Cost-Effectiveness and Cost-Utility of a Colon Capsule Endoscopy in a Population-Based Screening Program for Colorectal Cancer

Background: Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) has been proposed as a non-invasive alternative to colonoscopy for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, offering greater patient comfort and potentially reducing healthcare burden. However, its cost-effectiveness in population-based screening remains uncertain. Methods: This study used a state-transition (Markov) model to simulate lifetime outcomes of CRC screening in Denmark, Scotland, and Spain, comparing the standard pathway based on fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) followed by colonoscopy with an alternative pathway replacing colonoscopy with CCE after a positive FIT result. The model incorporated costs (2024 euros), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and CRC cases avoided, applying a yearly discount rate of 3%. Deterministic sensitivity analyses explored uncertainty in capsule cost, adherence, and reinvestigation rates for non-advanced polyps. Results: Across all settings, CCE resulted in higher costs but slightly increased effectiveness and utility (mean QALYs 28.7 vs. 28.8; CRC detected 0.032-0.034 vs. 0.035-0.037 per person). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) ranged from 43,538EUR in Spain to 136,930EUR in Denmark per additional CRC detected. Capsule cost was the main driver of ICER variation, whereas adherence rates had minimal effect on cost-effectiveness. Changes in the prevalence of non-advanced polyps had a modest impact, except when capsule prices were high. Conclusions: Overall, replacing colonoscopy with CCE slightly increases detection and health gains at the expense of higher costs. Cost-effectiveness largely depends on capsule price and adherence. Artificial intelligence-assisted CCE interpretation may further improve diagnostic and economic performance, potentially supporting adoption in large-scale CRC screening programs.