Search

Background Observational studies are frequently used to estimate the comparative effectiveness of different colorectal cancer (CRC) screening methods due to the practical limitations and time needed to conduct large clinical trials. However, time-varying confounders, e.g. polyp detection in the last screening, can bias statistical results. Recently, generalized methods, or G-methods, have been used for the analysis of observational studies of CRC screening, given their ability to account for such time-varying confounders. Discretization, or the process of converting continuous functions into discrete counterparts, is required for G-methods when the treatment and outcomes are assessed at a continuous scale. Development This paper evaluates the interplay between time-varying confounding and discretization, which can induce bias in assessing screening effectiveness. We investigate this bias in evaluating the effect of different CRC screening methods that differ from each other in typical screening frequency. Application First, using theory, we establish the direction of the bias. Then, we use simulations of hypothetical settings to study the bias magnitude for varying levels of discretization, frequency of screening and length of the study period. We develop a method to assess possible bias due to coarsening in simulated situations. Conclusions The proposed method can inform future studies of screening effectiveness, especially for CRC, by determining the choice of interval lengths where data are discretized to minimize bias due to coarsening while balancing computational costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background & aimsRelative risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) decreases with age among individuals with a family history of CRC. However, no screening recommendations specify less frequent screening with increasing age. We aimed to determine whether such a refinement would be cost effective.MethodsWe determined the relative risk for CRC for individuals based on age and number of affected first-degree relatives (FDRs) using data from publications. For each number of affected FDRs, we used the Microsimulation Screening Analysis model to estimate costs and effects of colonoscopy screening strategies with different age ranges and intervals. Screening was then optimized sequentially, starting with the youngest age group, and allowing the interval of screening to change at certain ages. Strategies with an incremental cost effectiveness ratio below $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year were considered cost effective.ResultsFor people with 1 affected FDR (92% of those with a family history), screening every 3 years beginning at an age of 40 years is most cost effective. If no adenomas are found, the screening interval can gradually be extended to 5 and 7 years, at ages 45 and 55 years, respectively. From a cost-effectiveness perspective, individuals with more affected FDRs should start screening earlier and at shorter intervals. However, frequency can be reduced if no abnormalities are found.ConclusionsUsing a microsimulation model, we found that for individuals with a family history of CRC, it is cost effective to gradually increase the screening interval if several subsequent screening colonoscopies have negative results and no new cases of CRC are found in family members.

BackgroundThe 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.MethodsWe 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.ResultsCompared 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.InterpretationCompared 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.

BackgroundLow penetrance genetic variants, primarily single nucleotide polymorphisms, have substantial influence on colorectal cancer (CRC) susceptibility. Most CRCs develop from colorectal adenomas (CRA). Here we report the first comprehensive field synopsis that catalogues all genetic association studies on CRA, with a parallel online database [http://www.chs.med.ed.ac.uk/CRAgene/].MethodsWe performed a systematic review, reviewing 9750 titles, and then extracted data from 130 publications reporting on 181 polymorphisms in 74 genes. We conducted meta-analyses to derive summary effect estimates for 37 polymorphisms in 26 genes. We applied the Venice criteria and Bayesian False Discovery Probability (BFDP) to assess the levels of the credibility of associations.ResultsWe considered the association with the rs6983267 variant at 8q24 as 'highly credible', reaching genome-wide statistical significance in at least one meta-analysis model. We identified 'less credible' associations (higher heterogeneity, lower statistical power, BFDP > 0.02) with a further four variants of four independent genes: MTHFR c.677C>T p.A222V (rs1801133), TP53 c.215C>G p.R72P (rs1042522), NQO1 c.559C>T p.P187S (rs1800566), and NAT1 alleles imputed as fast acetylator genotypes. For the remaining 32 variants of 22 genes for which positive associations with CRA risk have been previously reported, the meta-analyses revealed no credible evidence to support these as true associations.ConclusionsThe limited number of credible associations between low penetrance genetic variants and CRA reflects the lower volume of evidence and associated lack of statistical power to detect associations of the magnitude typically observed for genetic variants and chronic diseases. The CRA gene database provides context for CRA genetic association data and will help inform future research directions.

In the province-wide colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program in Ontario, Canada, individuals with a family history of CRC are offered colonoscopy screening and those without are offered guaiac fecal occult blood testing (gFOBT, Hemoccult II). We used microsimulation modeling to estimate the cumulative number of CRC deaths prevented and colonoscopies performed between 2008 and 2038 with this family history-based screening program, compared to a regular gFOBT program. In both programs, we assumed screening uptake increased from 30% (participation level in 2008 before the program was launched) to 60%. We assumed that 11% of the population had a family history, defined as having at least one first-degree relative diagnosed with CRC. The programs offered screening between age 50 and 74 years, every two years for gFOBT, and every ten years for colonoscopy. Compared to opportunistic screening (2008 participation level kept constant at 30%), the gFOBT program cumulatively prevented 6,700 more CRC deaths and required 570,000 additional colonoscopies by 2038. The family history-based screening program increased these numbers to 9,300 and 1,100,000, a 40% and 93% increase, respectively. If biennial gFOBT was replaced with biennial fecal immunochemical test (FIT), annual Hemoccult Sensa or five-yearly sigmoidoscopy screening, both the added benefits and colonoscopies required would decrease. A biennial gFOBT screening program that identifies individuals with a family history of CRC and recommends them to undergo colonoscopy screening would prevent 40% (range in sensitivity analyses: 20-51%) additional deaths while requiring 93% (range: 43-116%) additional colonoscopies, compared to a regular gFOBT screening program.

PurposeFamily history of colorectal cancer (CRC) is a known risk factor for CRC and encompasses both genetic and shared environmental risks.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review to estimate the impact of family history on the natural history of CRC and adherence to screening.ResultsWe found high heterogeneity in family-history definitions, the most common definition being one or more first-degree relatives. The prevalence of family history may be lower than the commonly cited 10%, and confirms evidence for increasing levels of risk associated with increasing family-history burden. There is evidence for higher prevalence of adenomas and of multiple adenomas in people with family history of CRC but no evidence for differential adenoma location or adenoma progression by family history. Limited data regarding the natural history of CRC by family history suggest a differential age or stage at cancer diagnosis and mixed evidence with respect to tumor location. Adherence to recommended colonoscopy screening was higher in people with a family history of CRC.ConclusionStratification based on polygenic and/or multifactorial risk assessment may mature to the point of displacing family history-based approaches, but for the foreseeable future, family history may remain a valuable clinical tool for identifying individuals at increased risk for CRC.

PurposeIdentification of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) associated with development of advanced colorectal adenomas.Experimental designDiscovery phase: 1,406 Caucasian patients (139 advanced adenoma cases and 1,267 controls) from the Adenoma Prevention with Celecoxib (APC) trial were included in a genome-wide association study (GWAS) to identify variants associated with postpolypectomy disease recurrence. Genome-wide significance was defined as false discovery rate less than 0.05, unadjusted P = 7.4 × 10(-7). Validation phase: results were further evaluated using 4,175 familial colorectal adenoma cases and 5,036 controls from patients of European ancestry [COloRectal Gene Identification consortium (CORGI), Scotland, Australia, and VQ58].ResultsOur study identified eight SNPs associated with advanced-adenoma risk in the APC trial (rs2837156, rs7278863, rs2837237, rs2837241, rs2837254, rs741864 at 21q22.2, and rs1381392 and rs17651822 at 3p24.1, at P < 10(-7) level with OR > 2). Five variants in strong pairwise linkage disequilibrium (rs7278863, rs2837237, rs741864, rs741864, and rs2837241; r(2) = 0.8-1) are in or near the coding region for the tight junction adhesion protein, IGSF5. An additional variant associated with advanced adenomas, rs1535989 [minor allele frequency, 0.11; OR, 2.09; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.50-2.91], also predicted colorectal cancer development in a validation analysis (P = 0.019) using a series of adenoma cases or colorectal cancer (CORGI study) and 3 sets of colorectal cancer cases and controls (Scotland, VQ58, and Australia; N = 9,211).ConclusionsOur results suggest that common polymorphisms contribute to the risk of developing advanced adenomas and might also contribute to the risk of developing colorectal cancer. The variant at rs1535989 may identify patients whose risk for neoplasia warrants increased colonoscopic surveillance.

In 2012, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) engaged the scientific community to provide a vision for cancer epidemiology in the 21st century. Eight overarching thematic recommendations, with proposed corresponding actions for consideration by funding agencies, professional societies, and the research community emerged from the collective intellectual discourse. The themes are (i) extending the reach of epidemiology beyond discovery and etiologic research to include multilevel analysis, intervention evaluation, implementation, and outcomes research; (ii) transforming the practice of epidemiology by moving toward more access and sharing of protocols, data, metadata, and specimens to foster collaboration, to ensure reproducibility and replication, and accelerate translation; (iii) expanding cohort studies to collect exposure, clinical, and other information across the life course and examining multiple health-related endpoints; (iv) developing and validating reliable methods and technologies to quantify exposures and outcomes on a massive scale, and to assess concomitantly the role of multiple factors in complex diseases; (v) integrating "big data" science into the practice of epidemiology; (vi) expanding knowledge integration to drive research, policy, and practice; (vii) transforming training of 21st century epidemiologists to address interdisciplinary and translational research; and (viii) optimizing the use of resources and infrastructure for epidemiologic studies. These recommendations can transform cancer epidemiology and the field of epidemiology, in general, by enhancing transparency, interdisciplinary collaboration, and strategic applications of new technologies. They should lay a strong scientific foundation for accelerated translation of scientific discoveries into individual and population health benefits.