Evidence mapPaperPMID 33743605Full record

SynthesisBMC gastroenterology2021

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.

Sajesh K Veettil, Siang Tong Kew, Kean Ghee Lim, Pochamana Phisalprapa, Suresh Kumar, Yeong Yeh Lee, Nathorn Chaiyakunapruk

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC gastroenterology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 36% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Sajesh K VeettilDepartment of Pharmacotherapy, College of Pharmacy, The University of Utah, 30 2000 E, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA.
Siang Tong KewDepartment of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, International Medical University, International Medical University, Bukit Jalil, 57000, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Kean Ghee LimDepartment of Surgery, International Medical University, Negeri Sembilan, Jalan Rasah, 70300, Seremban, Malaysia.
Pochamana PhisalprapaDivision of Ambulatory Medicine, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, 10700, Thailand.
Suresh KumarDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, School of Pharmacy, International Medical University, Bukit Jalil, 57000, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Yeong Yeh LeeSchool of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kota Bharu, Malaysia.
Nathorn ChaiyakunaprukDepartment of Pharmacotherapy, College of Pharmacy, The University of Utah, 30 2000 E, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA. nathorn.chaiyakunapruk@utah.edu.
International Medical University · MYHospital Universiti Sains Malaysia · MYMahidol University · THMonash University Malaysia · MYUniversity of Utah · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIndividuals 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).

methodsSystematic 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.

resultsAccording 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.

conclusionASAVLD 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.

Indexed as

AdenomaColorectal NeoplasmsAspirinColonoscopyCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansQuality-Adjusted Life YearsSecondary PreventionAspirinAspirinChemopreventionColorectal adenomasColorectal cancerCost-effectiveness analysisNetwork meta-analysisSurveillance colonoscopy

Identifiers

PMID33743605
PMCPMC7981989
OpenAlexW3136939225

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.