Search

Introduction: People with low income have worse outcomes throughout the cancer care continuum; however, little is known about income and the diagnostic interval. We described diagnostic pathways by neighborhood income and investigated the association between income and the diagnostic interval. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of colon cancer patients diagnosed 2007–2019 in Ontario using routinely collected data. The diagnostic interval was defined as the number of days from the first colon cancer encounter to diagnosis. Asymptomatic pathways were defined as first encounter with a colonoscopy or guaiac fecal occult blood test not occurring in the emergency department and were examined separately from symptomatic pathways. Quantile regression was used to determine the association between neighborhood income quintile and the conditional 50th and 90th percentile diagnostic interval controlling for age, sex, rural residence, and year of diagnosis. Results: A total of 64,303 colon cancer patients were included. Patients residing in the lowest income neighborhoods were more likely to be diagnosed through symptomatic pathways and in the emergency department. Living in low‐income neighborhoods was associated with longer 50th and 90th‐percentile symptomatic diagnostic intervals compared to patients living in the highest income neighborhoods. For example, the 90th percentile diagnostic interval was 15 days (95% CI 6–23) longer in patients living in the lowest income neighborhoods compared to the highest. Conclusion: These findings reveal income inequities during the diagnostic phase of colon cancer. Future work should determine pathways to reducing inequalities along the diagnostic interval and evaluate screening and diagnostic assessment programs from an equity perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Colorectal cancer is the third leading cause of cancer death for both men and women, with an estimated 52 980 persons in the US projected to die of colorectal cancer in 2021. Colorectal cancer is most frequently diagnosed among persons aged 65 to 74 years. It is estimated that 10.5% of new colorectal cancer cases occur in persons younger than 50 years. Incidence of colorectal cancer (specifically adenocarcinoma) in adults aged 40 to 49 years has increased by almost 15% from 2000-2002 to 2014-2016. In 2016, 26% of eligible adults in the US had never been screened for colorectal cancer and in 2018, 31% were not up to date with screening.Objective: To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for colorectal cancer in adults 40 years or older. The review also examined whether these findings varied by age, sex, or race/ethnicity. In addition, as in 2016, the USPSTF commissioned a report from the Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network Colorectal Cancer Working Group to provide information from comparative modeling on how estimated life-years gained, colorectal cancer cases averted, and colorectal cancer deaths averted vary by different starting and stopping ages for various screening strategies.Population: Asymptomatic adults 45 years or older at average risk of colorectal cancer (ie, no prior diagnosis of colorectal cancer, adenomatous polyps, or inflammatory bowel disease; no personal diagnosis or family history of known genetic disorders that predispose them to a high lifetime risk of colorectal cancer [such as Lynch syndrome or familial adenomatous polyposis]).Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with high certainty that screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 50 to 75 years has substantial net benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 45 to 49 years has moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 76 to 85 years who have been previously screened has small net benefit. Adults who have never been screened for colorectal cancer are more likely to benefit.Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for colorectal cancer in all adults aged 50 to 75 years. (A recommendation) The USPSTF recommends screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 45 to 49 years. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends that clinicians selectively offer screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 76 to 85 years. Evidence indicates that the net benefit of screening all persons in this age group is small. In determining whether this service is appropriate in individual cases, patients and clinicians should consider the patient's overall health, prior screening history, and preferences. (C recommendation). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) is updating its 2016 colorectal cancer screening recommendations.Objective: To provide updated model-based estimates of the benefits, burden, and harms of colorectal cancer screening strategies and to identify strategies that may provide an efficient balance of life-years gained (LYG) from screening and colonoscopy burden to inform the USPSTF.Design, Setting, and Participants: Comparative modeling study using 3 microsimulation models of colorectal cancer screening in a hypothetical cohort of 40-year-old US individuals at average risk of colorectal cancer.Exposures: Screening from ages 45, 50, or 55 years to ages 70, 75, 80, or 85 years with fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), multitarget stool DNA testing, flexible sigmoidoscopy alone or with FIT, computed tomography colonography, or colonoscopy. All persons with an abnormal noncolonoscopy screening test result were assumed to undergo follow-up colonoscopy. Screening intervals varied by test. Full adherence with all procedures was assumed.Main Outcome and Measures: Estimated LYG relative to no screening (benefit), lifetime number of colonoscopies (burden), number of complications from screening (harms), and balance of incremental burden and benefit (efficiency ratios). Efficient strategies were those estimated to require fewer additional colonoscopies per additional LYG relative to other strategies.Results: Estimated LYG from screening strategies ranged from 171 to 381 per 1000 40-year-olds. Lifetime colonoscopy burden ranged from 624 to 6817 per 1000 individuals, and screening complications ranged from 5 to 22 per 1000 individuals. Among the 49 strategies that were efficient options with all 3 models, 41 specified screening beginning at age 45. No single age to end screening was predominant among the efficient strategies, although the additional LYG from continuing screening after age 75 were generally small. With the exception of a 5-year interval for computed tomography colonography, no screening interval predominated among the efficient strategies for each modality. Among the strategies highlighted in the 2016 USPSTF recommendation, lowering the age to begin screening from 50 to 45 years was estimated to result in 22 to 27 additional LYG, 161 to 784 additional colonoscopies, and 0.1 to 2 additional complications per 1000 persons (ranges are across screening strategies, based on mean estimates across models). Assuming full adherence, screening outcomes and efficient strategies were similar by sex and race and across 3 scenarios for population risk of colorectal cancer.Conclusions and Relevance: This microsimulation modeling analysis suggests that screening for colorectal cancer with stool tests, endoscopic tests, or computed tomography colonography starting at age 45 years provides an efficient balance of colonoscopy burden and life-years gained. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in the US.Objective: To systematically review the effectiveness, test accuracy, and harms of screening for CRC to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force.Data Sources: MEDLINE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for relevant studies published from January 1, 2015, to December 4, 2019; surveillance through March 26, 2021.Study Selection: English-language studies conducted in asymptomatic populations at general risk of CRC.Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two reviewers independently appraised the articles and extracted relevant study data from fair- or good-quality studies. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted.Main Outcomes and Measures: Colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, test accuracy in detecting cancers or adenomas, and serious adverse events.Results: The review included 33 studies (n = 10 776 276) on the effectiveness of screening, 59 (n = 3 491 045) on the test performance of screening tests, and 131 (n = 26 987 366) on the harms of screening. In randomized clinical trials (4 trials, n = 458 002), intention to screen with 1- or 2-time flexible sigmoidoscopy vs no screening was associated with a decrease in CRC-specific mortality (incidence rate ratio, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.68-0.80]). Annual or biennial guaiac fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) vs no screening (5 trials, n = 419 966) was associated with a reduction of CRC-specific mortality after 2 to 9 rounds of screening (relative risk at 19.5 years, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.84-0.98]; relative risk at 30 years, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.65-0.93]). In observational studies, receipt of screening colonoscopy (2 studies, n = 436 927) or fecal immunochemical test (FIT) (1 study, n = 5.4 million) vs no screening was associated with lower risk of CRC incidence or mortality. Nine studies (n = 6497) evaluated the test accuracy of screening computed tomography (CT) colonography, 4 of which also reported the test accuracy of colonoscopy; pooled sensitivity to detect adenomas 6 mm or larger was similar between CT colonography with bowel prep (0.86) and colonoscopy (0.89). In pooled values, commonly evaluated FITs (14 studies, n = 45 403) (sensitivity, 0.74; specificity, 0.94) and stool DNA with FIT (4 studies, n = 12 424) (sensitivity, 0.93; specificity, 0.85) performed better than high-sensitivity gFOBT (2 studies, n = 3503) (sensitivity, 0.50-0.75; specificity, 0.96-0.98) to detect cancers. Serious harms of screening colonoscopy included perforations (3.1/10 000 procedures) and major bleeding (14.6/10 000 procedures). CT colonography may have harms resulting from low-dose ionizing radiation. It is unclear if detection of extracolonic findings on CT colonography is a net benefit or harm.Conclusions and Relevance: There are several options to screen for colorectal cancer, each with a different level of evidence demonstrating its ability to reduce cancer mortality, its ability to detect cancer or precursor lesions, and its risk of harms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors comment on the recommendation of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) for colorectal cancer screening for average-risk individuals at age 45. Topics discussed include the role of screening at age 45 in balance of life-years gained compared with colonoscopy burden based on microsimulation models, benefit of guaiac fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) with follow-up colonoscopy as screening modality, and other ways to prevent colorectal cancer.

