Cost-effectiveness analysis of the optimal threshold of an automated immunochemical test for colorectal cancer screening: Performances of immunochemical colorectal cancer screening

Abstract

The use of an automated I-FOBT at 75 ng/ml would guarantee more efficient screening than currently used G-FOBT. Health authorities in industrialized countries should consider the replacement of G-FOBT by an automated I-FOBT test in the near future.

Diagnostic accuracy of fecal immunochemical test in average‐ and familial‐risk colorectal cancer screening

“…These studies have shown that FIT is highly sensitive for detecting CRC, its accuracy for AN is adequate and it is a cost-effective test in the CRC screening setting. [20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30] However, no studies have compared the diagnostic accuracy between these populations of a quantitative FIT so far. Only one recently published study has compared the diagnostic yield of a qualitative FIT in these two populations, and the authors did not find differences in FIT yield either.…”

Alternatives to colonoscopy for population-wide colorectal cancer screening

“…13,15,16,20,33 The iFOBT is more costly than its guaiacbased counterpart, 20 but modelling studies showed that it is more cost-effective. [34][35][36][37] This is largely explained by the higher participation rate, detection rate, sensitivity and PPV, and with lower NNScope and NNScreen. There is a general consensus that it should replace gFOBT.…”

Critical considerations of fecal occult blood tests for colorectal cancer

“…A recent cost-effectiveness analysis found that FITs guarantees more efficient screening than gFOBTs [20]. However, despite the growing evidence in its favor, further work is warranted on the optimal use of the FIT in screening programs, particularly in settings where colonoscopy capacity is constrained.…”