Monday, September 1, 2025
Science
No Result
View All Result
  • Login
  • HOME
  • SCIENCE NEWS
  • CONTACT US
  • HOME
  • SCIENCE NEWS
  • CONTACT US
No Result
View All Result
Scienmag
No Result
View All Result
Home Science News Cancer

Multitarget Stool DNA Tests Offer Greater Sensitivity but Lower Cost-Effectiveness Than FIT for Early CRC Detection

May 12, 2025
in Cancer
Reading Time: 3 mins read
0
65
SHARES
594
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
ADVERTISEMENT

In a groundbreaking analysis published in the upcoming issue of Annals of Internal Medicine, researchers from the German Cancer Research Center in Heidelberg have challenged the prevailing assumption that higher sensitivity in colorectal cancer screening tests always translates into better cost-effectiveness. Their study meticulously compares the economic feasibility of multitarget stool DNA tests (MSDT), along with their next-generation counterparts (N-G MSDT), against the traditional fecal immunochemical tests (FIT), which have been the cornerstone of non-invasive colorectal cancer (CRC) screening.

Colorectal cancer remains one of the leading causes of cancer mortality worldwide, and early detection through effective screening is crucial for improving patient outcomes. While MSDT and N-G MSDT, such as Exact Sciences’ Cologuard and Cologuard Plus, boast superior sensitivity in detecting advanced neoplasia and early-stage CRC compared to FIT, this heightened detection capability comes with significantly increased screening costs. The researchers have employed a robust cost analysis framework, factoring in Medicare reimbursement rates, test costs, and patient adherence to follow-up colonoscopies, to quantify the economic trade-offs.

Their findings reveal that the screening costs per early-detected CRC or advanced neoplasia case via MSDT-based methods are approximately seven to nine times higher than those associated with FIT-based screening. Strikingly, even if the prices for MSDT and N-G MSDT were slashed to 20% of their current levels, these methods would still not be more cost-effective than FIT. This critical insight underscores the need to balance test sensitivity with economic sustainability in public health strategies.

To deepen the analysis, the team modeled different scenarios of patient compliance with follow-up colonoscopy, ranging from 30% to 90%. Colonoscopy remains the definitive diagnostic and therapeutic procedure following a positive stool test. Lower colonoscopy uptake accentuated the cost disparity, with incremental costs soaring beyond $1.4 million for MSDT and $1.5 million for N-G MSDT per additional CRC case detected when compared with FIT. Even at the highest assumed follow-up rates, the additional costs remained over half a million dollars per early-detected case, highlighting persistent inefficiencies in MSDT approaches.

The investigators emphasize that although MSDT and N-G MSDT exhibit higher sensitivity, equivalent diagnostic performance could, in some cases, be achieved by adjusting the positivity threshold of FIT, thereby minimizing costs without compromising test efficacy. This finding challenges the perceived superiority of more expensive testing modalities and calls for recalibrating screening protocols to optimize both clinical outcomes and economic practicality.

Methodologically, the study synthesized data from two independent cohorts comparing the diagnostic accuracy of Cologuard and Cologuard Plus with a commercially available FIT. By integrating reimbursement rates and colonoscopy uptake metrics, the researchers calculated aggregate screening costs per diagnosis of advanced neoplasia or early CRC. This comprehensive approach provides a transparent and reproducible model for evaluating screening cost-effectiveness in real-world settings.

The implications of this research are multifold. Firstly, it questions the wholesale adoption of multitarget stool DNA testing as a superior alternative in population-based CRC screening programs. Given constrained healthcare budgets and the imperative for efficient resource utilization, FIT remains a compelling option for widespread screening initiatives. Secondly, the study points to the importance of patient adherence to follow-up procedures in determining the overall value of any screening regimen.

Moreover, the research reinforces the dynamic nature of screening strategies. Sensitivity and specificity rates are not immutable attributes of diagnostic tests but can be modulated through threshold adjustments. This flexibility in FIT performance offers pragmatic avenues for enhancing screening outcomes without incurring prohibitive costs associated with novel molecular assays.

These findings assume particular significance in the context of healthcare systems facing escalating cancer burdens combined with fiscal pressures. Policymakers and clinicians must weigh the marginal benefits of advanced diagnostic tests against their economic impact, ensuring that screening programs remain accessible, affordable, and scientifically justified.

Importantly, the study clarifies that while simplicity and accessibility favor FIT, it is not devoid of limitations. MSDT and N-G MSDT provide additional genetic and epigenetic information that might ultimately translate to clinical benefits in selected populations. However, such benefits must be validated against their cost implications in comparative effectiveness research.