Background: Parallel test of risk stratification and two-sample qualitative fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) are used to screen colorectal cancer (CRC) in Shanghai, China. This study was designed to identify an optimal initial screening modality based on available data. Methods: A total of 538,278 eligible residents participated in the program during the period of January 2013 to June 2017. Incident CRC was collected through program reporting system and by record linkage with the Shanghai Cancer Registry up to December 2017. Logistic regression model was applied to identify significant factors to calculate risk score for CRC. Cutoff points of risk score were determined based on Youden index and defined specificity. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive values (PPVs) were computed to evaluate validity of assumed screening modalities. Results: A total of 446 CRC were screen-detected, and 777 interval or missed cases were identified through record linkage. The risk score system had an optimal cutoff point of 19 and performed better in detecting CRC and predicting long-term CRC risk than did the risk stratification. When using a cutoff point of 24, parallel test of risk score, and FIT were expected to avoid 56 interval CRCs with minimal decrease in PPV and increase in colonoscopy. However, the observed detection rates were much lower than those expected due to low compliance to colonoscopy. Conclusions: Risk score is superior to risk stratification used in the program, particularly when combined with FIT. Compliance to colonoscopy should be improved to guarantee the effectiveness of CRC screening in the population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is commonly used for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Despite demographic variations in stool hemoglobin concentrations, few data exist regarding optimal positivity thresholds by age and sex. Objective: To identify programmatic (multitest) FIT performance characteristics and optimal FIT quantitative hemoglobin positivity thresholds in a large, population-based, screening program. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Kaiser Permanente Northern and Southern California. Participants: Adults aged 50 to 75 years who were eligible for screening and had baseline quantitative FIT results (2013 to 2014) and 2 years of follow-up. Nearly two thirds (411 241) had FIT screening in the previous 2 years. Measurements: FIT programmatic sensitivity for CRC and number of positive test results per cancer case detected, overall and by age and sex. Results: Of 640 859 persons who completed a baseline FIT and were followed for 2 years, 481 817 (75%) had at least 1 additional FIT and 1245 (0.19%) received a CRC diagnosis. Cancer detection (programmatic sensitivity) increased at lower positivity thresholds, from 822 in 1245 (66.0%) at 30 µg/g to 925 (74.3%) at 20 µg/g and 987 (79.3%) at 10 µg/g; the number of positive test results per cancer case detected increased from 43 at 30 µg/g to 52 at 20 µg/g and 85 at 10 µg/g. Reducing the positivity threshold from 20 to 15 µg/g would detect 3% more cancer cases and require 23% more colonoscopies. At the conventional FIT threshold of 20 µg/g, programmatic sensitivity decreased with increasing age (79.0%, 73.4%, and 68.9% for ages 50 to 59, 60 to 69, and 70 to 75 years, respectively; P  = 0.009) and was higher in men than women (77.0% vs. 70.6%; P  = 0.011). Limitation: Information on advanced adenoma was lacking. Conclusion: Increased cancer detection at lower positivity thresholds is counterbalanced by substantial increases in positive tests. Tailored thresholds may provide screening benefits that are more equal among different demographic groups, depending on local resources. Primary Funding Source: National Cancer Institute. The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is commonly used for colorectal cancer screening. Population-based screening programs use a broad range of FIT positivity thresholds to optimize cancer detection while limiting the number of colonoscopies triggered by positive results. This study examined the balance between cancer detection and screening burden at varying FIT positivity thresholds by using data from 2 large community-based screening programs in California. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although colonoscopy-based screening has proven to be highly effective in detecting colorectal cancer (CRC), participation rates remain disappointing. Development of CRC is associated with a number of genetic or somatic mutations. New, non-invasive stool tests are currently being developed based on the detection of these alterations. We investigated if a non-invasive stool assay can offer sufficient sensitivity and specificity to supplement colonoscopy-based screening. Methods: We compared a combined stool assay, which incorporates fecal occult blood testing (FOBT), quantification of human DNA (hDNA) as well as detection of genetic mutations of KRAS and BRAF (Combined DNA stool assay), with commercially available FOBT and M2-PK tests in a multi-centric six-armed pre-clinical case cohort study. Seven hundred thirty-four patients were recruited prior to elective/screening colonoscopy or prior to surgery in case of a recent CRC diagnosis. According to clinical assessment and colonoscopy/histology results, the following groups were assigned: controls, irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), hyperplastic polyps, adenomas, and CRC. Finally, 566 out of 734 patients (77.1%) were screened for CRC and overall gut status via colonoscopy, FOBT, M2-PK, with combined FOBT/M2-PK and the Combined DNA stool assay as described here. Results: All sensitivities and specificities are measured against histologically confirmed results by colonoscopy. Confirmed sensitivities for detecting colorectal cancer were 68% with FOBT, 83% with M2-PK, 90% with combined FOBT and M2-PK, and 85% with the Combined DNA stool assay. Specificities were 96% with FOBT, 61% with M2-PK, 62% with combined FOBT and M2-PK, and 92% with the Combined DNA stool assay in the control group with no pathological findings during colonoscopy. Conclusions: The Combined DNA stool assay detects CRC with a significantly higher Youden Index than the other reviewed non-invasive screening options. The results also suggest that the Combined DNA stool assay represents a reliable assay for detecting colorectal cancer, sufficient to be recommended as a supplement to colonoscopy screening. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ᅟ: Immunochemical fecal occult blood tests (iFOBTs) are increasingly used for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. In our preceding observational study, sensitivity for detecting advanced colorectal neoplasms by iFOBT was 70.8% among users of low-dose acetylsalicylic acid compared with 35.9% among non-users (p = 0.001), whereas there were only very small differences in specificity. In receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analyses, the area under the curve (AUC) was much higher for acetylsalicylic acid users than for non-users, with particularly strong differences in men (0.87 versus 0.68, p = 0.003). These findings suggested that use of acetylsalicylic acid before conduct of iFOBT might be a promising approach to improve non-invasive screening for CRC.Methods/design: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, the diagnostic performance of two iFOBTs for detecting advanced colorectal neoplasms after a single low-dose of acetylsalicylic acid (300 mg) compared to placebo is evaluated. Acetylsalicylic acid or placebo is administered at least 5 days before a planned, study-independent colonoscopic screening in 2400 participants aged 40 to 80 years. Stool samples are obtained before and on three different days after the single dose of acetylsalicylic acid or placebo. In addition, optional blood samples are taken for future biomarker analyses. The diagnostic performance of the iFOBTs will be compared to the results of the colonoscopy as a gold standard for the diagnosis of colorectal neoplasms. Additionally, gender-specific performance of the tests and gain in diagnostic performance by test application on multiple days will be evaluated.Discussion: If the findings from our preceding observational study will be confirmed in this large trial, the proposed low-risk, inexpensive intervention would considerably improve the diagnostic accuracy of iFOBTs and thus lead to enhanced early detection of colorectal neoplasms. Thus, the results of this trial may have a large public health impact.Trial Registration: This trial was registered before recruitment of the participants in www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu on the 30th of May 2012: EudraCT No.: 2011-005603-32 and in www.drks.de on 13th of March 2012: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS-ID: DRKS00003252 . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) are widely used and recommended for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Fecal hemoglobin (Hb) may degrade with long transport durations and high ambient temperatures, potentially reducing sensitivity to detect CRC and its precursors. This study aimed at investigating the impact of temperatures and sample travel times on diagnostic performance of a quantitative FIT for detection of advanced neoplasms (AN, CRC, or advanced adenoma).Methods: Participants of screening colonoscopy in south-western Germany conducted a quantitative FIT prior to bowel preparation between February 2012 and June 2016. From available locations and dates of stool sampling and transport, maximum ambient temperatures were linked to 2,870 participants aged 50–79 years and sample return durations were recorded. The impact of ambient temperatures and return duration on FIT sensitivity and specificity was assessed for five different cutoffs between 10 and 25 µg Hb/g feces.Results: At a positivity threshold of 20 µg Hb/g feces, overall sensitivity and specificity for detecting any AN were 40% (95% CI, 35–47%) and 95% (95% CI, 94–96%), respectively. Inverse associations between maximum ambient temperature (median 18.1°C, inter-quartile range [IQR] =11.4–24.9°C) and sensitivity of FIT were observed which were stronger at higher cutoffs. Sample return durations (median 6 days, IQR =4–8 days) were not associated with variable sensitivities or specificities.Conclusion: Hb degredation during fecal sample transportation in summer months may be of some concern for diagnostic performance of the FIT evaluated under routine conditions in a middle-European climate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The economic evaluation of colorectal cancer screening is challenging because of the need to model the underlying unobservable natural history of the disease.Objectives: To describe the available Markov models and to critically analyze their main structural assumptions.Methods: A systematic search was performed in eight relevant databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Econlit, National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, Health Economic Evaluations Database, Health Technology Assessment database, Cost-Effective Analysis Registry, and European Network of Health Economics Evaluation Databases), identifying 34 models that met the inclusion criteria. A comparative analysis of model structure and parameterization was conducted using two checklists and guidelines for cost-effectiveness screening models.Results: Two modeling techniques were identified. One strategy used a Markov model to reproduce the natural history of the disease and an overlaying model that reproduced the screening process, whereas the other used a single model to represent a screening program. Most of the studies included only adenoma-carcinoma sequences, a few included de novo cancer, and none included the serrated pathway. Parameterization of adenoma dwell time, sojourn time, and surveillance differed between studies, and there was a lack of validation and statistical calibration against local epidemiological data. Most of the studies analyzed failed to perform an adequate literature review and synthesis of diagnostic accuracy properties of the screening tests modeled.Conclusions: Several strategies to model colorectal cancer screening have been developed, but many challenges remain to adequately represent the natural history of the disease and the screening process. Structural uncertainty analysis could be a useful strategy for understanding the impact of the assumptions of different models on cost-effectiveness results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Participants in population-based screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) may experience increased anxiety immediately after a positive screening test, but research in this area is limited. The objective of this study was to explore how screening participants experience a positive test result and cope with the pre-diagnostic waiting period in a CRC screening program.Materials and methods: Screening participants with a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) result were identified in the Danish national CRC program before they attended diagnostic colonoscopy. Sixteen screening participants were selected for an interview in their own homes, using a semi-structured interview guide. Transcribed data were analyzed thematically.Results: The most prominent themes were symptom appraisal and communication strategies. Most participants attributed the positive FIT result showing blood in the stool to pre-existing non-malignant conditions but a few were very worried about the FIT result and the outcome of the colonoscopy. Communication strategies included discussions with family or friends about the positive FIT result and the upcoming colonoscopy, or containing information until the colonoscopy had provided the definitive diagnostic result. There was no apparent need for communication with health care professionals during the pre-diagnostic waiting period.Conclusion: The pre-diagnostic waiting period between positive FIT result and colonoscopy in a population-based screening program may cause worry for some participants, potentially to require support, but most people consider it unconcerning. Screening providers should communicate to all screening participants in written form that negative emotional responses may occur after a positive screening result. This is particularly important in screening programs using self-sample kits without the presence of a health care professional to reassure the few participants who may experience significant anxiety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for hemoglobin in stool are increasingly used for colorectal cancer screening. Reported sensitivities and specificities have strongly varied between studies, but it is unclear to what extent such variation reflects differences between tests or between study population characteristics. We aimed to evaluate the key parameters of FIT performance for detecting advanced neoplasia (AN) according to sex and age. Methods: Sex- and age-specific sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values (PPVs) and negative predictive values (NPVs) for detecting AN of a quantitative FIT (FOB Gold®) were evaluated among 3211 men and women aged 50-79 years who underwent screening colonoscopy in Germany. Results: At the cutoff recommended by the manufacturer (17 µg hemoglobin/g feces), sensitivity was higher (51.2% versus 34.7%, p=0.004) and specificity was lower (91.0% versus 94.8%, p<0.001) among 65-79 year-old participants compared with 50-64 year-old participants. PPVs and NPVs did not differ significantly between age groups. However, higher NPVs were observed among women compared with men (94.7% versus 92.5%, p=0.015). Specificity was also higher among women compared with men (94.7% versus 92.3%, p=0.007), while there was only a little variation in sensitivity (40.3% versus 41.8%, p=0.789) according to sex. In joint stratification by both factors, sensitivity ranged from 34.1% (95% CI 24.2%-45.2%) in 50-64 year-old women to 51.4% (95% CI 39.3%-63.3%) in 65-79 year-old men (p=0.029). The observed age and sex differences were highly consistent across a wide range of alternative cutoffs from 10 to 50 µg hemoglobin/g feces. Conclusion: There are major differences in diagnostic performance parameters according to sex and age, which should receive careful attention in the interpretation and comparison of results of FIT-based colorectal cancer screening studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Screening with the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is effective in reducing deaths from colorectal cancer (CRC). Since 2004, biennial FIT screening has been available to a target population in Taiwan as a national screening program. The objective of the current study was to identify the factors that influence willingness to undergo a confirmatory colonoscopy after a positive FIT, because related references in the published literature were scarce.Methods: A semistructured questionnaire was based on the Health Belief Model (HBM) and a literature review. A stratified, random sampling method was used to recruit participants who had a positive FIT from all cities/counties in Taiwan. Cross-sectional, computer-assisted telephone interviews were conducted in 2012, and the results were analyzed using a logistic regression model that took into account population demographics, core content of the HBM, and HBM-modifying variables.Results: In total, 2807 respondents were included in the analysis. The completion rate was 50%. Multivariate analyses revealed that higher perceived threat (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.31-2.01), higher cues for action (aOR, 2.18; 95% CI, 1.68-1.82), lower perceived barriers (aOR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.34-0.42) and higher health behavior scores (aOR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.05-1.60) were associated with a greater willingness to participate in confirmatory colonoscopy. Participants who were older (aOR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.55-0.98) or unmarried (aOR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.56-0.92) were less likely to participate in verification.Conclusions: The government could improve the screening rate by training case managers to assist in following patients until they complete colonoscopy, subsidizing sedated colonoscopies, and providing health education not only to the general public but also to physicians. Cancer 2018;124:907-15. © 2017 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Uptake of screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) can reduce mortality, and population-based screening is offered in England. To date, there is little evidence on the association between having a long-term condition (LTC) and CRC screening uptake. The objective of this study was to examine the association between having an LTC and uptake of CRC screening in England with the guaiac fecal occult blood test, with a particular focus on common mental disorders. Methods: The study was a preregistered secondary analysis of two cohorts: first, a linked data set between the regional Yorkshire Health Study (YHS) and the National Health Service National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (BCSP, years 2006-2014); second, the national English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA, years 2014-2015). Individuals eligible for BCSP screening who participated in either the YHS (7,142) or ELSA Wave 7 (4,099) were included. Study registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02503969. Results: In both the cohorts, diabetes was associated with lower uptake (YHS odds ratio [OR] for non-uptake 1.35, 95% Cl 1.03-1.78; ELSA 1.33, 1.03-1.72) and osteoarthritis was associated with increased uptake (YHS 0.75, 0.57-0.99; ELSA 0.76, 0.62-0.93). After controlling for broader determinants of health, there was no evidence of significantly different uptake for individuals with common mental disorders. Conclusion: Two large independent cohorts provided evidence that uptake of CRC screening is lower among individuals with diabetes and higher among individuals with osteoarthritis. Further work should compare barriers and facilitators to screening among individuals with either of these conditions. This study also demonstrates the benefits of data linkage for improving clinical decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Screening for colorectal cancer in average-risk adults is recommended beginning at age 50 years and continuing until age 75 years. This study was conducted to provide evidence for the effectiveness of an American Cancer Society grant program promoting colorectal cancer screening by implementing evidence-based interventions proven to increase screening rates.Methods: Analysis compared colorectal cancer screening rates in 77 grant-funded federally qualified health centers between 2013 and 2015 to those of a sample of 77 nonfunded federally qualified health centers selected using a genetic matching technique. The Uniform Data System from 2013 to 2015 provided data used in the analysis performed in 2016.Results: Funded grantees differed significantly from nongrantees on several indicators at baseline. Genetic matching resulted in good-quality matched samples. Both matched samples increased colorectal cancer screening rates over time. Grantees increased their colorectal cancer screening rates significantly more than nongrantees, especially between 2013 and 2014, where funded federally qualified health centers increased by 9% and nonfunded federally qualified health centers increased by 3%. Across the 3 years, increases were 12% and 9%, respectively.Conclusions: The findings suggest grant funding was effective in promoting improvements in colorectal cancer screening rates in funded federally qualified health centers, and these improvements exceed those of nonfunded federally qualified health centers. Funding that results in targeted, intensive efforts supported by technical assistance and accountability for data and reporting, can result in improved system policies and practices that, in turn, can increase screening rates among uninsured and underserved populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) has low sensitivity for detecting advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACRN); thus, a considerable portion of FIT-negative persons may have ACRN. We aimed to develop a risk-scoring model for predicting ACRN in FIT-negative persons. Materials and methods: We reviewed the records of participants aged ≥40 years who underwent a colonoscopy and FIT during a health check-up. We developed a risk-scoring model for predicting ACRN in FIT-negative persons. Results: Of 11,873 FIT-negative participants, 255 (2.1%) had ACRN. On the basis of the multivariable logistic regression model, point scores were assigned as follows among FIT-negative persons: age (per year from 40 years old), 1 point; current smoker, 10 points; overweight, 5 points; obese, 7 points; hypertension, 6 points; old cerebrovascular attack (CVA), 15 points. Although the proportion of ACRN in FIT-negative persons increased as risk scores increased (from 0.6% in the group with 0–4 points to 8.1% in the group with 35–39 points), it was significantly lower than that in FIT-positive persons (14.9%). However, there was no statistical difference between the proportion of ACRN in FIT-negative persons with ≥40 points and in FIT-positive persons (10.5% vs. 14.9%, P = 0.321). Conclusions: FIT-negative persons may need to undergo screening colonoscopy if they clinically have a high risk of ACRN. The scoring model based on age, smoking habits, overweight or obesity, hypertension, and old CVA may be useful in selecting and prioritizing FIT-negative persons for screening colonoscopy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Interventions to improve fecal testing for colorectal cancer (CRC) exist, but are not yet routine practice. We conducted this systematic review to determine how implementation strategies and contextual factors influenced the uptake of interventions to increase Fecal Immunochemical Tests (FIT) and Fecal Occult Blood Testing (FOBT) for CRC in rural and low-income populations in the United States.Methods: We searched Medline and the Cochrane Library from January 1998 through July 2016, and Scopus and clinicaltrials.gov through March 2015, for original articles of interventions to increase fecal testing for CRC. Two reviewers independently screened abstracts, reviewed full-text articles, extracted data and performed quality assessments. A qualitative synthesis described the relationship between changes in fecal testing rates for CRC, intervention components, implementation strategies, and contextual factors. A technical expert panel of primary care professionals, health system leaders, and academicians guided this work.Results: Of 4218 citations initially identified, 27 unique studies reported in 29 publications met inclusion criteria. Studies were conducted in primary care (n = 20, 74.1%), community (n = 5, 18.5%), or both (n = 2, 7.4%) settings. All studies (n = 27, 100.0%) described multicomponent interventions. In clinic based studies, components that occurred most frequently among the highly effective/effective study arms were provision of kits by direct mail, use of a pre-addressed stamped envelope, client reminders, and provider ordered in-clinic distribution. Interventions were delivered by clinic staff/community members (n = 10, 37.0%), research staff (n = 6, 22.2%), both (n = 10, 37.0%), or it was unclear (n = 1, 3.7%). Over half of the studies lacked information on training or monitoring intervention fidelity (n = 15, 55.6%).Conclusions: Studies to improve FIT/FOBT in rural and low-income populations utilized multicomponent interventions. The provision of kits through the mail, use of pre-addressed stamped envelopes, client reminders and in-clinic distribution appeared most frequently in the highly effective/effective clinic-based study arms. Few studies described contextual factors or implementation strategies. More robust application of guidelines to support reporting on methods to select, adapt and implement interventions can help end users determine not just which interventions work to improve CRC screening, but which interventions would work best in their setting given specific patient populations, clinical settings, and community characteristics.Trial Registration: In accordance with PRISMA guidelines, our systematic review protocol was registered with PROSPERO, the international prospective register of systematic reviews, on April 16, 2015 (registration number CRD42015019557 ). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Australian Government's National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) was introduced in 2006 to provide free home-based immunochemical faecal occult blood test (iFOBT) to eligible Australians turning 55 and 65years in that year. With the gradual inclusion of additional age cohorts, the rollout of the NBCSP is being implemented in the context of a degree of opportunistic or de facto screening. This study investigated factors associated with self-reported ever-uptake of the NBCSP and of any CRC screening using follow-up questionnaire data from 105,897 Australians aged ≥45years enrolled in the 45 and Up Study in New South Wales, Australia. Of the 91,968 study participants with information on CRC screening behaviour, 70,444 (76.6%) reported ever-uptake of any CRC screening. 63,777 study participants were eligible for a NBCSP invitation, of these 33,148 (52.0%) reported ever-uptake of screening through the NBCSP. Current smoking (RR=0.86, 0.83-0.90), non-participation in breast cancer screening (female) or PSA testing (male) (RR=0.84, 0.81-0.86), poor self-reported health (RR=0.89, 0.86-0.91), lower levels of education (RR=0.91, 0.90-0.93), and not speaking English at home (RR=0.88, 0.85-0.91) were associated with reduced ever-uptake of screening within the NBCSP and of any CRC screening. Individuals with a family history of CRC were less likely to screen through the NBCSP (RR=0.71, 0.69-0.73), but more likely to participate in any CRC screening (RR=1.18, 1.17-1.19). Smokers, disadvantaged groups and those with non-English speaking backgrounds are less likely to have ever-participated in organised screening through the NBCSP or in any form of CRC screening, supporting efforts to improve participation in these groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Physician recommendations for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening have consistently been shown to be a strong predictor of screening. The aim of this study was to investigate perceptions of CRC screening modalities and recommendation behaviors among physicians in Korea.Methods: A cross-sectional, nationally representative survey conducted between November 2013 and February 2014. In total, 379 physicians (241 primary care physicians and 138 physicians affiliated with the Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases responded to this survey (overall response rate of 31.4%).Results: About 29% of all respondents "always" recommended and about 67% "sometimes" recommended CRC screening. Colonoscopy was perceived as an effective primary screening tool for CRC, and 80% of the physicians recommended colonoscopy for CRC screening. Only 7% recommended FOBT. In multivariate analysis, recommending FOBT was associated with stronger belief in the screening efficacy of FOBT (aOR 3.70, 95% CI 2.09, 6.57), weaker belief in the screening efficacy of colonoscopy (aOR 0.29, 95% CI 0.12, 0.69), and negative decisional balance for colonoscopy screening (aOR 0.82, 95% CI 0.71, 0.95).Conclusions: Although FOBT is provided free-of-charge through a nationwide CRC screening program, colonoscopy was more commonly recommended and preferred by physicians. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To analyze the sociodemographic and organizational factors influencing participation in population-based colorectal cancer screening programs (CRCSP) in Spain, a retrospective study was conducted in a cohort of people invited to participate in the first 3 screening rounds of 6 CRCSP from 2000 to 2012. Mixed logistic regression models were used to analyze the relationship between sociodemographic and organizational factors, such as the type of fecal occult blood test (FOBT) used and the FOBT delivery type. The analysis was performed separately in groups (Initial screening-first invitation, Subsequent invitation for previous never-responders, Subsequent invitation-regular, Subsequent invitation-irregular intervals). The results showed that, in the Initial screening-first invitation group, participation was higher in women than in men in all age groups (OR 1.05 in persons aged 50-59years and OR 1.12 in those aged 60-69years). Participation was also higher when no action was required to receive the FOBT kit, independently of the type of screening (Initial screening-first invitation [OR 2.24], Subsequent invitation for previous never-responders [OR 2.14], Subsequent invitation-regular [OR 2.03], Subsequent invitation-irregular intervals [OR 9.38]) and when quantitative rather than qualitative immunological FOBT (FIT) was offered (Initial screening-first invitation [OR 0.70], Subsequent invitation for previous never-responders [OR 0.12], Subsequent invitation-regular [OR 0.20]) or guaiac testing (Initial screening-first invitation [OR 0.81], Subsequent invitation for previous never-responders [OR 0.88], Subsequent invitation-regular [OR 0.73]). In conclusion, the results of this study show that screening participation could be enhanced by inclusion of the FOBT kit with the screening invitation and the use of the quantitative FIT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The qualitative-quantitative study investigates the co-existence of barriers and levers to FOBT screening in 5894 individuals reluctant to be screened, identifying operational motivational patterns that may increase screening compliance. Co-occurrence analysis was performed according to three motivational conditions (barriers, levers, or both).Cluster analysis then identified motivational predictors of effective screening. One quarter of the individuals who had refused screening nevertheless expressed at least one motivation towards FOBT. As such, co-existence of barriers and levers within the same individual demonstrates ambivalence tendencies. Intrinsic motivations appear to be the most likely to increase FOBT compliance. This study finds that certain factors well-known to improve CRC screening compliance generally, may not have much impact on reluctant individuals due to ambivalence and contextual nuances. Several practical recommendations to encourage screening participation are offered, such as focusing on levers rather barriers, providing tailored education to improve awareness and readiness, and fostering intrinsic motivation with relevant approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Screening over many years is required to optimize reductions in colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality. However, no prior trials have compared strategies for obtaining long-term adherence.Methods: Systems of Support to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening and Follow-Up was implemented in an integrated health care organization in Washington State. Between 2008 and 2009, 4675 individuals aged 50 to 74 years were randomized to receive the usual care (UC), which included clinic-based strategies to increase CRC screening (arm 1), or, in years 1 and 2, mailings with a call-in number for colonoscopy and mailed fecal tests (arm 2), mailings plus brief telephone assistance (arm 3), or mailings and assistance plus nurse navigation (arm 4). Active-intervention subjects (those in arms 2, 3, and 4 combined) who were still eligible for CRC screening were