Cost-effectiveness of Barrett's oesophagus screening and surveillance
View/ Open
Author(s)
Gordon, Louisa
C. Mayne, George
Griffith University Author(s)
Year published
2013
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Endoscopic screening and surveillance of patients with Barrett's oesophagus to detect oesophageal cancer at earlier stages is contentious. As a consequence, their cost-effectiveness is also debatable. Current health economic evidence shows mixed results for demonstrating their value, mainly due to varied assumptions around progression rates to cancer, quality of life and treatment pathways. No randomized controlled trial exists to definitively support the efficacy of surveillance programs and one is unlikely to be undertaken. Contemporary treatment, cost and epidemiological data to contribute to cost-effectiveness analyses ...
View more >Endoscopic screening and surveillance of patients with Barrett's oesophagus to detect oesophageal cancer at earlier stages is contentious. As a consequence, their cost-effectiveness is also debatable. Current health economic evidence shows mixed results for demonstrating their value, mainly due to varied assumptions around progression rates to cancer, quality of life and treatment pathways. No randomized controlled trial exists to definitively support the efficacy of surveillance programs and one is unlikely to be undertaken. Contemporary treatment, cost and epidemiological data to contribute to cost-effectiveness analyses are needed. Risk assessment to stratify patients at low- or high-risk of developing cancer should improve cost-effectiveness outcomes as higher gains will be seen for those at higher risk, and medical resource use will be avoided in those at lower risk. Rapidly changing technologies for imaging, biomarker testing and less-invasive endoscopic treatments also promise to lower health system costs and avoid adverse events in patients.
View less >
View more >Endoscopic screening and surveillance of patients with Barrett's oesophagus to detect oesophageal cancer at earlier stages is contentious. As a consequence, their cost-effectiveness is also debatable. Current health economic evidence shows mixed results for demonstrating their value, mainly due to varied assumptions around progression rates to cancer, quality of life and treatment pathways. No randomized controlled trial exists to definitively support the efficacy of surveillance programs and one is unlikely to be undertaken. Contemporary treatment, cost and epidemiological data to contribute to cost-effectiveness analyses are needed. Risk assessment to stratify patients at low- or high-risk of developing cancer should improve cost-effectiveness outcomes as higher gains will be seen for those at higher risk, and medical resource use will be avoided in those at lower risk. Rapidly changing technologies for imaging, biomarker testing and less-invasive endoscopic treatments also promise to lower health system costs and avoid adverse events in patients.
View less >
Journal Title
Best Practice & Research: Clinical Gastroenterology
Volume
27
Issue
6
Copyright Statement
© 2013 Elsevier. This is the author-manuscript version of this paper. Reproduced in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. Please refer to the journal's website for access to the definitive, published version.
Subject
Medical and Health Sciences not elsewhere classified
Clinical Sciences