{"title":"Economic Evaluation of Gastric Cancer Screening Strategies: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Aziz Rezapour, Kamran Irandoust, Maryam Eri, Faeze Foruzanfar, Aghdas Souresrafil, Somayeh Afshari, Seidamir Pasha Tabaeian","doi":"10.1007/s12029-025-01202-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Gastric cancer (GC) is one of the most prevalent cancers worldwide, with high mortality and economic burden. Early detection through cost-effective screening strategies can improve patient outcomes and optimize healthcare resource allocation. This systematic review evaluates the cost-effectiveness of various GC screening approaches.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive search was conducted in Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, Embase, the NHS Economic Evaluation Database, and Google Scholar for studies published between 1990 and 2023. Relevant studies were selected based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The CHEERS 2022 checklist was used to assess study quality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 6027 studies were retrieved, and after a two-phase screening and quality assessment, 47 studies were included. Most studies originated from China, Japan, the USA, Singapore, and South Korea. Findings indicate that screening is generally more cost-effective than no screening. Endoscopy was more cost-effective than upper gastrointestinal (UGI) X-ray but not superior to Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) screening, serum pepsinogen (PG) testing, or novel risk scoring methods. H. pylori screening was more cost-effective than endoscopy and symptomatic treatment but not superior to serum PG testing and risk scoring methods. Urea breath test (UBT)-based H. pylori screening was less cost-effective than most alternatives.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Selecting cost-effective GC screening strategies can improve early detection rates and reduce healthcare costs. Policymakers should consider population-specific factors when implementing screening programs to maximize health benefits and economic efficiency.</p>","PeriodicalId":15895,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer","volume":"56 1","pages":"85"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12029-025-01202-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Gastric cancer (GC) is one of the most prevalent cancers worldwide, with high mortality and economic burden. Early detection through cost-effective screening strategies can improve patient outcomes and optimize healthcare resource allocation. This systematic review evaluates the cost-effectiveness of various GC screening approaches.
Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted in Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, Embase, the NHS Economic Evaluation Database, and Google Scholar for studies published between 1990 and 2023. Relevant studies were selected based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The CHEERS 2022 checklist was used to assess study quality.
Results: A total of 6027 studies were retrieved, and after a two-phase screening and quality assessment, 47 studies were included. Most studies originated from China, Japan, the USA, Singapore, and South Korea. Findings indicate that screening is generally more cost-effective than no screening. Endoscopy was more cost-effective than upper gastrointestinal (UGI) X-ray but not superior to Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) screening, serum pepsinogen (PG) testing, or novel risk scoring methods. H. pylori screening was more cost-effective than endoscopy and symptomatic treatment but not superior to serum PG testing and risk scoring methods. Urea breath test (UBT)-based H. pylori screening was less cost-effective than most alternatives.
Conclusions: Selecting cost-effective GC screening strategies can improve early detection rates and reduce healthcare costs. Policymakers should consider population-specific factors when implementing screening programs to maximize health benefits and economic efficiency.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer is a multidisciplinary medium for the publication of novel research pertaining to cancers arising from the gastrointestinal tract.The journal is dedicated to the most rapid publication possible.The journal publishes papers in all relevant fields, emphasizing those studies that are helpful in understanding and treating cancers affecting the esophagus, stomach, liver, gallbladder and biliary tree, pancreas, small bowel, large bowel, rectum, and anus. In addition, the Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer publishes basic and translational scientific information from studies providing insight into the etiology and progression of cancers affecting these organs. New insights are provided from diverse areas of research such as studies exploring pre-neoplastic states, risk factors, epidemiology, genetics, preclinical therapeutics, surgery, radiation therapy, novel medical therapeutics, clinical trials, and outcome studies.In addition to reports of original clinical and experimental studies, the journal also publishes: case reports, state-of-the-art reviews on topics of immediate interest or importance; invited articles analyzing particular areas of pancreatic research and knowledge; perspectives in which critical evaluation and conflicting opinions about current topics may be expressed; meeting highlights that summarize important points presented at recent meetings; abstracts of symposia and conferences; book reviews; hypotheses; Letters to the Editors; and other items of special interest, including:Complex Cases in GI Oncology: This is a new initiative to provide a forum to review and discuss the history and management of complex and involved gastrointestinal oncology cases. The format will be similar to a teaching case conference where a case vignette is presented and is followed by a series of questions and discussion points. A brief reference list supporting the points made in discussion would be expected.