randomized to mailings being stopped or continued in years 3 and 5. The time in compliance with CRC screening over 5 years was compared for persons assigned to any intervention and persons assigned to UC. Screening tests contributed time on the basis of national guidelines for screening intervals (fecal tests annually, sigmoidoscopy every 5 years, and colonoscopy every 10 years).Results: All participants contributed data, but they were censored at disenrollment, death, the age of 76 years, or a diagnosis of CRC. Compared with UC participants, intervention participants had 31% more adjusted covered time over 5 years (incidence rate ratio, 1.31; 95% confidence interval, 1.25-1.37; covered time, 47.5% vs 62.1%). Fecal testing accounted for almost all additional covered time.Conclusions: In a health care organization with clinic-based activities to increase CRC screening, a centralized program led to increased CRC screening adherence over 5 years. Longer term data on screening adherence and its impact on CRC outcomes are needed. Cancer 2017;123:4472-80. © 2017 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives To examine over-screening of older Israelis for colon and breast cancer. Design Cross sectional. Setting Clalit Health Services ( CHS), Israel's largest health maintenance organization ( HMO), provides care for more than half of the country's population and operates a national age-based programs for cancer screening. Participants All community-dwelling members aged 65 to 79 in 2014 (N = 370,876). Measurements We used CHS data warehouse to evaluate cancer screening during 2014. Life expectancy ( LE) was estimated using the validated Schonberg index. Results Almost one-quarter (23.1%; 15.6% of adults aged 65-74, 42.7% of adults aged 75-79) of the study population had an estimated LE of less than 10 years. Annual fecal occult blood test and biannual mammography rates among adults aged 65 to 74 with a LE of 10 years or longer were 37.1% and 70.0%, respectively. Rates dropped after age 75 (4.0%, 19.5%) and to a lesser extent with a LE of less than 10 years (31.6%, 56.4%). Prostate-specific antigen testing is not part of the national screening program, and the proportion of people tested (42.6%), did not vary similarly with age of 75 and older (43.2%) or LE of less than 10 years (38.1%). Conclusion The cancer screening inclusion criteria of the national referral system have a strong effect on receipt of screening; LE considerations are less influential. Some method of estimating LE could be incorporated into algorithms to improve individualized cancer screening to reduce over- and underscreening of older adults. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study has attempted to assess the effectiveness of quantitative faecal immunochemical tests (FIT) for triage of people presenting with lower abdominal symptoms, where a referral to secondary care for investigation of suspected colorectal cancer (CRC) is being considered, particularly when the 2-week criteria are not met.Methods: We conducted a systematic review following published guidelines for systematic reviews of diagnostic tests. Twenty-one resources were searched up until March 2016. Summary estimates were calculated using a bivariate model or a random-effects logistic regression model.Results: Nine studies are included in this review. One additional study, included in our systematic review, was provided as 'academic in confidence' and cannot be described herein. When FIT was based on a single faecal sample and a cut-off of 10 μg Hb/g faeces, sensitivity estimates indicated that a negative result using either the OC-Sensor or HM-JACKarc may be adequate to rule out nearly all CRC; the summary estimate of sensitivity for the OC-Sensor was 92.1% (95% confidence interval, CI 86.9-95.3%), based on four studies (n = 4091 participants, 176 with CRC), and the only study of HM-JACKarc to assess the 10 μg Hb/g faeces cut-off (n = 507 participants, 11 with CRC) reported a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI 71.5-100%). The corresponding specificity estimates were 85.8% (95% CI 78.3-91.0%) and 76.6% (95% CI 72.6-80.3%), respectively. When the diagnostic criterion was changed to include lower grades of neoplasia, i.e. the target condition included higher risk adenoma (HRA) as well as CRC, the rule-out performance of both FIT assays was reduced.Conclusions: There is evidence to suggest that triage using FIT at a cut-off around 10 μg Hb/g faeces has the potential to correctly rule out CRC and avoid colonoscopy in 75-80% of symptomatic patients.Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO 42016037723. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite free colorectal cancer screening in France, participation remains low and low socioeconomic status is associated with a low participation. Our aim was to assess the effect of a screening navigation program on participation and the reduction in social inequalities in a national-level organized mass screening program for colorectal cancer by fecal-occult blood test (FOBT). A multicenter (3 French departments) cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted over two years. The cluster was a small geographical unit stratified according to a deprivation index and the place of residence. A total of 14,556 subjects (72 clusters) were included in the control arm where the FOBT program involved the usual postal reminders, and 14,373 subjects (66 clusters) were included in the intervention arm. Intervention concerned only non-attended subjects with a phone number available defined as the navigable population. A screening navigator was added to the usual screening organization to identify and eliminate barriers to CRC screening with personalized contact. The participation rate by strata increased in the intervention arm. The increase was greater in affluent strata than in deprived ones. Multivariate analyses demonstrated that the intervention mainly with phone navigation increased individual participation (OR=1.19 [1.10, 1.29]) in the navigable population. For such interventions to reduce social inequalities in a country with a national level organized mass screening program, they should first be administered to deprived populations, in accordance with the principle of proportionate universalism. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01555450. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND Patient, physician, and environmental factors were identified, and the authors examined the contribution of these factors to demographic and health variation in colonoscopy follow-up after a positive fecal occult blood test/fecal immunochemical test (FOBT/FIT) screening. METHODS In total, 76,243 FOBT/FIT-positive patients were identified from 120 Veterans Health Administration (VHA) facilities between August 16, 2009 and March 20, 2011 and were followed for 6 months. Patient demographic (race/ethnicity, sex, age, marital status) and health characteristics (comorbidities), physician characteristics (training level, whether primary care provider) and behaviors (inappropriate FOBT/FIT screening), and environmental factors (geographic access, facility type) were identified from VHA administrative records. Patient behaviors (refusal, private sector colonoscopy use) were estimated with statistical text mining conducted on clinic notes, and follow-up predictors and adjusted rates were estimated using hierarchical logistic regression. RESULTS Roughly 50% of individuals completed a colonoscopy at a VHA facility within 6 months. Age and comorbidity score were negatively associated with follow-up. Blacks were more likely to receive follow-up than whites. Environmental factors attenuated but did not fully account for these differences. Patient behaviors (refusal, private sector colonoscopy use) and physician behaviors (inappropriate screening) fully accounted for the small reverse race disparity and attenuated variation by age and comorbidity score. Patient behaviors (refusal and private sector colonoscopy use) contributed more to variation in follow-up rates than physician behaviors (inappropriate screening). CONCLUSIONS In the VHA, blacks are more likely to receive colonoscopy follow-up for positive FOBT/FIT results than whites, and follow-up rates markedly decline with advancing age and comorbidity burden. Patient and physician behaviors explain race variation in follow-up rates and contribute to variation by age and comorbidity burden. Cancer 2017;123:3502-12. Published 2017. This article is a US Government work and is in the public domain in the USA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Increasing participation in fecal screening tests is a major challenge in countries that have implemented colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs.Objective: To determine whether providing general practitioners (GPs) a list of patients who are nonadherent to CRC screening enhances patient participation in fecal immunochemical testing (FIT).Design, Setting, and Participants: A 3-group, cluster-randomized study was conducted from July 14, 2015, to July 14, 2016, on the west coast of France, with GPs in 801 practices participating and involving adult patients (50-74 years) who were at average risk of CRC and not up-to-date with CRC screening. The final follow-up date was July 14, 2016.Interventions: General practitioners were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups: 496 received a list of patients who had not undergone CRC screening (patient-specific reminders group, 10 476 patients), 495 received a letter describing region-specific CRC screening adherence rates (generic reminders group, 10 606 patients), and 455 did not receive any reminders (usual care group, 10 147 patients).Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was patient participation in CRC screening 1 year after the intervention.Results: Among 1482 randomized GPs (mean age, 53.4 years; 576 women [38.9%]), 1446 participated; of the 33 044 patients of these GPs (mean age, 59.7 years; 17 949 women [54.3%]), follow-up at 1 year was available for 31 229 (94.5%). At 1 year, 24.8% (95% CI, 23.4%-26.2%) of patients in the specific reminders group, 21.7% (95% CI, 20.5%-22.8%) in the generic reminders group, and 20.6% (95% CI, 19.3%-21.8%) in the usual care group participated in the FIT screening. The between-group differences were 3.1% (95% CI, 1.3%-5.0%) for the patient-specific reminders group vs the generic reminders group, 4.2% (95% CI, 2.3%-6.2%) for the patient-specific reminders group vs the usual care group, and 1.1% (95% CI, -0.6% to 2.8%) for generic reminders group vs the usual care group.Conclusions and Relevance: Providing French GPs caring for adults at average risk of CRC with a list of their patients who were not up-to-date with their CRC screening resulted in a small but significant increase in patient participation in FIT screening at 1 year compared with patients who received usual care. Providing GPs with generic reminders about regional rates of CRC screening did not increase screening rates compared with usual care.Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02515344. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach is more effective than colonoscopy outreach for increasing 1-time colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, but long-term effectiveness may need repeat testing and timely follow-up for abnormal results.Objective: Compare the effectiveness of FIT outreach and colonoscopy outreach to increase completion of the CRC screening process (screening initiation and follow-up) within 3 years.Design, Setting, and Participants: Pragmatic randomized clinical trial from March 2013 to July 2016 among 5999 participants aged 50 to 64 years who were receiving primary care in Parkland Health and Hospital System and were not up to date with CRC screenings.Interventions: Random assignment to mailed FIT outreach (n = 2400), mailed colonoscopy outreach (n = 2400), or usual care with clinic-based screening (n = 1199). Outreach included processes to promote repeat annual testing for individuals in the FIT outreach group with normal results and completion of diagnostic and screening colonoscopy for those with an abnormal FIT result or assigned to colonoscopy outreach.Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was screening process completion, defined as adherence to colonoscopy completion, annual testing for a normal FIT result, diagnostic colonoscopy for an abnormal FIT result, or treatment evaluation if CRC was detected. Secondary outcomes included detection of any adenoma or advanced neoplasia (including CRC) and screening-related harms (including bleeding or perforation).Results: All 5999 participants (median age, 56 years; women, 61.9%) were included in the intention-to-screen analyses. Screening process completion was 38.4% in the colonoscopy outreach group, 28.0% in the FIT outreach group, and 10.7% in the usual care group. Compared with the usual care group, between-group differences for completion were higher for both outreach groups (27.7% [95% CI, 25.1% to 30.4%] for the colonoscopy outreach group; 17.3% [95% CI, 14.8% to 19.8%] for FIT outreach group), and highest in the colonoscopy outreach group (10.4% [95% CI, 7.8% to 13.1%] for the colonoscopy outreach group vs FIT outreach group; P < .001 for all comparisons). Compared with usual care, the between-group differences in adenoma and advanced neoplasia detection rates were higher for both outreach groups (colonoscopy outreach group: 10.3% [95% CI, 9.5% to 12.1%] for adenoma and 3.1% [95% CI, 2.0% to 4.1%] for advanced neoplasia, P < .001 for both comparisons; FIT outreach group: 1.3% [95% CI, -0.1% to 2.8%] for adenoma and 0.7% [95% CI, -0.2% to 1.6%] for advanced neoplasia, P < .08 and P < .13, respectively), and highest in the colonoscopy outreach group (colonoscopy outreach group vs FIT outreach group: 9.0% [95% CI, 7.3% to 10.7%] for adenoma and 2.4% [95% CI, 1.3% to 3.3%] for advanced neoplasia, P < .001 for both comparisons). There were no screening-related harms in any groups.Conclusions and Relevance: Among persons aged 50 to 64 years receiving primary care at a safety-net institution, mailed outreach invitations offering FIT or colonoscopy compared with usual care increased the proportion completing CRC screening process within 3 years. The rate of screening process completion was higher with colonoscopy than FIT outreach.Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01710215. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Recent studies report racial disparities among individuals in organized colorectal cancer (CRC) programs; however, there is a paucity of information on CRC screening utilization by race/ethnicity among newly age-eligible adults in such programs.Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study among Kaiser Permanente Northern California enrollees who turned age 50 years between 2007 and 2012 (N=138,799) and were served by a systemwide outreach and facilitated in-reach screening program based primarily on mailed fecal immunochemical tests to screening-eligible people. Kaplan-Meier and Cox model analyses were used to estimate differences in receipt of CRC screening in 2015-2016.Results: Cumulative probabilities of CRC screening within 1 and 2 years of subjects' 50th birthday were 51% and 73%, respectively. Relative to non-Hispanic whites, the likelihood of completing any CRC screening was similar in blacks (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% CI=0.96, 1.00); 5% lower in Hispanics (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI=0.93, 0.96); and 13% higher in Asians (hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% CI=1.11, 1.15) in adjusted analyses. Fecal immunochemical testing was the most common screening modality, representing 86% of all screening initiations. Blacks and Hispanics had lower receipt of fecal immunochemical testing in adjusted analyses.Conclusions: CRC screening uptake was high among newly screening-eligible adults in an organized CRC screening program, but Hispanics were less likely to initiate screening near age 50 years than non-Hispanic whites, suggesting that cultural and other individual-level barriers not addressed within the program likely contribute. Future studies examining the influences of culturally appropriate and targeted efforts for screening initiation are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Basque Colorectal Cancer Screening Programme has both high participation rate and high compliance rate of colonoscopy after a positive faecal occult blood test (FIT). Although, colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with biannual (FIT) has shown to reduce CRC mortality, the ultimate effectiveness of the screening programmes depends on the accuracy of FIT and post-FIT colonoscopy, and thus, harms related to false results might not be underestimated. Current CRC screening programmes use a single faecal haemoglobin concentration (f-Hb) cut-off for colonoscopy referral for both sexes and all ages. We aimed to determine optimum f-Hb cut-offs by sex and age without compromising neoplasia detection and interval cancer proportion.Methods: Prospective cohort study using a single-sample faecal immunochemical test (FIT) on 444,582 invited average-risk subjects aged 50-69 years. A result was considered positive at ≥20 μg Hb/g faeces. Outcome measures were analysed by sex and age for a wide range of f-Hb cut-offs.Results: We analysed 17,387 positive participants in the programme who underwent colonoscopy. Participation rate was 66.5%. Men had a positivity rate for f-Hb of 8.3% and women 4.8% (p < 0.0001). The detection rate for advanced neoplasia (cancer plus advanced adenoma) was 44.0‰ for men and 15.9‰ for women (p < 0.0001). The number of colonoscopies required decreased in both sexes and all age groups through increasing the f-Hb cut-off. However, the loss in CRC detection increased by up to 28.1% in men and 22.9% in women. CRC missed were generally at early stages (Stage I-II: from 70.2% in men to 66.3% in women).Conclusions: This study provides detailed outcomes in men and women of different ages at a range of f-Hb cut-offs. We found differences in positivity rates, neoplasia detection rate, number needed to screen, and interval cancers in men and women and in younger and older groups. However, there are factors other than sex and age to consider when consideration is given to setting the f-Hb cut-off. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Uptake of colorectal cancer screening is low in the English NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP). Participation in screening is strongly associated with socioeconomic status. The aim of this study was to determine whether a supplementary leaflet providing the 'gist' of guaiac-based Faecal Occult Blood test (gFOBt) screening for colorectal cancer could reduce the socioeconomic status (SES) gradient in uptake in the English NHS BCSP.Methods: The trial was integrated within routine BCSP operations in November 2012. Using a cluster randomised controlled design all adults aged 59-74 years who were being routinely invited to complete the gFOBt were randomised based on day of invitation. The Index of Multiple Deprivation was used to create SES quintiles. The control group received the standard information booklet ('SI'). The intervention group received the SI booklet and the Gist leaflet ('SI + Gist') which had been designed to help people with lower literacy engage with the invitation. Blinding of hubs was not possible and invited subjects were not made aware of a comparator condition. The primary outcome was the gradient in uptake across IMD quintiles.Results: In November 2012, 163,525 individuals were allocated to either the 'SI' intervention (n = 79,104) or the 'SI + Gist' group (n = 84,421). Overall uptake was similar between the intervention and control groups (SI: 57.3% and SI + Gist: 57.6%; OR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.92-1.13, p = 0.77). Uptake was 42.0% (SI) vs. 43.0% (SI + Gist) in the most deprived quintile and 65.6% vs. 65.8% in the least deprived quintile (interaction p = 0.48). The SES gradient in uptake was similar between the study groups within age, gender, hub and screening round sub-groups.Conclusions: Providing supplementary simplified information in addition to the standard information booklet did not reduce the SES gradient in uptake in the NHS BCSP. The effectiveness of the Gist leaflet when used alone should be explored in future research.Trial Registration: ISRCTN74121020 , registered: 17/20/2012. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycle is a commonly used improvement process in health care settings, although its documented use in pragmatic clinical research is rare. A recent pragmatic clinical research study, called the Strategies and Opportunities to STOP Colon Cancer in Priority Populations (STOP CRC), used this process to optimize the research implementation of an automated colon cancer screening outreach program in intervention clinics. We describe the process of using this PDSA approach, the selection of PDSA topics by clinic leaders, and project leaders' reactions to using PDSA in pragmatic research.Methods: STOP CRC is a cluster-randomized pragmatic study that aims to test the effectiveness of a direct-mail fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) program involving eight Federally Qualified Health Centers in Oregon and California. We and a practice improvement specialist trained in the PDSA process delivered structured presentations to leaders of these centers; the presentations addressed how to apply the PDSA process to improve implementation of a mailed outreach program offering colorectal cancer screening through FIT tests. Center leaders submitted PDSA plans and delivered reports via webinar at quarterly meetings of the project's advisory board. Project staff conducted one-on-one, 45-min interviews with project leads from each health center to assess the reaction to and value of the PDSA process in supporting the implementation of STOP CRC.Results: Clinic-selected PDSA activities included refining the intervention staffing model, improving outreach materials, and changing workflow steps. Common benefits of using PDSA cycles in pragmatic research were that it provided a structure for staff to focus on improving the program and it allowed staff to test the change they wanted to see. A commonly reported challenge was measuring the success of the PDSA process with the available electronic medical record tools.Conclusion: Understanding how the PDSA process can be applied to pragmatic trials and the reaction of clinic staff to their use may help clinics integrate evidence-based interventions into their everyday care processes.Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01742065 . Registered October 31, 2013. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS), which reliably detects neoplasms in the distal colon and rectum but not in the proximal colon, has been shown to reduce incidence and mortality of distal colorectal cancer (CRC). Fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) detect the majority of CRCs and some proportion of adenomas also in the proximal colon. We assessed the expected diagnostic performance of combined application of FS and FIT. We systematically reviewed screening studies conducted in an average risk population that reported specificities and site-specific sensitivities of FITs for detection of CRC or advanced adenoma (AA). Only studies that conducted colonoscopy in all subjects were included. PubMed and Web of Science were searched until May 13, 2016. Reference lists of eligible studies were also screened. Sensitivity of FS was derived from colonoscopy results, assuming the same sensitivity as colonoscopy for left-sided neoplasms and follow-up colonoscopy after detection of distal adenomas. Bivariate meta-analyses were used to derive summary estimates of overall sensitivity and specificity of individual and joint application of both tests. Ten eligible studies were identified. Summary estimates (95% confidence intervals) of overall sensitivity for detecting CRC and AA were 65% (56-74%) and 27% (23-31%) for FIT alone, 67% (58-75%) and 67% (59-75%) for FS alone, and 89% (83-92%) and 75% (68-80%), respectively, for the combination of both tests. The pooled specificity (95% CI) of FIT was 92% (90-95%). Adding a FIT to a once-only screening FS would substantially increase sensitivity of CRC screening at a modest loss in specificity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Long-term adherence to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is particularly important for fecal testing. Some U.S. studies report that only 25% of individuals repeat fecal testing annually. The purpose of this qualitative study was to identify barriers and facilitators reported by patients with suboptimal screening adherence to refine interventions for starting ongoing adherence to CRC screening. We also explored whether participants, particularly never screeners, would be willing to do a CRC screening blood test.Methods: Forty-one patients who previously enrolled in the Systems of Support to Increase CRC Screening (SOS) trial were interviewed 4-5 years later. Participants were purposively selected to include men and women with diverse race/ethnicities who had either been inconsistent screeners or had never screened during the first three years of SOS despite receiving at least two rounds of mailed fecal tests. Two interviewers conducted 30-min telephone interviews using a semi-structured interview guide. An iterative thematic analysis approach was used.Results: Themes related to screening barriers were more pervasive among never screeners including: (1) Avoidance (inattention, procrastination) (2) Concerns about handling stool; (3) Health concerns; (4) Fear of a cancer diagnosis or positive test results. Themes related to screening facilitators were more often mentioned by participants who screened at least once including: (1) Use of a simpler 1-sample fecal test; (2) Convenience of mailings and doing the test at home; (3) Salience of prevention, especially as one got older; and (4) Influence of recommendations from providers, family and friends. Participants had diverse preferences for the number (3 on average) and types (phone, mail, text) of screening reminders. Some participants did not prefer e-mail links to the patient shared electronic health record because of difficulties remembering their password. It was acceptable for a nurse or medical assistant not from their clinic to call them as long as that person was knowledgeable about their records and could communicate with their physician. Participants, especially never screeners, were generally very enthusiastic about the potential option of a CRC screening blood test.Conclusion: Future CRC screening programs should be designed to minimize these barriers and maximize facilitators to improve long-term screening adherence.Trial Registration: Primary Funding Agency: The National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health (R01CA121125). Registered at clinicaltrials.gov NCT00697047 . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aim: To guide selection of optimal screening strategies for advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACRN), we evaluated the screening performances of sigmoidoscopy, fecal immunochemical test (FIT), and the Asia-Pacific Colorectal Screening (APCS) system, as well as combinations of these techniques. Methods: We reviewed the records of participants who had undergone a colonoscopy and FIT as part of a comprehensive health-screening program. Results of sigmoidoscopy were estimated from lesions under colonoscopic examination. The screening strategies were classified as sigmoidoscopy-based, FIT-based, and APCS-based. The sensitivity and reduction of number needed to colonoscope (NNScope) of each screening strategy were assessed. Results: Of 23 023 participants, 398 (1.7%) had ACRN. To predict the presence of ACRN, sigmoidoscopy was the most effective method (odds ratio [OR]: 22.96, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 18.26–29.07), followed by FIT (OR: 7.18, 95% CI: 5.28–9.68) and APCS (high risk [≥4] OR: 2.59, 95% CI: 1.87–3.58; moderate risk [2–3] OR: 1.66, 95% CI: 1.28–2.17). Regarding sigmoidoscopy-based strategies, “sigmoidoscopy positive alone” and “sigmoidoscopy positive or APCS ≥4” were optimal strategies (reduction of NNScope: 79–86%; sensitivity: 73–78%). In the case of FIT-based strategies, “FIT positive or APCS ≥4” was the optimal strategy (reduction of NNScope: 72%; sensitivity: 37%). With regard to the APCS system only, “APCS ≥2” and “APCS ≥4” were recommended as sensitivity-preferred and reduction in NNScope-preferred strategies, respectively. Conclusions: The performance in ACRN prediction differs among screening methods (sigmoidoscopy, FIT, and APCS). Among the various single or combined screening strategies, several specific strategies can be chosen depending on medical resources, financial budgets, and screenee preference. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The ColonCancerCheck screening program for colorectal cancer (CRC) in Ontario, Canada, is considering switching from biennial guaiac fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) screening between age 50–74 years to the more sensitive, but also less specific fecal immunochemical test (FIT). The aim of this study is to estimate whether the additional benefits of FIT screening compared to gFOBT outweigh the additional costs and harms. Methods: We used microsimulation modeling to estimate quality adjusted life years (QALYs) gained and costs of gFOBT and FIT, compared to no screening, in a cohort of screening participants. We compared strategies with various age ranges, screening intervals, and cut-off levels for FIT. Cost-efficient strategies were determined for various levels of available colonoscopy capacity. Results: Compared to no screening, biennial gFOBT screening between age 50–74 years provided 20 QALYs at a cost of CAN$200,900 per 1,000 participants, and required 17 colonoscopies per 1,000 participants per year. FIT screening was more effective and less costly. For the same level of colonoscopy requirement, biennial FIT (with a high cut-off level of 200 ng Hb/ml) between age 50–74 years provided 11 extra QALYs gained while saving CAN$333,300 per 1000 participants, compared to gFOBT. Without restrictions in colonoscopy capacity, FIT (with a low cut-off level of 50 ng Hb/ml) every year between age 45–80 years was the most cost-effective strategy providing 27 extra QALYs gained per 1000 participants, while saving CAN$448,300. Interpretation: Compared to gFOBT screening, switching to FIT at a high cut-off level could increase the health benefits of a CRC screening program without considerably increasing colonoscopy demand. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose Colonoscopy is not widely and easily available in all countries, even for symptomatic patients. This is one of the causes of tumors not being diagnosed until an advanced stage. The aim of this study was to estimate the efficacy of the fecal occult blood test (FOBT) in the diagnostic work-up of outpatients referred to a colorectal unit due to indistinct abdominal symptoms. Patients/methods Among 10 418 consecutive symptomatic individuals referred to the outpatient clinic, an immunochemical FOBT (Hem-Check 1 ® ) was recommended for 9432 patients with indistinct symptoms as a tool for qualifying them for colonoscopy. All the subjects were treated according to their diagnosis and followed-up for the next 10 years. Results Colorectal cancer (CRC) was diagnosed in 535 individuals: 393/986 (39.9%) among patients with red-flag symptoms, and 142/951 (14.9%) of individuals with indistinct symptoms and a positive FOBT. In the latter group, less-advanced tumors, classed as such using Dukes’ classification, were twice as common and more advanced CRC occurred twice as seldom than in the former. Cancer recurrence-free and overall survival periods after surgical treatment for CRC were significantly longer in patients with indistinct symptoms who qualified for diagnostic procedures on the basis of a positive FOBT. Conclusions Patients with symptoms suggesting organic colon disease had a worse prognosis compared to individuals with non-specific symptoms. If bowel endoscopy is not widely and easily available, qualification for colonoscopy on the basis of alarm symptoms and a positive FOBT seems to be an effective strategy in early CRC diagnosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Timely follow-up of fecal occult blood screening with colonoscopy is essential for achieving colorectal cancer mortality reduction. In the present study, we evaluated the effectiveness of centrally generated, physiciantargeted audit and feedback to improve colonoscopy uptake after a positive fecal occult blood test (FOBT) result within Ontario's population-wide ColonCancerCheck Program. Methods This prospective cohort study used data sets from Ontario's ColonCancerCheck Program (2008-2011) that were linked to provincial administrative health databases. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate the effect of centralized, physician-targeted audit and feedback on colonoscopy uptake in an Ontario-wide fobt-positive cohort. Results A mailed physician audit and feedback report identifying individuals outstanding for colonoscopy for 3 or more months after a positive fobt result did not increase the likelihood of colonoscopy uptake (hazard ratio: 0.95; 95% confidence interval: 0.79 to 1.13). Duration of positive FOBT status was strongly inversely associated with the hazard of follow-up colonoscopy (p for linear trend: <0.001). Conclusions In a large population-wide setting, centralized tracking in the form of physician-targeted mailed audit and feedback reports does not improve colonoscopy uptake for screening participants with a positive fobt result outstanding for 3 or more months. Mailed physician-targeted screening audit and feedback reports alone are unlikely to improve compliance with follow-up colonoscopy in Ontario. Other interventions such as physician audits or automatic referrals, demonstrated to be effective in other jurisdictions, might be warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In Denmark, a nationwide screening program for colorectal cancer was implemented in March 2014. Along with this, a clinical database for program monitoring and research purposes was established. Objective: The aim of this study was to estimate the agreement and validity of diagnosis and procedure codes in the Danish Colorectal Cancer Screening Database (DCCSD). Methods: All individuals with a positive immunochemical fecal occult blood test (iFOBT) result who were invited to screening in the first 3 months since program initiation were identified. From these, a sample of 150 individuals was selected using stratified random sampling by age, gender and region of residence. Data from the DCCSD were compared with data from hospital records, which were used as the reference. Agreement, sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values were estimated for categories of codes "clean colon", "colonoscopy performed", "overall completeness of colonoscopy", "incomplete colonoscopy", "polypectomy", "tumor tissue left behind", "number of polyps", "lost polyps", "risk group of polyps" and "colorectal cancer and polyps/benign tumor". Results: Hospital records were available for 136 individuals. Agreement was highest for "colorectal cancer" (97.1%) and lowest for "lost polyps" (88.2%). Sensitivity varied between moderate and high, with 60.0% for "incomplete colonoscopy" and 98.5% for "colonoscopy performed". Specificity was 92.7% or above, except for the categories "colonoscopy performed" and "overall completeness of colonoscopy", where the specificity was low; however, the estimates were imprecise. Conclusion: A high level of agreement between categories of codes in DCCSD and hospital records indicates that DCCSD reflects the hospital records well. Further, the validity of the categories of codes varied from moderate to high. Thus, the DCCSD may be a valuable data source for future research on colorectal cancer screening. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The diagnosis of colorectal cancer ( CRC) can be difficult as symptoms are variable with poor specificity. Thus, there is a quest for simple, non-invasive testing that can help streamline those with significant colonic pathology. Aim To assess using faecal immunochemical test for haemoglobin (FIT) or faecal calprotectin ( FCP) to detect CRC and adenoma in symptomatic patients referred from primary care. Methods A total of 799 referred for urgent lower gastrointestinal investigations were prospectively recruited. Of these, 430 completed colonic investigations and returned stool samples, and were included in the final statistical analysis. Faecal immunochemical test for haemoglobin was performed on HM- JACKarc analyser (Kyowa Medex, Tokyo, Japan), and FCP by the EliA Calprotectin immunoassay (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, United States). Results The negative predictive value ( NPV) using FIT alone or both markers ( FIT and FCP) in combination was similar at 99% for CRC, with a sensitivity and specificity of 84% and 93%, respectively. FIT measurements were significantly higher in left-sided colonic lesions compared with the right side; 713 vs. 94; P = 0.0203). For adenoma, the NPV using FIT alone, or both markers ( FIT and FCP) in combination, was similar at 94% with a sensitivity and specificity of 69% and 56%, respectively. Conclusions Undetectable faecal immunochemical test for haemoglobin is sufficiently sensitive to exclude colorectal cancer, with higher values in left-sided lesions. FCP in combination does not appear to provide additional diagnostic information. Further studies to determine the health economic benefits of implementing faecal immunochemical test for haemoglobin in primary care are required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer-specific death in the USA. Evidence suggests people with mental illness are less likely to receive preventive health services, including cancer screening. We hypothesized that mental illness is a risk factor for non-adherence to colorectal cancer-screening guidelines.Methods: We analyzed results of the 2007 California Health Interview Survey to test whether mental illness is a risk factor for non-adherence to colorectal cancer-screening recommendations among individuals age 50 or older (N = 15,535). This cross-sectional dataset is representative of California. Screening was defined as either fecal occult blood testing during the preceding year, sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy during the preceding 5 years. Mental illness was identified using the Kessler K6 screening tool. Associations were evaluated using weighted multivariate logistic regressions.Results: Mental illness was not associated with colorectal cancer-screening adherence (OR 0.89; 95% CI 0.63-1.25). Risk factors for non-adherence included being female (OR 1.25; 95% CI 1.09-1.44), delaying accessing health care during the previous year (OR 1.89; 95% CI 1.56-2.29).Conclusion: Unlike previous studies, this study did not find a relationship between mental illness and colorectal cancer-screening adherence. This could be due to differences in study populations. State-specific healthcare policies involving care coordination for individuals with mental illness could also influence colorectal cancer-screening adherence in California. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Numerous etiologies are implicated in the complications of diabetes. A link between diabetes and the predisposition to certain cancers, including colon cancer, has been established during the last decade. However, the relationship between fecal occult blood test (FOBT), a screening method used principally for detection of colon cancer, and diabetes has not been explored. Methods We investigated the association of positive FOBT with HbA1c of 5.70–6.49% (prediabetes) and HbA1c of ≥ 6.5% (diabetes) during health screening of 12,836 Japanese people aged 30–79 years (9258 men and 3578 women). Results Mean age and HbA1c were significantly higher in the positive (n = 1502) than the negative FOBT groups (n = 11,334). There were fewer men and current smokers in the positive FOBT group. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that, compared with HbA1c of ≤ 5.69%, HbA1c of ≥ 6.5% was significantly associated with positive FOBT, independently of relevant confounders including age, sex, and past history of gastric/duodenal ulcers and colon cancer or polyp. Conclusion Current results support a predisposition towards gastrointestinal cancer in diabetics, or may imply the development of diabetes-related gut microangiopathy, which deserves further study including FOBT and clinical diagnosis of the gut. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and study aims Serrated polyposis syndrome (SPS) is a high risk condition for colorectal cancer (CRC). Surveillance strategies for patients with serrated lesions remain controversial. We aimed to evaluate a diagnostic strategy to detect SPS consistently during reassessment colonoscopy in patients with proximal serrated lesions. Methods This was a retrospective study of all individuals from a fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based CRC screening program (2010 - 2013) with one or more serrated lesions of ≥ 5 mm proximal to the sigmoid colon on baseline colonoscopy. We analyzed all individuals empirically scheduled for a reassessment colonoscopy aimed at diagnosing SPS within 1 year. Reassessment colonoscopy was performed with standard white-light or chromoendoscopy ± high definition endoscopy depending on availability. SPS diagnosis was based on the cumulative number of polyps in both the baseline and reassessment colonoscopies. Factors associated with SPS diagnosis were analyzed. Results From 3444 screening colonoscopies, 196 patients met the study entry criteria, of whom 11 patients (0.32 %) met the criteria for SPS on baseline colonoscopy. Reassessment colonoscopies were performed in 71 patients at 11.9 ± 1.7 months and detected 20 additional patients with SPS, a tripling of the rate of SPS up to 0.90 %. Independent factors associated with SPS diagnosis were: having five or more proximal serrated lesions (odds ratio [OR] 4.01 [95 % confidence interval 1.20 - 13.45]; P = 0.02) or two or more sessile serrated polyps ≥ 10 mm (OR 6.35 [1.40 - 28.81]; P = 0.02) on baseline colonoscopy and the use of chromoendoscopy ± high definition endoscopy during reassessment colonoscopy (OR 4.99 [1.11 - 22.36]; P = 0.04). Conclusions A 1-year reassessment colonoscopy using chromoendoscopy and high definition endoscopes substantially improves SPS detection in individuals from a FIT-based screening program with proximal serrated lesions. Five or more proximal serrated lesions or two or more sessile serrated polyps ≥ 10 mm could be thresholds for requiring a reassessment colonoscopy. Prospective studies are required to validate these results and adjust surveillance recommendations in patients with serrated lesions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aimed to investigate the effects of sex and deprivation on participation in a population-based faecal immunochemical test (FIT) colorectal cancer screening programme. The study population included 9785 individuals invited to participate in two rounds of a population-based biennial FIT-based screening programme, in a relatively deprived area of Dublin, Ireland. Explanatory variables included in the analysis were sex, deprivation category of area of residence and age (at end of screening). The primary outcome variable modelled was participation status in both rounds combined (with "participation" defined as having taken part in either or both rounds of screening). Poisson regression with a log link and robust error variance was used to estimate relative risks (RR) for participation. As a sensitivity analysis, data were stratified by screening round. In both the univariable and multivariable models deprivation was strongly associated with participation. Increasing affluence was associated with higher participation; participation was 26% higher in people resident in the most affluent compared to the most deprived areas (multivariable RR=1.26: 95% CI 1.21-1.30). Participation was significantly lower in males (multivariable RR=0.96: 95%CI 0.95-0.97) and generally increased with increasing age (trend per age group, multivariable RR=1.02: 95%CI, 1.01-1.02). No significant interactions between the explanatory variables were found. The effects of deprivation and sex were similar by screening round. Deprivation and male gender are independently associated with lower uptake of population-based FIT colorectal cancer screening, even in a relatively deprived setting. Development of evidence-based interventions to increase uptake in these disadvantaged groups is urgently required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]