Research articleProductivity Savings from Colorectal Cancer Prevention and Control Strategies
Introduction
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth most common malignancy and second most common cause of cancer death among Americans.1 In recent years, CRC incidence and mortality rates declined, with the greatest annual decline observed between the years 2002 and 2004.2 These declines are associated with increased screening, earlier-stage diagnosis, and improvements in cancer treatment.3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
Despite these encouraging trends, the absolute number of newly diagnosed CRC patients and CRC deaths will increase in the coming decades because of the aging population. Rising numbers of patients with CRC and resultant deaths will inflict considerable costs to society.9 Mariotto et al.10 forecast that annual costs of CRC treatment and time costs will be $17.7 billion by the year 2020 if current trends in CRC continue. These costs are only a portion of the total burden of CRC as they exclude cost estimates for productivity losses. The cost of productivity loss is broadly defined as the monetary value of output (usually estimated as wages) that would have been produced in absence of illness, disability, or premature mortality. Costs attributable to productivity losses—even in elderly populations—can be considerable and, in younger populations with large labor force participation, can equal or exceed the cost of medical care.11
Interventions to reduce risk factors and improve screening and treatment are effective at reducing the burden of CRC by inducing savings through avoided treatment, morbidity, and mortality costs.12, 13 Few cost studies of CRC prevention and treatment include productivity losses in their estimates, and as a result, grossly undercount potential savings. Estimates of productivity loss are not readily accessible, but are nonetheless critical when considering a societal perspective for evaluations of approaches to curb the costs associated with CRC mortality and morbidity. A model is developed that estimates productivity loss from CRC incidence and mortality from a societal perspective. Potential savings are projected from the implementation of the following approaches to CRC prevention and control: risk factor reduction, improved screening, and more widespread use of adjuvant chemotherapy.
Section snippets
Methods
This paper provides intervention-specific mortality information that can be used in comparative effectiveness studies of CRC prevention and control programs and assesses the value of these benefits, which can be used in cost-effectiveness and cost–benefit analyses. The model uses CRC incidence and mortality projections from sophisticated models produced by the National Cancer Institute's (NCI's) Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET)14 in conjunction with economic models
Colorectal Cancer Deaths
The expected numbers of CRC deaths by gender for each strategy is estimated for each year from 2005 through 2020 and are reported for the year 2010 and cumulatively for 2005 through 2020 (Table 2). Assuming that CRC screening, treatment, and risk factor levels from 2005 continued through 2010, there will be 48,748 deaths from CRC in 2010; further, 23,783 deaths will be in women and 24,965 deaths will be in men. If all interventions had been implemented simultaneously in 2005, there would have
Discussion
Without interventions to reduce the incidence and mortality of CRC, the projected cumulative productivity cost of CRC from 2005 through 2020 is projected to be $339 billion. Other published studies report that the cost of CRC care, which focuses on medical costs, is projected to be more than $14 billion in 2010. These costs are projected to exceed $17 billion by 2020.10 Added to the annual productivity costs estimated, the total economic burden of CRC would be $39 billion in 2020. With
References (40)
- et al.
The role of body mass index, physical activity, and diet in colorectal cancer recurrence and survival: a review of the literature
Am J Clin Nutr
(2010) - et al.
Cancer statistics, 2010
CA Cancer J Clin
(2010) - et al.
Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975–2004, featuring cancer in American Indians and Alaska Natives
Cancer
(2007) - et al.
Progress in cancer screening practices in the U.S.: results from the 2000 National Health Interview Survey
Cancer
(2003) - et al.
How much can current interventions reduce colorectal cancer mortality in the U.S.?Mortality projections for scenarios of risk-factor modification, screening, and treatment
Cancer
(2006) - et al.
Relation between Medicare screening reimbursement and stage at diagnosis for older patients with colon cancer
JAMA
(2006) - et al.
Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult bloodMinnesota Colon Cancer Control Study
N Engl J Med
(1993) - et al.
Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975–2002, featuring population-based trends in cancer treatment
J Natl Cancer Inst
(2005) - et al.
Age, sex, and racial differences in the use of standard adjuvant therapy for colorectal cancer
J Clin Oncol
(2002) - et al.
The prevalence of patients with colorectal carcinoma under care in the U.S.
Cancer
(2003)
Projections of the cost of cancer care in the U.S.: 2010–2020
J Natl Cancer Inst
National Cancer Institute 2006 Fact Book
Effect of rising chemotherapy costs on the cost savings of colorectal cancer screening
J Natl Cancer Inst
Cost-effectiveness analyses of colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force
Ann Intern Med
National Cancer Institute website
Productivity costs of cancer mortality in the U.S.: 2000–2020
J Natl Cancer Inst
Estimates and projections of value of life lost from cancer deaths in the U.S.
J Natl Cancer Inst
President's addressThe polyp-cancer sequence in the large bowel
Proc R Soc Med
The evolution of cancer of the colon and rectum
Cancer
CDC website
Cited by (26)
Three Versus Six Months of Adjuvant Doublet Chemotherapy for Patients With Colorectal Cancer: A Multi-Country Cost-Effectiveness and Budget Impact Analysis
2021, Clinical Colorectal CancerCitation Excerpt :Such estimates provide additional information compared with the previous CUA, which split risk stage using a binary division between patients with high-risk stage III disease versus low-risk stage III and stage II disease combined. Approximately 1.8 million people33 are diagnosed with CRC per annum globally, with the cost of managing this disease projected to be over US$39 billion34; around half of these patients35 present with stage II or III disease. Making savings relevant to this patient cohort therefore has significant cost consequences for healthcare systems globally.
The EMA assessment of encorafenib in combination with cetuximab for the treatment of adult patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma harbouring the BRAFV600E mutation who have received prior therapy
2021, ESMO OpenCitation Excerpt :Approximately 25% of newly diagnosed patients present with metastases and 50% of patients eventually develop metastatic disease.3 The median survival for patients who are originally diagnosed with metastatic CRC (mCRC) is about 2 years.4,5 The standard first-line therapy for patients with mCRC consists of a combination of chemotherapy (fluoropyrimidines/leucovorin with or without oxaliplatin or irinotecan) and monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) or the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR).6
Colorectal cancer-inflammatory bowel disease nexus and felony of Escherichia coli
2017, Life SciencesCitation Excerpt :These data highlight the need to develop effective strategies for the management of CRC [2]. Recently, there has been a decline in CRC associated mortality due to improved early stage detection, increased screening for CRC, and improved treatment options for cancer patients [3]. However, the upward trend in the incidence of CRC calls for an urgent need to develop effective preventative strategies.
Lessons from a Systematic Literature Search on Diagnostic DNA Methylation Biomarkers for Colorectal Cancer: How to Increase Research Value and Decrease Research Waste?
2022, Clinical and Translational GastroenterologyCharacterizing trends in cancer patients' survival using the jpsurv software
2021, Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention