Association Between Time to Colonoscopy After a Positive Fecal Test Result and Risk of Colorectal Cancer and Cancer Stage at Diagnosis

Perceptions of the Impact of Comorbidity on the Bowel Cancer Screening Programme: Qualitative Study With Bowel Screening Participants and Staff

INTRODUCTION

The impact of multiple health conditions on bowel cancer screening is currently unknown. We explored the impact of multiple health conditions on bowel cancer screening perceptions, experience and clinical management decisions following a positive stool test.

METHODS

Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted remotely with Bowel Screening Wales staff (n = 16) stratified by regional location and role and with screening participants (n = 19) stratified by age, gender and comorbidity. Interview topics were guided by the Common-Sense Model.

RESULTS

Screening participants, regardless of comorbidity status, placed great emphasis on the importance of early detection of cancer and completing the bowel screening process. Screening staff emphasised comorbidities in the clinical decision-making process; however, screening participants had low awareness of the impact that comorbidities can have on bowel screening. Participants describe how the presence of multiple health conditions can mask potential bowel symptoms and influence beliefs about follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Bowel screening staff try to individualise the service to meet participant needs. The potential mismatch in screening staff and participant awareness and expectations of the bowel screening and diagnostic process needs to be addressed. Clearer and more regular communication with screening participants could support the screening process, particularly for those with significant coexisting health conditions or facing time delays. The possible masking effects and misattribution of symptoms because of comorbidities highlight an opportunity for education and raising awareness for screening participants and a potential area of focus for discussions in clinical consultations and staff training.

PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Project funding included costs for patients and public contributors to be compensated for their contributions to the project, in line with current standards. A patient and public contributor was involved in the design of the study, including protocol development, and the interpretation of key findings and implications for patients, which are subsequently reflected within the manuscript.

The impact of delayed screening colonoscopies during the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening services in Ireland were cancelled or postponed for periods during the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of screening colonoscopy delays after a positive FIT on clinical and histopathological outcomes due to these restrictions.

METHODS

Participants in the Irish National Bowel Screening Programme with a positive Immunochemical Faecal Test (FIT) during the COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020-December 2021) were included. Patients were categorised into attended for a colonoscopy <3 months and attended for colonoscopy ≥3-17 months post positive FIT. Chi-Square Test of independence was performed using WinPepi.

RESULTS

3227 individuals had a complete index colonoscopy <3 months and 262 attended colonoscopy from ≥3 to 17 months post positive FIT. Of the clients whose colonoscopy was between ≥3-17 months from positive FIT, the median wait time was 3 months. There was no significant difference found between the two groups for CRC (5.8 % vs 5.0 %, p=0.544) or for the proportion of cancer stage I, stage II and unknown (33.7 %, 40.6 %, 25.7 %, p=0.411). There was no difference in the proportions of adenomas (57.8 % vs 58.4 %, p=0.849) and the proportion of advanced adenomas (7.7 % vs 10.7 %, p=0.077) detected between the two groups. A similar proportion of polyps were detected in individuals whose index colonoscopies were postponed <3 months from positive FIT (66.9 % vs 66 %, p=0.786).

CONCLUSION

A median delay of 3 months in screening colonoscopies after a positive FIT does not adversely impact clinical or histopathological outcomes. There was no significant difference in cancer staging, advanced adenomas or polyps detected between those who attended colonoscopies <3 months and ≥3-17 months post positive FIT. COVID-19 related disruptions to the normal functioning of the Irish bowel screening programme did not compromise our key objectives of advanced adenoma and cancer detection.

Community collaboration to advance racial/ethnic equity in colorectal Cancer screening: Protocol for a multilevel intervention to improve screening and follow-up in community Health centers

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening utilization is low among low-income, uninsured, and minority populations that receive care in community health centers (CHCs). There is a need for evidence-based interventions to increase screening and follow-up care in these settings.

METHODS

A multilevel, multi-component pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial is being conducted at 8 CHCs in two metropolitan areas (Boston and Los Angeles), with two arms: (1) Mailed FIT outreach with text reminders, and (2) Mailed FIT-DNA with patient support. We also include an additional CHC in Rapid City (South Dakota) that follows a parallel protocol for FIT-DNA but is not randomized due to lack of a comparison group. Eligible individuals in participating clinics are primary care patients ages 45-75, at average-risk for CRC, and overdue for CRC screening. Participants with abnormal screening results are offered navigation for follow-up colonoscopy and CRC risk assessment.

RESULTS

The primary outcome is the completion rate of CRC screening at 90 days. Secondary outcomes include the screening completion rate at 180 days and the rate of colonoscopy completion within 6 months among participants with an abnormal result. Additional goals are to enhance our understanding of facilitators and barriers to CRC risk assessment in CHC settings.

CONCLUSIONS

This study assesses the effectiveness of two multilevel interventions to increase screening participation and follow-up after abnormal screening in under-resourced clinical settings, informing future efforts to address CRC disparities.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT05714644.

Impact of racial disparities in follow-up and quality of colonoscopy on colorectal cancer outcomes

BACKGROUND

The benefits of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs rely on completing follow-up colonoscopy when a noncolonoscopy test is abnormal and on quality of colonoscopy screening as measured by the endoscopists' adenoma detection rate. Existing data demonstrate substantially lower follow-up colonoscopy rates and adenoma detection rate for Black Americans than White Americans. However, the contributions of racial differences in follow-up colonoscopy and adenoma detection rate on CRC outcomes have not been rigorously evaluated.

METHODS

We used established and validated CRC-Adenoma Incidence and Mortality (CRC-AIM) model as our analysis platform, with inputs from published literature that report lower follow-up colonoscopy rates and adenoma detection rate in Black adults compared with White adults (15% and 10% lower, respectively). We simulated screening with annual fecal immunochemical test, triennial multitarget stool DNA, and colonoscopy every 10 years between ages 45 and 75 years using real-world utilization of the screening modalities vs no screening. We reported lifetime outcomes per 1000 Black adults.

RESULTS

Elimination of Black-White disparities in follow-up colonoscopy rates would reduce CRC incidence and mortality by 5.2% and 9.3%, respectively, and improve life-years gained with screening by 3.4%. Elimination of Black-White disparities in endoscopists' adenoma detection rate would reduce CRC incidence and mortality by 9.4% and improve life-years gained by 3.7%. Elimination of both disparities would reduce CRC incidence and mortality by 14.6% and 18.7%, respectively, and improve life-years gained by 7.1%.

CONCLUSIONS

This modeling study predicts eliminating racial differences in follow-up colonoscopy rates, and quality of screening colonoscopy would substantially reduce Black-White disparities in CRC incidence and mortality.

Boosting efficiency in the endoscopy suite: integrating team workflows improves productivity and minimizes cost

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Inefficiencies in the endoscopy suite cause frustration for physicians, hospital administrators, staff, and patients. Turnover time (TOT), the time between one case ending and another beginning, is subjectively disproportionate between various team members. We aimed to define perceptions of TOT and target steps within the process to improve efficiency.

METHODS

This was a prospective cohort study at a tertiary center outpatient endoscopy unit. Phase I aimed to identify the TOT process components based on time stamps in the electronic medical record (N = 686). We defined gastroenterologist perceived TOT (pTOT), anesthesia pTOT, and standard TOT (sTOT). TOT length was calculated for each subgroup. Patient transport was identified as an intervenable target. In Phase II, the task of patient transport moved from the anesthesiology team to endoscopy nurses. Mean TOT and proportion of cases with sTOT <15 minutes' preintervention (n = 2192) and postintervention (n = 292) were compared.

RESULTS

Seven key TOT components were identified that explain variations in pTOT. Average anesthesia pTOT was 15 minutes, whereas average gastroenterologist pTOT was 34 minutes (25.9% vs 57.2% of case length; P = .0007). In Phase II, mean sTOT improved from 18.51 to 14.25 minutes (P < .0001), and proportion of sTOT within 15 minutes improved from 41.79% to 58.90% (P < .0001). This intervention saved 45 minutes per room per day, allowing for a revenue potential of more than $300,000 per year per procedure room.

CONCLUSIONS

This study defines variations in TOT and shows that finding imbalances and sharing the workload significantly cuts costs and improves the overall efficiency of the different subgroups in the turnover process.

COVID-19 impact on incidence and stage at diagnosis of five prominent cancers: A French cancer registry-based study

BACKGROUND

The French healthcare system has been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, including cancer care.

METHODS

In order to evaluate the impact of this pandemic on cancer incidence, the Isere Departmental Cancer Registry compared the actual 2020 incidence of melanoma, breast, colorectal, prostate and lung cancers with the expected 2020 incidence based on data collected by the Registry between 2015 and 2019, taking into account periods of lockdown and reopening. When available, cancer stages and/or prognostic scores were recorded.

RESULTS

During the period of initial confinement, a 54%, 50% and 36,8% drop in incidence was observed for breast, prostate and colorectal cancer respectively. Although their annual incidence remained stable, a worsening trend emerged as a decline in the number of low stages/scores at diagnosis in favour of higher stages/scores towards the end of 2020. In contrast, a significant 17,8% drop was observed in annual incidence of melanoma, particularly for Breslow scores < 1 (-27,4%). However, this trend was noticeable before the lockdown, as well as the 14% reduction in the incidence of lung cancer in women, but not in men.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of certain cancers was caught up over the year but the COVID-19 pandemic seems to be associated with a change in their severity at diagnosis throughout 2020. The downward trends in female lung cancer and melanoma incidence point to complex underlying phenomena. Further analysis is still needed to assess the global impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer incidence.

Evaluating the Reach of a Patient Navigation Program for Follow-up Colonoscopy in a Large Federally Qualified Health Center

Patient navigation (PN) has been shown to improve participation in cancer screening, including colorectal cancer screening, and is now a recommended practice by the Community Preventive Services Task Force. Despite the effectiveness of PN programs, little is known about the number of contacts needed to successfully reach patients or about the demographic and healthcare utilization factors associated with reach. PRECISE was an individual randomized study of PN versus usual care conducted as a partnership between two large health systems in the Pacific Northwest. The navigation program was a six-topic area telephonic program designed to support patients with an abnormal fecal test result to obtain a follow-up colonoscopy. We report the number of contact attempts needed to successfully reach navigated patients. We used logistic regression to report the demographic and healthcare utilization characteristics associated with patients allocated to PN who were successfully reached. We identified 1,200 patients with an abnormal fecal immunochemical test result, of whom 970 were randomized into the study (45.7% were female, 17.5% were Spanish-speaking, and the mean age was 60.8 years). Of the 479 patients allocated to the PN intervention, 382 (79.7%) were reached within 18 call attempts, and nearly all (n = 356; 93.2%) were reached within six contact attempts. Patient characteristics associated with reach were race, county of residence, and body mass index. Our findings can guide future efforts to optimize the reach of PN programs. Prevention Relevance: The findings from this large study can inform clinic-level implementation of future PN programs in Federally Qualified Health Centers to improve the reach of patients needing cancer screenings, optimize staff resources, and ultimately increase cancer screenings.

Electronic Coding for Abnormal Fecal Immunochemical Test Is Associated With Increased Colonoscopy Completion

INTRODUCTION

We examined the utility of the International Classification of Disease, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) code, R19.5, for a positive or abnormal fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and its association with colonoscopy completion.

METHODS

We identified all patients in a safety-net health system who underwent FITs from January 1, 2020, to August 31, 2021, and extracted the FIT date, FIT result, and ICD-10 code (R19.5) and colonoscopy procedures for each patient.

RESULTS

FIT-positive patients who had an R19.5 designation within 90 days (n = 383) were significantly more likely than all other FIT-positive patients (n = 273) to complete a colonoscopy within 6 months (40.9% vs 16.8%, P <0.001).

DISCUSSION

We found that less than two-thirds of patients had an ICD-10 code designated in their chart within 30 days of an abnormal FIT. When coding occurred in a timely manner, patients were more likely to complete their colonoscopy within 6 months.

Risk Factors for Suboptimal Colon Cancer Diagnosis and Management at a Safety-Net Hospital System

INTRODUCTION

Colon cancer (CC) is the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States. Quality measures have been introduced by the American Gastroenterological Association and Commission on Cancer for optimal management of CC. In this study, we sought to identify factors that may hinder the timely diagnosis and treatment of CC at a safety-net hospital system.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review was performed for patients aged ≥18 y diagnosed with CC from 2018 to 2021. Primary outcomes were time from positive fecal immunochemical test to colonoscopy, time from diagnosis to surgery, and time from diagnosis to adjuvant chemotherapy. Secondary end points were demographic characteristics associated with suboptimal outcomes in any of the above measures.

RESULTS

One hundred ninety patients were diagnosed with nonmetastatic CC. The majority were Hispanic and non-English-speaking. 74.1% of patients with a positive fecal immunochemical test received a colonoscopy within 180 d. 59.6% of nonemergent cases received surgery within 60 d of diagnosis. 77% of those eligible received adjuvant chemotherapy within 120 d of diagnosis. No clinically significant demographic factor was associated with delay in colonoscopy, surgery, or adjuvant chemotherapy. Most frequent cause of delay in surgery (38.0%) was optimization of comorbidities. Most frequent cause of delay in adjuvant chemotherapy (71.4%) was delay in surgery itself.

CONCLUSIONS

No clinically significant demographic factor was associated with experiencing delays in diagnostic colonoscopy, surgery, or adjuvant chemotherapy.

A Quality Improvement Study on Colonoscopy Wait Times in Underinsured Patients Following the COVID-19 Pandemic

INTRODUCTION

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic limited access to colonoscopy. To advance colorectal cancer health equity, we conducted a quality improvement study on colonoscopy wait times in 2019-2023 for underinsured (Medicaid, uninsured) compared with insured patients at an academic medical center providing colonoscopy for surrounding Federally Qualified Health Centers.

METHODS

Retrospective chart reviews were performed on adult outpatient colonoscopies in the preintervention period (2019-2021). In 2022, an institutional grant funded bilingual patient navigation to reduce colonoscopy wait times. Postintervention data were collected prospectively from May 2022 to May 2023 in 2 phases. Multivariable regression analyses were conducted for colonoscopy wait times as a primary outcome.

RESULTS

Analysis of 3,403 screening/surveillance and 1,896 diagnostic colonoscopies revealed significantly longer colonoscopy wait times for underinsured compared with insured patients after 2019. For screening/surveillance colonoscopies, wait time differences between underinsured and insured patients in the second postintervention phase were reduced by 34.21 days (95% confidence interval [CI]: 11.07-57.35) compared with the postpandemic period and by 56.36 days (95% CI: 34.16-78.55) compared with the first postintervention phase. For diagnostic colonoscopies, wait time differences in the second postintervention phase were reduced by 27.57 days (95% CI: 9.96-45.19) compared with the postpandemic period and by 20.40 days (95% CI: 1.02-39.77) compared with the first postintervention phase.

DISCUSSION

Colonoscopy wait times were significantly longer for underinsured compared with insured patients following the COVID-19 pandemic. This disparity was partially ameliorated by patient navigation. Monitoring outpatient colonoscopy wait times in underinsured patients is important for advancing health equity.

Patterns of Care Following a Positive Fecal Blood Test for Colorectal Cancer: A Mixed Methods Study

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Multilevel barriers to colonoscopy after a positive fecal blood test for colorectal cancer (CRC) are well-documented. A less-explored barrier to appropriate follow-up is repeat fecal testing after a positive test. We investigated this phenomenon using mixed methods.

DESIGN

This sequential mixed methods study included quantitative data from a large cohort of patients 50-89 years from four healthcare systems with a positive fecal test 2010-2018 and qualitative data from interviews with physicians and patients.

MAIN MEASURES

Logistic regression was used to evaluate whether repeat testing was associated with failure to complete subsequent colonoscopy and to identify factors associated with repeat testing. Interviews were coded and analyzed to explore reasons for repeat testing.

KEY RESULTS

A total of 316,443 patients had a positive fecal test. Within 1 year, 76.3% received a colonoscopy without repeat fecal testing, 3% repeated testing and then received a colonoscopy, 4.4% repeated testing without colonoscopy, and 16.3% did nothing. Among repeat testers (7.4% of total cohort, N = 23,312), 59% did not receive a colonoscopy within 1 year. In adjusted models, those with an initial positive test followed by a negative second test were significantly less likely to receive colonoscopy than those with two successive positive tests (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.35-0.40). Older age (65-75 vs. 50-64 years: OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.33-1.41) and higher comorbidity score (≥ 4 vs. 0: OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.67-1.83) were significantly associated with repeat testing compared to those who received colonoscopy without repeat tests. Qualitative interview data revealed reasons underlying repeat testing, including colonoscopy avoidance, bargaining, and disbelief of positive results.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients in this cohort, 7.4% repeated fecal testing after an initial positive test. Of those, over half did not go on to receive a colonoscopy within 1 year. Efforts to improve CRC screening must address repeat fecal testing after a positive test as a barrier to completing colonoscopy.

Evaluation of the "Burgenland PREvention trial of colorectal cancer Disease with ImmunologiCal Testing" (B-PREDICT)-a population-based colorectal cancer screening program

BACKGROUND

The colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program B-PREDICT is a population based invited two stage screening project using a faecal immunochemical test (FIT) for initial screening followed by a colonoscopy for those with a positive FIT. B-PREDICT was compared with the opportunistic screening colonoscopy (OPP-COL), performed in course of the nationwide screening program.

METHODS

Within B-PREDICT all residents of the Austrian federal state Burgenland, aged between 40 and 80 are annually invited to FIT testing. All individuals who underwent initial colonoscopy in Burgenland between 01/2003 and 12/2014, were included in this study. Individuals from the FIT-triggered invited screening program B-PREDICT were compared with those from the non-FIT triggered OPP-COL.

RESULTS

15 133 individuals from B-PREDICT were compared to 10 045 individuals with OPP-COL. CRC detection rates were 1.34% (CI-95%, [1.15; 1.52]) in B-PREDICT compared to 0.54% in OPP-COL (95%-CI, [0.39; 0.68] p < 0.001). The decrease in the age standardized incidence rates of CRC was more pronounced in the population screened with FIT than in the general population screened with colonoscopy. Changes in incidence rates per year were -4.4% (95%-CI, [-5.1; -3.7]) vs. -1.8% (95%-CI, [-1.9; -1.6] p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

B-PREDICT shows a two-fold higher detection rate of CRC as well as HRA compared to OPP-COL.

Development of a Follow-Up Measure to Ensure Complete Screening for Colorectal Cancer

Importance

The current quality performance measure for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is limited to initial screening. Despite low rates, there is no measure for appropriate follow-up with colonoscopy after receipt of an abnormal result of a stool-based screening test (SBT) for CRC. A quality performance measure is needed.

Objective

To develop and test a quality performance measure for follow-up colonoscopy within 6 months of an abnormal result of an SBT for CRC.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective quality improvement study examined data from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2020, with 2018 plus 6 months of follow-up as the primary measurement period to verify performance rates, specify a potential measure, and test for validity, reliability, and feasibility. The Optum Labs Data Warehouse (OLDW), a deidentified database of health care claims and clinical data, was accessed. The OLDW contains longitudinal health information on enrollees and patients, representing a diverse mixture of ages and geographic regions across the US. For the database study, adults from 38 health care organizations (HCOs) aged 50 to 75 years who completed an initial CRC SBT with an abnormal result were observed to determine follow-up colonoscopy rates within 6 months. Rates were stratified by race, ethnicity, sex, insurance, and test modality. Three HCOs participated in the feasibility field testing. Data were analyzed from June 1, 2022, to May 31, 2023.

