Publication:
Very-low-dose aspirin and surveillance colonoscopy is cost-effective in secondary prevention of colorectal cancer in individuals with advanced adenomas: network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis

dc.contributor.authorSajesh K. Veettilen_US
dc.contributor.authorSiang Tong Kewen_US
dc.contributor.authorKean Ghee Limen_US
dc.contributor.authorPochamana Phisalprapaen_US
dc.contributor.authorSuresh Kumaren_US
dc.contributor.authorYeong Yeh Leeen_US
dc.contributor.authorNathorn Chaiyakunapruken_US
dc.contributor.otherSiriraj Hospitalen_US
dc.contributor.otherMonash University Malaysiaen_US
dc.contributor.otherUniversity of Utah Healthen_US
dc.contributor.otherSchool of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysiaen_US
dc.contributor.otherUniversiti Kebangsaan Malaysiaen_US
dc.contributor.otherInternational Medical Universityen_US
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-04T09:05:02Z
dc.date.available2022-08-04T09:05:02Z
dc.date.issued2021-12-01en_US
dc.description.abstractBackground: Individuals with advanced colorectal adenomas (ACAs) are at high risk for colorectal cancer (CRC), and it is unclear which chemopreventive agent (CPA) is safe and cost-effective for secondary prevention. We aimed to determine, firstly, the most suitable CPA using network meta-analysis (NMA) and secondly, cost-effectiveness of CPA with or without surveillance colonoscopy (SC). Methods: Systematic review and NMA of randomised controlled trials were performed, and the most suitable CPA was chosen based on efficacy and the most favourable risk–benefit profile. The economic benefits of CPA alone, 3 yearly SC alone, and a combination of CPA and SC were determined using the cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) in the Malaysian health-care perspective. Outcomes were reported as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in 2018 US Dollars ($) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), and life-years (LYs) gained. Results: According to NMA, the risk–benefit profile favours the use of aspirin at very-low-dose (ASAVLD, ≤ 100 mg/day) for secondary prevention in individuals with previous ACAs. Celecoxib is the most effective CPA but the cardiovascular adverse events are of concern. According to CEA, the combination strategy (ASAVLD with 3-yearly SC) was cost-saving and dominates its competitors as the best buy option. The probability of being cost-effective for ASAVLD alone, 3-yearly SC alone, and combination strategy were 22%, 26%, and 53%, respectively. Extending the SC interval to five years in combination strategy was more cost-effective when compared to 3-yearly SC alone (ICER of $484/LY gain and $1875/QALY). However, extending to ten years in combination strategy was not cost-effective. Conclusion: ASAVLD combined with 3-yearly SC in individuals with ACAs may be a cost-effective strategy for CRC prevention. An extension of SC intervals to five years can be considered in resource-limited countries.en_US
dc.identifier.citationBMC Gastroenterology. Vol.21, No.1 (2021)en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12876-021-01715-7en_US
dc.identifier.issn1471230Xen_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-85103179587en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/77614
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85103179587&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.titleVery-low-dose aspirin and surveillance colonoscopy is cost-effective in secondary prevention of colorectal cancer in individuals with advanced adenomas: network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysisen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85103179587&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections