A novel hypothesis on the sensitivity of the fecal occult blood test: Results of a joint analysis of 3 randomized controlled trials

Modelling the impact of bias in fecal immunochemical testing on long-term outcomes of colorectal cancer screening

BACKGROUND

As the impact of unmanaged bias (i.e. systematic source of inaccuracy) in fecal immunochemical test (FIT) analytical performance on long-term colorectal cancer (CRC) outcomes is unknown, we assessed the impact bias in FIT performance in an ongoing FIT-based CRC screening program.

METHODS

This study consisted of two parts: cross-sectional observational data analysis to estimate change in short-term outcomes and microsimulation modelling to estimate change in long-term outcomes assuming different levels of bias by assuming 15 % lower up to 15 % higher Hemoglobin detected in the stool compared to observed. Two scenarios were considered: bias occurring 1) one-time only, due to the occasional bias associated with the FIT kits used in 2020 and 2) consistently due to a constant bias associated with the FIT kits used from 2020 onwards.

RESULTS

With a hypothetical bias of -15 % to +15 %, we observed a positivity rate ranging from 6.7 % to 7.8 %, and a detection rate for CRC between 0.65 % and 0.68 %. Single biases in FIT performance resulted in less than 0.1 % change in long-term CRC screening outcomes, while consistent biases resulted in a much larger change (up to 1.4 % in CRC cases and CRC-related deaths and up to 2.07 % in total costs). Detecting lower Hemoglobin concentrations resulted in a relatively larger change on long-term CRC outcomes in comparison to positive bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Because of the substantial impact of consistent FIT bias, it is important to set evidence-based acceptance criteria of bias on long-term CRC screening outcomes and in particular, the introduction of an asymmetrical or upward shifted tolerance interval for FIT bias.

Projected Colorectal Cancer Incidence and Mortality Based on Observed Adherence to Colonoscopy and Sequential Stool-Based Screening

INTRODUCTION

Modeling supporting recommendations for colonoscopy and stool-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tests assumes 100% sequential participant adherence. The impact of observed adherence on the long-term effectiveness of screening is unknown. We evaluated the effectiveness of a program of screening colonoscopy every 10 years vs annual high-sensitivity guaiac-based fecal occult blood testing (HSgFOBT) using observed sequential adherence data.

METHODS

The MIcrosimulation SCreening ANalysis (MISCAN) model used observed sequential screening adherence, HSgFOBT positivity, and diagnostic colonoscopy adherence in HSgFOBT-positive individuals from the National Colonoscopy Study (single-screening colonoscopy vs ≥4 HSgFOBT sequential rounds). We compared CRC incidence and mortality over 15 years with no screening or 10 yearly screening colonoscopy vs annual HSgFOBT with 100% and differential observed adherence from the trial.

RESULTS

Without screening, simulated incidence and mortality over 15 years were 20.9 (95% probability interval 15.8-26.9) and 6.9 (5.0-9.2) per 1,000 participants, respectively. In the case of 100% adherence, only screening colonoscopy was predicted to result in lower incidence; however, both tests lowered simulated mortality to a similar level (2.1 [1.6-2.9] for screening colonoscopy and 2.5 [1.8-3.4] for HSgFOBT). Observed adherence for screening colonoscopy (83.6%) was higher than observed sequential HSgFOBT adherence (73.1% first round; 49.1% by round 4), resulting in lower simulated incidence and mortality for screening colonoscopy (14.4 [10.8-18.5] and 2.9 [2.1-3.9], respectively) than HSgFOBT (20.8 [15.8-28.1] and 3.9 [2.9-5.4], respectively), despite a 91% adherence to diagnostic colonoscopy with FOBT positivity. The relative risk of CRC mortality for screening colonoscopy vs HSgFOBT was 0.75 (95% probability interval 0.68-0.80). Findings were similar in sensitivity analyses with alternative assumptions for repeat colonoscopy, test performance, risk, age, and projection horizon.

DISCUSSION

Where sequential adherence to stool-based screening is suboptimal and colonoscopy is accessible and acceptable-as observed in the national colonoscopy study, microsimulation, comparative effectiveness, screening recommendations.

The Natural Disease Course of Pancreatic Cyst-Associated Neoplasia, Dysplasia, and Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Results of a Microsimulation Model

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Estimates on the progression of precursor lesions to pancreatic cancer (PC) are scarce. We used microsimulation modeling to gain insight into the natural disease course of PC and its precursors. This information is pivotal to explore the efficacy of PC screening.

METHODS

A Microsimulation Screening Analysis model was developed in which pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasms and cysts can evolve from low-grade dysplasia (LGD) to high-grade dysplasia (HGD) to PC. The model was calibrated to Dutch PC incidence data and Japanese precursor prevalence data (autopsy cases without PC) and provides estimates of PC progression (precursor lesion onset and stage duration).

RESULTS

Mean LGD state durations of cysts and pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasms were 15.8 years and 17.1 years, respectively. Mean HGD state duration was 5.8 years. For lesions that progress to PC, the mean duration was 4.8-4.9 years for LGD lesions and 4.0-4.1 years for HGD lesions. In 13.7% of individuals who developed PC, the HGD state lasted less than 1 year. The probability that an individual at age 50 years developed PC in the next 20 years was estimated to be 1.8% in the presence of any cyst and 6.1% in case of an LGD mucinous cyst. This 20-year PC risk was estimated to be 5.1% for individuals with an LGD pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasm.

CONCLUSIONS

Mean duration of HGD lesions before development of PC was estimated to be 4.0 years. This implies a window of opportunity for screening, presuming the availability of a reliable diagnostic test. The probability that an LGD cyst will progress to cancer was predicted to be low.

Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening in Slovakia

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is an ideal disease for screening due to known and detectable precursor lesions and slow progression from benign adenoma to invasive cancer. The introduction of organized population-based screening programs reduces the burden of colorectal cancer and increases the quality of the screening process with a more favorable harm to benefit ratio compared to opportunistic screening.

METHODS

The study used the microsimulation screening analysis-colon simulation model for the estimation of the effect of various factors on cancer incidence and mortality. The model simulated the Slovakian population from 2018 to 2050. Study includes the analysis of two screening strategies the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) every 2 years and annual FIT. Cost-effectiveness parameters were evaluated comparing each simulated screening scenario with no screening.

RESULTS

Compared to no screening, the biennial FIT would detect 29 600 CRC cases and annual FIT 37 800 CRC cases. Mortality due to CRC showed benefits for both strategies with 17,38% reduction in biennial FIT and 24,67% reduction in annual FIT approach. Both screening programs were more costly as well as more effective compared to no screening. The ICER for biennial FIT strategy was 1776 EUR per 1 QALY and for the annual FIT 3991 EUR per 1 QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, this is the first cost-effectiveness analysis focusing on multiple national CRC screening strategies in Slovakia. Both strategies demonstrated cost-effectiveness compared to no screening. However, for optimal population-based programmatic screening strategy, the policymakers should also consider human resources availability, acceptability of screening test among the population or additional resources including the screening funding.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of colorectal cancer screening in Shanghai, China: a modelling study

•

The current Shanghai CRC screening program is cost-effective.

•

Changing to a validated FIT would make the program more efficient.

•

The results were sensitive to an increase in the cost of the validated FIT.

•

The results were sensitive to more participation in screening and colonoscopy.

Background

The current community-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program in Shanghai, launched in 2013, invited individuals aged 50–74 years to triennial screening with a qualitative faecal immunochemical test (FIT) and questionnaire-based risk assessment (RA). We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the existing Shanghai screening program and compare it to using a validated two-sample quantitative FIT.

Methods

We simulated four strategies (no screening, Shanghai FIT, Shanghai FIT + RA and validated FIT) for the Shanghai screening program and evaluated CRC incidence, CRC mortality, the number of life years gained (LYG), the number of FITs, and colonoscopies required for each. An incremental cost-effectiveness analysis was performed to assess the cost- effectiveness of each strategy.

Results

All screening modalities reduced CRC incidence and CRC mortality, gained extra number of LYG compared to no screening. Screening using the Shanghai FIT and validated FIT reduced CRC incidence from 45 cases to 43 per 1,000 simulated individuals (4.4%). Incidence was reduced to 42 cases (6.7%) using the Shanghai FIT + RA. All screening strategies reduced CRC mortality by 10.0% (from 10 to 9 deaths) and resulted in 6 to 7 LYG. The validated FIT was the most cost-effective among the evaluated strategies (ICER ¥26,461 per LYG).

Conclusions

Our findings show that the current Shanghai screening program is (cost-) effective compared to no screening, but changing to a validated FIT would make the program more efficient.

Optimising colorectal cancer screening in Shanghai, China: a modelling study

INTRODUCTION

To reduce the burden of colorectal cancer (CRC) in Shanghai, China, a CRC screening programme was commenced in 2013 inviting those aged 50-74 years to triennial screening with a faecal immunochemical test (FIT) and risk assessment. However, it is unknown whether this is the optimal screening strategy for this population. We aimed to determine the optimal CRC screening programme for Shanghai in terms of benefits, burden, harms and cost-effectiveness.

METHODS

Using Microsimulation Screening Analysis-Colon (MISCAN-Colon), we estimated the costs and effects of the current screening programme compared with a situation without screening. Subsequently, we estimated the benefits (life years gained (LYG)), burden (number of screening events, colonoscopies and false-positive tests), harms (number of colonoscopy complications) and costs (Renminb (¥)) of screening for 324 alternative screening strategies. We compared several different age ranges, screening modalities, intervals and FIT cut-off levels. An incremental cost-effectiveness analysis determined the optimal strategy assuming a willingness-to-pay of ¥193 931 per LYG.

RESULTS

Compared with no screening, the current screening programme reduced CRC incidence by 40% (19 cases per 1000 screened individuals) and CRC mortality by 67% (7 deaths). This strategy gained 32 additional life years, increased colonoscopy demand to 1434 per 1000 individuals and cost an additional ¥199 652. The optimal screening strategy was annual testing using a validated one-sample FIT, with a cut-off of 10 µg haemoglobin per gram from ages 45 to 80 years (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, ¥62 107). This strategy increased LY by 0.18% and costs by 27%. Several alternative cost-effective strategies using a validated FIT offered comparable benefits to the current programme but lower burden and costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the current screening programme in Shanghai is effective at reducing CRC incidence and mortality, the programme could be optimised using a validated FIT. When implementing CRC screening, jurisdictions with limited health resources should use a validated test.

Tripolar Electrode Electrochemical Impedance Spectroscopy for Endoscopic Devices toward Early Colorectal Tumor Detection

Embedded sensors for endoscopy devices have been studied toward a convenient and decision-supportive methodology in colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosis, but no device could provide direct CRC screening with in situ measurements. In this study, we proposed a millimeter-scale electrical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) device that can be integrated into a biopsy tool in endoscopy for colorectal tumor detection. A minimally invasive tripolar electrode was designed to sense the tissue impedance, and a multilayer neural network was implemented for the classification algorithm. The sensor performance was investigated in terms of sensitivity, reliability, and repeatability using dummy tissues made of agarose hydrogels at various saline concentrations. In addition, an in vivo study was conducted in mice with an implanted CT-26 colon tumor line. The results demonstrated that the prototyped EIS device and algorithm can detect the tumor tissue in suspicious lesions with high sensitivity and specificity of 87.2 and 92.5%, respectively, and a low error of 7.1%. The findings of this study are promising for in situ CRC screening and may advance the diagnostic efficacy of CRC detection during endoscopic procedures.

Effect of colorectal cancer screening on long-term survival of colorectal cancer patients: Results of the Korea National Cancer Screening Program

The Korea National Cancer Screening Program (KNCSP) provides fecal immunochemical test-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening for people aged ≥50 years. This study aimed to investigate the long-term survival effects of CRC screening based on screening history and interval time since screening. The study cohort was obtained by linking three national databases, namely the Korea Central Cancer Registry, KNCSP database, and Death Certificate. We included 32 509 CRC patients diagnosed in 2008-2009, who underwent CRC screening via the KNCSP between 2004 and 2009. The patients were followed-up until 2019, and their survival was assessed according to their CRC screening history. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to compare time to deaths among CRC patients according to CRC screening history, after adjusting for covariates. Of the 32 509 patients, 20 022 (61.5%) patients were alive by the end of 2019. Long-term survival was significantly higher among screened patients (68.2%) than non-screened (57.2%) individuals. Compared with never-screened patients, the hazard ratio (HR) for CRC-specific death in screened patients was 0.77 (95% CI%, 0.73-0.80). Lowest HR was observed in screened, localized CRC patients (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.42-0.56); HR for CRC-specific death was the lowest in patients screened within 12 months of diagnosis (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.66-0.74), following which, the HRs increased with increasing time interval. CRC screening was positively associated with favorable prognosis in CRC patients aged 50-79 years. The effects on long-term survival according to interval time was the best among individuals screened within one year before diagnosis. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Defining the Validity of Skin Self-Examination as a Screening Test for the Detection of Suspicious Pigmented Lesions: A Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy

BACKGROUND

Skin self-examination (SSE) is widely promoted for the detection of suspicious pigmented lesions. However, determining screening accuracy is essential to appraising the usefulness of SSE.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this work was to pool estimates from studies of SSE diagnostic accuracy in the detection of suspicious pigmented lesions.