The authors advocate for continued research aimed at refining screening algorithms, possibly incorporating risk stratification models that tailor test choice to individual patient profiles. Such precision screening could harness the strengths of both FIT and multitarget DNA tests, delivering personalized prevention strategies while safeguarding public health budgets.

In summary, this seminal work urges a reevaluation of the prevailing enthusiasm for expensive stool DNA-based diagnostics in colorectal cancer screening. It underscores the enduring value and cost-efficiency of FIT, advocating for evidence-based adjustments in screening thresholds to maximize benefit without disproportionate financial burden. The study serves as a clarion call for balancing technological innovation with economic realism in the fight against colorectal cancer.


Subject of Research: People

Article Title: Dollars needed to pay per early-detected colorectal cancer in stool-based screening

News Publication Date: 13-May-2025

Web References: http://dx.doi.org/10.7326/ANNALS-24-04026

Keywords: Colorectal cancer, Cost effectiveness, Cancer screening

Tags: advanced neoplasia detection techniquescolorectal cancer mortality preventioncolorectal cancer screening guidelinescost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screeningearly detection of colorectal cancereconomic analysis of cancer screeningfecal immunochemical tests comparisonMedicare reimbursement for cancer testsmultitarget stool DNA testsnon-invasive cancer screening methodspatient adherence to colonoscopy follow-upssensitivity vs cost in CRC tests
Share26Tweet16
Previous Post

Leading Scientific Breakthroughs Honored at ACC Asia Conference

Next Post

Estrogen-Related Receptors: A Promising Target for Treating Metabolic and Muscular Disorders

Related Posts

blank
Cancer

Tailored Risk Messages Show No Impact on Increasing Colorectal Cancer Screening Rates

September 1, 2025
blank
Cancer

Evaluating Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma in Chinese Youth

September 1, 2025
blank
Cancer

DNA-Wrapped Nanoparticles Triple CRISPR’s Efficiency

September 1, 2025
blank
Cancer

Targeting Nrf2 in AML: Combating Chemoresistance

September 1, 2025
blank
Cancer

BH3 Mimetics Revolutionize Acute Myeloid Leukemia Treatment

September 1, 2025
blank
Cancer

Unraveling Lung Adenocarcinoma Cell Interactions with Transcriptomics

September 1, 2025
Next Post
Muscle cells

Estrogen-Related Receptors: A Promising Target for Treating Metabolic and Muscular Disorders

  • Mothers who receive childcare support from maternal grandparents show more parental warmth, finds NTU Singapore study

    Mothers who receive childcare support from maternal grandparents show more parental warmth, finds NTU Singapore study

    27543 shares
    Share 11014 Tweet 6884
  • University of Seville Breaks 120-Year-Old Mystery, Revises a Key Einstein Concept

    956 shares
    Share 382 Tweet 239
  • Bee body mass, pathogens and local climate influence heat tolerance

    642 shares
    Share 257 Tweet 161
  • Researchers record first-ever images and data of a shark experiencing a boat strike

    509 shares
    Share 204 Tweet 127
  • Warm seawater speeding up melting of ‘Doomsday Glacier,’ scientists warn

    313 shares
    Share 125 Tweet 78
Science

Embark on a thrilling journey of discovery with Scienmag.com—your ultimate source for cutting-edge breakthroughs. Immerse yourself in a world where curiosity knows no limits and tomorrow’s possibilities become today’s reality!

RECENT NEWS

  • Unveiling Self-Compassion Variability in Indian Adolescents
  • Mental Health of Nursing Staff in Post-COVID Era
  • AR Improves Training for Common Extremity Fractures
  • Integrating Chronic Disease Clinics to Combat China’s Health Crisis

Categories

  • Agriculture
  • Anthropology
  • Archaeology
  • Athmospheric
  • Biology
  • Blog
  • Bussines
  • Cancer
  • Chemistry
  • Climate
  • Earth Science
  • Marine
  • Mathematics
  • Medicine
  • Pediatry
  • Policy
  • Psychology & Psychiatry
  • Science Education
  • Social Science
  • Space
  • Technology and Engineering

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 5,182 other subscribers

© 2025 Scienmag - Science Magazine

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In
No Result
View All Result
  • HOME
  • SCIENCE NEWS
  • CONTACT US

© 2025 Scienmag - Science Magazine

Discover more from Science

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading