IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v44y2024i5p554-571.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Colorectal Cancer Screening Strategies Using Active Learning and Monte Carlo Simulation

Author

Listed:
  • Amirhossein Fouladi

    (Senior Consultant, UNCOMN, Chatham, IL, USA)

  • Amin Asadi

    (Data Science, AI, OR, and Logistics, University of Twente, Twente, Netherlands)

  • Eric A. Sherer

    (Chemical Engineering, Louisiana Tech University, Ruston, LA, USA)

  • Mahboubeh Madadi

    (Marketing and Business Analytics, San Jose State University, San Jose, CA, USA)

Abstract

Introduction Detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) in the early stages through available screening tests increases the patient’s survival chances. Multimodal screening policies can benefit patients by providing more diverse screening options and balancing the risks and benefits of screening tests. We investigate the cost-effectiveness of a wide variety of multimodal CRC screening policies. Methods We developed a Monte Carlo simulation framework to model CRC dynamics. We proposed an innovative calibration process using machine learning models to estimate age- and size-specific adenomatous polyps’ progression and regression rates. The proposed approach significantly expedites the model parameter space search. Results Two multimodal proposed policies (i.e., 1] colonoscopy at 50 y and fecal occult blood test annually between 60 and 75 y and 2] colonoscopy at 50 and 60 y and fecal immunochemical test annually between 70 and 75 y) are identified as efficient frontier policies. Both policies are cost-effective at a willingness to pay of $50,000. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the sensitivity of results to a change in screening test costs as well as adherence behavior. The sensitivity analysis results suggest that the proposed policies are mostly robust to the considered changes in screening test costs, as there is a significant overlap between the efficient frontier policies of the baseline and the sensitivity analysis cases. However, the efficient frontier policies were more sensitive to changes in adherence behavior. Conclusion Generally, combining stool-based tests with visual tests will benefit patients with higher life expectancy and a lower expected cost compared with unimodal screening policies. Colonoscopy at younger ages (when the colonoscopy complication risk is lower) and stool-based tests at older ages are shown to be more effective. Highlights We propose a detailed Markov model to capture the colorectal cancer (CRC) dynamics. The proposed Markov model presents the detailed dynamics of adenomas progression to CRC. We use more than 44,000 colonoscopy reports and available data in the literature to calibrate the proposed Markov model using an innovative approach that leverages machine learning models to expedite the calibration process. We investigate the cost-effectiveness of a wide variety of multimodal CRC screening policies and compare their performances with the current in-practice policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Amirhossein Fouladi & Amin Asadi & Eric A. Sherer & Mahboubeh Madadi, 2024. "Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Colorectal Cancer Screening Strategies Using Active Learning and Monte Carlo Simulation," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 44(5), pages 554-571, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:44:y:2024:i:5:p:554-571
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X241258224
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X241258224
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X241258224?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:44:y:2024:i:5:p:554-571. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.