scholarly journals Applying Latest Data Science Technology in Cancer Screening Programs

2020 ◽  
pp. 31-39
Author(s):  
Lian Wen ◽  
Wuqi Qiu ◽  
Kedian Mu
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Data Science ◽  
Screening Programs ◽  
Data Usage ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Data Coverage ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Accuracy Data ◽  
Current Screening

Cancer screening programs have been implemented in many different countries for many years to collect information of the fatal diseases, to provide early diagnosis, to support medical research, and to help governments making policies. However, few of those programs have utilized latest data science technologies, therefore not be able to generate the maximum benefits from those programs. To overcome this problem and improve the quality of cancer screening programs, this paper firstly (i) reviews the typical architecture and IT technologies used in current screening programs and recognizes their limitations; then (ii) introduces recent developments in data science that could be implemented in screening programs; finally (iii) proposes the structure of General Medical Screening Framework (GMSF), which could be developed to host future cancer screening programs that will advance data coverage, data accuracy, data usage and lower in the costs. The structure of GMSF and its key elements are described in this paper and some practical approaches to build GMSF are discussed. This work might initialize a series or research to bring the latest IT technologies, particularly data science technologies, into cancer screening programs, and significantly increase the efficiency and reduce the cost of future cancer screening programs.

scholarly journals Prostate Cancer Screening in the Workplace

AAOHN Journal ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 46 (8) ◽  
pp. 379-384 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire Snyder ◽  
Peggy N. Schrammel ◽  
Claudia B. Griffiths ◽  
Robert I. Griffiths
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Prostate Cancer Screening ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Screening Tests ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Total Cost ◽  
Screening Programs ◽  
Psa Testing ◽  
The Cost

Recognition of the mortality and morbidity associated with prostate cancer has resulted in employer based screening programs. This retrospective cohort study identified the employer costs of prostate cancer screening and referrals due to abnormal test results. The subjects were 385 men enrolled in a workplace screening program at a single employer between 1993 and 1995. Screening consisted of digital rectal examination (DRE) annually for enrolled employees aged 40 years and older, plus annual prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing for those 50 and older, and those 40 and older and considered at high risk. Data related to the health care and lost productivity costs of screening and referrals for abnormal test results were collected and analyzed. The total cost of screening was $44,355, or approximately $56 per screening encounter (788 DREs; 437 PSAs). Abnormal screening tests resulted in 52 referrals. Upon further evaluation, 42% were found to have an enlargement, 29% a node, and 12% benign prostatic hyperplasia. Only one malignancy was found. The total cost of additional referrals was $31,815, or 42% of the cost of screening plus referrals. As the cost per screening encounter was low, prostate cancer screening in the workplace is an efficient alternative.

scholarly journals Recommendations From the International Colorectal Cancer Screening Network on the Evaluation of the Cost of Screening Programs

2016 ◽  
Vol 22 (5) ◽  
pp. 461-465 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sujha Subramanian ◽  
Florence K. L. Tangka ◽  
Sonja Hoover ◽  
Marion Nadel ◽  
Robert Smith ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Screening ◽  
Screening Programs ◽  
The Cost

Driving action through data: Delivering online cancer screening reports to primary care providers.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (30_suppl) ◽  
pp. 174-174
Author(s):  
Nicki Cunningham ◽  
Shama Umar ◽  
Dafna Carr ◽  
Richard Smith ◽  
Patrick Flynn
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Clinical Guidelines ◽  
Management System ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Access Management ◽  
Screening Programs ◽  
Screening Activity

174 Background: The Screening Activity Report (SAR), a supplementary tool for primary care providers (PCPs), was released in April, 2014. Providers are able to access this comprehensive report securely via an online solution and view the screening activity of their patients across Cancer Care Ontario (CCO)’s three organized cancer screening programs; breast, cervical and colorectal. The objectives of the SAR are to improve the quality of cancer screening by increasing provincial screening rates, improving the rate of appropriate follow-up of abnormal results and promote the alignment of cancer screening practices with CCO’s evidence-based clinical guidelines. Methods: CCO partnered with eHealth Ontario in 2012 to leverage their identity and access management system to provide safe and secure online access to the report. Since this time, CCO has implemented a multi-faceted campaign to support registrations to the system, encourage report access, and gather feedback on how to improve the report for future iterations. Using a detailed methodology developed by a wide range of subject matter experts at CCO, the SAR employs numerous provincial data sources to provide an overview of the patient rosters. Actionable categories are assigned at the patient level using a unique algorithm based on the latest clinical guidelines. Results: Previous to April 2014, the SAR was referred to as the ColonCancerCheck SAR (CCC SAR) as it included colorectal cancer screening data only. The last release of the CCC SAR was in October, 2013. At this time 4,824 providers were registered to the identity and access management system and adoption of this report had reached 31% after being available for five months to providers. To date, 4,992 providers are now registered and adoption of the April SAR has already reached 27% after being available for almost two months. Conclusions: The SAR is the first tool of its kind to make widespread use of eHealth’s identity and access management system service and target a broad user base of PCPs. The successful launch of the SAR has provided key insights into how technology can be leveraged to share provincial data in a meaningful way with providers and support them in improving the quality of cancer screening.

scholarly journals Can polygenic risk scores contribute to cost-effective cancer screening? A systematic review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Padraig Dixon ◽  
Edna Keeney ◽  
Jenny C Taylor ◽  
Sarah Wordsworth ◽  
Richard Martin
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Economic ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Risk Scores ◽  
Polygenic Risk ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Economic Studies

Polygenic risk is known to influence susceptibility to cancer. The use of data on polygenic risk, in conjunction with other predictors of future disease status, may offer significant potential for preventative care through risk-stratified screening programmes. An important element in the evaluation of screening programmes is their cost-effectiveness. We undertook a systematic review of papers evaluating the cost-effectiveness of screening interventions informed by polygenic risk scores compared to more conventional screening modalities. We included papers reporting cost-effectiveness outcomes in the English language published as articles or uploaded onto preprint servers with no restriction on date, type of cancer or form of polygenic risk modelled. We excluded papers evaluating screening interventions that did not report cost-effectiveness outcomes or which had a focus on monogenic risk. We evaluated studies using the Quality of Health Economic Studies checklist. Ten studies were included in the review, which investigated three cancers: prostate (n=5), colorectal (n=3) and breast (n=2). All study designs were cost-utility papers implemented as Markov models (n=6) or microsimulations (n=4). Nine of ten papers scored highly (score >75 on a 0-100) scale) when assessed using the Quality of Health Economic Studies checklist. Eight of ten studies concluded that polygenic risk informed cancer screening was likely to be more cost-effective than alternatives. However, the included studies lacked robust external data on the cost of polygenic risk stratification, did not account for how very large volumes of polygenic risk data on individuals would be collected and used, did not consider ancestry-related differences in polygenic risk, and did not fully account for downstream economic sequalae stemming from the use of polygenic risk data in these ways. These topics merit attention in future research on how polygenic risk data might contribute to cost-effective cancer screening.

Use of Modeling to Evaluate the Cost-Effectiveness of Cancer Screening Programs

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 203-208 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy B. Knudsen ◽  
Pamela M. McMahon ◽  
G. Scott Gazelle
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Resource Constraints ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Public Health Interventions ◽  
Screening Programs ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Use Of Models

Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is an analytic tool that provides a framework for comparing the health benefits and resource expenditures associated with competing medical and public health interventions, thereby allowing decision makers to identify interventions that yield the greatest amount of health, given their resource constraints. Models are important components of most, if not all, CEAs, and they play a key role in evaluating the cost-effectiveness of cancer screening programs, in particular. In this article, we describe the basic types of models used to evaluate cancer screening programs and provide examples of the use of models in CEAs and to guide cancer screening policy. Finally, we offer some suggestions for important concepts to consider when interpreting model results.

Simulated Lifetime Costs of Three Types of Employer-Based, Periodic, Breast Cancer Screening Programs for Working-Age Women

1994 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert I. Griffiths ◽  
Claudia B. Griffiths ◽  
Neil R. Powe
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Breast Cancer Screening ◽  
Screening Program ◽  
Lifetime Cost ◽  
Decision Analysis Model ◽  
Screening Programs ◽  
Mean Lifetime ◽  
Lifetime Costs ◽  
The Cost

Purpose. To estimate the lifetime cost of three types of employer-sponsored breast cancer screening programs and to identify factors influencing cost. Design. A computerized decision analysis model was constructed to compare lifetime costs of providing breast cancer screening in each of three screening programs: on-site within an employer, mobile unit visiting the employer, and off-site. Subjects. Three hypothetical cohorts of 10,000 female employees 38 years of age at time of first screening. Intervention. A cohort was enrolled in each screening program and received screening from age 38 through age 64. Employees continued to receive benefits related to breast cancer until age 100 or death. Measures. Costs in the model included those for screening, workup for a suspicious mammogram, treatment for breast cancer, short-term losses in employee productivity, and disability due to breast cancer. Approach. The model was used to estimate the mean lifetime cost per employee, to the employer, of the On-Site program. This cost was compared to the cost of the other programs. Results. Mean lifetime cost per employee was $5,485 for the On-Site screening program. This cost was significantly (P<.0001) lower than in the Off-Site program (by $311) or the Mobile program (by $212). The baseline results for the On-Site program were quite sensitive to the cost of screening, the sensitivity and specificity of screening, age at initiation of screening, and the underlying incidence of breast cancer in the population. Conclusion. Employers and other entities should consider these factors such as location and content in selecting the most efficient and effective breast cancer screening program.

Is the Promise of Cancer-Screening Programs Being Compromised? Quality of Follow-Up Care after Abnormal Screening Results

2003 ◽  
Vol 60 (3) ◽  
pp. 294-331 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Robin Yabroff ◽  
Kathleen Shakira Washington ◽  
Amy Leader ◽  
Elizabeth Neilson ◽  
Jeanne Mandelblatt
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Screening Programs ◽  
Follow Up Care
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document