Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 29, 2025
Competing-Risk Nomogram for Predicting Cancer-Specific Survival in Multiple Primary Colorectal Cancer Patients after Surgery
Published on: September 27, 2024
Cost-effectiveness of blood-based colorectal cancer screening - a simulation model incorporating real-world
Elifnur Yay Donderici1, Shaun P Forbes1, Nicole J Zhang1
1Guardant Health Inc, Redwood City, CA, USA.
Objectives:
Although U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommended CRC screenings are effective; patient reluctance reduces adherence. Most cost-effectiveness models assume perfect adherence, yet one-third of eligible individuals aren't current with CRC screening. Our study assesses the cost-effectiveness of Shield, an FDA-approved blood-based CRC screening test, using real-world adherence.
Methods:
The CAN-SCREEN (Colorectal cANcer SCReening Economics and adherENce) model, a validated discrete-event simulation, evaluated clinical and economic outcomes of CRC screening under real-world adherence scenarios. We compared the Shield blood-based test administered every 3 years to no screening, considering it cost-effective if the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was under $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained.
Results:
Shield increased QALYs by 154 and raised costs by $7.5 million per 1,000 individuals, with an ICER of $48,662 per QALY, meeting the $100,000/QALY threshold. Shield remained cost-effective up to a unit cost of $3,241 (at $100,000/QALY) and $4,942 (at $150,000/QALY). Sensitivity analyses confirmed cost-effectiveness with lower adherence to diagnostic colonoscopy (56.1%) and annual screenings.
Conclusion:
The CAN-SCREEN model shows that Shield is cost-effective compared to no screening. Including real-world adherence improves accuracy in assessing screening strategies. Shield's noninvasive approach offers a promising, cost-effective way to increase adherence and reduce CRC mortality.
