trends in demographics (age, income, co-morbidities), treatment (surgical staging and adjuvant pelvic radiotherapy), and pathology (grade, histology, stage) across 14 geographic regions defined by local health integration networks (LHINs) in Ontario. Primary outcome was 5-year overall survival among LHINs, which were compared in a multilevel Cox regression model to account for clustering of patient data at the hospital level. RESULTS: There were 3,875 evaluable cases with complete information on demographics, treatment, pathology, and outcomes. There was significant variation in patient demographics, treatment, and pathology across the 14 LHINs. Low income level and surgery at a low-volume, community hospital without gynecologic oncologists were not associated with a higher risk of death. There was a trend towards clustering of patients within hospitals. After adjustment for covariates, there was no significant difference in survival across LHINs. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of a single-payer, publicly-funded health care system, we did not find significant regional differences in endometrial cancer outcomes.

Association of socioeconomic status and receipt of colorectal cancer investigations: a population-based retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Although the Canadian health care system was designed to ensure equal access, inequities persist. It is not known if inequities exist for receipt of investigations used to screen for colorectal cancer (CRC). We examined the association between socioeconomic status and receipt of colorectal investigation in Ontario. METHODS: People aged 50 to 70 years living in Ontario on Jan. 1, 1997, who did not have a history of CRC, inflammatory bowel disease or colorectal investigation within the previous 5 years were followed until death or Dec. 31, 2001. Receipt of any colorectal investigation between 1997 and 2001 inclusive was determined by means of linked administrative databases. Income was imputed as the mean household income of the person's census enumeration area. Multivariate analysis was performed to evaluate the relationship between the receipt of any colorectal investigation and income. RESULTS: Of the study cohort of 1,664,188 people, 21.2% received a colorectal investigation in 1997-2001. Multivariate analysis demonstrated a significant association between receipt of any colorectal investigation and income (p < 0.001); people in the highest-income quintile had higher odds of receiving any colorectal investigation (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.38; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.36-1.40) and of receiving colonoscopy (adjusted OR 1.50; 95% CI 1.48-1.53). INTERPRETATION: Socioeconomic status is associated with receipt of colorectal investigations in Ontario. Only one-fifth of people in the screening-eligible age group received any colorectal investigation. Further work is needed to determine the reason for this low rate and to explore whether it affects CRC mortality.