PDF herunterladen
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Endosc Int Open 2017; 05(12): E1197-E1207
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-113565
Original article
Eigentümer und Copyright ©Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2017

Implementation of an optical diagnosis strategy saves costs and does not impair clinical outcomes of a fecal immunochemical test-based colorectal cancer screening program

Jasper L. A. Vleugels   *
1   Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
,
Marjolein J. E. Greuter   *
2   Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
,
Yark Hazewinkel
1   Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
,
Veerle M. H. Coupé
2   Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
,
Evelien Dekker
1   Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
› Institutsangaben
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

submitted 18. Januar 2017

accepted after revision 22. Mai 2017

Publikationsdatum:
22. November 2017 (online)

Auch verfügbar auf
   Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Background and study aims In an optical diagnosis strategy, diminutive polyps that are endoscopically characterized with high confidence are removed without histopathological analysis and distal hyperplastic polyps are left in situ. We evaluated the effectiveness and costs of optical diagnosis.

Methods Using the Adenoma and Serrated pathway to Colorectal CAncer (ASCCA) model, we simulated biennial fecal immunochemical test (FIT) screening in individuals aged 55 – 75 years. In this program, we compared an optical diagnosis strategy with current histopathology assessment of all diminutive polyps. Base-case assumptions included 76 % high-confidence predictions and sensitivities of 88 %, 91 %, and 88 % for endoscopically characterizing adenomas, sessile serrated polyps, and hyperplastic polyps, respectively. Outcomes were colorectal cancer burden, number of colonoscopies, life-years, and costs.

Results Both the histopathology strategy and the optical diagnosis strategy resulted in 21 life-days gained per simulated individual compared with no screening. For optical diagnosis, €6 per individual was saved compared with the current histopathology strategy. These cost savings were related to a 31 % reduction in colonoscopies in which histopathology was needed for diminutive polyps. Projecting these results onto the Netherlands (17 million inhabitants), assuming a fully implemented FIT-based screening program, resulted in an annual undiscounted cost saving of € 1.7 – 2.2 million for optical diagnosis.

Conclusion Implementation of optical diagnosis in a FIT-based screening program saves costs without decreasing program effectiveness when compared with current histopathology analysis of all diminutive polyps. Further work is required to evaluate how endoscopists participating in a screening program should be trained, audited, and monitored to achieve adequate competence in optical diagnosis.

* These authors contributed equally to this work.


 

  • References

  • 1 Ferlay J, Steliarova-Foucher E, Lortet-Tieulent J. et al. Cancer incidence and mortality patterns in Europe: estimates for 40 countries in 2012. Eur J Cancer 2013; 49: 1374-1403
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Strum WB. Colorectal adenomas. N Engl J Med 2016; 375: 389-390
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Muto T, Bussey HJ, Morson BC. The evolution of cancer of the colon and rectum. Cancer 1975; 36: 2251-2270
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Brenner H, Altenhofen L, Stock C. et al. Natural history of colorectal adenomas: birth cohort analysis among 3.6 million participants of screening colonoscopy. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2013; 22: 1043-1051
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Zauber AG, Winawer SJ, O’Brien MJ. et al. Colonoscopic polypectomy and long-term prevention of colorectal-cancer deaths. N Engl J Med 2012; 366: 687-696
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Lieberman D, Moravec M, Holub J. et al. Polyp size and advanced histology in patients undergoing colonoscopy screening: implications for CT colonography. Gastroenterology 2008; 135: 1100-1105
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Hassan C, Pickhardt PJ, Kim DH. et al. Systematic review: distribution of advanced neoplasia according to polyp size at screening colonoscopy. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2010; 31: 210-217
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Wanders LK, East JE, Uitentuis SE. et al. Diagnostic performance of narrowed spectrum endoscopy, autofluorescence imaging, and confocal laser endomicroscopy for optical diagnosis of colonic polyps: a meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol 2013; 14: 1337-1347
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Rex DK, Kahi C, O’Brien M. et al. The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy PIVI (Preservation and Incorporation of Valuable Endoscopic Innovations) on real-time endoscopic assessment of the histology of diminutive colorectal polyps. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 419-422
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Hassan C, Pickhardt PJ, Rex DK. A resect and discard strategy would improve cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2010; 8: 865-869
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Kessler WR, Imperiale TF, Klein RW. et al. A quantitative assessment of the risks and cost savings of forgoing histologic examination of diminutive polyps. Endoscopy 2011; 43: 683-691
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Greuter MJ, Xu XM, Lew JB. et al. Modeling the Adenoma and Serrated pathway to Colorectal CAncer (ASCCA). Risk Anal 2014; 34: 889-910
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Ijspeert JEG, Vermeulen L, Meijer GA. et al. Serrated neoplasia-role in colorectal carcinogenesis and clinical implications. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2015; 12: 401-409
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Stoop EM, de Haan MC, de Wijkerslooth TR. et al. Participation and yield of colonoscopy versus non-cathartic CT colonography in population-based screening for colorectal cancer: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2012; 13: 55-64
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 IKNL. Cijfers over kanker. Available from: 2011 http://www.cijfersoverkanker.nl/ Accessed 2017 May 16
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Pohl H, Srivastava A, Bensen SP. et al. Incomplete polyp resection during colonoscopy – results of the complete adenoma resection (CARE) study. Gastroenterology 2013; 144: 74-80 .e1
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Whitlock EP, Lin JS, Liles E. et al. Screening for colorectal cancer: a targeted, updated systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 2008; 149: 638-658
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Niv Y, Hazazi R, Levi Z. et al. Screening colonoscopy for colorectal cancer in asymptomatic people: a meta-analysis. Dig Dis Sci 2008; 53: 3049-3054
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Luning TH, Keemers-Gels ME, Barendregt WB. et al. Colonoscopic perforations: a review of 30,366 patients. Surg Endosc 2007; 21: 994-997
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu. Landelijke Monitoring en Evaluatie Bevolkingsonderzoek Darmkanker 2014. Available from http://www.rivm.nl/dsresource?objectid=f1d0682a-ae2c-4c76-ab13-5fad4870b5b0&type=org&disposition=inline Accessed 2017 May 16
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Johnson MR, Grubber J, Grambow SC. et al. Physician non-adherence to colonoscopy interval guidelines in the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System. Gastroenterology 2015; 149: 938-951
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 van Heijningen EM, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Steyerberg EW. et al. Adherence to surveillance guidelines after removal of colorectal adenomas: a large, community-based study. Gut 2015; 64: 1584-1592
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Dekker E, van Leerdam ME, Hazewinkel Y. et al. Nederlandse Richtlijn Coloscopie Surveillance. Nederlandse Vereniging van Maag-, Darm- en Leverartsen in samenwerking met Nederlandse Vereniging van Pathologie. Available from: 2013 http://www.mdl.nl/uploads/240/1308/Richtlijn_Coloscopie_Surveillance_definitief_2013.pdf Accessed 2017 May 16
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Ijspeert JE, Bastiaansen BA, van Leerdam ME. et al. Development and validation of the WASP classification system for optical diagnosis of adenomas, hyperplastic polyps and sessile serrated adenomas/polyps. Gut 2016; 65: 963-970
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 van Rossum LG, van Rijn AF, Laheij RJ. et al. Random comparison of guaiac and immunochemical fecal occult blood tests for colorectal cancer in a screening population. Gastroenterology 2008; 135: 82-90
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 van Rijn JC, Reitsma JB, Stoker J. et al. Polyp miss rate determined by tandem colonoscopy: a systematic review. Am J Gastroenterol 2006; 101: 343-350
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Leggett B, Whitehall V. Role of the serrated pathway in colorectal cancer pathogenesis. Gastroenterology 2010; 138: 2088-2100
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Central Bureau for Statistics. Available from: 2012 http://www.cbs.nl/ Accessed 2017 May 16
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Siegel JE, Torrance GW, Russell LB. et al. Guidelines for pharmacoeconomic studies. Recommendations from the panel on cost effectiveness in health and medicine. Panel on cost Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. Pharmacoeconomics 1997; 11: 159-168
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 World Health Organization. WHO-CHOICE. Cost effectiveness and strategic planning. Available from: http://www.who.int/choice/en/ Accessed 2017 May 16
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Hassan C, Quintero E, Dumonceau JM. et al. Post-polypectomy colonoscopy surveillance: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline. Endoscopy 2013; 45: 842-851
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Rees CJ, Rajasekhar PT, Wilson A. et al. Narrow band imaging optical diagnosis of small colorectal polyps in routine clinical practice: the Detect Inspect Characterise Resect and Discard 2 (DISCARD 2) study. Gut 2017; 66: 887-895
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Patel SG, Schoenfeld P, Kim HM. et al. Real-time characterization of diminutive colorectal polyp histology using narrow-band imaging: implications for the resect and discard strategy. Gastroenterology 2016; 150: 406-418
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 McGill SK, Evangelou E, Ioannidis JP. et al. Narrow band imaging to differentiate neoplastic and non-neoplastic colorectal polyps in real time: a meta-analysis of diagnostic operating characteristics. Gut 2013; 62: 1704-1713
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Parikh ND, Chaptini L, Njei B. et al. Diagnosis of sessile serrated adenomas/polyps with image-enhanced endoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Endoscopy 2016; 48: 731-739
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Raghavendra M, Hewett DG, Rex DK. Differentiating adenomas from hyperplastic colorectal polyps: narrow-band imaging can be learned in 20 minutes. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 72: 572-576
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Patel SG, Rastogi A, Austin G. et al. Gastroenterology trainees can easily learn histologic characterization of diminutive colorectal polyps with narrow band imaging. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2013; 11: 997-1003 .e1
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 NICE. Virtual chromoendoscopy to assess colorectal polyps during colonoscopy. Guidance and guidelines. NICE 2017. Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/dg28 Accessed 2017 May 16
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Nederlandse Zorgautoriteit. Tarieven voor zorginstellingen. 2012 Available from: https://www.nza.nl/regelgeving/tarieven/ Accessed 2017 May 16
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Rex DK, Schoenfeld PS, Cohen J. et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 31-53
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Tilson L, Sharp L, Usher C. et al. Cost of care for colorectal cancer in Ireland: a health care payer perspective. Eur J Health Econ 2012; 13: 511-524
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar