Search

Using a bioinformatics-based strategy, we set out to identify hypermethylated genes that could serve as biomarkers for early detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) in stool. In addition, the complementary value to a Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) was evaluated. Candidate genes were selected by applying cluster alignment and computational analysis of promoter regions to microarray-expression data of colorectal adenomas and carcinomas. DNA methylation was measured by quantitative methylation-specific PCR on 34 normal colon mucosa, 71 advanced adenoma, and 64 CRC tissues. The performance as biomarker was tested in whole stool samples from in total 193 subjects, including 19 with advanced adenoma and 66 with CRC. For a large proportion of these series, methylation data for GATA4 and OSMR were available for comparison. The complementary value to FIT was measured in stool subsamples from 92 subjects including 44 with advanced adenoma or CRC. Phosphatase and Actin Regulator 3 (PHACTR3) was identified as a novel hypermethylated gene showing more than 70-fold increased DNA methylation levels in advanced neoplasia compared with normal colon mucosa. In a stool training set, PHACTR3 methylation showed a sensitivity of 55% (95% CI: 33-75) for CRC and a specificity of 95% (95% CI: 87-98). In a stool validation set, sensitivity reached 66% (95% CI: 50-79) for CRC and 32% (95% CI: 14-57) for advanced adenomas at a specificity of 100% (95% CI: 86-100). Adding PHACTR3 methylation to FIT increased sensitivity for CRC up to 15%. PHACTR3 is a new hypermethylated gene in CRC with a good performance in stool DNA testing and has complementary value to FIT.

Cross-protection against non-HPV16/18 types and the emergence of broad spectrum vaccines protecting against multiple HPV types will influence the cost-effectiveness of future screening. To assess this influence we used an individual-based simulation model describing the relation between 14 HPV types and cervical disease, allowing the occurrence of multiple type infections. Screening scenarios for vaccinated women were evaluated, firstly for HPV16/18 vaccination with partial cross-protection against HPV 31, 33, 45 and 58 and secondly, for broad spectrum vaccination against 5-13 HPV types. The vaccine-induced incidence reduction of type-specific infection was varied from 0 to 95% in the cross-protection setting and set at 100% in the setting of broad spectrum vaccines. Scenarios of either cytology or HPV DNA screening were considered under varying lifetime number of screening rounds. At a cost-effectiveness threshold of €20,000/QALY, four times HPV DNA screening between 30 and 60 years was the selected scenario in addition to HPV16/18 vaccination, whether or not cross-protection was conferred (€6707 and €9994/QALY, respectively). In the absence of cross-protection, a fifth screening round might be considered (ICER €22,967/QALY). In addition to broad spectrum vaccination, one screen during lifetime was cost-effective up to an 11-valent vaccine. If the vaccine-induced type-specific incidence reduction was lowered to 99%, one screen during lifetime was cost-effective even in addition to 13-valent vaccination. In conclusion, in a cohort of HPV16/18 vaccinated women, four rounds of HPV DNA screening is cost-effective. One screen during lifetime remains cost-effective in addition to broad spectrum vaccination offering protection against many high-risk HPV types., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

In past decades, studies focusing on new chemotherapeutic agents for patients with inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer have reported only modest gains in survival. These health gains are achieved at considerable cost, but economic evidence is lacking on superiority of one agent in terms of cost effectiveness. The objective of this systematic review was to assess fully published cost-effectiveness studies comparing the new agents docetaxel, paclitaxel, vinorelbine, gemcitabine and pemetrexed, and the targeted therapies erlotinib and gefitinib with one another. We performed systematic searches in the bibliographic databases PubMed, EMBASE and Health Economic Evaluations (HEED) [via the Cochrane Library] for fully published studies from the past 10 years. Studies were screened by two independent reviewers according to a priori inclusion criteria. The methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated by two independent reviewers using standardized assessment tools. A total of 222 potential studies were identified; 11 studies and six reviews were included. The methodological quality of the full economic evaluations was fairly good. Transparency in costs and resource use, details on statistical tests and sensitivity analysis were points for improvement. In first-line treatment, gemcitabine+cisplatin was cost effective compared with other platinum-based regimens (paclitaxel, docetaxel and vinorelbine). In one study, pemetrexed+cisplatin was cost effective compared with gemcitabine+cisplatin in patients with non-squamous-cell carcinoma. In second-line treatment, docetaxel was cost effective compared with best supportive care; erlotinib was cost effective compared with placebo; and docetaxel and pemetrexed were dominated by erlotinib. We found indications of superiority in terms of cost effectiveness for gemcitabine+cisplatin in a first-line setting, and for erlotinib in a second-line setting.

Background: The use of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines has been universally approved for women from age 12 to 25 years, but those older than 16 years receive no reimbursement for the cost of the vaccine in the Netherlands. Reductions in the vaccine price as well as new insights in the efficacy of HPV vaccines offer renewed arguments to consider HPV vaccination in adult women. We calculated the clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of vaccinating women aged 17-25 years in 2010., Methods: The calculations were based on an individual-based simulation model for cervical carcinogenesis, with HPV infection risks obtained from a type-specific HPV transmission model. The indirect protective effect from vaccinating 12 to 16 year-old girls was adjusted for. Cervical screening in the model was incorporated according Dutch screening guidelines, i.e. 7 cytology-based rounds at 5-year intervals from the age of 30. As base-case, we assumed the vaccine to offer full protection against HPV16/18 only if no prior exposure to that type had occurred before vaccination. In sensitivity analyses, we considered partial cross-protection against types 31/33/45/58 and efficacy against all future infections, irrespective of previous or current infection status., Results: In base-case analyses, vaccinating 17 year-olds reduced their lifetime risk of treatment for precancerous lesions from 7.77% to 3.48% and their lifetime cervical cancer risk from 0.52% to 0.24%. These risks were 6.12% and 0.45%, respectively, for a 25 year-old vaccinee. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for vaccinating 17-25 year-olds was €22,526 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) at a vaccine price of €65 per dose, a 50% reduction of the 2010 pharmacy price in the Netherlands. If cross-protection against types 31/33/45/58 was included, the ICER decreased to €14,734 per QALY. Results were robust to efficacy assumptions with respect to previous or current infection status., Conclusion: The clinical benefit of HPV vaccination of women up to 25 years moderately depends on cross-protection to non-vaccine types. Refunding the cost of the vaccine to 17-25 year-old women in the Netherlands can be considered cost-effective at anticipated price reductions., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: A single sampled faecal immunochemical test (FIT) has moderate sensitivity for colorectal cancer and advanced adenomas. Repeated FIT sampling could improve test sensitivity. The aim of the present study is to determine whether any of three different strategies of double FIT sampling has a better combination of sensitivity and specificity than single FIT sampling., Methods: Test performance of single FIT sampling in subjects scheduled for colonoscopy was compared to double FIT sampling intra-individually. Test positivity of double FIT sampling was evaluated in three different ways: 1) "one of two FITs+" when at least one out of two measurements exceeded the cut-off value, 2) "two of two FITs+" when both measurements exceeded the cut-off value, 3) "mean of two FITs+" when the geometric mean of two FITs exceeded the cut-off value. Receiver operator curves were calculated and sensitivity of single and the three strategies of double FIT sampling were compared at a fixed level of specificity., Results: In 124 of 1096 subjects, screen relevant neoplasia (SRN) were found (i.e. early stage CRC or advanced adenomas). At any cut-off, "two of two FITs+" resulted in the lowest and "one of two FITs+" in the highest sensitivity for SRN (range 35-44% and 42%-54% respectively). ROC's of double FIT sampling were similar to single FIT sampling. At specificities of 85/90/95%, sensitivity of any double FIT sampling strategy did not differ significantly from single FIT (p-values 0.07-1)., Conclusion: At any cut off, "one of two FITs+" is the most sensitive double FIT sampling strategy. However, at a given specificity level, sensitivity of any double FIT sampling strategy for SRN is comparable to single FIT sampling at a different cut-off value. None of the double FIT strategies has a superior combination of sensitivity and specificity over single FIT., (© 2011 Oort et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.)

Background: Vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV) types 16/18 is being implemented in many countries. There may be indirect benefit of HPV vaccination to nonvaccinated women, who may experience a reduced risk of infection with vaccine-preventable types (herd immunity). We attempt to disentangle the direct and indirect effects of HPV vaccination, while accounting for 14 oncogenic HPV types in a dynamic modeling framework., Methods: On the basis of vaccine uptake among preadolescent girls in the Netherlands, we calculated how heterosexual transmission of HPV-16/18 is expected to change as a result of vaccination, and used these predictions in an individual-based simulation model of cervical carcinogenesis that considers 14 high-risk HPV types. Models were parameterized to match prevaccine data on type-specific HPV infection and cervical disease., Results: At 50% vaccine coverage, the estimated lifetime infection risk in nonvaccinated women dropped from 0.46 (95% credible interval = 0.35-0.54) to 0.37 (0.26-0.46) for HPV-16, and from 0.40 (0.32-0.46) to 0.31 (0.22-0.36) [corrected] for HPV-18. For the whole population, we calculated an eventual 47% reduction in cervical cancer incidence, with 1 in 4 cases prevented among nonvaccinated women. The number of indirectly averted cancer cases was highest with vaccine coverage between 50% and 70%, approximating 70 cases per 100,000 women born from 2010 onward., Conclusions: HPV-16/18 vaccination of preadolescent girls will markedly lower infection rates among nonvaccinated women. Reduced transmission of vaccine-preventable HPV becomes a prominent aspect of cervical cancer control, especially in populations with moderate vaccine coverage.

Purpose: Screening women for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia or cervical cancer (CIN3(+)) by high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing has as side-effect the detection of hrHPV-positive women without clinically relevant lesions. Here, we developed an objective assay assessing the methylation status of the promoter regions of CADM1 and MAL to triage hrHPV-positive women for CIN3(+)., Experimental Design: In a training set (51 women with CIN3(+) and 224 without CIN2(+)), panels consisting of one to four quantitative methylation-specific PCR (qMSP) assays (CADM1-m12,CADM1-m18,MAL-m1,MAL-m2) were analyzed. Cross-validated receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) curves were constructed and the panel with highest partial cross-validated area under the curve (AUC) was used for validation in an independent set of 236 consecutive hrHPV-positive women from a screening cohort. In the validation set, the ROC curve of the panel was compared with CIN3(+) sensitivity and specificity of cytology and of cytology combined with HPV16/18 genotyping., Results: In the training set, CADM1-m18 combined with MAL-m1 was the best panel (cross-validated partial AUC = 0.719). In the validation set, this panel revealed CIN3(+) sensitivities ranging from 100% (95% CI: 92.4-100) to 60.5% (95% CI: 47.1-74.6), with corresponding specificities ranging from 22.7% (95% CI: 20.2-25.2) to 83.3% (95% CI: 78.4-87.4). For cytology these were 65.8% (95% CI: 52.3-79.0) and 78.8% (95% CI: 73.7-83.1) and for cytology/HPV16/18, these were 84.2% (95% CI: 72.0-92.7) and 54.0% (95% CI: 49.2-58.7), respectively. The point estimates of both cytology and cytology/HPV16/18 were equal to the values of the ROC curve of CADM1-m18/MAL-m1., Conclusions: We developed an objective methylation marker panel that was equally discriminatory for CIN3(+) as cytology or cytology with HPV16/18 genotyping in hrHPV-positive women. This opens the possibility for complete cervical screening by objective, nonmorphological molecular methods., (©2011 AACR.)

Background: Adjusting the threshold for positivity of quantitative fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) allows for controlling the number of follow-up colonoscopies in a screening program. However, it is unknown to what extent higher cutoff levels affect detection rates of screen-relevant neoplasia. This study aimed to assess the effect of higher cutoff levels of a quantitative FIT on test positivity rate and detection rate of early-stage colorectal cancers (CRC)., Methods: Subjects above 40 years old scheduled for colonoscopy in 5 hospitals were asked to sample a single FIT (OC sensor) before colonoscopy. Screen-relevant neoplasia were defined as advanced adenoma or early-stage cancer (stage I and II). Positivity rate, sensitivity, and specificity were evaluated at increasing cutoff levels of 50 to 200 ng/mL., Results: In 2,145 individuals who underwent total colonoscopy, 79 patients were diagnosed with CRC, 38 of which were with early-stage disease. Advanced adenomas were found in 236 patients. When varying cutoff levels from ≥ 50 to ≥ 200 ng/mL, positivity rates ranged from 16.5% to 10.2%. With increasing cutoff levels, sensitivity for early-stage CRCs and for screen-relevant neoplasia ranged from 84.2% to 78.9% and 47.1% to 37.2%, respectively., Conclusions: Higher FIT cutoff levels substantially decrease test positivity rates with only limited effects on detection rates of early-stage CRCs. However, spectrum bias resulting in higher estimates of sensitivity than would be expected in a screening population may be present., Impact: Higher cutoff levels can reduce strain on colonoscopy capacity with only a modest decrease in sensitivity for curable cancers., (©2010 AACR.)

Background: Diagnosing colorectal cancer (CRC) at an early stage improves survival. To what extent any delay affects outcome once patients are symptomatic is still unclear.Our objectives were to evaluate the association between diagnostic delay and survival in symptomatic patients with early stage CRC and late stage CRC., Methods: Prospective population-based observational study evaluating daily clinical practice in Northern Holland. Diagnostic delay was determined through questionnaire-interviews. Dukes' stage was classified into two groups: early stage (Dukes A or B) and late stage (Dukes C or D) cancer. Patients were followed up for 3.5 years after diagnosis., Results: In total, 272 patients were available for analysis. Early stage CRC was present in 136 patients while 136 patients had late stage CRC. The mean total diagnostic delay (SE) was 31 (1.5) weeks in all CRC patients. No significant difference was observed in the mean total diagnostic delay in early versus late stage CRC (p = 0.27).In early stage CRC, no difference in survival was observed between patients with total diagnostic delay shorter and longer than the median (Kaplan-Meier, log-rank p = 0.93).In late stage CRC, patients with a diagnostic delay shorter than the median had a shorter survival than patients with a diagnostic delay longer than the median (log-rank p = 0.01). In the multivariate Cox regression model with survival as dependent variable and median delay, age, open access endoscopy, number and type of symptoms as independent variables, the odd's ratio for survival in patients with long delay (>median) versus short delay (

In The Netherlands, vaccination against HPV16/18 has been recommended for all 12-year-old girls. Because screening of vaccinated women remains important, we evaluated the model-based cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening strategies. We considered cytology and the HPV DNA test as primary screening instrument, varied the number of screening rounds from 7 to 4, and set the screening starting age at 30 and 35 years. Our model predicted reductions in cervical cancer mortality between 60 and 81% (from 199 deaths to 37-79) when adding screening to vaccination (assumptions for vaccination: 95% efficacy, 100% compliance, lifelong protection). Screening 5 times with HPV DNA (euro11,133/QALY) or 7 times with cytology (euro17,627/QALY) were scenarios with comparable costs and effects and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios below the threshold in The Netherlands (euro20,000 per QALY).

We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of HPV16/18 vaccination for girls aged 12 years in The Netherlands in addition to cervical cancer screening. For this purpose, we developed a simulation model that describes the relation between each of the high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) types and cervical disease, allowing the occurrence of multiple type-specific infections. Model parameters were derived from Dutch cohort studies, including a large population-based screening trial, and from the national cervical cancer registry. The model satisfactorily reproduced Dutch data on HPV infection and the presence of cervical lesions. For our base-case scenario in which 85% of the girls aged 12 years were vaccinated against types 16/18 (95% efficacy, lifelong protection), the model predicted a decrease of 60% in the number of cervical cancer cases and cervical cancer deaths indicating that substantial health benefits can be achieved. Health savings were robust against changes in the vaccine efficacy (varied from 85% to 98%) but savings showed a substantial reduction when the efficacy started waning 10 years after vaccination. The discounted costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) were euro 19,500/QALY (range euro 11,000 to euro 25,000/QALY) and lied near the cost-effectiveness threshold of euro 20,000/QALY used in The Netherlands. The simulations further showed that vaccination cannot replace screening because vaccination without screening was less effective than screening in preventing cancer in women over 40 years of age. In conclusion, our model results support the implementation of HPV16/18 vaccination in young women in addition to cervical cancer screening.

Objective: Addition of high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing to post-treatment monitoring policies of women treated for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) may improve the effectiveness of detecting recurrent/residual disease. Recent studies have shown that HPV type 16 confers an increased risk of high-grade CIN and cervical cancer. This study aimed to find out whether the post-treatment CIN3 rate is increased in HPV16-positive women treated for CIN3., Methods: We included 229 hrHPV-positive women treated for CIN3. HPV typing was performed by GP5+/6+-PCR followed by reverse line blotting on a cervical scrape taken before treatment. HPV typing data were related to the occurrence of post-treatment CIN3 within a median follow-up time of 20.1 months (range 3-85.4 months) following treatment., Results: Twenty nine of the 151 (19%) HPV16-positive women versus 6 of the 78 (8%) women with other hrHPV types had recurrent/residual CIN3. Post-treatment CIN3 rate was significantly increased in women with HPV16 compared to those harboring other hrHPV types (p=0.03). None of the other hrHPV types were associated with higher post-treatment CIN3 rates., Conclusion: Women treated for HPV16 containing CIN3 should be monitored more intensively because of their increased risk of post-treatment CIN3. Thus, the HPV genotype should be considered in post-treatment monitoring policies.