Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 3 Optimal strategy according to the Ceiling Ratio in Base-case and Multivariate Scenarios

From: Cost-effectiveness simulation and analysis of colorectal cancer screening in Hong Kong Chinese population: comparison amongst colonoscopy, guaiac and immunologic fecal occult blood testing

  Optimal Strategy
Ceiling Ratio No Screening Biennial G-FOBT Annual G-FOBT Colonoscopy every 10 years Biennial I-FOBT Annual I-FOBT
In term of LYs
Base-case scenario
 [0, 19,838] Extended Dominance Dominance Dominance (19,838, 23,742] (23,742, +∞)
Non-discounted Scenario (Discount Rate = 0 %)
 [0, 14,681] Extended Dominance Dominance Dominance (14,681, 15,856] (15,856, +∞)
In term of QALYs
Base-case scenario
 [0, 2976] Extended Dominance Dominance Dominance (2976, 4087] (4087, +∞)
Non-discounted Scenario (Discount Rate = 0 %)
 [0, 2510] Extended Dominance Dominance Dominance (2510, 3294] (3294, +∞)
Ramsey’s Utility Set Scenario (Cancer free = 1.00; S1/S2 = 0.90; S3 = 0.80; S4 = 0.76)
 [0, 12,294] Extended Dominance Dominance Dominance (12,294, 15,279] (15,279, +∞)
Ness’s Utility Set Scenario (Cancer free = 0.91; S1 = 0.74; S2 = 0.70; S3 = 0.50; S4 = 0.25)  
 [0, 9278] Extended Dominance Dominance Dominance (9278, 11,803] (11,803, +∞)
Sharp’s Utility Set Scenario (Cancer free = 0.94; S1/S2/S3/S4 = 0.80)  
 [0, 12,505] Extended Dominance Dominance Dominance (12,505, 15,460] (15,460, +∞)
  1. Note: G-FOBT, Guaiac fecal occult blood testing; I-FOBT, immunologic fecal occult blood testing; ∞, infinity