Health benefits and cost effectiveness of endoscopic and nonendoscopic cytosponge screening for Barrett's esophagus
- PMID: 23041329
- DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2012.09.060
Health benefits and cost effectiveness of endoscopic and nonendoscopic cytosponge screening for Barrett's esophagus
Abstract
Background & aims: We developed a model to compare the health benefits and cost effectiveness of screening for Barrett's esophagus by either Cytosponge™ or by conventional endoscopy vs no screening, and to estimate their abilities to reduce mortality from esophageal adenocarcinoma.
Methods: We used microsimulation modeling of a hypothetical cohort of 50-year-old men in the United Kingdom with histories of gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms, assuming the prevalence of Barrett's esophagus to be 8%. Participants were invited to undergo screening by endoscopy or Cytosponge (invitation acceptance rates of 23% and 45%, respectively), and outcomes were compared with those from men who underwent no screening. We estimated the number of incident esophageal adenocarcinoma cases prevented and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of the different strategies. Patients found to have high-grade dysplasia or intramucosal cancer received endotherapy. Model inputs included data on disease progression, test accuracy, post-treatment status, and surveillance protocols. Costs and benefits were discounted at 3.5% per year. Supplementary and sensitivity analyses comprised esophagectomy management of high-grade dysplasia or intramucosal cancer, screening by ultrathin nasal endoscopy, and different assumptions of uptake of screening invitations for either strategy.
Results: We estimated that compared with no screening, Cytosponge screening followed by treatment of patients with dysplasia or intramucosal cancer costs an additional $240 (95% credible interval, $196-$320) per screening participant and results in a mean gain of 0.015 (95% credible interval, -0.001 to 0.029) QALYs and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $15.7 thousand (K) per QALY. The respective values for endoscopy were $299 ($261-$367), 0.013 (0.003-0.023) QALYs, and $22.2K. Screening by the Cytosponge followed by treatment of patients with dysplasia or intramucosal cancer would reduce the number of cases of incident symptomatic esophageal adenocarcinoma by 19%, compared with 17% for screening by endoscopy, although this greater benefit for Cytosponge depends on more patients accepting screening by Cytosponge compared with screening by endoscopy.
Conclusions: In a microsimulation model, screening 50-year-old men with symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease by Cytosponge is cost effective and would reduce mortality from esophageal adenocarcinoma compared with no screening.
Copyright © 2013 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
Cost Effectiveness of Screening Patients With Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease for Barrett's Esophagus With a Minimally Invasive Cell Sampling Device.Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017 Sep;15(9):1397-1404.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.02.017. Epub 2017 Feb 24. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017. PMID: 28238953 Free PMC article.
-
Cost-effectiveness model of endoscopic screening and surveillance in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease.Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2004 Oct;2(10):868-79. doi: 10.1016/s1542-3565(04)00394-5. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2004. PMID: 15476150
-
Endoscopy for upper GI cancer screening in the general population: a cost-utility analysis.Gastrointest Endosc. 2011 Sep;74(3):610-624.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.05.001. Epub 2011 Jul 13. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011. PMID: 21741639
-
Cost considerations in implementing a screening and surveillance strategy for Barrett's oesophagus.Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2015 Feb;29(1):51-63. doi: 10.1016/j.bpg.2014.12.002. Epub 2014 Dec 18. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2015. PMID: 25743456 Review.
-
Barrett's oesophagus: Current controversies.World J Gastroenterol. 2017 Jul 28;23(28):5051-5067. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i28.5051. World J Gastroenterol. 2017. PMID: 28811703 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Screening for Barrett's esophagus and esophageal adenocarcinoma: rationale, recent progress, challenges, and future directions.Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015 Apr;13(4):623-34. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2014.03.036. Epub 2014 Jun 2. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015. PMID: 24887058 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Screening and Preventive Strategies in Esophagogastric Cancer.Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2017 Apr;26(2):163-178. doi: 10.1016/j.soc.2016.10.004. Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2017. PMID: 28279462 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Progression of Barrett's esophagus toward esophageal adenocarcinoma: an overview.Ann Gastroenterol. 2017;30(1):1-6. doi: 10.20524/aog.2016.0091. Epub 2016 Sep 30. Ann Gastroenterol. 2017. PMID: 28042232 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Research advances in esophageal diseases: bench to bedside.F1000Prime Rep. 2013 Oct 1;5:44. doi: 10.12703/P5-44. F1000Prime Rep. 2013. PMID: 24167725 Free PMC article. Review.
-
A crosssectional analysis of Facebook comments to study public perception of a new diagnostic test called the Cytosponge.Dis Esophagus. 2019 Jan 1;32(1):10.1093/dote/doy085. doi: 10.1093/dote/doy085. Dis Esophagus. 2019. PMID: 30239646 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical