Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Cost–benefit analysis of screening colonoscopy in 40- to 50-year-old first-degree relatives of patients with colorectal cancer

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Colorectal Disease Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background and aims

As shown previously, 40- to 50-year-old first-degree relatives of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) have significantly more colorectal adenomas than controls of the same age. Screening colonoscopy of these persons at risk between 40 and 50 years might be cost beneficial.

Methods

We prepared a detailed cost–benefit analysis of screening colonoscopy and possible repeat endoscopies according to current expenditures for endoscopic procedures in Germany. Since screening colonoscopy is generally offered and reimbursed from 55 years on in Germany, we analysed the period between 45 and 55 years, taking an annual interest rate of 5% into account. Costs were analysed based on the results of a former study [11] depending on various participation rates in a general screening programme.

Findings

Based on the available 1994 figure of about €20,000 for diagnosis and treatment of one cancer case, screening colonoscopy is cost beneficial when participation is high. Under a more realistic assumption of currently about €40,000 per cancer case, screening colonoscopy is cost beneficial in any case.

Interpretation

Our data support that systematic screening colonoscopy in first-degree relatives of patients with CRC by the age of 45 years most likely demonstrates an economic benefit.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN (1993) Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. N Engl J Med 329:1977–1981

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Eide TJ (1986) Risk of colorectal cancer in adenoma-bearing individuals within a defined population. Int J Cancer 38:173–176

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. O’Brien MJ, Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Gottlieb LS, Sternberg SS, Diaz B, Dickersin GR, Ewing S, Geller S, Kasimian D (1990) The National Polyp Study. Patient and polyp characteristics associated with high-grade dysplasia in colorectal adenomas. Gastroenterology 98:371–379

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Stryker SJ, Wolff BG, Culp CE, Libbe SD, Ilstrup DM, MacCarty RL (1987) Natural history of untreated colonic polyps. Gastroenterology 93:1009–1013

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Nusko G, Mansmann U, Kirchner T, Hahn EG (2002) Risk related surveillance following colorectal polypectomy. Gut 51:424–428

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, O’Brien MJ, Ho MN, Gottlieb L, Sternberg SS, Waye JD, Bond J, Schapiro M, Stewart ET (1993) Randomized comparison of surveillance intervals after colonoscopic removal of newly diagnosed adenomatous polyps. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. N Engl J Med 328:901–906

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Hixson LJ, Fennerty MB, Sampliner RE (1994) Two year incidence of colon adenomas developing after tandem colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 89:687–691

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Avidan B, Sonnenberg A, Schnell TG, Leya J, Metz A, Sontag SJ (2002) New occurrence and recurrence of neoplasms within 5 years of a screening colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 97:1524–1529

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Schmiegel W, Adler G, Fruhmorgen P, Folsch U, Graeven U, Layer P, Petrasch S, Porschen R, Pox C, Sauerbruch T (2000) Colorectal carcinoma: prevention and early detection in an asymptomatic population—prevention in patients at risk—endoscopic diagnosis, therapy and after-care of polyps and carcinomas. German Society of Digestive and Metabolic Diseases/Study Group for Gastrointestinal Oncology. Z Gastroenterol 38:49–75

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Gruppe HK (1999) Deutsche Empfehlungen zur gesundheitsökonomischen Evaluation—Revidierte Fassung des Hannoveraner Konsens. Gesundheitsökon Qualitätsmanag 4:A62–A64

    Google Scholar 

  11. Menges M, Fischinger J, Gärtner B, Thomas G, Wördehoff D, Maier M, Harloff M, Stegmaier C, Rädle J, Zeitz M (2005) Screening colonoscopy in 40–50 year old first-degree relatives of patients with colorectal cancer is efficient: a controlled multicenter study. Int J Colorectal Dis 2005 Sep 15:1–7 (Epub ahead of print)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Vijan S, Hwang EW, Hofer TP, Hayward RA (1999) Which colon cancer screening test? A comparison of costs, effectiveness, and compliance. Am J Med 111:662–664

    Google Scholar 

  13. Sonnenberg A, Delco F, Inadomi JM (2000) Cost-effectiveness of colonoscopy in screening for colorectal cancer. Ann Intern Med 133:573–584

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Jorgensen OD, Kronborg O, Fenger C (1995) A randomized surveillance study of patients with pedunculated and small sessile tubular and tubulovillous adenomas. The Funen Adenoma Follow-up Study. Scand J Gastroenterol 30:686–692

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Lieberman DA, Weiss DG, Bond JH, Ahnen DJ, Garewal H, Chejfec G (2000) Use of colonoscopy to screen asymptomatic adults for colorectal cancer. Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study Group 380. N Engl J Med 343:162–168

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Kozuka S, Nogaki M (1975) Premalignancy of the mucosal polyp in the large intestine. II. Estimation of the periods required for malignant transformation of mucosal polyps. Dis Colon Rectum 18:494–500

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Internal Medicine II, Division of Gastroenterology, University of the Saarland, Homburg, Germany

    Markus Menges, Barbara Gärtner & Johannes Fischinger

  2. Department of Internal Medicine, Diakonie-Hospital, Diakoniestraße 10, 74523, Schwäbisch Hall, Germany

    Markus Menges

  3. Institute of Medical Biometrics, Epidemiology, and Medical Informatics, University of the Saarland, Homburg, Germany

    Thomas Georg

  4. Department of Internal Medicine I, Charité, Campus Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany

    Martin Zeitz

Authors
  1. Markus Menges
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Barbara Gärtner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Thomas Georg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Johannes Fischinger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Martin Zeitz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Markus Menges.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Menges, M., Gärtner, B., Georg, T. et al. Cost–benefit analysis of screening colonoscopy in 40- to 50-year-old first-degree relatives of patients with colorectal cancer. Int J Colorectal Dis 21, 596–601 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-005-0058-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-005-0058-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation