Article Text
PDF
Abstract
Objective To project future trajectories of the gastric cancer (GC) burden in China under different scenarios of GC prevention and identify strategies to improve affordability and cost-effectiveness.
Design Using a cohort of Chinese men and women born during 1951–1980, we assumed that different prevention strategies were conducted, including eradication of Helicobacter pylori (Hp) and endoscopy screening (one-time, annual, biennial, triennial or stratified according to personal risk). We performed a literature search to identify up-to-date data and populate a Markov model to project the number of new GC cases and deaths during 2021–2035, as well as resource requirements and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). We examined the impacts of general (among the whole population) and targeted (high-risk population) prevention.
Results During 2021–2035, 10.0 million new GC cases and 5.6 million GC deaths would occur, with 7.6%–35.5% and 6.9%–44.5%, respectively, being avoidable through various prevention strategies. Relative to the status quo, Hp eradication was a cost-saving strategy. General annual screening dominated other screening strategies, but cost more than CNY 70 000 per QALY gained (willingness-to-pay) compared with Hp eradication. Among endoscopy strategies, targeted screening resulted in 44%–49% lower cost per QALY gained over the status quo than general screening. Among high-risk population, tailoring the screening frequency according to personal risk could reduce endoscopy-related resources by 22% compared with biennial screening and by 55% compared with annual screening,
Conclusion Our findings provide important input for future decision-making and investment, highlighting the need and feasibility for China to include GC prevention in its national health plans.
- GASTRIC CANCER
- COST-EFFECTIVENESS
- SCREENING
- CANCER PREVENTION
Data availability statement
All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as online supplemental information.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Data availability statement
All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as online supplemental information.
Footnotes
Contributors JJ designed the study and is responsible for the overall content as guarantor. ZW, YZ, and WG analysed the data and drew the figures. All other authors participated in the acquisition or interpretation of data. ZW drafted the manuscript and all the authors critically revised it. All authors approved the version to be published and agree to be accountable for the work.
Funding This work was supported by the CAMS Fund for Medical Sciences (grant no: 2021-1-I2M-022).
Competing interests None declared.
Patient and public involvement Patients and/or the public were not involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting, or dissemination plans of this research.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.