Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Jun;4(6):e436-e444.
doi: 10.1016/S2589-7500(22)00042-5. Epub 2022 Apr 13.

Cost-effectiveness of artificial intelligence for screening colonoscopy: a modelling study

Affiliations
Free article

Cost-effectiveness of artificial intelligence for screening colonoscopy: a modelling study

Miguel Areia et al. Lancet Digit Health. 2022 Jun.
Free article

Abstract

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) tools increase detection of precancerous polyps during colonoscopy and might contribute to long-term colorectal cancer prevention. The aim of the study was to investigate the incremental effect of the implementation of AI detection tools in screening colonoscopy on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, and the cost-effectiveness of such tools.

Methods: We conducted Markov model microsimulation of using colonoscopy with and without AI for colorectal cancer screening for individuals at average risk (no personal or family history of colorectal cancer, adenomas, inflammatory bowel disease, or hereditary colorectal cancer syndrome). We ran the microsimulation in a hypothetical cohort of 100 000 individuals in the USA aged 50-100 years. The primary analysis investigated screening colonoscopy with versus without AI every 10 years starting at age 50 years and finishing at age 80 years, with follow-up until age 100 years, assuming 60% screening population uptake. In secondary analyses, we modelled once-in-life screening colonoscopy at age 65 years in adults aged 50-79 years at average risk for colorectal cancer. Post-polypectomy surveillance followed the simplified current guideline. Costs of AI tools and cost for downstream treatment of screening detected disease were estimated with 3% annual discount rates. The main outcome measures included the incremental effect of AI-assisted colonoscopy versus standard (no-AI) colonoscopy on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, and cost-effectiveness of screening projected for the average risk screening US population.

Findings: In the primary analyses, compared with no screening, the relative reduction of colorectal cancer incidence with screening colonoscopy without AI tools was 44·2% and with screening colonoscopy with AI tools was 48·9% (4·8% incremental gain). Compared with no screening, the relative reduction in colorectal cancer mortality with screening colonoscopy with no AI was 48·7% and with screening colonoscopy with AI was 52·3% (3·6% incremental gain). AI detection tools decreased the discounted costs per screened individual from $3400 to $3343 (a saving of $57 per individual). Results were similar in the secondary analyses modelling once-in-life colonoscopy. At the US population level, the implementation of AI detection during screening colonoscopy resulted in yearly additional prevention of 7194 colorectal cancer cases and 2089 related deaths, and a yearly saving of US$290 million.

Interpretation: Our findings suggest that implementation of AI detection tools in screening colonoscopy is a cost-saving strategy to further prevent colorectal cancer incidence and mortality.

Funding: European Commission and Japan Society of Promotion of Science.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of interests YM declares consultancy work for and having equipment on loan from Olympus, and ownership interest in Cybernet System. AR has done consultancy work for and received research grants from Fujifilm, has been on advisory boards for and received speaker fees from Medtronic, has received speaker fees and research grants from Boston Scientific, and has done consultancy work for Cosmo Pharmaceuticals. MB has done consultancy work for Cybernet System. PS has done consultancy work for Medtronic, Olympus, Boston Scientific, Fujifilm, Salix Pharmaceuticals, and Lumendi; and has received research grants from Ironwood, Erbe, Docbot, Cosmo Pharmaceuticals, and CDx Labs. MFK has done consultancy and teaching work for Olympus, has equipment on loan from Fujifilm, and has done teaching work for Boston Scientific. HM has done consultancy work for and has equipment on loan from Olympus and Medtronic; and has done consultancy work for Boston Scientific. DKR has ownership interest in Satisfai Health and has done consultancy work for Olympus. MD-R has received a teaching grant from Olympus, a research grant from Fujifilm, and has done consultancy work for Medtronic. CH has done consultancy work for and has equipment on loan from Medtronic and Fujifilm, and has done consultancy work for Pentax. All other authors declare no competing interests.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources