Effectiveness of a Mailed Colorectal Cancer Screening Outreach Program in Community Health Clinics: The STOP CRC Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

A pragmatic randomized trial of mailed fecal immunochemical testing to increase colorectal cancer screening among low-income and minoritized populations

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is underused, particularly among low-income and minoritized populations, for whom the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has challenged progress in achieving equity.

METHODS

A hub-and-spoke model was used. The hub was a nonacademic organization and the spokes were three community health center (CHC) systems overseeing numerous clinic sites. Via a cluster-randomized trial design, nine clinic sites were randomized to intervention and 16 clinic sites were randomized to usual care. Patient-level interventions included invitation letters, mailed fecal immunochemical tests (FITs), and call/text-based reminders. Year 1 intervention impact, which took place during the COVID-19 pandemic, was assessed as the proportion completing screening among individuals not up to date at baseline, which compared intervention and nonintervention clinics accounting for intraclinic cluster variation; confidence intervals (CIs) around differences not including 0 were interpreted as statistically significant.

RESULTS

Among 26,736 patients who met eligibility criteria, approximately 58% were female, 55% were Hispanic individuals, and 44% were Spanish speaking. The proportion completing screening was 11.5 percentage points (ppts) (95% CI, 6.1-16.9 ppts) higher in intervention versus usual care clinics. Variation in differences between intervention and usual care clinics was observed by sex (12.6 ppts [95% CI, 7.2-18.0 ppts] for females; 8.8 ppts [95% CI, 4.7-13.9 ppts] for males) and by racial and ethnic group (13.8 ppts [95% CI, 7.0-20.6 ppts] for Hispanic individuals; 13.0 ppts [95% CI, 3.6-22.4 ppts] for Asian individuals; 11.3 ppts [95% CI, 5.8-16.8 ppts] for non-Hispanic White individuals; 6.1 ppts [95% CI, 0.8-10.4 ppts] for Black individuals).

CONCLUSIONS

A regional mailed FIT intervention was effective for increasing CRC screening rates across CHC systems serving diverse, low-income populations.

Exploring Colorectal Cancer Screening Reach Among United States Veterans: Analyzing Clinical, Sociodemographic, and Social Determinants of Health-Based Patient Factors Across Screening Methods: Analyzing Clinical, Sociodemographic, and Social Determinants of Health-based Patient Factors Across Screening Methods

INTRODUCTION

Mailed fecal immunochemical testing (mFIT), in-clinic FIT (cFIT), and colonoscopy are believed to reach distinct patient populations. This study aims to evaluate this belief.

METHODS

Sociodemographic, clinical, and social determinants of health (SDOH) characteristics of 201 patients completing mFIT, 203 patients completing cFIT, and 74 patients completing colonoscopy at a Northeastern United States Veterans Affairs center from August 2023 to January 2024 were compared using descriptive statistics, χ2, and ANOVA tests.

RESULTS

Patients completing mFIT (P=0.003) and cFIT (P=0.001) were older than those completing colonoscopy. mFIT patients had more private health insurance as compared with cFIT (P<0.0001) patients. Patients completing colonoscopy had higher average disability ratings as compared with cFIT patients (P<0.0001). mFIT (P<0.0001) and colonoscopy (P<0.0001) patients had more time elapsed since their last primary care visit as compared with cFIT patients. mFIT patients had lower rates of mental health disorders as compared with colonoscopy (P<0.0001) and cFIT (P<0.0001) patients. cFIT patients had higher rates of past stool test use as compared with mFIT (P<0.0001) and colonoscopy (P<0.0001) patients. mFIT patients had lower rates of past colonoscopy completion as compared with cFIT (P<0.0001) and colonoscopy (P<0.0001) patients. There were no significant differences in SDOH domains among patients completing each of the screening methods.

CONCLUSION

While each of the screening methods reaches a different patient population, mFIT does not reach a substantially more vulnerable population compared with cFIT and colonoscopy, highlighting the need for improvements in mFIT outreach.

Practice Facilitation to Address Unhealthy Alcohol Use in Primary Care: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Unhealthy alcohol use (UAU) is the fourth most preventable cause of death in the US. The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends that primary care clinicians routinely screen all adults 18 years and older for UAU; however, this preventive service is poorly implemented.

Objective

To determine if practice facilitation improved delivery of the recommended care for UAU compared to usual care.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This practice-level cluster randomized clinical trial was conducted across diverse and representative primary care practices throughout Virginia. A total of 76 primary care practices enrolled between October 2019 and January 2023.

Intervention

Practices received immediate (intervention) or 6-month delayed (control) practice facilitation, which included tailored educational sessions, workflow management, and tools for addressing UAU.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Outcomes included the increase in recommended screening for UAU, brief interventions, referral for counseling, and medication treatment. Data were collected via medical record review (structured and free text data) and transcripts of practice facilitator sessions and exits interviews.

Results

Of the 76 primary care practices enrolled, 32 were randomized to intervention and 35 to control; 11 789 patients (mean [SD] age, 50.1 [16.3] years; 61.1% women) were randomly selected for analysis, with patient demographics similar to Virginia at large. From baseline to 6 months after intervention, screening with a validated instrument increased from 2.1% (95% CI, 0.5%-8.4%) to 35.5% (95% CI, 11.5%-69.9%) in the intervention group compared to 0.4% (95% CI, 0.1%-1.8%) to 1.4% (95% CI, 0.3%-5.8%) in the control group (P < .001). Brief office-based interventions for the intervention group increased from 26.2% (95% CI, 14.2%-45.8%) to 62.6% (95% CI, 43.6%-78.3%) vs 45.5% (95% CI, 28.0%-64.1%) to 55.1% (95% CI, 36.5%-72.3%) in the control group (P = .008). Identification of UAU, referral for counseling, and medication treatment had similar changes for both groups. Qualitative analyses of transcripts revealed that few clinicians understood the preventive service prior to practice facilitation, but at the end most felt much more competent and confident with screening and brief intervention for UAU.

Conclusions and Relevance

This cluster randomized clinical trial demonstrated that practice facilitation can help primary care practices to better implement screening and counseling for UAU into their routine workflow. Effective primary care practice implementation interventions such as this can have a profound effect on the health of communities. Given the number of people that the participating practices care for, this intervention resulted in an additional 114 604 patients being screened annually for UAU who would not have been otherwise.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04248023.

Strategic use of resources to enhance colorectal cancer screening for patients with diabetes (SURE: CRC4D) in federally qualified health centers: a protocol for hybrid type ii effectiveness-implementation trial

BACKGROUND

Persons with diabetes have 27% elevated risk of developing colorectal cancer (CRC) and are disproportionately from priority health disparities populations. Federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) struggle to implement CRC screening programs for average risk patients. Strategies to effectively prioritize and optimize CRC screening for patients with diabetes in the primary care safety-net are needed.

METHODS

Guided by the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation and Sustainment Framework, we conducted a stakeholder-engaged process to identify multi-level change objectives for implementing optimized CRC screening for patients with diabetes in FQHCs. To identify change objectives, an implementation planning group of stakeholders from FQHCs, safety-net screening programs, and policy implementers were assembled and met over a 7-month period. Depth interviews (n = 18-20) with key implementation actors were conducted to identify and refine the materials, methods and strategies needed to support an implementation plan across different FQHC contexts. The planning group endorsed the following multi-component implementation strategies: identifying clinic champions, development/distribution of patient educational materials, developing and implementing quality monitoring systems, and convening clinical meetings. To support clinic champions during the initial implementation phase, two learning collaboratives and bi-weekly virtual facilitation will be provided. In single group, hybrid type 2 effectiveness-implementation trial, we will implement and evaluate these strategies in a in six safety net clinics (n = 30 patients with diabetes per site). The primary clinical outcomes are: (1) clinic-level colonoscopy uptake and (2) overall CRC screening rates for patients with diabetes assessed at baseline and 12-months post-implementation. Implementation outcomes include provider and staff fidelity to the implementation plan, patient acceptability, and feasibility will be assessed at baseline and 12-months post-implementation.

DISCUSSION

Study findings are poised to inform development of evidence-based implementation strategies to be tested for scalability and sustainability in a future hybrid 2 effectiveness-implementation clinical trial. The research protocol can be adapted as a model to investigate the development of targeted cancer prevention strategies in additional chronically ill priority populations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05785780) on March 27, 2023 (last updated October 21, 2023).

A qualitative assessment of the acceptability of human papillomavirus self-sampling and informational materials among diverse populations

BACKGROUND

Disparities in cervical cancer screening rates among marginalized groups is a driver of inequalities in cervical cancer. Self-sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is a newly emerging alternative to clinician-performed testing to screen for cervical cancer, and has high potential to reduce screening barriers in under-screened and marginalized groups. We study the acceptability in of HPV self-sampling and informational materials among Black/African American, Hispanic/Spanish speaking, American Indian/Alaska Native and transgender/nonbinary populations.

METHODS

We conducted qualitative interviews with patients, ages 30-65, who were Black/African American, Hispanic, American Indian, and/or transgender/nonbinary individuals assigned female at birth. Telephone interviews were conducted in English or Spanish. Patients did not complete the test, rather were asked about the attractiveness, comprehensibility, and acceptability of the HPV self-test, instructions, and messaging.

RESULTS

Among 23 completed interviews (5 American Indian/Alaska Native, 7 Hispanic [2 bilingual, 5 Spanish-speaking], 5 Black/African American, and 6 transgender/nonbinary), patients from all groups thought the test was straightforward and convenient, and they would complete the test at home or in clinic. The transgender/nonbinary patients preferred at-home testing. American Indian and transgender/nonbinary patients liked that the test might avoid pain, discomfort, and invasiveness. All patients liked the letter and instructions. All groups had specific suggestions for making the materials more culturally acceptable.

CONCLUSIONS

The HPV self-test and the instructions and materials for use were acceptable for a diverse group of patients. Tailored outreach and messaging should be considered to reduce screening disparities among groups that have been historically underserved by the medical system.

Preferred sources of information on diabetes prevention programmes: a population-based cross-sectional study in Poland

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to analyse preferred sources of information on diabetes prevention programmes and to identify sociodemographic determinants influencing these preferences among adults in Poland.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional survey was carried out between 15 and 18 September 2023 using a computer-assisted web interview. A self-prepared questionnaire included 10 questions on sources of information on type 2 diabetes prevention.

PARTICIPANTS

Data were obtained from 1046 adults (18-82 years); 53.4% were females.

RESULTS

Most respondents preferred email communication (46.4%), followed by a doctor or nurse (33.5%), and a letter or leaflet directly delivered to the mailbox (25.8%) for type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2) prevention information. Younger respondents were more likely to indicate mass media (OR=1.81, 95% CI=1.12 to 2.95, p=0.01) and digital media (OR=1.65, 95% CI=1.02 to 2.67, p=0.04) as a source of information on DM2 prevention. Those who had higher education (OR=1.51, 95% CI=1.16 to 1.96, p=0.002), as well as those with chronic diseases (OR=1.50, 95% CI=1.14 to 1.97, p=0.004), were more likely to indicate digital media. Out of 10 different variables analysed in this study, passive occupational status (OR=1.43, 95% CI=1.04 to 1.96, p=0.03) as well as having chronic diseases (OR=1.51, 95% CI=1.16 to 1.96, p=0.002) were associated with higher odds of indicating healthcare workers as a preferred source of information. Marital status, having children, place of residence, household characteristics and financial status do not significantly decide communication preferences.

CONCLUSION

Communication on DM2 prevention should be adjusted to public preferences and expectations. Tailoring interventions to different demographic groups can enhance outreach and engagement. Email emerged as a popular choice, suggesting the potential of digital communication in preventive health programmes.

Factors Affecting Post-trial Sustainment or De-implementation of Study Interventions: A Narrative Review

In contrast to traditional randomized controlled trials, embedded pragmatic clinical trials (ePCTs) are conducted within healthcare settings with real-world patient populations. ePCTs are intentionally designed to align with health system priorities leveraging existing healthcare system infrastructure and resources to ease intervention implementation and increase the likelihood that effective interventions translate into routine practice following the trial. The NIH Pragmatic Trials Collaboratory, funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), supports the conduct of large-scale ePCT Demonstration Projects that address major public health issues within healthcare systems. The Collaboratory has a unique opportunity to draw on the Demonstration Project experiences to generate lessons learned related to ePCTs and the dissemination and implementation of interventions tested in ePCTs. In this article, we use case studies from six completed Demonstration Projects to summarize the Collaboratory's experience with post-trial interpretation of results, and implications for sustainment (or de-implementation) of tested interventions. We highlight three key lessons learned. First, ineffective interventions (i.e., ePCT is null for the primary outcome) may be sustained if they have other measured benefits (e.g., secondary outcome or subgroup) or even perceived benefits (e.g., staff like the intervention). Second, effective interventions-even those solicited by the health system and/or designed with significant health system partner buy-in-may not be sustained if they require significant resources. Third, alignment with policy incentives is essential for achieving sustainment and scale-up of effective interventions. Our experiences point to several recommendations to aid in considering post-trial sustainment or de-implementation of interventions tested in ePCTs: (1) include secondary outcome measures that are salient to health system partners; (2) collect all appropriate data to allow for post hoc analysis of subgroups; (3) collect experience data from clinicians and staff; (4) engage policy-makers before starting the trial.

Improving Colorectal Cancer Screening in a Regional Safety-Net Health System over a 10-Year Period: Lessons for Population Health

BACKGROUND

Despite national policy efforts to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, rates in vulnerable populations remain suboptimal. Many types of interventions have been employed, but their impact on improving population-level rates of CRC screening over time is uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

Assess the impact of 10 years of different in-reach and outreach strategies to improve CRC screening and identify factors associated with being screen up-to-date (SUTD).

DESIGN

Observational cohort study.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged 50-74 years from 12 community-based primary care clinics in an integrated, regional safety-net health system.

INTERVENTIONS

Multiple system-level interventions were implemented over time (visit-based electronic health record [EHR] reminders, quality measurement, annual preventive service letters, and mailed fecal immunohistochemical stool tests [FIT]).

MAIN MEASURES

CRC SUTD rates by calendar year among those with a primary care (PC) visit in the prior 1 and 3 years and their multivariable correlates.

KEY RESULTS

The sample included 31,786-40,405 patients/year. In 2011, mean age was 58.9, 63.9% were women, 37.0% were Hispanic, 39.3% Black, 16.8% White, and 6.6% Asian/Other, and 60.5% were uninsured/Medicaid. Three-quarters of patients had ≥ 1 PC visit in the prior year. Lower-intensity interventions (EHR reminders, quality measurement, annual prevention letters) had limited impact on SUTD rates (2-3% rise). Implementing system-wide mailed FIT increased rates from 51.2 to 61.9% among those with a PC visit in the past year (40.5 to 46.8% with a PC visit ≤ 3 years). Stopping mailed FIT due to COVID wiped out these gains. Higher screening rates were associated with the following: older age; female; more comorbidities, PC clinic visits, and prior FITs; and better insurance coverage. Hispanics had the highest SUTD rates followed by Asians, Blacks, and Whites (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of a system-wide mailed FIT program had the greatest impact on SUTD rates. Lower-intensity interventions (EHR reminders, quality measurement, and patient letters) had limited effects.

Colonoscopy vs the Fecal Immunochemical Test: Which is Best?

Although there is no debate around the effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening in reducing disease burden, there remains a question regarding the most effective and cost-effective screening modality. Current United States guidelines present a panel of options that include the 2 most commonly used modalities, colonoscopy and stool testing with the fecal immunochemical test (FIT). Large-scale comparative effectiveness trials comparing colonoscopy and FIT for colorectal cancer outcomes are underway, but results are not yet available. This review will separately state the "best case" for FIT and colonoscopy as the screening tool of first choice. In addition, the review will examine these modalities from a health economics perspective to provide the reader further context about the relative advantages of these commonly used tests.

Implementing an Organized Colorectal Cancer Screening Program: Lessons Learned From an Academic-Community Practice

Introduction

The effectiveness of mailed fecal immunochemical test outreach might be enhanced through an organized colorectal cancer screening program, yet published real-world experiences are limited. We synthesized the process of implementing a colorectal cancer screening program that used mailed fecal immunochemical test outreach in a large integrated academic-community practice.

Methods

Data from a pilot mailed fecal immunochemical test program were shared with healthcare system leadership, which inspired the creation of a cross-institutional organized colorectal cancer screening program. In partnership with a centralized population health team and primary care, we defined (1) the institutional approach to colorectal cancer screening, (2) the target population and method for screening, (3) the team responsible for implementation, (4) the healthcare team responsible for decisions and care, (5) a quality assurance structure, and (6) a method for identifying cancer occurrence.

Results

The Fred Hutch/UW Medicine Population Health Colorectal Cancer Screening Program began in September 2021. The workflow for mailed fecal immunochemical test outreach included a mailed postcard, a MyChart message from the patient's primary care provider, a fecal immunochemical test kit with a letter signed by the primary care provider and program director, and up to 3 biweekly reminders. Patients without a colonoscopy 3 months after an abnormal fecal immunochemical test result received navigation through the program. In the first program year, we identified 9,719 patients eligible for outreach, and in an intention-to-treat analysis, 32% of patients completed colorectal cancer screening by fecal immunochemical test or colonoscopy.

Conclusions

Real-world experiences detailing how to implement organized colorectal cancer screening programs might increase adoption. In our experience, broadly disseminating pilot data, early institutional support, robust data management, and strong cross-departmental relationships were critical to successfully implementing a colorectal cancer screening program that benefits all patients.

Why is early detection of colon cancer still not possible in 2023?

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is a fundamental tool in the prevention and early detection of one of the most prevalent and lethal cancers. Over the years, screening, particularly in those settings where it is well organized, has succeeded in reducing the incidence of colon and rectal cancer and improving the prognosis related to them. Despite considerable advancements in screening technologies and strategies, the effectiveness of CRC screening programs remains less than optimal. This paper examined the multifaceted reasons behind the persistent lack of effectiveness in CRC screening initiatives. Through a critical analysis of current methodologies, technological limitations, patient-related factors, and systemic challenges, we elucidated the complex interplay that hampers the successful reduction of CRC morbidity and mortality rates. While acknowledging the advancements that have improved aspects of screening, we emphasized the necessity of addressing the identified barriers comprehensively. This study aimed to raise awareness of how important CRC screening is in reducing costs for this disease. Screening and early diagnosis are not only important in improving the prognosis of patients with CRC but can lead to an important reduction in the cost of treating a disease that is often diagnosed at an advanced stage. Spending more sooner can mean saving money later.

Screening for Colorectal Cancer: The Role of Clinical Laboratories

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer incidence and mortality. Screening can result in reductions in incidence and mortality, but there are many challenges to uptake and follow-up.

CONTENT

Here, we will review the changing epidemiology of CRC, including increasing trends for early and later onset CRC; evidence to support current and emerging screening strategies, including noninvasive stool and blood-based tests; key challenges to ensuring uptake and high-quality screening; and the critical role that clinical laboratories can have in supporting health system and public health efforts to reduce the burden of CRC on the population.

SUMMARY

Clinical laboratories have the opportunity to play a seminal role in optimizing early detection and prevention of CRC.

Effort Required and Lessons Learned From Recruiting Health Plans and Rural Primary Care Practices for a Cancer Screening Outreach Study

INTRODUCTION

Recruiting organizations (i.e., health plans, health systems, or clinical practices) is important for implementation science, yet limited research explores effective strategies for engaging organizations in pragmatic studies. We explore the effort required to meet recruitment targets for a pragmatic implementation trial, characteristics of engaged and non-engaged clinical practices, and reasons health plans and rural clinical practices chose to participate.

METHODS

We explored recruitment activities and factors associated with organizational enrollment in SMARTER CRC, a randomized pragmatic trial to increase rates of CRC screening in rural populations. We sought to recruit 30 rural primary care practices within participating Medicaid health plans. We tracked recruitment outreach contacts, meeting content, and outcomes using tracking logs. Informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, we analyzed interviews, surveys, and publicly available clinical practice data to identify facilitators of participation.

RESULTS

Overall recruitment activities spanned January 2020 to April 2021. Five of the 9 health plans approached agreed to participate (55%). Three of the health plans chose to operate centrally as 1 site based on network structure, resulting in 3 recruited health plan sites. Of the 101 identified practices, 76 met study eligibility criteria; 51% (n = 39) enrolled. Between recruitment and randomization, 1 practice was excluded, 5 withdrew, and 7 practices were collapsed into 3 sites for randomization purposes based on clinical practice structure, leaving 29 randomized sites. Successful recruitment required iterative outreach across time, with a range of 2 to 17 encounters per clinical practice. Facilitators to recruitment included multi-modal outreach, prior relationships, effective messaging, flexibility, and good timing.

CONCLUSION

Recruiting health plans and rural clinical practices was complex and iterative. Leveraging existing relationships and allocating time and resources to engage clinical practices in pragmatic implementation research may facilitate more diverse representation in future trials and generalizability of research findings.

Patient preferences for the design of a pharmacy-based colorectal cancer screening program

PURPOSE

To assess preferences for design of a pharmacy-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program (PharmFIT™) among screening-eligible adults in the United States (US) and explore the impact of rurality on pharmacy use patterns (e.g., pharmacy type, prescription pick-up preference, service quality rating).

METHODS

We conducted a national online survey of non-institutionalized US adults through panels managed by Qualtrics, a survey research company. A total of 1,045 adults (response rate 62%) completed the survey between March and April 2021. Sampling quotas matched respondents to the 2010 US Census and oversampled rural residents. We assessed pharmacy use patterns by rurality and design preferences for learning about PharmFIT™; receiving a FIT kit from a pharmacy; and completing and returning the FIT kit.

RESULTS

Pharmacy use patterns varied, with some notable differences across rurality. Rural respondents used local, independently owned pharmacies more than non-rural respondents (20.4%, 6.3%, p < 0.001) and rated pharmacy service quality higher than non-rural respondents. Non-rural respondents preferred digital communication to learn about PharmFIT™ (36% vs 47%; p < 0.001) as well as digital FIT counseling (41% vs 49%; p = 0.02) more frequently than rural participants. Preferences for receiving and returning FITs were associated with pharmacy use patterns: respondents who pick up prescriptions in-person preferred to get their FIT (OR 7.7; 5.3-11.2) and return it in-person at the pharmacy (OR 1.7; 1.1-2.4).

CONCLUSION

Pharmacies are highly accessible and could be useful for expanding access to CRC screening services. Local context and pharmacy use patterns should be considered in the design and implementation of PharmFIT™.

Uptake of colorectal cancer screening after mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach in a newly eligible 45-49-year-old community health center population

PURPOSE

We assessed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) uptake following a mailed FIT intervention among 45-49-year-olds newly eligible for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening based on 2021 United States Preventive Services Task Force screening recommendations. We also tested the effect of an enhanced versus plain mailing envelope on FIT uptake.

METHODS

In February 2022 we mailed FITs to eligible 45-49-year-olds at one Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) clinic. We determined the proportion who completed FITs within 60 days. We also conducted a nested randomized trial comparing uptake using an enhanced envelope (padded with tracking label and colored messaging sticker) versus plain envelope. Finally, we determined the change in CRC screening by any modality (e.g., FIT, colonoscopy) among all clinic patients in this age group (i.e., clinic-level screening) between baseline and 6 months post-intervention.

RESULTS

We mailed FITs to 316 patients. Sample characteristics: 57% female, 58% non-Hispanic Black, and 50% commercially insured. Overall, 54/316 (17.1%) returned a FIT within 60 days, including 34/158 (21.5%) patients in the enhanced envelope arm versus 20/158 (12.7%) in the plain envelope arm (difference 8.9 percentage points, 95% CI: 0.6-17.2). Clinic-level screening among all 45-49-year-olds increased 16.6 percentage points (95% CI: 10.9-22.3), from 26.7% at baseline to 43.3% at 6 months.

CONCLUSION

CRC screening appeared to increase following a mailed FIT intervention among diverse FQHC patients aged 45-49. Larger studies are needed to assess acceptability and completion of CRC screening in this younger population. Visually appealing mailers may improve uptake when implementing mailed interventions. Trial registration The trial was registered on May 28, 2020 at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier NCT04406714).

Engaging stakeholders in the use of an interactive simulation tool to support decision-making about the implementation of colorectal cancer screening interventions

PURPOSE

We aimed to understand how an interactive, web-based simulation tool can be optimized to support decision-making about the implementation of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) for improving colorectal cancer (CRC) screening.

METHODS

Interviews were conducted with decision-makers, including health administrators, advocates, and researchers, with a strong foundation in CRC prevention. Following a demonstration of the microsimulation modeling tool, participants reflected on the tool's potential impact for informing the selection and implementation of strategies for improving CRC screening and outcomes. The interviews assessed participants' preferences regarding the tool's design and content, comprehension of the model results, and recommendations for improving the tool.

RESULTS

Seventeen decision-makers completed interviews. Themes regarding the tool's utility included building a case for EBI implementation, selecting EBIs to adopt, setting implementation goals, and understanding the evidence base. Reported barriers to guiding EBI implementation included the tool being too research-focused, contextual differences between the simulated and local contexts, and lack of specificity regarding the design of simulated EBIs. Recommendations to address these challenges included making the data more actionable, allowing users to enter their own model inputs, and providing a how-to guide for implementing the simulated EBIs.

CONCLUSION

Diverse decision-makers found the simulation tool to be most useful for supporting early implementation phases, especially deciding which EBI(s) to implement. To increase the tool's utility, providing detailed guidance on how to implement the selected EBIs, and the extent to which users can expect similar CRC screening gains in their contexts, should be prioritized.

Sample size requirements for testing treatment effect heterogeneity in cluster randomized trials with binary outcomes

Cluster randomized trials (CRTs) refer to a popular class of experiments in which randomization is carried out at the group level. While methods have been developed for planning CRTs to study the average treatment effect, and more recently, to study the heterogeneous treatment effect, the development for the latter objective has currently been limited to a continuous outcome. Despite the prevalence of binary outcomes in CRTs, determining the necessary sample size and statistical power for detecting differential treatment effects in CRTs with a binary outcome remain unclear. To address this methodological gap, we develop sample size procedures for testing treatment effect heterogeneity in two-level CRTs under a generalized linear mixed model. Closed-form sample size expressions are derived for a binary effect modifier, and in addition, a computationally efficient Monte Carlo approach is developed for a continuous effect modifier. Extensions to multiple effect modifiers are also discussed. We conduct simulations to examine the accuracy of the proposed sample size methods. We present several numerical illustrations to elucidate features of the proposed formulas and to compare our method to the approximate sample size calculation under a linear mixed model. Finally, we use data from the Strategies and Opportunities to Stop Colon Cancer in Priority Populations (STOP CRC) CRT to illustrate the proposed sample size procedure for testing treatment effect heterogeneity.

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.

The Promise of Cancer Health Justice: How Stakeholders and the Community Can Build a Sustained and Equitable System of Cancer Care Through the Lens of Colorectal Cancer Interventions

ABSTRACT

Disparities in outcomes and persistent barriers to adequate care in colorectal cancer are reflective of a system that has failed to achieve the ideals of health equity and health justice. In this review, we discuss that although much research has been done to improve upon gaps in screening, treatment, and supportive care in colorectal cancer, a concerted effort across multiple research, regulatory, and funding stakeholders with community-level organizations is essential in building a self-sustained system that effectively achieves health equity outcomes. We also highlight several examples of novel community-based interventions along the continuum of cancer care that demonstrate the potential of what can be accomplished when we invest in scaling up small-scale solutions to the state and national levels and offer ways in which stakeholders and the community may mutually benefit through a system of incentives, self-assessment tools, and attainable metrics.

Implementing an enhanced mailed FIT program to improve CRC screening at a federally qualified health center: experiences of patients and staff

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer death in the USA. Screening programs in federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) are essential to reducing CRC-related mortality and morbidity among underserved populations. Centralized, population-based mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) programs can improve CRC screening rates, but barriers to implementation remain. We qualitatively explored barriers and facilitators to implementation of a mailed FIT program at a large, urban FQHC that employed advance notification "primers" (live calls and texts) and automated reminders. We interviewed 25 patients and 45 FQHC staff by telephone about their experience with the program. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and content analyzed using NVivo.12. Patients and staff found advance notifications conveyed through live phone calls or text messages to be acceptable and motivational for FIT completion. Live phone primers were helpful in addressing patients' questions and misconceptions about screening, particularly for patients new to screening. Advance notifications sent by text were considered timely and useful in preparing patients for receipt of the FIT. Barriers to implementation included lack of receipt of primers, reminders, or the mailed FIT itself due to inaccurate patient contact information within the FQHC medical record; lack of systems for documenting mailed FIT outreach to coordinate with clinical care; and lack of local caller identification for primers and reminders. Our findings demonstrate that an enhanced mailed FIT program using primers and reminders was acceptable. Our findings can help other FQHCs implement and optimize their mailed FIT programs.

Clinical Trials Overview: From Explanatory to Pragmatic Clinical Trials

Clinical trials have been the bedrock of research to evaluate the safety and efficacy of new medical, surgical, or other interventions. Traditional "explanatory" clinical trials have aimed to explain a biological cause (new treatment) and effect (patient outcome) while controlling for many factors that might impact the evaluation, such as restricted eligibility criteria, frequent follow-up visits, and multiple clinical and laboratory measures. Despite the benefits of a well-controlled clinical trial, compromises have been made that can limit who might benefit from a new intervention, can increase complexity of the conduct of a trial, or that lead to excessively long durations of trials. An alternative approach to evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention is based on "pragmatic" clinical trials, which consider how an intervention affects a patient's condition in the real world, accounting for how to optimize an intervention within the operations of busy and diverse clinical practices. Although we describe explanatory and pragmatic trial designs as separate approaches, there is a continuum of approaches that intersect. Some key points are the need to maintain scientific rigor, increase efficiency of clinical trials operations, ensure that trial results can be generalized to a broad spectrum of patients, and balance the needs of real-world clinical care. Pragmatic trials can leverage technology and telecommunication strategies of decentralized trials to further reach underrepresented and underserved patients to close the health disparity gaps.

Improving sandwich variance estimation for marginal Cox analysis of cluster randomized trials

Cluster randomized trials (CRTs) frequently recruit a small number of clusters, therefore necessitating the application of small-sample corrections for valid inference. A recent systematic review indicated that CRTs reporting right-censored, time-to-event outcomes are not uncommon and that the marginal Cox proportional hazards model is one of the common approaches used for primary analysis. While small-sample corrections have been studied under marginal models with continuous, binary, and count outcomes, no prior research has been devoted to the development and evaluation of bias-corrected sandwich variance estimators when clustered time-to-event outcomes are analyzed by the marginal Cox model. To improve current practice, we propose nine bias-corrected sandwich variance estimators for the analysis of CRTs using the marginal Cox model and report on a simulation study to evaluate their small-sample properties. Our results indicate that the optimal choice of bias-corrected sandwich variance estimator for CRTs with survival outcomes can depend on the variability of cluster sizes and can also slightly differ whether it is evaluated according to relative bias or type I error rate. Finally, we illustrate the new variance estimators in a real-world CRT where the conclusion about intervention effectiveness differs depending on the use of small-sample bias corrections. The proposed sandwich variance estimators are implemented in an R package CoxBcv.

Intervention delivery for embedded pragmatic clinical trials: Development of a tool to measure complexity

BACKGROUND

Conducting an embedded pragmatic clinical trial in the workflow of a healthcare system is a complex endeavor. The complexity of the intervention delivery can have implications for study planning, ability to maintain fidelity to the intervention during the trial, and/or ability to detect meaningful differences in outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a literature review, developed a tool, and conducted two rounds of phone calls with NIH Pragmatic Trials Collaboratory Demonstration Project principal investigators to develop the Intervention Delivery Complexity Tool. After refining the tool, we piloted it with Collaboratory demonstration projects and developed an online version of the tool using the R Shiny application (https://duke-som.shinyapps.io/ICT-ePCT/).

RESULTS

The 6-item tool consists of internal and external factors. Internal factors pertain to the intervention itself and include workflow, training, and the number of intervention components. External factors are related to intervention delivery at the system level including differences in healthcare systems, the dependency on setting for implementation, and the number of steps between the intervention and the outcome.

CONCLUSION

The Intervention Delivery Complexity Tool was developed as a standard way to overcome communication challenges of intervention delivery within an embedded pragmatic trial. This version of the tool is most likely to be useful to the trial team and its health system partners during trial planning and conduct. We expect further evolution of the tool as more pragmatic trials are conducted and feedback is received on its performance outside of the NIH Pragmatic Trials Collaboratory.

Data Challenges in Identifying Patients Due for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Rural Clinics

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality are disproportionately high among rural residents despite the availability of effective screening methods. Outreach activities can improve CRC screening rates but rely on accurate identification of patients due for screening. We report on data challenges in rural clinics and Medicaid health plans in Oregon in identifying patients eligible for CRC screening, in a large project implementing mailed fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) and patient navigation.

METHODS

We analyzed data from clinic intake surveys and administrative claims. Clinics were asked to identify total population numbers relevant to CRC screening and follow-up. Health plans also identified enrollees eligible for CRC screening in Spring, 2021. Clinic staff validated patient lists for eligibility using their electronic health records (EHR).

RESULTS

EHR features varied across the 29 participating and 28 responding clinics. Among the 28 responding clinics, 21 were able to report their Medicaid population (75%), 19 reported the number of patients aged 50 to 75 (68%) and the number screened for CRC in the last year (68%). Only 8 (29%) were able to report screening details such as number screened by FIT and 9 were able to report on patients with an abnormal FIT or colonoscopy completed after FIT (32%). Health plans had challenges properly identifying where enrollees received care and had missing data for race and ethnicity (range 22 to 34% unknown race, <1% to 24% unknown ethnicity).

DISCUSSION

Most participating rural primary care clinics and Medicaid health plans experienced challenges identifying the population due for a CRC screening outreach program. Better EHR functionality and data reporting capabilities could help rural clinics apply population-based strategies and ultimately attenuate disparities in cancer screening and follow-up.

Modifications in Primary Care Clinics to Continue Colorectal Cancer Screening Promotion During the COVID-19 Pandemic

COVID-19 caused significant declines in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Health systems and clinics, faced with a new rapidly spreading infectious disease, adapted to maintain patient safety and address the effects of the pandemic on healthcare delivery. This study aimed to understand how CDC-funded Colorectal Cancer Control Program recipients and their partner health systems and clinics may have modified evidence-based intervention (EBI) implementation to promote CRC screening during the COVID-19 pandemic; to identify barriers and facilitators to implementing modifications; and to extract lessons that can be applied to support CRC screening, chronic disease management, and clinic resilience in the face of future public health crises. Nine recipients were selected to reflect the diversity inherent among all CRCCP recipients. Recipient and clinic partner staff answered unique sets of pre-interview questions to inform tailoring of interview guides that were developed using constructs from the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidence-based Implementation Strategies (FRAME-IS) and Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). The study team then interviewed recipient, health system, and clinic partner staff incorporating pre-interview responses to focus each conversation. We employed a rapid qualitative analysis approach then conducted virtual focus groups with recipient representatives to validate emergent themes. Three modifications that emerged from thematic analysis include: (1) offering mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) kits for CRC screening with mail or drop off return; (2) increasing the use of patient education and engagement strategies; and (3) increasing the use of or improving automated patient messaging systems. With improved tracking and automated reminder systems, mailed FIT kits paired with tailored patient education and clear instructions for completing the test could help primary care clinics catch up on the backlog of missed screenings during COVID-19. Future research can assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of offering mailed FIT kits on maintaining or improving CRC screening, especially among people who are medically underserved.

Challenges in Recruitment and Retention: Leveraging Health-Related Antecedents and Information Carrier Factors to Improve Patient Participation in Pancreatic Cancer Research-A Review Article

ABSTRACT

Advancements in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) prevention, diagnosis, and treatment rely on representative and robust clinical trial participation. Given the severity of PDAC, along with the lack of effective early detection approaches, the need for accessible screening tools and new treatments is dire. Unfortunately, enrollment barriers often result in low participant accrual rates for PDAC studies and illustrate the challenging terrain researchers are facing. Research participation along with access to preventative care has been further impacted by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. In this review, we use the Comprehensive Model for Information Seeking to discuss underexplored factors that influence patient participation in clinical studies. Adequate staffing, flexible scheduling, effective patient and physician communication, and culturally responsive messaging, along with the use of telehealth, can support enrollment objectives. Clinical research studies are a key component of health care, informing medical advancements, and improving outcomes. By leveraging health-related antecedents and information carrier factors, researchers can more effectively address barriers to participation and implement potential evidence-based mitigating strategies. While this work focuses on the PDAC research context, the lessons delineated here are applicable to the wider cancer research setting.

In pursuit of equity in cancer care: moving beyond the Affordable Care Act

Although Medicaid Expansion under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) has been associated with many improvements for patients with cancer, Snyder et al. provide evidence demonstrating the persistence of racial disparities in cancer. This Editorial describes why insurance coverage alone does not ensure access to health care, highlights various manifestations of structural racism that constitute barriers to access beyond the direct costs of care, and calls for not just equality, but equity, in cancer care.

Increasing Fecal Immunochemical Test Return Rates by Implementing Effective “Reminder to Complete Kit” Communication With Participants: A Quality Improvement Study

Background

The incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) in the United States is increasing. It remains the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States for men and women combined, mainly due to underutilization of screening methods. The American Cancer Society now recommends that adults aged 45 years and older with an average risk of CRC undergo regular screening with either a high-sensitivity stool-based test or structural (visual) examination, depending on patient preference and test availability. The primary objective of this quality improvement project was to determine if reminder methods, such as telephone or letter reminders, increased the return rate of fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) for CRC screening.

Methodology

At public outreach events and daily clinics in the West Texas Panhandle area, participants in the GET FIT program were provided with FIT kits after completing the education on CRC. Participants who fit the inclusion criteria and had received a FIT kit from the program were included. They were instructed on how to perform the test and mail it back. Participants who did not return the completed kits within two weeks were reminded either through (1) a reminder letter, (2) telephone, or (3) a combination of letter reminder and telephone call every two weeks (±three days) for 60 days or five attempts to contact. We de-identified and analyzed the FIT kit return data from April-September 2019 before analyzing these reminder methods. We then calculated the change in return rates from October 2019 to March 2020. Our goal was to increase the FIT return rates by 25% compared to the baseline return rate.

Results

The pre-intervention return rate of kits for April-September 2019 was 61.52%, and the post-intervention return rate for October 2019-March 2020 was 71.85%. This rate was equal to an approximately 16.79% increase in return rates that was statistically significant (p < 0.01). There was a significant difference in the method of reminder between the two groups, but no significant differences in gender and race/ethnicity between the two groups. There was a significant difference in return rates between race/ethnicities in the October-March cohort with black and Hispanic participants having the highest return rates of 82.3% and 77.25%, respectively.

Conclusions

FIT remains one of the primary options for CRC screening. Due to its lower cost and noninvasiveness, FIT was offered to patients at average risk. We demonstrated an increase in return rates, although we did not meet our target return rate goal for this project. This study was limited due to a gradual increase in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases and a subsequent shift and conversation of ongoing research into COVID-19.

Mailed fecal testing and patient navigation versus usual care to improve rates of colorectal cancer screening and follow-up colonoscopy in rural Medicaid enrollees: a cluster-randomized controlled trial

Background

Screening reduces incidence and mortality from colorectal cancer (CRC), yet US screening rates are low, particularly among Medicaid enrollees in rural communities. We describe a two-phase project, SMARTER CRC, designed to achieve the National Cancer Institute Cancer Moonshot^SM objectives by reducing the burden of CRC on the US population. Specifically, SMARTER CRC aims to test the implementation, effectiveness, and maintenance of a mailed fecal test and patient navigation program to improve rates of CRC screening, follow-up colonoscopy, and referral to care in clinics serving rural Medicaid enrollees.

Methods

Phase I activities in SMARTER CRC include a two-arm cluster-randomized controlled trial of a mailed fecal test and patient navigation program involving three Medicaid health plans and 30 rural primary care practices in Oregon and Idaho; the implementation of the program is supported by training and practice facilitation. Participating clinic units were randomized 1:1 into the intervention or usual care. The intervention combines (1) mailed fecal testing outreach supported by clinics, health plans, and vendors and (2) patient navigation for colonoscopy following an abnormal fecal test result. We will evaluate the effectiveness, implementation, and maintenance of the intervention and track adaptations to the intervention and to implementation strategies, using quantitative and qualitative methods. Our primary effectiveness outcome is receipt of any CRC screening within 6 months of enrollee identification. Our primary implementation outcome is health plan- and clinic-level rates of program delivery, by component (mailed FIT and patient navigation). Trial results will inform phase II activities to scale up the program through partnerships with health plans, primary care clinics, and regional and national organizations that serve rural primary care clinics; scale-up will include webinars, train-the-trainer workshops, and collaborative learning activities.

Discussion

This study will test the implementation, effectiveness, and scale-up of a multi-component mailed fecal testing and patient navigation program to improve CRC screening rates in rural Medicaid enrollees. Our findings may inform approaches for adapting and scaling evidence-based approaches to promote CRC screening participation in underserved populations and settings.

Trial registration

Registered at clinicaltrial.gov (NCT04890054) and at the NCI’s Clinical Trials Reporting Program (CTRP #: NCI-2021-01032) on May 11, 2021.

A Centralized Program with Stepped Support Increases Adherence to Colorectal Cancer Screening Over 9 Years: a Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Screening over many years is required to optimize colorectal cancer (CRC) outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of a CRC screening intervention on adherence to CRC screening over 9 years.

DESIGN

Randomized trial.

SETTING

Integrated health care system in Washington state.

PARTICIPANTS

Between August 2008 and November 2009, 4653 adults in a Washington state integrated health care system aged 50-74 due for CRC screening were randomized to usual care (UC; N =1163) or UC plus study interventions (interventions: N = 3490).

INTERVENTIONS

Years 1 and 2: (arm 1) UC or this plus study interventions; (arm 2) mailed fecal tests or information on scheduling colonoscopy; (arm 3) mailings plus brief telephone assistance; or (arm 4) mailings and assistance plus nurse navigation. In year 3, stepped-intensity participants (arms 2, 3, and 4 combined) still eligible for screening were randomized to either stopped or continued interventions in years 3 and 5-9.

MAIN MEASURES

Time in adherence to CRC testing over 9 years (covered time, primary outcome), and percent with no CRC testing in participants assigned to any intervention compared to UC only. Poisson regression models estimated incidence rate ratios for covered time, adjusting for patient characteristics and accounting for variable follow-up time.

KEY RESULTS

Compared to UC, intervention participants had 21% more covered time over 9 years (57.5% vs. 69.1%; adjusted incidence rate ratio 1.21, 95% confidence interval 1.16-1.25, P<0.001). Fecal testing accounted for almost all additional covered time among intervention patients. Compared to UC, intervention participants were also more likely to have completed at least one CRC screening test over 9 years or until censorship (88.6% vs. 80.6%, P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

An outreach program that included mailed fecal tests and phone follow-up led to increased adherence to CRC testing and fewer age-eligible individuals without any CRC testing over 9 years.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Systems of Support (SOS) to Increase Colon Cancer Screening and Follow-up (SOS), NCT00697047, clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00697047.

Two weights make a wrong: Cluster randomized trials with variable cluster sizes and heterogeneous treatment effects

In cluster randomized trials (CRTs), the hierarchical nesting of participants (level 1) within clusters (level 2) leads to two conceptual populations: clusters and participants. When cluster sizes vary and the goal is to generalize to a hypothetical population of clusters, the unit average treatment effect (UATE), which averages equally at the cluster level rather than equally at the participant level, is a common estimand of interest. From an analytic perspective, when a generalized estimating equations (GEE) framework is used to obtain averaged treatment effect estimates for CRTs with variable cluster sizes, it is natural to specify an inverse cluster size weighted analysis so that each cluster contributes equally and to adopt an exchangeable working correlation matrix to account for within-cluster correlation. However, such an approach essentially uses two distinct weights in the analysis (i.e. both cluster size weights and covariance weights) and, in this article, we caution that it will lead to biased and/or inefficient treatment effect estimates for the UATE estimand. That is, two weights "make a wrong" or lead to poor estimation characteristics. These findings are based on theoretical derivations, corroborated via a simulation study, and illustrated using data from a CRT of a colorectal cancer screening program. We show that, an analysis with both an independence working correlation matrix and weighting by inverse cluster size is the only approach that always provides valid results for estimation of the UATE in CRTs with variable cluster sizes.

Redefining precision cancer prevention to promote health equity

Precision cancer prevention as it is currently envisioned is a targeted, molecular-based approach to intercept carcinogenesis before cancer develops or before it becomes untreatable. Unfortunately, due to systemic biases, current precision cancer prevention interventions might not be effective in all populations, especially in minoritized communities. In addition, not all cancer risk is attributable to genetic or even biological factors, but includes social determinants of health (SDH). Here, we propose a broader framework for precision cancer prevention, anchored in optimizing the benefits to harms for all people. We propose that precision cancer prevention considers not only what is being delivered, but also for whom, where, and how, with a goal of achieving cancer prevention health equity.

Colonoscopy Following an Abnormal Fecal Test Result from an Annual Colorectal Cancer Screening Program in a Federally Qualified Health Center

OBJECTIVE

Individuals with an abnormal fecal immunochemical test (FIT) result have an elevated risk of colorectal cancer, and the risk increases if the follow-up colonoscopy is delayed. Of note, rates of follow-up colonoscopy are alarmingly low in federally qualified health centers (FQHCs), US health care settings that serve a majority racial and ethnic minority patient population. We assessed factors associated with colonoscopy after an abnormal FIT result and used chart-abstracted data to assess reasons (including process measures) for lack of follow-up as part of an annual, mailed-FIT outreach program within a large, Latino-serving FQHC.

METHODS

As part of the National Institutes of Health-funded PROMPT study, we identified patients with an abnormal FIT result and used logistic regression to assess associations between patient demographics and receipt of follow-up colonoscopy, controlling for patients' preferred language. We report on time (days) to referral and time to colonoscopy. For charts with an abnormal FIT result but no evidence of colonoscopy, we performed a manual abstraction and obtained the reason for the absence of colonoscopy. When there was no evidence of colonoscopy in a patient's electronic health record (EHR), we performed an automated query of the administrative claims database to identify colonoscopy outcomes.

RESULTS

We identified 324 patients with abnormal FIT results from July to October 2018. These patients were mostly publicly insured (Medicaid 53.1%, Medicare 14.5%), 81.8% were aged 50 to 64 years, 55.3% were female, 80.3% were Hispanic/Latino, and 67.3% preferred to speak Spanish. We found that 108/324 (33.3%) patients completed colonoscopy within 12 months, and the median time to colonoscopy was 94 days (IQR: 68-176). Common barriers to colonoscopy completion, obtained from chart-abstracted data, were: no documentation following referral to gastrointestinal (GI) specialist or GI consultation (41.6%), no referral to GI specialist following abnormal fecal test (34.2%), and absence of a valid insurance authorization (6.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Multi-level strategies are needed to provide optimal care across the cancer continuum for FQHC patients. In order to reduce the risk of CRC and realize the return on fecal testing investment, concerted system-level efforts are urgently needed to improve rates of follow-up colonoscopy among FQHC patients and redress racial and ethnic disparities in CRC screening outcomes.

Colorectal Cancer Screening and Yield in a Mailed Outreach Program in a Safety-Net Healthcare System

BACKGROUND

Screening with fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) reduces colorectal cancer mortality; however, screening remains low in underserved populations. Mailed outreach, including an invitation letter, FIT, and test instructions, is an evidence-based strategy to improve screening.

AIMS

To examine screening completion and yield in a mailed outreach program in a safety-net healthcare system.

METHODS

We identified and mailed outreach invitations to patients due for screening in a large safety-net system between September 1, 2018, and August 31, 2019. We examined: (1) screening completion, the proportion of patients completing FIT or screening colonoscopy within 6 months of the mailed invitation; and (2) timely diagnostic colonoscopy, the proportion of patients completing colonoscopy within 6 months of positive FIT.

RESULTS

We mailed 14,879 invitations to 13,190 patients. Nearly half (n = 6098, 46.2%) of patients completed screening: 4,896 (80.3%) completed FIT through mailed outreach; 1,114 (18.3%) FIT through usual care; and 88 (1.4%) screening colonoscopy through usual care. Of patients with a positive FIT (n = 289), 50.5% completed diagnostic colonoscopy within 6 months, 10.7% within 6-12 months, and 4.8% after 12 months. A total of 8 cancers and 83 advanced adenomas were detected in the 191 patients completing diagnostic colonoscopy.

CONCLUSION

After implementing and scaling up mailed outreach in a safety-net system, about half of patients completed screening, and the majority did so through mailed outreach. However, many patients failed to complete diagnostic colonoscopy after positive FIT. Results highlight the importance of adapting mailed outreach programs to local contexts and constraints of healthcare systems, in order to support efforts to improve CRC screening in underserved populations.

Program Components and Results From an Organized Colorectal Cancer Screening Program Using Annual Fecal Immunochemical Testing

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Programmatic colorectal cancer (CRC) screening increases uptake, but the design and resources utilized for such models are not well known. We characterized program components and participation at each step in a large program that used mailed fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) with opportunistic colonoscopy.

METHODS

Mixed-methods with site visits and retrospective cohort analysis of 51-75-year-old adults during 2017 in the Kaiser Permanente Northern California integrated health system.

RESULTS

Among 1,023,415 screening-eligible individuals, 405,963 (40%) were up to date with screening at baseline, and 507,401 of the 617,452 not up-to-date were mailed a FIT kit. Of the entire cohort (n = 1,023,415), 206,481 (20%) completed FIT within 28 days of mailing, another 61,644 (6%) after a robocall at week 4, and 40,438 others (4%) after a mailed reminder letter at week 6. There were over 800,000 medical record screening alerts generated and about 295,000 FIT kits distributed during patient office visits. About 100,000 FIT kits were ordered during direct-to-patient calls by medical assistants and 111,377 people (11%) completed FIT outside of the automated outreach period. Another 13,560 (1.3%) completed a colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, or fecal occult blood test unrelated to FIT. Cumulatively, 839,463 (82%) of those eligible were up to date with screening at the end of the year and 12,091 of 14,450 patients (83.7%) with positive FIT had diagnostic colonoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

The >82% screening participation achieved in this program resulted from a combination of prior endoscopy (40%), large initial response to mailed FIT kits (20%), followed by smaller responses to automated reminders (10%) and personal contact (12%).

Persistent Barriers to Colorectal Cancer Screening Completion Amid Centralized Outreach: A Mixed Methods Study

PURPOSE

To understand patient experiences and persistent barriers to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening amid centralized outreach at urban family medicine practices.

APPROACH

Following a pragmatic trial assessing mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach, we invited a subset of participants to complete a semi-structured qualitative interview and structured questionnaire.

SETTING

Single urban academic healthcare system.

PARTICIPANTS

Sixty patients who were eligible and overdue for CRC screening at the time of trial enrollment.

METHOD

Using Andersen's Behavioral Model, we developed an interview guide to systematically assess factors shaping screening decisions and FIT uptake. Close-ended responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were analyzed using the constant comparative method.

RESULTS

Most participants (82%) self-reported that they had ever completed any modality of CRC screening, and nearly half (43%) completed the mailed FIT during the trial. Most patients (60%) preferred FIT to colonoscopy due to its private, convenient, and non-invasive nature; however, persistent barriers related to screening beliefs including fear of test results and cancer treatment still prevented some patients from completing any form of CRC screening.

CONCLUSIONS

Mailed FIT can overcome many structural barriers to CRC screening, yet clear communication and follow-up amid centralized outreach are essential. For some patients, tailored outreach or navigation to address screening-related fears or other screening beliefs may be needed to ensure timely completion of CRC screening.

A Pragmatic Clinical Trial Approach to Assessing and Monitoring Suicidal Ideation: Results from A National US Trauma Care System Study

OBJECTIVE

Few investigations have comprehensively described methods for assessing and monitoring suicidal ideation in pragmatic clinical trials of mental health services interventions. This investigation's goal was to assess a collaborative care intervention's effectiveness in reducing suicidal ideation and describe suicide monitoring implementation in a nationwide protocol.

METHOD

The investigation was a secondary analysis of a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial at 25-Level I trauma centers. Injury survivors (N = 635) were randomized to control (n = 370) and intervention (n = 265) conditions and assessed at baseline hospitalization and follow-up at 3-, 6- and 12-months post-injury. The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) item-9 was used to evaluate patients for suicidal ideation. Mixed model regression was used to assess intervention versus control group changes in PHQ-9 item-9 scores over time and associations between baseline characteristics and development of suicidal ideation longitudinally. As part of the study implementation process assessment, suicide outreach call logs were also reviewed.

RESULTS

Over 50% of patients endorsed suicidal ideation at ≥1 assessment. Intervention patients relative to control patients demonstrated reductions in endorsements of suicidal ideation that did not achieve statistical significance (F[3,1461] = 0.74, P = .53). The study team completed outreach phone calls, texts or voice messages to 268 patients with PHQ-9 item-9 scores ≥1 (n = 161 control, n = 107 intervention).

CONCLUSIONS

Suicide assessment and monitoring can be feasibly implemented in large-scale pragmatic clinical trials. Intervention patients demonstrated less suicidal ideation over time; however, these comparisons did not achieve statistical significance. Intensive pragmatic trial monitoring may mask treatment effects by providing control patients a supportive intervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02655354.

Incidence, mortality, survival, risk factor and screening of colorectal cancer: A comparison among China, Europe, and northern America

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common malignancies worldwide. China, Europe and northern America account for more than half of the new CRC cases and associated deaths globally. This review summarizes the current status and temporal trends of CRC in China, Europe, and northern America. The potential primary preventive strategies and latest advances in CRC screening techniques and programs are discussed. Recently, the incidence and mortality of CRC in some European and northern American countries have decreased; conversely, CRC incidence and mortality continue to increase in China. The overall 5-year relative survival rate for CRC is similar between these regions, but there is considerable heterogeneity among European countries. Implementing population-based CRC screening programs can effectively address the growing disease burden. The effectiveness of nationwide CRC screening programs in these regions has been limited by relatively low coverage and participation rate. The deployment of state-of-the-art techniques and precise risk-adapted screening strategies incorporating effective risk prediction models and screening techniques may boost screening effectiveness. Our review provides novel foundations for the development and optimization of CRC preventive strategies.

Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of Mailed FIT in a Safety Net Clinic Population

BACKGROUND

Mailed fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) can increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates, including for vulnerable patients, but its cost-effectiveness is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to examine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the initial cycle of our mailed FIT program from November 2017 to July 2019 in a federally qualified health center (FQHC) system in Central Texas.

DESIGN

Single group intervention and economic analysis PARTICIPANTS: Eligible patients were those ages 50-75 who had been seen recently in a system practice and were not up to date with screening.

INTERVENTION

The program mailing packet included an introductory letter in plain language, the FIT itself, easy to read instructions, and a postage-paid lab mailer, supplemented with written and text messaging reminders.

MAIN MEASURES

We measured effectiveness based on completion of mailed FIT and cost-effectiveness in terms of cost per person screened. Costs were measured using detailed micro-costing techniques from the perspective of a third-party payer and expressed in 2019 US dollars. Direct costs were based on material supply costs and detailed observations of labor required, valued at the wage rate.

KEY RESULTS

Of the 22,838 eligible patients who received program materials, mean age was 59.0, 51.5% were female, and 43.9% were Latino. FIT were successfully completed by 19.2% (4395/22,838) patients at an average direct cost of $5275.70 per 500-patient mailing. Assuming completed tests from the mailed intervention represent incremental screening, the direct cost per patient screened, compared with no intervention, was $54.83. Incorporating start-up and indirect costs increases total costs to $7014.45 and cost per patient screened to $72.90. Alternately, assuming 2.5% and 5% screening without the intervention increased the direct (total) cost per patient screened to $60.03 ($80.80) and $67.05 ($91.47), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Mailed FIT is an effective and cost-effective population health strategy for CRC screening in vulnerable patients.

Centralized colorectal cancer screening outreach and patient navigation for vulnerable populations in North Carolina: study protocol for the SCORE randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Although colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is effective in reducing CRC mortality, screening rates in vulnerable populations served by community health centers (CHCs) remain below national targets. CHCs in North Carolina are challenged to reach CRC screening targets as they tend to be under-resourced, have limited capacity to implement and sustain population health interventions, and typically operate independently from one another and from regional colonoscopy providers. The Scaling Colorectal Cancer Screening Through Outreach, Referral, and Engagement (SCORE) project is designed to address barriers to CRC screening in partnership with CHCs by implementing a multilevel intervention that includes centralized support infrastructure for mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach and patient navigation to follow-up colonoscopy. This paper describes protocols for the SCORE implementation trial.

METHODS

We will conduct a type 2 hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial that will assess effectiveness at increasing CRC screening and follow-up rates while also assessing implementation outcomes. The planned trial sample will include 4000 CHC patients who are at average CRC risk and due for screening. Participants will be randomized 1:1 to receive either usual care or a multilevel intervention that includes mailed FIT outreach and patient navigation support to follow-up colonoscopy for those with abnormal FIT. The primary effectiveness outcome is completion of any CRC screening test at six months after randomization. We will also conduct a multilevel assessment of implementation outcomes and determinants.

DISCUSSION

This hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial will evaluate the effectiveness and implementation of an intervention that provides centralized infrastructure for mailed FIT screening and patient navigation for CHCs that operate independently of other healthcare facilities. Findings from this research will enhance understanding of the effectiveness of a centralized approach and factors that determine successful implementation in vulnerable patient populations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was registered on May 28, 2020, at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier NCT04406714).

Enhancing the use of EHR systems for pragmatic embedded research: lessons from the NIH Health Care Systems Research Collaboratory

OBJECTIVE

We identified challenges and solutions to using electronic health record (EHR) systems for the design and conduct of pragmatic research.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Since 2012, the Health Care Systems Research Collaboratory has served as the resource coordinating center for 21 pragmatic clinical trial demonstration projects. The EHR Core working group invited these demonstration projects to complete a written semistructured survey and used an inductive approach to review responses and identify EHR-related challenges and suggested EHR enhancements.

RESULTS

We received survey responses from 20 projects and identified 21 challenges that fell into 6 broad themes: (1) inadequate collection of patient-reported outcome data, (2) lack of structured data collection, (3) data standardization, (4) resources to support customization of EHRs, (5) difficulties aggregating data across sites, and (6) accessing EHR data.

DISCUSSION

Based on these findings, we formulated 6 prerequisites for PCTs that would enable the conduct of pragmatic research: (1) integrate the collection of patient-centered data into EHR systems, (2) facilitate structured research data collection by leveraging standard EHR functions, usable interfaces, and standard workflows, (3) support the creation of high-quality research data by using standards, (4) ensure adequate IT staff to support embedded research, (5) create aggregate, multidata type resources for multisite trials, and (6) create re-usable and automated queries.

CONCLUSION

We are hopeful our collection of specific EHR challenges and research needs will drive health system leaders, policymakers, and EHR designers to support these suggestions to improve our national capacity for generating real-world evidence.

Mitigating the impact of COVID-19 on colorectal cancer screening: Organized service screening perspectives from the Asia-Pacific region

Colorectal cancer(CRC) is one of the most prevalent malignancies in the Asia-Pacific region, and many countries in this region have launched population CRC service screening. In this study, CRC screening key indicators, including the FIT(fecal immunochemical test) screening rate (or participation rate) and the rate of undergoing colonoscopy after positive FIT in 2019 and 2020, were surveyed in individual countries in the Asia-Pacific region. The impact of the pandemic on the effectiveness of CRC screening was simulated given different screening rates and colonoscopy rates and assuming the pandemic would persist or remain poorly controlled for a long period of time, using the empirical data from the Taiwanese program and the CRC natural history model. During the COVID-19 pandemic, most of the programs in this region were affected, but to different extents, which was largely influenced by the severity of the local pandemic. Most of the programs continued screening services in 2020, although a temporary pause occurred in some countries. The modeling study revealed that prolonged pauses of screening led to 6% lower effectiveness in reducing CRC mortality. Screening organizers should coordinate with health authorities to elaborate on addressing screening backlogs, setting priorities for screening, and applying modern technologies to overcome potential obstacles. Many novel approaches that were developed and applied during the COVID-19 pandemic, such as the risk-stratified approach that takes into account personal CRC risk and the local epidemic status, as well as new digital technologies, are expected to play important roles in CRC screening in the future.

Follow-up colonoscopy after an abnormal stool-based colorectal cancer screening result: analysis of steps in the colonoscopy completion process

Background

Delays in receiving follow-up colonoscopy after an abnormal fecal immunochemical test (FIT) result are associated with increased colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. Little is known about patterns of follow-up colonoscopy completion in federally qualified health centers.

Methods

We abstracted the medical records of health center patients, aged 50–75 years, who had an abnormal FIT result between August 5, 2017 and August 4, 2018 (N = 711). We assessed one-year rates of colonoscopy referral, pre-procedure visit completion, colonoscopy completion, and time to colonoscopy; associations between these outcomes and patient characteristics; and reasons for non-completion found in the medical record.

Results

Of the 711 patients with an abnormal FIT result, 90% were referred to colonoscopy, but only 52% completed a pre-procedure visit, and 43% completed a colonoscopy within 1 year. Median time to colonoscopy was 83 days (interquartile range: 52–131 days). Pre-procedure visit and colonoscopy completion rates were relatively low in patients aged 65–75 (vs. 50–64), who were uninsured (vs. insured) or had no clinic visit in the prior year (vs. ≥ 1 clinic visit). Common reasons listed for non-completion were that the patient declined, or the provider could not reach the patient.

Discussion

Efforts to improve follow-up colonoscopy rates in health centers might focus on supporting the care transition from primary to specialty gastroenterology care and emphasize care for older uninsured patients and those having no recent clinic visits. Our findings can inform efforts to improve follow-up colonoscopy uptake, reduce time to colonoscopy receipt, and save lives from colorectal cancer.

Trial registration: National Clinical Trial (NCT) Identifier: NCT03925883.

Screening and prevention of colorectal cancer

Mortality from colorectal cancer is reduced through screening and early detection; moreover, removal of neoplastic lesions can reduce cancer incidence. While understanding of the risk factors, pathogenesis, and precursor lesions of colorectal cancer has advanced, the cause of the recent increase in cancer among young adults is largely unknown. Multiple invasive, semi- and non-invasive screening modalities have emerged over the past decade. The current emphasis on quality of colonoscopy has improved the effectiveness of screening and prevention, and the role of new technologies in detection of neoplasia, such as artificial intelligence, is rapidly emerging. The overall screening rates in the US, however, are suboptimal, and few interventions have been shown to increase screening uptake. This review provides an overview of colorectal cancer, the current status of screening efforts, and the tools available to reduce mortality from colorectal cancer.

Increasing uptake of colon cancer screening in a medically underserved population with the addition of blood-based testing

BACKGROUND

Adherence to colorectal cancer screening in the United States is suboptimal, particularly in medically underserved populations due to significant barriers to care. Unique accessible, low-cost, and non-invasive screening tests for this population could greatly benefit current rates. In this article, we assess patient preference and the impact of offering a blood-based test on screening rates in a cost-free health fair setting from April 2017 to April 2019.

METHODS

Participants who met colorectal cancer screening eligibility criteria set forth by the United States Preventive Services Task Force were recommended to attend the colon cancer screening station. Those participants who elected to attend were offered various, accepted screening methods, and if they declined, were offered alternative blood-based testing. Screening rates, test outcomes, and the rate of follow up completion of colonoscopy were measured and compared with historic screening outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 1401 participants who were recommended to attend, 640 (45.7%) participants were evaluated at the colon cancer screening station, of whom 460 were eligible for testing. Amongst these, none selected colonoscopy, 30 (6.5%) selected fecal immunochemical testing, and 430 (93.5%) selected blood-based testing. Only 2 participants returned the fecal immunochemical tests. In the blood test cohort, 88 were positive and 20 received a follow up colonoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on this assessment, blood-based testing is an effective method to increase screening rates in medically underserved populations, though efforts to further improve access to follow up colonoscopy are necessary.

Two Medicaid health plans' models and motivations for improving colorectal cancer screening rates

Screening rates for colorectal cancer (CRC) remain low, especially among certain populations. Mailed fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) outreach initiated by U.S. health plans could reach underserved individuals, while solving CRC screening data and implementation challenges faced by health clinics. We report the models and motivations of two health insurance plans implementing a mailed FIT program for age-eligible U.S. Medicaid and Medicare populations. One health plan operates in a single state with ~220,000 enrollees; the other operates in multiple states with ~2 million enrollees. We conducted in-depth qualitative interviews with key stakeholders and observed leadership and clinic staff planning during program development and implementation. Interviews were transcribed and coded using a content analysis approach; coded interview reports and meeting minutes were iteratively reviewed and summarized for themes. Between June and September 2016, nine participants were identified, and all agreed to the interview. Interviews revealed that organizational context was important to both organizations and helped shape program design. Both organizations were hoping this program would address barriers to their prior CRC screening improvement efforts and saw CRC screening as a priority. Despite similar motivations to participate in a mailed FIT intervention, contextual features of the health plans led them to develop distinct implementation models: a collaborative model using some health clinic staffing versus a centralized model operationalizing outreach primarily at the health plan. Data are not yet available on the models' effectiveness. Our findings might help inform the design of programs to deliver mailed FIT outreach.

Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Quality Improvement Initiative Using a Bilingual Patient Navigator, Mobile Technology, and Fecal Immunochemical Testing to Engage Hispanic Adults

BACKGROUND

Fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) are an effective screening method to detect and prevent colorectal cancer (CRC) when done in appropriate intervals. The use of bilingual patient navigators (PNs) and secure short message service (SMS) has been demonstrated to increase CRC screening rates among Hispanic adults.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this quality improvement project is to increase CRC screening rates among Hispanic adults in a family clinic by 25% in the post-project implementation period using an unlicensed bilingual PN, secure SMS, and at-home FITs.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was used. Spanish-translated educational videos were delivered using SMS, and instructional screening guidance was provided via telephone in Spanish by the PN. Participants were surveyed to determine satisfaction with the support received from the PN.

FINDINGS

Findings showed a 35% increase in the clinic's FIT rates. Findings also showed that having a PN's support influenced the decision to complete FIT as compared to the use of secure SMS.

Low Rates of Colonoscopy Follow-up After a Positive Fecal Immunochemical Test in a Medicaid Health Plan Delivered Mailed Colorectal Cancer Screening Program

BACKGROUND

Follow-up colonoscopy after a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is necessary for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening to be effective. We report colonoscopy follow-up rates after a positive FIT overall and by population characteristics in the BeneFIT demonstration pilot, a Medicaid health insurance plan-delivered mailed FIT outreach program.

METHODS

In 2016, 2 health insurance plans in Oregon and in Washington state mailed FIT kits to Medicaid patients who, based on claims data, were overdue for CRC screening. We report follow-up colonoscopy completion rates after positive FIT, and differences in completion rates by age, sex, race, ethnicity, preferred language, and number of primary care visits in the prior year. This research was human subjects approved with a waiver of consent for data collection.

RESULTS

The FIT positivity rates in Health Plan Oregon and Health Plan Washington were 7.9% (39/488) and 14.6% (125/857), respectively. Colonoscopy completion rates within 12 months of the positive test were 35.9% (14/41) in Health Plan Oregon and 32.8% (41/125) in Health Plan Washington. Colonoscopy completion rates were higher among individuals who preferred a language other than English (Non-English speakers 70.0%, English speakers 31.3%, P = .04).

CONCLUSION

In a health plan-delivered mailed FIT outreach program, follow-up colonoscopy rates after a positive test were low. Additional interventions are needed to assure colonoscopy after a positive FIT test and to reap the benefits of screening.