Main Outcome and Measures

The primary outcome consisted of follow-up colonoscopy rates following an abnormal SBT result for CRC. Reliability statistics were also calculated across HCOs, race, ethnicity, and measurement year.

Results

Among 20 581 adults (48.6% men and 51.4% women; 307 [1.5%] Asian, 492 [7.2%] Black, 644 [3.1%] Hispanic, and 17 705 [86.0%] White; mean [SD] age, 63.6 [7.1] years) in 38 health systems, 47.9% had a follow-up colonoscopy following an abnormal SBT result for CRC within 6 months. There was significant variation between HCOs. Notably, significantly fewer Black patients (37.1% [95% CI, 34.6%-39.5%]) and patients with Medicare (49.2% [95% CI, 47.7%-50.6%]) or Medicaid (39.2% [95% CI, 36.3%-42.1%]) insurance received a follow-up colonoscopy. A quality performance measure that tracks rates of follow-up within 6 months of an abnormal SBT result was observed to be feasible, valid, and reliable, with a median reliability statistic between HCOs of 94.5% (range, 74.3%-99.7%).

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this observational study of 20 581 adults suggest that a measure of follow-up colonoscopy within defined periods after an abnormal result of an SBT test for CRC is warranted based on low current performance rates and would be feasible to collect by health systems and produce valid, reliable results.

Proportions and characteristics of interval cancer in annual fecal immunochemical test screening and postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer: Results from a Japanese multicenter prospective study using questionnaires, the C-DETECT study

OBJECTIVES

There are several types of colorectal cancer (CRC) according to the detection methods and intervals, including interval CRC (iCRC) and postcolonoscopy CRC (PCCRC). We aimed to examine their proportions and characteristics.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter prospective study using questionnaires in Japan ("C-DETECT study"), in which differences in CRC characteristics according to detection methods and intervals were examined from consecutive adult patients. Because the annual fecal immunochemical test (FIT) was used in population-based screening, the annual FIT-iCRC was assessed.

RESULTS

In total, 1241 CRC patients (1064 with invasive CRC) were included. Annual FIT-iCRC (a), 3-year PCCRC (b), and CRC detected within 1 year after a positive FIT with noncompliance to colonoscopy (c) accounted for 4.5%, 7.0%, and 3.9% of all CRCs, respectively, and for 3.9%, 5.4%, and 4.3% of invasive CRCs, respectively. The comparison among these (a, b, c) and other CRCs (d) demonstrated differences in the proportions of ≥T2 invasion ([a] 58.9%, [b] 44.8%, [c] 87.5%, [d] 73.0%), metastasis ([a] 33.9%, [b] 21.8%, [c] 54.2%, [d] 43.9%), right-sided CRC ([a] 42.9%, [b] 40.2%, [c] 18.8%, [d] 28.6%), and female sex ([a] 53.6%, [b] 49.4%, [c] 27.1%, [d] 41.6%). In metastatic CRC, (a) and (b) showed a higher proportions of BRAF mutations ([a] [b] 12.0%, [c] [d] 3.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Annual FIT-iCRC and 3-year PCCRC existed in nonnegligible proportions. They were characterized by higher proportions of right-sided tumors, female sex, and BRAF mutations. These findings suggest that annual FIT-iCRC and 3-year PCCRC may have biological features different from those of other CRCs.

Provision of colonoscopy in rural settings: A qualitative assessment of provider context, barriers, facilitators, and capacity

PURPOSE

Colonoscopy can prevent morbidity and mortality from colorectal cancer (CRC) and is the most commonly used screening method in the United States. Barriers to colonoscopy at multiple levels can contribute to disparities. Yet, in rural settings, little is known about who delivers colonoscopy and facilitators and barriers to colonoscopy access through screening completion.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative study with providers in rural Oregon who worked in endoscopy centers or primary care clinics. Semistructured interviews, conducted in July and August, 2021, focused on clinician experiences providing colonoscopy to rural Medicaid patients, including workflows, barriers, and access. We used thematic analysis, through immersion crystallization, to analyze interview transcripts and develop emergent themes.

FINDINGS

We interviewed 19 providers. We found two categories of colonoscopy providers: primary care providers (PCPs) doing colonoscopy on their own patients (n = 9; 47%) and general surgeons providing colonoscopy to patients referred to their services (n = 10; 53%). Providers described barriers to colonoscopy at the provider, community, and patient levels and suggested patient supports could help overcome them. Providers found current colonoscopy capacity sufficient, but noted PCPs trained to perform colonoscopy would be key to continued accessibility. Finally, providers shared concerns about the shrinking number of PCP endoscopists, especially with anticipated increased screening demand related to the CRC screening guideline shift.

CONCLUSIONS

These themes reflect opportunities to address multilevel barriers to improve access, colonoscopy capacity, and patient education approaches. Our results highlight that PCPs are an essential part of the workforce that provides colonoscopy in rural areas.

Unsatisfactory Fecal Immunochemical Tests for Colorectal Cancer Screening: Prevalence, Reasons, and Subsequent Testing

BACKGROUND

Fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is an effective colorectal cancer screening modality. Little is known about prevalence, reasons, and testing after unsatisfactory FIT, or a FIT that cannot be processed by the laboratory due to inadequate stool specimen or incomplete labeling.

METHODS

Our retrospective cohort study examined unsatisfactory FIT among average-risk individuals aged 50-74 years in a large, integrated, safety-net health system who completed an index FIT from 2010 to 2019. We determined prevalence of unsatisfactory FIT and categorized reasons hierarchically. We used multivariable logistic regression models to identify factors associated with: (i) unsatisfactory FIT; and (ii) subsequent testing within 15 months of the unsatisfactory FIT.

RESULTS

Of 56,980 individuals completing an index FIT, 10.2% had an unsatisfactory FIT. Reasons included inadequate specimen (51%), incomplete labeling (27%), old specimen (13%), and broken/leaking container (8%). Unsatisfactory FIT was associated with being male [OR, 1.10; confidence interval (CI), 1.03-1.16], Black (OR, 1.46; CI, 1.33-1.61), Spanish speaking (OR, 1.12; CI, 1.01-1.24), on Medicaid (OR, 1.42; CI, 1.28-1.58), and received FIT by mail (OR, 2.66; CI, 2.35-3.01). Among those with an unsatisfactory FIT, fewer than half (41%) completed a subsequent test within 15 months (median, 4.4 months). Adults aged 50-54 years (OR, 1.16; CI, 1.01-1.39) and those who received FIT by mail (OR, 1.92; CI, 1.49-2.09) were more likely to complete a subsequent test.

CONCLUSIONS

One in ten returned a FIT that could not be processed, mostly due to patient-related reasons. Fewer than half completed a subsequent test after unsatisfactory FIT.

IMPACT

Screening programs should address these breakdowns such as specimen collection and labeling to improve real-world effectiveness. See related In the Spotlight, p. 183.

Association of time to resection with survival in patients with colon cancer

PURPOSE

Colon cancer (CC) remains a leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide, for which colectomy represents the standard of care. Yet, the impact of delayed resection on survival outcomes remains controversial. We assessed the association between time to surgery and 10-year survival in a national cohort of CC patients.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study identified all adults who underwent colectomy for Stage I-III CC in the 2004-2020 National Cancer Database. Those who required neoadjuvant therapy or emergent resection < 7 days from diagnosis were excluded. Patients were classified into Early (< 25 days) and Delayed (≥ 25 days) cohorts after an adjusted analysis of the relationship between time to surgery and 10-year survival. Survival at 1-, 5-, and 10-years was assessed via Kaplan-Meier analyses and Cox proportional hazard modeling, adjusting for age, sex, race, income quartile, insurance coverage, Charlson-Deyo comorbidity index, disease stage, location of tumor, receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy, as well as hospital type, location, and case volume.

RESULTS

Of 165,991 patients, 84,665 (51%) were classified as Early and 81,326 (49%) Delayed. Following risk adjustment, Delayed resection was associated with similar 1-year [hazard ratio (HR) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97-1.04, P = 0.72], but inferior 5- (HR 1.24, CI 1.22-1.26; P < 0.001) and 10-year survival (HR 1.22, CI 1.20-1.23; P < 0.001). Black race [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 1.36, CI 1.31-1.41; P < 0.001], Medicaid insurance coverage (AOR 1.34, CI 1.26-1.42; P < 0.001), and care at high-volume hospitals (AOR 1.12, 95%CI 1.08-1.17; P < 0.001) were linked with greater likelihood of Delayed resection.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with CC who underwent resection ≥ 25 days following diagnosis demonstrated similar 1-year, but inferior 5- and 10-year survival, compared to those who underwent surgery within 25 days. Socioeconomic factors, including race and Medicaid insurance, were linked with greater odds of delayed resection. Efforts to balance appropriate preoperative evaluation with expedited resection are needed to optimize patient outcomes.

Examining the Association Between the COVID-19 Pandemic and the Rate of Diagnostic Tests for Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer in Manitoba, Canada

Background: Strategies to minimize the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic led to a reduction in diagnostic testing. It is important to assess the magnitude and duration of this impact to plan ongoing care and avoid long-lasting impacts of the pandemic. Objective: We examined the association between the COVID-19 pandemic and the rate of diagnostic tests for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer in Manitoba, Canada. Design and Participants: A population-based, cross-sectional study design with an interrupted time series analysis was used that included diagnostic tests from January 1, 2015 until August 31, 2022. Setting: Manitoba, Canada. Main Outcomes: Outcomes included mammogram, breast ultrasound, colposcopy, and colonoscopy rates per 100,000. Cumulative and percent cumulative differences between the fitted and counterfactual number of tests were estimated. Mean, median, and 90th percentile number of days from referral to colonoscopy date by referral type (elective, semiurgent, urgent) were determined. Results: In April 2020, following the declaration of the COVID-19 public health emergency, bilateral mammograms decreased by 77%, unilateral mammograms by 70%, breast ultrasounds by 53%, colposcopies by 63%, and colonoscopies by 75%. In Winnipeg (the largest urban center in the province), elective and semiurgent colonoscopies decreased by 76% and 39%, respectively. There was no decrease in urgent colonoscopies. As of August 2022, there were an estimated 7270 (10.7%) fewer bilateral mammograms, 2722 (14.8%) fewer breast ultrasounds, 836 (3.3%) fewer colposcopies, and 11 600 (13.8%) fewer colonoscopies than expected in the absence of COVID-19. As of December 2022, in Winnipeg, there were an estimated 6030 (23.9%) fewer elective colonoscopies, 313 (2.6%) fewer semiurgent colonoscopies, and 438 (27.3%) more urgent colonoscopies. Conclusions: In Manitoba, the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with sizable decreases in diagnostic tests for breast, colorectal, and cervical cancer. Two and a half years later, there remained large cumulative deficits in bilateral mammograms, breast ultrasounds, and colonoscopies.

Impact of Treatment Delay on the Prognosis of Patients with Ovarian Cancer: A Population-based Study Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Database

Purpose: This study aimed to assess the impact of treatment delay on prognosis in patients with ovarian cancer. Methods: A retrospective analysis of patients with ovarian cancer in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database between 2010 and 2015 was performed. Chi-square tests were used to assess baseline differences. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to evaluate the effect of different treatment intervals on survival outcomes in patients. Cox regression analyses were used to identify independent factors associated with ovarian cancer prognosis. Results: Of the 21,590 patients included, 15,675 (72.6%), 5,582 (25.9%), and 333 (1.54%) were classified into the immediate-treatment (<1 month after diagnosis), intermediate-delay (1-2 month delayed), and long-delay groups (≥3 months delayed), respectively. The 5-year probability of overall survival (OS) was 61.4% in the immediate-treatment group, decreasing to 36.4% and 34.8% in the intermediate- and long-delay groups, respectively. Similar survival differences were also reflected in cancer-specific survival (CSS), with 5-year CSS probabilities of 66.7%, 42.6%, and 41.8% in the aforementioned groups, respectively. Patients in the intermediate-delay group showed poorer OS (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.11; p=0.006) and CSS (adjusted HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.01-1.11; p=0.012) than immediate-treatment group. Conclusions: Patients with delayed treatment had poorer OS and CSS. The patient's waiting time from diagnosis to initial treatment should be within 1 month.

Engaging primary care physicians is critical in the screening and diagnosis of colorectal cancer at safety-net hospital systems

Background

Primary care physicians (PCP) play a key role in offering colorectal cancer (CRC) screenings, particularly amongst underserved populations. Given potential delays in or omission of CRC screening in the absence of a PCP, we aimed to determine stage of CRC at diagnosis in an underserved population.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was conducted at two Los Angeles County safety-net hospitals. Inclusion criteria were a CRC diagnosis between 2018 and 2021 and age between 50 and 75 years at diagnosis time. The primary outcome was the cancer stage at diagnosis.

Results

A total of 373 patients were included, of those, 52.5 % had a PCP. Compared to others, PCP was similar in age, racial composition, and primary spoken language (Table 1). Of patients with a PCP, 52.0% were diagnosed by screening. After screening, the most common indication for colonoscopy were blood per rectum (24.9 %) and imaging findings (18.0 %). Patients with a PCP had a significantly lower rate of late stage CRC than those without a PCP (42.4 % vs. 68.0 %, p < 0.001). After adjustment, having a PCP was associated with significantly reduced odds of late stage CRC (Adjusted Odds Ratio 0.83, 95 % Confidence Interval [0.68-1.04]). Having a PCP was not associated with any adjusted increase in number of adenomas or tumor size.

Conclusions

Patients with a PCP, irrespective of undergoing screening, were diagnosed at earlier CRC stages. This underlines the crucial role of PCPs in CRC and diagnosis, reinforcing the need for their active involvement in these processes.

Population health outcomes of blood-based screening for colorectal cancer in comparison to current screening modalities: insights from a discrete-event simulation model incorporating longitudinal adherence

AIM

Insufficient adherence to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening impedes individual and population health benefits, with about one-third of individuals non-adherent to available screening options. The impact of poor adherence is inadequately considered in most health economics models, limiting the evaluation of real-world population-level screening outcomes. This study introduces the CAN-SCREEN (Colorectal cANcer SCReening Economics and adherENce) model, utilizing real-world adherence scenarios to assess the effectiveness of a blood-based test (BBT) compared to existing strategies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The CAN-SCREEN model evaluates various CRC screening strategies per 1,000 screened individuals for ages 45-75. Adherence is modeled in two ways: (1) full adherence and (2) longitudinally declining adherence. BBT performance is based on recent pivotal trial data while existing strategies are informed using literature. The full adherence model is calibrated using previously published Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) models. Outcomes, including life-years gained (LYG), CRC cases averted, CRC deaths averted, and colonoscopies, are compared to no screening.

RESULTS

Longitudinal adherence modeling reveals differences in the relative ordering of health outcomes and resource utilization, as measured by the number of colonoscopies performed per 1,000, between screening modalities. BBT outperforms the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and the multitarget stool DNA (mtsDNA) test with more CRC deaths averted (13) compared to FIT and mtsDNA (7, 11), more CRC cases averted (27 vs. 16, 22) and higher LYG (214 vs. 157, 199). BBT yields fewer CRC deaths averted compared to colonoscopy (13, 15) but requires fewer colonoscopies (1,053 vs. 1,928).

LIMITATIONS

Due to limited data, the CAN-SCREEN model with longitudinal adherence leverages evidence-informed assumptions for the natural history and real-world longitudinal adherence to screening.

CONCLUSIONS

The CAN-SCREEN model demonstrates that amongst non-invasive CRC screening strategies, those with higher adherence yield more favorable health outcomes as measured by CRC deaths averted, CRC cases averted, and LYG.

Developing Patient-Refined Messaging for Follow-Up Colonoscopy After Abnormal Fecal Testing in Hispanic Communities: Key Learnings from Virtual Boot Camp Translation

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer death in the US. Screening by fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is a strategy to lower CRC rates. Unfortunately, only half of patients with an abnormal FIT result complete the follow-up colonoscopy, an essential component of screening. We used virtual Boot Camp Translation (BCT), to elicit input from partners to develop messaging/materials to motivate patients to complete a follow-up colonoscopy. Participants were Hispanic, ages 50 to 75 years, and Spanish-speaking. All materials were developed in English and Spanish. The first meeting included expert presentations that addressed colorectal health. The two follow-up sessions obtained feedback on messaging/materials developed based on themes from the first meeting. Ten participants attended the first meeting and eight attended the follow-up sessions. The two key barriers to follow-up colonoscopy after abnormal FIT noted by participants were (a) lack of colonoscopy awareness and (b) fear of the colonoscopy procedure. We learned that participants valued simple messaging to increase knowledge and alleviate concerns, patient-friendly outreach materials, and increased access to health information. Using virtual BCT, we included participant feedback to design culturally relevant health messages to promote follow-up colonoscopy after abnormal fecal testing among Hispanic patients served by community clinics.

Hub-and-Spoke centralized intervention to optimize colorectal cancer screening and follow-up: A pragmatic, cluster-randomized controlled trial protocol

BACKGROUND

Guidelines recommend screening for colorectal cancer (CRC), but participation and abnormal test follow up rates are suboptimal, with disparities by demography. Evidence-based interventions exist to promote screening, but community adoption and implementation are limited.

METHODS

The San Diego Accelerating Colorectal Cancer Screening and Follow-up through Implementation Science (ACCSIS) program is an academic-community partnership testing regional implementation of a Hub-and-Spoke model for increasing CRC screening and follow-up. The "hub" is a non-academic, non-profit organization that includes 17 community health center (CHC) systems, serving over 190 rural and urban clinic sites. The "spokes" are 3 CHC systems that oversee 11-28 clinics each, totaling over 60 clinics. Using a cluster-randomized trial design, 9 clinics were randomized to intervention and 16 to usual care. Within intervention clinics, approximately 5000 eligible patients not up-to-date with CRC screening per year were identified for intervention. Interventions include an invitation primer, a mailed fecal immunochemical test with completion instructions, and phone and text-based reminders (hub) and patient navigation protocol to promote colonoscopy completion after abnormal FIT (spoke). Outcomes include: 1) proportion of patients up-to-date with screening after three years in intervention versus non-intervention clinics; 2) proportion of patients with abnormal FIT completing colonoscopy within six months of the abnormal result. Implementation science measures are collected to assess acceptability, intervention and usual care adaptations, and sustainability of the intervention strategies.

CONCLUSION

This large-scale, regional cluster randomized trial among CHCs serving diverse populations is anticipated to accelerate progress in CRC prevention in underserved populations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT04941300.

Cancer Screening: Patient and Population Strategies

Although cancer has been the second leading cause of death for close to 100 years, progress has been made in reducing cancer mortality and morbidity, with the adoption of high-quality screening tests and treatment advances delivered at earlier stages of diagnosis. To achieve the high cancer screening rates demonstrated by some practices, proven effective strategies need to be broadly adopted at both the patient and population levels. Factors affecting cancer screening test completion and approaches to improvement are described both generally and for breast, lung, cervical, colorectal, and prostate cancers. Closing the racial disparity gap is a critical component of reaching cancer screening and prevention goals.

Cost-utility analysis of real-time artificial intelligence-assisted colonoscopy in Italy

Background and study aims Artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted colonoscopy has proven to be effective compared with colonoscopy alone in an average-risk population. We aimed to evaluate the cost-utility of GI GENIUS, the first marketed real-time AI system in an Italian high-risk population. Methods A 1-year cycle cohort Markov model was developed to simulate the disease evolution of a cohort of Italian individuals positive on fecal immunochemical test (FIT), aged 50 years, undergoing colonoscopy with or without the AI system. Adenoma or colorectal cancer (CRC) were identified according to detection rates specific for each technique. Costs were estimated from the Italian National Health Service perspective. Results Colonoscopy+AI system was dominant with respect to standard colonoscopy. The GI GENIUS system prevented 155 CRC cases (-2.7%), 77 CRC-related deaths (-2.8%), and improved quality of life (+0.027 QALY) with respect to colonoscopy alone. The increase in screening cost (+€10.50) and care for adenoma (+€3.53) was offset by the savings in cost of care for CRC (-€28.37), leading to a total savings of €14.34 per patient. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed the cost-efficacy of the AI system (almost 80% probability). Conclusions The implementation of AI detection tools in colonoscopy after patients test FIT-positive seems to be a cost-saving strategy for preventing CRC incidence and mortality.

[Évaluation de la gravité du cancer colorectal dépisté dans le contexte de la crise sanitaire liée au COVID19 en région Ile-de-France]

BACKGROUND

After the announcement in March 2020 of the COVID-19 pandemic, colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs were suspended in several countries. Compared to the lesions detected during previous campaigns, this study aims to assess the severity of CRC detected during the 2020 screening campaign in Île-de-France, the French region most affected by the 1st wave of the pandemic.

METHODS

The descriptive and etiological study included all faecal immunochemical test (FIT) results carried out between January 2017 and December 2020 on people aged 50-74, living in Île-de-France. First, the proportion of colonoscopies performed within one month (One-month-colo) following FIT; the yield of colonoscopy (proportion of colonoscopies with a neoplasm lesion among those performed) and CRC severity (TNM Classification, Level-0: T0/N0/M0, Level-1: T1/T2/N0/M0, Level-2: T3/T4/N0/M0; Level-3: T3/T4/N1/M0; Level-4: M1) were described in 2020 compared to previous campaigns (2017, 2018, and 2019). Subsequently, the link between the level of CRC severity and the predictive factors, including campaign year and time to colonoscopy, was analysed using polytomous multivariate regression.

RESULTS

The one-month-colo (2017: 9.1% of 11,529 colonoscopies; 2018: 8.5% of 13,346; 2019: 5.7% of 7,881; 2020: 6.7% of 11,040; p < 0.001), the yield (65.2%, 64.1%, 62.4%, 60.8% respectively, p < 0.001) were significantly different between campaigns. The proportion of CRC level-4 (4.8% in 2017 (653 CRC); 7.6% in 2018 (674 CRC); 4.6% in 2019 (330 CRC) and 4.7% in 2020 (404 CRC); p < 0.29) was not significantly different between campaigns. The probability of having CRC with a high severity level was inversely related to the time to colonoscopy but not to the campaign year. Compared to patients having undergone colonoscopy within 30 days, the odds were significantly reduced by 60% in patients having undergone colonoscopy after 7 months (adjusted Odds-Ratio: 0.4 [0.3; 0.6]; p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The French indicators were certainly degraded before the first wave of the COVID-19. The delay in access to colonoscopy as well as its extension induced by the COVID-19 crisis had no impact in terms of cancer severity, due to a discriminatory approach prioritizing patients with evident symptoms.

Changes in the Number of Gastrointestinal Cancers and Stage at Diagnosis with COVID-19 Pandemic in Japan: A Multicenter Cohort Study

This retrospective cohort study compared the number of newly diagnosed patients, stage at diagnosis, and detection process of gastrointestinal cancers based on hospital-based cancer registry data at two tertiary Japanese hospitals. The pre-COVID-19 period was from January 2017 to February 2020, with phase 1 (midst of COVID-19 pandemic) from March to December 2020 and phase 2 (the transition period to the "new normal") from January to December 2021. Each month, the number of patients diagnosed with esophageal, gastric, colorectal, pancreatic, liver, and biliary tract cancers were aggregated, classified by stage and detection process, and compared, including a total of 6453 patients. The number of colorectal Stage 0-II patients decreased significantly in phase 1 and increased in phase 2. The total number of colorectal cancer patients returned to pre-COVID-19 levels (mean monthly patients [SD]: 41.61 [6.81] vs. 36.00 [6.72] vs. 46.00 [11.32]). The number of patients with gastric cancer Stage I significantly decreased in phase 2 following phase 1. The number of gastric cancer patients decreased significantly from pre-COVID-19 levels (30.63 [6.62] vs. 22.40 [5.85] vs. 24.50 [4.15]). During phase 2, the number of patients diagnosed after screening with colorectal cancer increased significantly, whereas that with gastric cancer remained considerably lower. The number of Stage III colorectal and gastric cancer patients increased significantly from the pre-COVID-19 levels. Thus, gastric cancer may not be optimally screened during phases 1 and 2. There was a significant increase in patients with Stage III colorectal and gastric cancers from the pre-COVID-19 period; hence, the stage at diagnosis may have progressed.

Assessing patterns in cancer screening use by race and ethnicity during the coronavirus pandemic using electronic health record data

BACKGROUND

Efforts to prevent the spread of the coronavirus led to dramatic reductions in nonemergency medical care services during the first several months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Delayed or missed screenings can lead to more advanced stage cancer diagnoses with potentially worse health outcomes and exacerbate preexisting racial and ethnic disparities. The objective of this analysis was to examine how the pandemic affected rates of breast and colorectal cancer screenings by race and ethnicity.

METHODS

We analyzed panels of providers that placed orders in 2019-2020 for mammogram and colonoscopy cancer screenings using electronic health record (EHR) data. We used a difference-in-differences design to examine the extent to which changes in provider-level mammogram and colonoscopy orders declined over the first year of the pandemic and whether these changes differed across race and ethnicity groups.

RESULTS

We found considerable declines in both types of screenings from March through May 2020, relative to the same months in 2019, for all racial and ethnic groups. Some rebound in screenings occurred in June through December 2020, particularly among White and Black patients; however, use among other groups was still lower than expected.

CONCLUSIONS

This research suggests that many patients experienced missed or delayed screenings during the first few months of the pandemic, which could lead to detrimental health outcomes. Our findings also underscore the importance of having high-quality data on race and ethnicity to document and understand racial and ethnic disparities in access to care.

Reach and effectiveness of a centralized navigation program for patients with positive fecal immunochemical tests requiring follow-up colonoscopy

Completion rates for follow-up colonoscopies after an abnormal fecal immunochemical test (FIT) are suboptimal in federally qualified health center (FQHC) settings. We implemented a screening intervention that included mailed FIT outreach to North Carolina FQHC patients from June 2020 to September 2021 and centralized patient navigation to support patients with abnormal FITs in completing follow-up colonoscopy. We evaluated the reach and effectiveness of navigation using electronic medical record data and navigator call logs detailing interactions with patients. Reach assessments included the proportion of patients successfully contacted by phone and who agreed to participate in navigation, intensity of navigation provided (including types of barriers to colonoscopy identified and total navigation time), and differences in these measures by socio-demographic characteristics. Effectiveness outcomes included colonoscopy completion, timeliness of follow-up colonoscopy (i.e., within 9 months), and bowel prep adequacy. Among 514 patients who completed a mailed FIT, 38 patients had an abnormal result and were eligible for navigation. Of these, 26 (68%) accepted navigation, 7 (18%) declined, and 5 (13%) could not be contacted. Among navigated patients, 81% had informational needs, 38% had emotional barriers, 35% had financial barriers, 12% had transportation barriers, and 42% had multiple barriers to colonoscopy. Median navigation time was 48.5 min (range: 24-277 min). Colonoscopy completion differed across groups - 92% of those accepting navigation completed colonoscopy within 9 months, versus 43% for those declining navigation. We found that centralized navigation was widely accepted in FQHC patients with abnormal FIT, and was an effective strategy, resulting in high colonoscopy completion rates.

Postponing colonoscopy for 6 months in high-risk population increases colorectal cancer detection in China

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Colonoscopy is an important colorectal cancer (CRC) screening modality; however, not all high-risk groups identified by fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and/or high-risk factor questionnaire (HRFQ) undergo colonoscopy in time. The impact of delays in colonoscopy on CRC detection among high-risk populations remains poorly understood, warranting further clarification.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted among CRC high-risk population identified by Tianjin CRC screening program. According to the colonoscopy results after HRFQ and FIT, patients were classified into CRC, advanced adenoma, non-advanced adenoma, and normal groups. The time interval between CRC screening and colonoscopy was investigated and its relationship with colonoscopy results. Logistic regression was performed to explore the risk factors of CRC detection.

RESULTS

Among the high-risk population without a history of CRC or polyps, 49,810 underwent HRFQ, FIT, and colonoscopy, and a time interval of fewer than 6 months was found for 79.56% of patients (n = 39,630). People with positive FIT were more likely to undergo colonoscopy within 6 months, and detection rates of CRC and/or advanced adenoma were positively related to time intervals. Similar results were found in people with a negative FIT but positive HRFQ. A time interval longer than 6 months was a significant predictor of CRC detection in high-risk populations.

CONCLUSION

For high-risk people identified by CRC screening, especially those with a positive FIT, a time interval of 6 months was associated with an increased probability of CRC detection. Our findings emphasize that populations at high risk should undergo colonoscopy at least within 6 months.

Racial, Ethnic, and Socioeconomic Disparities in Treatment Delay Among Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma in the United States

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Failures have been reported across the cancer care continuum in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); however, the impact of treatment delays on outcomes has not been well-characterized. We described the prevalence of treatment delays in a racially and ethnically diverse cohort of patients and its association with overall survival.

METHODS

Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database, we identified patients diagnosed with HCC between 2001 and 2015. We performed multivariable logistic regression analysis to identify factors associated with treatment delay (ie, receipt of HCC-directed therapy >3 months after diagnosis). Cox proportional hazards regression analysis with a 5-month landmark was used to characterize the association between treatment delay and overall survival, accounting for immortal time bias.

RESULTS

Of 8450 patients with treatment within 12 months of HCC diagnosis, 1205 (14.3%) experienced treatment delays. The proportion with treatment delays ranged from 6.8% of patients undergoing surgical resection to 21.6% of those undergoing liver transplantation. In multivariable analysis, Black patients (odds ratio, 1.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.21-3.15) and those living in high poverty neighborhoods (odds ratio, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.25-1.92) were more likely to experience treatment delays than white patients and those living in low poverty neighborhoods, respectively. Treatment delay was independently associated with worse survival (hazard ratio 1.15, 95% CI, 1.05-1.25).

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly 1 in 7 patients with HCC experience treatment delays, with higher odds in Black patients and those living in high poverty neighborhoods. Treatment delays are associated with worse survival, highlighting a need for interventions to improve time-to-treatment.

Supply and quality of colonoscopy according to the characteristics of gastroenterologists in the French population-based colorectal-cancer screening program

BACKGROUND

Since its complete roll-out in 2009, the French colorectal cancer screening program (CRCSP) experienced 3 major constraints [use of a less efficient Guaiac-test (gFOBT), stopping the supply of Fecal-Immunochemical-Test kits (FIT), and suspension of the program due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)] affecting its effectiveness.

AIM

To describe the impact of the constraints in terms of changes in the quality of screening-colonoscopy (Quali-Colo).

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included screening-colonoscopies performed by gastroenterologists between Jan-2010 and Dec-2020 in people aged 50-74 living in Ile-de-France (France). The changes in Quali-colo (Proportion of colonoscopies performed beyond 7 mo (Colo_7 mo), Frequency of serious adverse events (SAE) and Colonoscopy detection rate) were described in a cohort of Gastroenterologists who performed at least one colonoscopy over each of the four periods defined according to the chronology of the constraints [gFOBT: Normal progress of the CRCSP using gFOBT (2010-2014); FIT: Normal progress of the CRCSP using FIT (2015-2018); STOP-FIT: Year (2019) during which the CRCSP experienced the cessation of the supply of test kits; COVID: Program suspension due to the COVID-19 health crisis (2020)]. The link between each dependent variable (Colo_7 mo; SAE occurrence, neoplasm detection rate) and the predictive factors was analyzed in a two-level multivariate hierarchical model.

RESULTS

The 533 gastroenterologists (cohort) achieved 21509 screening colonoscopies over gFOBT period, 38352 over FIT, 7342 over STOP-FIT and 7995 over COVID period. The frequency of SAE did not change between periods (gFOBT: 0.3%; FIT: 0.3%; STOP-FIT: 0.3%; and COVID: 0.2%; P = 0.10). The risk of Colo_7 mo doubled between FIT [adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.2 (1.1; 1.2)] and STOP-FIT [aOR: 2.4 (2.1; 2.6)]; then, decreased by 40% between STOP-FIT and COVID [aOR: 2.0 (1.8; 2.2)]. Regardless of the period, this Colo_7 mo’s risk was twice as high for screening colonoscopy performed in a public hospital [aOR: 2.1 (1.3; 3.6)] compared to screening-colonoscopy performed in a private clinic. The neoplasm detection, which increased by 60% between gFOBT and FIT [aOR: 1.6 (1.5; 1.7)], decreased by 40% between FIT and COVID [aOR: 1.1 (1.0; 1.3)].

CONCLUSION

The constraints likely affected the time-to-colonoscopy as well as the colonoscopy detection rate without impacting the SAE’s occurrence, highlighting the need for a respectable reference time-to-colonoscopy in CRCSP.

Delphi Initiative for Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer (DIRECt) International Management Guidelines

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Patients with early-onset colorectal cancer (eoCRC) are managed according to guidelines that are not age-specific. A multidisciplinary international group (DIRECt), composed of 69 experts, was convened to develop the first evidence-based consensus recommendations for eoCRC.

METHODS

After reviewing the published literature, a Delphi methodology was used to draft and respond to clinically relevant questions. Each statement underwent 3 rounds of voting and reached a consensus level of agreement of ≥80%.

RESULTS

The DIRECt group produced 31 statements in 7 areas of interest: diagnosis, risk factors, genetics, pathology-oncology, endoscopy, therapy, and supportive care. There was strong consensus that all individuals younger than 50 should undergo CRC risk stratification and prompt symptom assessment. All newly diagnosed eoCRC patients should receive germline genetic testing, ideally before surgery. On the basis of current evidence, endoscopic, surgical, and oncologic treatment of eoCRC should not differ from later-onset CRC, except for individuals with pathogenic or likely pathogenic germline variants. The evidence on chemotherapy is not sufficient to recommend changes to established therapeutic protocols. Fertility preservation and sexual health are important to address in eoCRC survivors. The DIRECt group highlighted areas with knowledge gaps that should be prioritized in future research efforts, including age at first screening for the general population, use of fecal immunochemical tests, chemotherapy, endoscopic therapy, and post-treatment surveillance for eoCRC patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The DIRECt group produced the first consensus recommendations on eoCRC. All statements should be considered together with the accompanying comments and literature reviews. We highlighted areas where research should be prioritized. These guidelines represent a useful tool for clinicians caring for patients with eoCRC.

Rates of Follow-up Colonoscopy After a Positive Stool-Based Screening Test Result for Colorectal Cancer Among Health Care Organizations in the US, 2017-2020

IMPORTANCE

Noninvasive stool-based screening tests (SBTs) are effective alternatives to colonoscopy. However, a positive SBT result requires timely follow-up colonoscopy (FU-CY) to complete the colorectal cancer screening paradigm.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate FU-CY rates after a positive SBT result and to assess the association of the early COVID-19 pandemic with FU-CY rates.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This mixed-methods cohort study included retrospective analysis of deidentified administrative claims and electronic health records data between June 1, 2015, and June 30, 2021, from the Optum Labs Data Warehouse and qualitative, semistructured interviews with clinicians from 5 health care organizations (HCOs). The study population included data from average-risk primary care patients aged 50 to 75 years with a positive SBT result between January 1, 2017, and June 30, 2020, at 39 HCOs.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the FU-CY rate within 1 year of a positive SBT result according to patient age, sex, race, ethnicity, insurance type, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), and prior SBT use.

RESULTS

This cohort study included 32 769 individuals (16 929 [51.7%] female; mean [SD] age, 63.1 [7.1] years; 2092 [6.4%] of Black and 28 832 [88.0%] of White race; and 825 [2.5%] of Hispanic ethnicity). The FU-CY rates were 43.3% within 90 days of the positive SBT result, 51.4% within 180 days, and 56.1% within 360 days (n = 32 769). In interviews, clinicians were uniformly surprised by the low FU-CY rates. Rates varied by race, ethnicity, insurance type, presence of comorbidities, and SBT used. In the Cox proportional hazards regression model, the strongest positive association was with multitarget stool DNA use (hazard ratio, 1.63 [95% CI, 1.57-1.68] relative to fecal immunochemical tests; P < .001), and the strongest negative association was with the presence of comorbidities (hazard ratio, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.59-0.71] for a CCI of >4 relative to 0; P < .001). The early COVID-19 pandemic was associated with lower FU-CY rates.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study found that FU-CY rates after a positive SBT result for colorectal cancer screening were low among an average-risk population, with the median HCO achieving a 53.4% FU-CY rate within 1 year. Socioeconomic factors and the COVID-19 pandemic were associated with lower FU-CY rates, presenting opportunities for targeted intervention by clinicians and health care systems.

Extent of Follow-Up on Abnormal Cancer Screening in Multiple California Public Hospital Systems: A Retrospective Review

BACKGROUND

Inequitable follow-up of abnormal cancer screening tests may contribute to racial/ethnic disparities in colon and breast cancer outcomes. However, few multi-site studies have examined follow-up of abnormal cancer screening tests and it is unknown if racial/ethnic disparities exist.

OBJECTIVE

This report describes patterns of performance on follow-up of abnormal colon and breast cancer screening tests and explores the extent to which racial/ethnic disparities exist in public hospital systems.

DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from five California public hospital systems. We used multivariable robust Poisson regression analyses to examine whether patient-level factors or site predicted receipt of follow-up test.

MAIN MEASURES

Using data from five public hospital systems between July 2015 and June 2017, we assessed follow-up of two screening results: (1) colonoscopy after positive fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) and (2) tissue biopsy within 21 days after a BIRADS 4/5 mammogram.

KEY RESULTS

Of 4132 abnormal FITs, 1736 (42%) received a follow-up colonoscopy. Older age, Medicaid insurance, lack of insurance, English language, and site were negatively associated with follow-up colonoscopy, while Hispanic ethnicity and Asian race were positively associated with follow-up colonoscopy. Of 1702 BIRADS 4/5 mammograms, 1082 (64%) received a timely biopsy; only site was associated with timely follow-up biopsy.

CONCLUSION

Despite the vulnerabilities of public-hospital-system patients, follow-up of abnormal cancer screening tests occurs at rates similar to that of patients in other healthcare settings, with colon cancer screening test follow-up occurring at lower rates than follow-up of breast cancer screening tests. Site-level factors have larger, more consistent impact on follow-up rates than patient sociodemographic traits. Resources are needed to identify health system-level factors, such as test follow-up processes or data infrastructure, that improve abnormal cancer screening test follow-up so that effective health system-level interventions can be evaluated and disseminated.

Patterns of initial colorectal cancer screenings after turning 50 years old and follow-up rates of colonoscopy after positive stool-based testing among the average-risk population

OBJECTIVES

Effective colorectal cancer (CRC) screening requires proper adherence beginning at the recommended screening age. For those with positive results on stool-based tests (SBTs), a follow-up colonoscopy is warranted. The objectives of this study were to 1) examine initial screening rates after turning 50 years old; and 2) assess rates of follow-up colonoscopy after a positive SBT.

METHODS

This retrospective study used de-identified administrative claims data from 01/01/2006 to 06/30/2020 for commercially insured and Medicare Advantage enrollees. For objective 1, the index year was the year enrollees turned 50. Rates of CRC screening during and after the index year were captured. For objective 2, the index date was the claim date of a fecal immunochemical test (FIT) or multitarget stool DNA test (mt-sDNA) where linked lab data indicated a positive test result. Rates and time to follow-up colonoscopy after a positive SBT were assessed.

RESULTS

Approximately 53% of enrollees initiated CRC screening within five years after turning 50 (50+ cohort N = 718,562). Among enrollees with an available lab result indicating a positive SBT (N = 7329; 2110 FIT and 5219 mt-sDNA), overall follow-up colonoscopy within 6 months of the positive result was less than optimal (65%) and varied by modality; 72% vs 46% (p < .001) among enrollees with a positive mt-sDNA test compared to FIT test, respectively.

CONCLUSION

There is potential for improving CRC screening among the eligible average-risk population, both to start screening once they reach the screening-eligible age, and to complete the CRC screening paradigm after a positive stool-based screen.

Perceived Provision of Perioperative Information and Care by Patients Who Have Undergone Surgery for Colorectal Cancer: A Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Active patient participation in preparation and recovery from colorectal cancer surgery can be facilitated by timely information and care and may improve patient wellbeing and reduce hospitalizations; Methods: We aimed to identify gaps in perioperative information and care by asking colorectal cancer surgical patients to retrospectively report on their perceptions of care via a cross-sectional survey; Results: Overall, 179 (64% consent rate) patients completed one of two 64-item surveys exploring their views of 'optimal care' or their experiences of 'actual care'. In total, 41 (64%) aspects of care were endorsed as optimal. Of these, almost three-quarters (73%) were received by most patients (80% or more). Gaps in care were identified from discrepancies in the endorsement of optimal versus actual survey items. Of the 41 items identified as representing 'optimal care', 11 items were received by fewer than 80% of patients, including the provision of information about the impact of surgical wait-times on cancer cure (69%); pre-habilitation behaviors to improve health (75%); the type of questions to ask the health care team (74%); impact of pain medications on bowel movements (73%); how to obtain medical supplies for self-care at home (67%); dietary or exercise advice after discharge (25-31%); and emotional advice after discharge (44%).

CONCLUSIONS

These gaps represent patient-centered priorities and targets for supportive interventions.

Comorbidities and Risk Factors of Patients Diagnosed with CRC after Positive Fecal Test in Real Life

(1) Background: Fecal occult blood test (FOBT) is the modality of choice in most countries for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. We aimed to investigate the risk factors for CRC among patients with a positive FOBT in real life. (2) Methods: This was a retrospective study that included patients who tested positive for FOBT. Data regarding the comorbidities and laboratories were collected and compared between CRC and non-CRC groups. (3) Results: Positive FOBT was found among 45,500 (5.36%) subjects and CRC was found in 1502 (3.3%). CRC patients were older, age 62.7 ± 7.15 years compared with 59.33 ± 7.3 years (p < 0.001), and had significantly higher rates of hypertension (48.4% vs. 44.7%, p = 0.002), iron-deficiency anemia (20.6% vs. 16.4, p < 0.001), family history of CRC (7.3% vs. 5.1%, p < 0.001), and previous CRC (6.5% vs. 0.3%, p < 0.001). Lower levels of hemoglobin, iron, and ferritin were found in the CRC group. Age, family history of CRC, and previous CRC were found to be significant risk factors for diagnosis of CRC after positive FOBT with OR of 1.057, 1.4, and 15.9, respectively. (4) Conclusions: Iron-deficiency anemia, family history of CRC, previous colorectal cancer, and low hemoglobin, iron, and ferritin levels should direct physicians to give high priority to colonoscopy scheduling.

Third Asia-Pacific consensus recommendations on colorectal cancer screening and postpolypectomy surveillance

The Asia-Pacific region has the largest number of cases of colorectal cancer (CRC) and one of the highest levels of mortality due to this condition in the world. Since the publishing of two consensus recommendations in 2008 and 2015, significant advancements have been made in our knowledge of epidemiology, pathology and the natural history of the adenoma-carcinoma progression. Based on the most updated epidemiological and clinical studies in this region, considering literature from international studies, and adopting the modified Delphi process, the Asia-Pacific Working Group on Colorectal Cancer Screening has updated and revised their recommendations on (1) screening methods and preferred strategies; (2) age for starting and terminating screening for CRC; (3) screening for individuals with a family history of CRC or advanced adenoma; (4) surveillance for those with adenomas; (5) screening and surveillance for sessile serrated lesions and (6) quality assurance of screening programmes. Thirteen countries/regions in the Asia-Pacific region were represented in this exercise. International advisors from North America and Europe were invited to participate.

Patient and tumour characteristics of screening-age adults diagnosed with screen-detected versus symptomatic colon cancer

AIM

International studies have shown that most colon cancers are diagnosed among people with symptoms, but research is limited in the United States. Here, we conducted a retrospective study of adults aged 50-85 years diagnosed with stage I-IIIA colon cancer between 1995 and 2014 in two US healthcare systems.

METHODS

Mode of detection (screening or symptomatic) was ascertained from medical records. We estimated unadjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) comparing detection mode by patient factors at diagnosis (year, age, sex, race, smoking status, body mass index [BMI], Charlson score), prediagnostic primary care utilization, and tumour characteristics (stage, location).

RESULTS

Of 1,675 people with colon cancer, 38.4% were screen-detected, while 61.6% were diagnosed following symptomatic presentation. Screen-detected cancer was more common among those diagnosed between 2010 and 2014 versus 1995-1999 (OR 1.65, 95% CI: 1.19-2.28), and those with a BMI of 25-<30 kg/m² (OR 1.54, 95% CI: 1.21-1.98) or ≥30 kg/m² (OR 1.52, 95% CI: 1.18-1.96) versus <25 kg/m² . Screen-detected cancer was less common among people aged 76-85 (OR 0.50, 95% CI: 0.39-0.65) versus 50-64, those with comorbidity scores >0 (OR 0.71, 95% CI: 0.56-0.91 for score = 1, OR 0.34, 95% CI: 0.26-0.45 for score = 2+), and those with 2+ prediagnostic primary care visits (OR 0.53, 95% CI: 0.37-0.76) versus 0 visits. The odds of screen detection were lower among patients diagnosed with stage IIA (OR 0.33, 95% CI = 0.27-0.41) or IIB (OR 0.12, 95% CI: 0.06-0.24) cancers versus stage I.

CONCLUSIONS

Most colon cancers among screen-eligible adults were diagnosed following symptomatic presentation. Even with increasing screening rates over time, research is needed to better understand why specific groups are more likely to be diagnosed when symptomatic and identify opportunities for interventions.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on colorectal cancer surgery in Japan: Clinical Study Group of Osaka University-A multicenter retrospective study

Aim

Due to the overwhelming spread of SARS-CoV-2 and its disruption of the healthcare system, delays and reduced numbers were reported for colorectal cancer screening, colonoscopies, and surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. This multicenter retrospective study investigated the still poorly understood impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on colorectal cancer treatment in Japan.

Methods

This study was organized by the Clinical Study Group of Osaka University, which comprised 32 major institutions in Osaka. We retrospectively analyzed the number of surgeries and colonoscopies performed and the characteristics of patients who underwent surgery for colorectal cancer between March 2019 and February 2021. We compared data collected before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. We also assessed the methods used for detecting colorectal cancer, including fecal occult blood test, abdominal symptoms, and anemia.

Results

The COVID-19 pandemic caused reductions in the annual numbers of surgeries (3569 vs 3198) and colonoscopies (67 622 vs 58 183) performed in the 2020 fiscal year, compared to the 2019 fiscal year. During the COVID-19 pandemic, a significantly lower proportion of patients were treated for clinical stages ≤I (24.2% vs 26.9%; P = .011), compared to the proportion treated before the pandemic. Fecal occult blood tests for detecting colorectal cancer were used significantly less frequently during the COVID-19 pandemic (26.2% vs 29.6%; P = .002). These trends were more significant in larger institutions.

Conclusion

The COVID-19 pandemic reduced the number of colonoscopies and surgeries performed for colorectal cancer and hindered the detection of asymptomatic early-stage cancers, and its impact varied by hospital size.

Self-Reported and Objective Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Planning, Compliance and Timeliness of a Diagnostic Colonoscopy after a Positive FIT Screening Result in the Flemish Colorectal Cancer Screening Program

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Flemish colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program (by fecal immunochemical test, FIT) was suspended and non-urgent medical procedures were discommended. This study estimates how this impacted diagnostic colonoscopy (DC) scheduling after a positive FIT and the interval between both in 2020. Methods: An online survey was sent to participants in the Flemish CRC screening program with a positive FIT but without a DC to explore the possible impact of COVID-19 on the scheduling of a DC. Self-reported survey results were complemented with objective data on DC compliance and the interval between FIT and DC. Results: In 2020, DC compliance was 4–5% lower than expected (for 3780 positive FITs no DC was performed). In February–March 2020, the median time between a positive FIT and DC significantly increased. Survey participants reported fear of COVID-19 contamination, perception to create hospital overload, delay in non-urgent medical procedures (on government advice) and not being sure a DC could be performed as contributing reasons. Conclusions: On top of a 3% lower participation, the COVID-19 pandemic further increased existing DC non-compliance and the positive FIT–DC interval. The survey confirmed the crucial role of COVID-19 in the decision not to plan a DC.

Effect of Chronic Comorbidities on Follow-up Colonoscopy After Positive Colorectal Cancer Screening Results: A Population-Based Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Fecal occult blood tests (FOBTs) are colorectal cancer screening tests used to identify individuals requiring further investigation with colonoscopy. Delayed colonoscopy after positive FOBT (FOBT+) is associated with poorer cancer outcomes. We assessed the effect of comorbidity on colonoscopy receipt within 12 months after FOBT+.

METHODS

Population-based healthcare databases from Ontario, Canada, were linked to assemble a cohort of 50-74-year-old individuals with FOBT+ results between 2008 and 2017. The associations between comorbidities and colonoscopy receipt within 12 months after FOBT+ were examined using multivariable cause-specific hazard regression models.

RESULTS

Of 168,701 individuals with FOBT+, 80.5% received colonoscopy within 12 months. In multivariable models, renal failure (hazard ratio [HR] 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62-0.82), heart failure (HR 0.77, CI 0.75-0.80), and serious mental illness (HR 0.88, CI 0.85-0.92) were associated with the lowest colonoscopy rates, compared with not having each condition. The number of medical conditions was inversely associated with colonoscopy uptake (≥4 vs 0: HR 0.64, CI 0.58-0.69; 3 vs 0: HR 0.75, CI 0.72-0.78; and 2 vs 0: HR 0.87, CI 0.85-0.89). Having both medical and mental health conditions was associated with a lower colonoscopy uptake relative to no comorbidity (HR 0.88, CI 0.87-0.90).

DISCUSSION

Persons with medical and mental health conditions had lower colonoscopy rates after FOBT+ than those without these conditions. Better strategies are needed to optimize colorectal cancer screening and follow-up in individuals with comorbidities.

Examining the Factors That Affect the Diagnosis of Patients with Positive Fecal Occult Blood Test Results

Due to the threat of colorectal cancer (CRC) to health, Taiwan included the fecal occult blood test (FOBT) under preventive health services in 2010. We examined the factors that affect the diagnosis of people with positive FOBT results. Data were retrospectively collected from the CRC screening database. In the model predicting factors that affect the diagnosis of 89,046 people with positive FOBT results, the risks of disease in the CRC group were lower in medical institutions that conducted follow-up examinations in regions such as Northern Taiwan compared to that in Eastern Taiwan (p = 0.013); they were lower in the age group of 50 to 65 years than those in the age group of 71 to 75 years (p < 0.001, p = 0.016), and lower in the outpatient medical units that conducted follow-up examinations than those in the inpatient medical units by 0.565 times (p < 0.001, 95% CI: 0.493−0.647). Factors affecting the diagnosis of patients with positive FOBT results were gender, the region of the medical institution, medical unit for follow-up examinations, age, screening site, family history, type of follow-up examinations, and follow-up time. Therefore, the identification of characteristics of patients with positive FOBT results and the promotion of follow-up examination are important prevention strategies for CRC.

Pandemic-resilient target setting in colorectal cancer screening for vulnerable older population

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) needs to be pandemic-resilient to avoid long-lasting shutdowns; however, realistic participation target remains unelucidated. This study aimed to identify the lowest acceptable participation rate in CRCS during a pandemic, focusing on vulnerable older populations who require urgent intervention.

METHODS

This nationwide cross-sectional study included 80,946 inpatients aged 70-85 years who were first diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC) after 70 years of age, between April 1, 2014 and March 31, 2019, in Japan. To evaluate the association between area-level CRCS participation rate and individual early CRC detection, a multilevel logistic regression model was constructed. The mandatorily implemented screening rates were converted to the total screening rate equivalents (TSREs), which reflect the remaining contributions of voluntarily provided screenings.

RESULTS

Early detections during stages 0-I were significantly observed when primary screening rate was ≥38% (TSRE) and combined follow-up rate was ≥85%. For early detection during Tis-T1, primary screening rate ≥ 38% (TSRE) and combined follow-up rate ≥ 90% were necessary. For follow-up rates ≥70% or ≥75%, there were cases where missed detection of Tis-T1 were observed.

CONCLUSION

The results indicate that, even during pandemic, CRCS should achieve a primary screening rate of 38% and follow-up rate of 85% for vulnerable older populations. These values, lower than the current desirable rates, suggest the maximum possible compromise in balancing the resources between cancer screening and pandemic measures. Moreover, they also indicate the minimum target for shifting to fecal immunochemical test-focused program. Further explorations with varied CRCS settings are necessary for verification.

Changes in Cancer Screening in the US During the COVID-19 Pandemic

IMPORTANCE

Health care was disrupted in the US during the first quarter of 2020 with the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic. Early reports in selected samples suggested that cancer screening services decreased greatly, but population-based estimates of cancer screening prevalence during 2020 have not yet been reported.

OBJECTIVE

To examine changes in breast cancer (BC), cervical cancer (CC), and colorectal cancer (CRC) screening prevalence with contemporary national, population-based Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This survey study included respondents from the 2014, 2016, 2018, and 2020 BRFSS surveys who were eligible for BC (women aged 50-74 years), CC (women aged 25-64 years), and CRC (women and men aged 50-75 years) screening. Data analysis was performed from September 2021 to February 2022.

EXPOSURES

Calendar year.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Self-reported receipt of a recent (defined as in the past year) BC, CC, and CRC screening test. Adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs) comparing 2020 vs 2018 prevalence and 95% CIs were computed.

RESULTS

In total, 479 248 individuals were included in the analyses of BC screening, 301 453 individuals were included in CC screening, and 854 210 individuals were included in CRC screening, In 2020, among respondents aged 50 to 75 years, 14 815 (11.4%) were Black, 12 081 (12.6%) were Hispanic, 156 198 (67.3%) were White, and 79 234 (29.9%) graduated from college (all percentages are weighted). After 4 years (2014-2018) of nearly steady prevalence, past-year BC screening decreased by 6% between 2018 and 2020 (from 61.6% in 2018 to 57.8% in 2020; aPR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.92-0.96), and CC screening decreased by 11% (from 58.3% in 2018 to 51.9% in 2020; aPR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.87-0.91). The magnitude of these decreases was greater in people with lower educational attainment and Hispanic persons. CRC screening prevalence remained steady; past-year stool testing increased by 7% (aPR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.02-1.12), offsetting a 16% decrease in colonoscopy (aPR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.82-0.88) between 2018 and 2020.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this survey study, stool testing increased and counterbalanced a decrease in colonoscopy during 2020, and BC and CC screening modestly decreased. How these findings might be associated with outcomes is not yet known, but they will be important to monitor, especially in populations with lower socioeconomic status, who experienced greater screening decreases during the COVID-19 pandemic.

A national quality improvement study identifying and addressing cancer screening deficits due to the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Cancer-related deaths over the next decade are expected to increase due to cancer screening deficits associated with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Although national deficits have been quantified, a structured response to identifying and addressing local deficits has not been widely available. The objectives of this report are to share preliminary data on monthly screening deficits in breast, colorectal, lung, and cervical cancers across diverse settings and to provide online materials from a national quality improvement (QI) study to help other institutions to address local screening deficits.

METHODS

This prospective, national QI study on Return-to-Screening enrolled 748 accredited cancer programs in the United States from April through June 2021. Local prepandemic and pandemic monthly screening test volumes (MTVs) were used to calculate the relative percent change in MTV to describe the monthly screening gap.

RESULTS

The majority of facilities reported monthly screening deficits (colorectal cancer, 80.6% [n = 104/129]; cervical cancer, 69.0% [n = 20/29]; breast cancer, 55.3% [n = 241/436]; lung cancer, 44.6% [n = 98/220]). Overall, the median relative percent change in MTV ranged from -17.7% for colorectal cancer (interquartile range [IQR], -33.6% to -2.8%), -6.8% for cervical cancer (IQR, -29.4% to 1.7%), -1.6% for breast cancer (IQR, -9.6% to 7.0%), and 1.2% for lung cancer (IQR, -16.9% to 19.0%). Geographic differences were not observed. There were statistically significant differences in the percent change in MTV between institution types for colorectal cancer screening (P = .02).

CONCLUSION

Cancer screening is still in need of urgent attention, and the screening resources made available online may help facilities to close critical gaps and address screenings missed in 2020.

LAY SUMMARY

Question: How can the effects of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on cancer screening be mitigated?

FINDINGS

When national resources were provided, including methods to calculate local screening deficits, 748 cancer programs promptly enrolled in a national Return-to-Screening study, and the majority identified local screening deficits, most notably in colorectal cancer. Using these results, 814 quality improvement projects were initiated with the potential to add 70,000 screening tests in 2021. Meaning: Cancer screening is still in need of urgent attention, and the online resources that we provide may help to close critical screening deficits.