As I said - I have had 2 colonoscopies - I'm a believer
My post was really to point out that a check-up every 10 years is not sufficient, and those annual fecal occult blood tests are just as important imo. (I believe that if no polyps are found then the frequency is every 10 years).
- That is the NHS version of drug used in the procedure.
Interesting, but I wouldn't be tempted in the slightest to wait. The new test is said to miss 14% of cancers and have a 10% false positive rate. But even if it was perfect, it's not yet available, and a cancer in your colon is not going to wait. Once it gets into your lymphatic system, chances of survival decrease considerably.
Then it may be nearly twice as sensitive than a conventional colonocopy. According to the info at this link, conventional colonoscopies miss 27% of polyps smaller than 5mm, 13% of polyps 5-9MM, and 6% of polyups larger than 10mm (sic). The overall miss rate for conventional colonoscopies is 24%. Yes, it does have a very low false positive rate, so a conventional colonoscopy might be a good "backup" if the new test indicates a positive finding.
Are you deducing the miss rate for cancers from the miss rate for polyps?
"Opps", yes I was, I looks like conventional colonoscopies miss approximately 4 percent of cancers.
That's sort of ambiguous. Does it mean that when someone fails to die of cancer that curative or maintenance treatment for that survivor costs $400,000?
No, it means that it costs $400,000 to buy enough colonoscopies to prevent a single cancer death (that is, to catch the tumor early enough to prevent a death from cancer that would have occurred had the tests not been given).
It is interesting, and thanks for the references. Can't say I buy much of it.
I suppose that may be the sticker price, though it seems very high for that too. But I doubt any insurance company pays that, and certainly Medicare doesn't.
According to this site, Medicare pays less than $500 for a colonoscopy.
