Search

Objective During the last two decades, organised colorectal cancer (CRC) screening has been widely implemented. It remains to be established if screen-detected CRC (SD-CRC) is associated with reduced long-term requirements for treatment as compared with patients with non-screen-detected CRC (NSD-CRC). Study design and methods This nationwide cohort study evaluated differences in treatment and healthcare contacts from the date of diagnosis to two years after comparing patients with SD-CRC and NSD-CRC. Data were collected from national healthcare registers, including patients aged 50–75 years and diagnosed with CRC between January 1st 2014 and March 31st 2018. Analyses were stratified into UICC stages and adjusted for sex, 5-year age groups, type of cancer (colonic/rectal), and Charlson comorbidity index score to address healthy user bias. Results In total, 12,040 patients were included, 4708 with SD-CRC and 7332 with NSD-CRC. In patients with SD-CRC, the duration of hospitalisation and rate of emergency surgery were reduced by 38 % (relative risk [RR] = 0.62) and 66 % (RR = 0.34), respectively. Moreover, this group was characterised by a 75 % reduction in oncological outpatient visits (RR = 0.35) and a reduced number of treatments with chemotherapy (RR = 0.57) and radiotherapy (RR = 0.50). There were no significant differences between the two populations in the rates of metastasectomy and the number of contacts with primary healthcare providers. Conclusion Compared to patients with NSD-CRC, patients with SD-CRC experience less hospitalisation and treatment within the first two years after diagnosis., Objective: During the last two decades, organised colorectal cancer (CRC) screening has been widely implemented. It remains to be established if screen-detected CRC (SD-CRC) is associated with reduced long-term requirements for treatment as compared with patients with non-screen-detected CRC (NSD-CRC). Study design and methods: This nationwide cohort study evaluated differences in treatment and healthcare contacts from the date of diagnosis to two years after comparing patients with SD-CRC and NSD-CRC. Data were collected from national healthcare registers, including patients aged 50–75 years and diagnosed with CRC between January 1st 2014 and March 31st 2018. Analyses were stratified into UICC stages and adjusted for sex, 5-year age groups, type of cancer (colonic/rectal), and Charlson comorbidity index score to address healthy user bias. Results: In total, 12,040 patients were included, 4708 with SD-CRC and 7332 with NSD-CRC. In patients with SD-CRC, the duration of hospitalisation and rate of emergency surgery were reduced by 38 % (relative risk [RR] = 0.62) and 66 % (RR = 0.34), respectively. Moreover, this group was characterised by a 75 % reduction in oncological outpatient visits (RR = 0.35) and a reduced number of treatments with chemotherapy (RR = 0.57) and radiotherapy (RR = 0.50). There were no significant differences between the two populations in the rates of metastasectomy and the number of contacts with primary healthcare providers. Conclusion: Compared to patients with NSD-CRC, patients with SD-CRC experience less hospitalisation and treatment within the first two years after diagnosis.

Background and Aims: The aim of this study was to describe short-term changes in morbidity and mortality associated with the implementation of screening for colorectal cancer in Denmark. Materials and Methods: Prospective cohort study with inclusion of all patients aged 50–75 years treated for colorectal cancer between 1 March 2014 and 31 December 2015 in Denmark. Adjusted hazard ratios were calculated for 30 and 90 days mortality using Cox Regression. We made two adjusted models—a “basic” adjusted for screening status, sex, age, smoking, alcohol consumption, and cancer type and an “advanced” that also included body mass index and American society of Anesthesiologists score in analyses. Relative risks were calculated for postoperative surgical and medical complications. Results: In total, 5348 patients were included. In the “basic model,” adjusted risk of 30 and 90 days total mortality was reduced in the screen-detected group (p < 0.01, HR = 0.43, CI = 0.24–0.76) and (p < 0.01, HR = 0.45, CI = 0.30–0.69). In the “advanced model,” only 90 days total mortality was significantly reduced in the screen-detected group (p = 0.01, HR 0.59, CI = 0.39–0.90). No significant changes were found with regard to surgical and medical complications, respectively, (p = 0.05 (CI = 0.76–1.00) and p = 0.47(CI = 0.74–1.15)). Conclusion: This nationwide study showed that screening for colorectal cancer was associated with a lower 90 days total mortality although no significant improvements were seen with regard to morbidity.

AIM: The aim of this study was to validate the clinical quality database of the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group. The validation is meant to focus on core data regarding staging of the disease, treatment provided, patient-related factors and key complications.METHOD: This was a database validation study assessing the completeness of the database and the accuracy of the data by re-entering core variables into an online module in a blinded fashion and comparing re-entered data with the original database data. A sample of 5% of patients from the years 2014-2017 was randomly selected.RESULTS: The sample of 936 patients was identified and data were re-entered. The completeness of the data retrieved was a median of 96%, 100% and 99% for preoperative, intra-operative and postoperative variables, respectively. The overall accuracy was a median of 95%. The least accurate variable was date of diagnosis (50% perfect agreement), with agreement rising to 96% when near matches defined as correct date ± 30 days were included. Intra-operative variables were of high quality, as were data on surgical complications including anastomotic leakage, where agreement was 97%.CONCLUSION: This was the first major validation of the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group's database. Overall, the completeness and quality of data were high, but the validation process also identified weaknesses, which can be crucial for future users to acknowledge and consider.