Economic impact of implementing optical diagnosis with a “resect and discard” strategy within the English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme: findings from the DISCARD3 study

Background and Aims Advances in endoscopic technology, such as narrow-band imaging and high-definition colonoscopes, offer the potential for optical diagnosis (OD) with a “resect and discard” (RD) strategy for diminutive (≤5 mm) and small (6-9 mm) colorectal polyps. This could help alleviate the huge cost and time burden required for histopathology. The aim of this study was to conduct an economic analysis of an RD strategy within the English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP). Methods A decision tree was designed to compare an RD strategy with standard histopathology for patients included in the DISCARD3 study (Detect InSpect ChAracterise Resect and Discard 3) and was extrapolated to a national BCSP patient cohort. Results Of the 525 patients in the DISCARD3 study, 354 were assessed for surveillance intervals (after excluding cases with colorectal cancer and at least 1 polyp >10 mm). Of 354 patients, 269 had polyps, of which 182 had only diminutive polyps, 77 had both small and diminutive polyps, and 10 had only small polyps. Surveillance interval concordance was 97.9% in patients with at least 1 diminutive polyp and 98.7% in patients with at least 1 diminutive or small polyp. In DISCARD3, an RD approach was found to reduce overall direct healthcare costs by $44,285.63 (–72.3%) for patients with diminutive polyps or by $66,129.13 (–75.0%) for patients with diminutive or small polyps. When extrapolated to the entire English BCSP, the annual savings were almost $3 million for patients with diminutive polyps or $4.3 million for patients with diminutive or small polyps, after adjusting for the costs of an OD quality assurance process. Conclusions OD with an RD strategy for diminutive and small polyps during BCSP colonoscopy would offer substantial cost savings without adversely affecting surveillance interval concordance. Advances in endoscopic technology, such as narrow-band imaging and high-definition colonoscopes, offer the potential for optical diagnosis (OD) with a “resect and discard” (RD) strategy for diminutive (≤5 mm) and small (6-9 mm) colorectal polyps. This could help alleviate the huge cost and time burden required for histopathology. The aim of this study was to conduct an economic analysis of an RD strategy within the English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP). A decision tree was designed to compare an RD strategy with standard histopathology for patients included in the DISCARD3 study (Detect InSpect ChAracterise Resect and Discard 3) and was extrapolated to a national BCSP patient cohort. Of the 525 patients in the DISCARD3 study, 354 were assessed for surveillance intervals (after excluding cases with colorectal cancer and at least 1 polyp >10 mm). Of 354 patients, 269 had polyps, of which 182 had only diminutive polyps, 77 had both small and diminutive polyps, and 10 had only small polyps. Surveillance interval concordance was 97.9% in patients with at least 1 diminutive polyp and 98.7% in patients with at least 1 diminutive or small polyp. In DISCARD3, an RD approach was found to reduce overall direct healthcare costs by $44,285.63 (–72.3%) for patients with diminutive polyps or by $66,129.13 (–75.0%) for patients with diminutive or small polyps. When extrapolated to the entire English BCSP, the annual savings were almost $3 million for patients with diminutive polyps or $4.3 million for patients with diminutive or small polyps, after adjusting for the costs of an OD quality assurance process. OD with an RD strategy for diminutive and small polyps during BCSP colonoscopy would offer substantial cost savings without adversely affecting surveillance interval concordance.