METHODS

This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021246356) and conducted in accordance with PRISMA-DTA guidelines. A systematic search of Medline (PubMed) EMBASE, CINAHL, and The Cochrane Library was conducted to identify relevant studies. We included studies that examined the accuracy of SSE, either whole-body or site-specific, for detecting change in individual pigmented lesions or detecting an atypical naevus. A univariate random-effects model, based on logit-transformed data, was used to calculate a summary diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) as well as pooled sensitivity and specificity. Cochran's Q test and the I2 statistic were calculated to assess heterogeneity. A proportional hazards model was used to calculate the area under the curve (AUC) and plot the summary receiver operator characteristic curve. We used the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool to grade study quality.

RESULTS

We identified 757 studies, of which 3 met inclusion criteria for quantitative synthesis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity based on 553 included participants was 59 and 82%, respectively. The summary DOR was 5.88 and the AUC was 0.71. There were some concerns regarding risk of bias in all 3 studies.

CONCLUSIONS

SSE can detect suspicious pigmented lesions with reasonable sensitivity and relatively high specificity, with the AUC suggesting acceptable discriminatory ability.

Colonoscopy-Related Mortality in a Fecal Immunochemical Test-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Program

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Many countries have introduced colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs with fecal immunochemical tests (FITs), and follow-up colonoscopies for individuals with a positive FIT result. In order to make an informed decision to participate, individuals must be informed about the benefits and harms of FIT-based screening and subsequent colonoscopy. Colonoscopy-related fatal complications in FIT-based screening are understudied. We aimed to estimate the colonoscopy-related mortality in a national FIT-based CRC screening program.

METHODS

Colonoscopy-related mortality within 30 days after colonoscopy was assessed by analysis of data from national endoscopy complication databases in the Netherlands, determining the excess 30-day rate of death in FIT-positive individuals undergoing colonoscopy vs FIT-negative individuals (based on data from the national screening database), and determining the rate of likely colonoscopy-related deaths based on registered causes of death by the Statistics Netherlands.

RESULTS

Between October 2013 and December 2017, 172,797 participants underwent colonoscopy after a positive result from a FIT in the Dutch national CRC screening program; 13,848 participants received a diagnosis of CRC. The reported fatal complication rate was 0.23 per 10,000 FIT-positive participants (or 1 per 43,199; 95% CI, 0.090 - 0.60) undergoing colonoscopy, whereas this was 0.91 per 10,000 FIT-positive participants (or 1 per 10,961; 95% CI, 0.44 - 1.38) according to the excess death rate. Likely colonoscopy-related causes of death were reported in 0.86 per 10,000 FIT-positive participants (or 1 per 11,236; 95% CI, 0.48 - 1.63) who underwent colonoscopy, of which 50% considered cardiovascular events.

CONCLUSIONS

Colonoscopy-related mortality within the Dutch FIT-based CRC screening program was estimated to range from 0.23 to 0.91 per 10,000 FIT-positive participants undergoing colonoscopy. These findings indicate underreporting of fatal complications in registries and a noteworthy incidence of fatal cardiovascular adverse events that requires further investigation. Nevertheless, the harm of FIT-based CRC screening is vastly outweighed by the benefits.

Methylation Status of Corticotropin-Releasing Factor (CRF) Receptor Genes in Colorectal Cancer

The corticotropin-releasing factor (CRF) system has been strongly associated with gastrointestinal pathophysiology, including colorectal cancer (CRC). We previously showed that altered expression of CRF receptors (CRFRs) in the colon critically affects CRC progression and aggressiveness through regulation of colonic inflammation. Here, we aimed to assess the potential of CRFR methylation levels as putative biomarkers in CRC. In silico methylation analysis of CRF receptor 1 (CRFR1) and CRF receptor 2 (CRFR2) was performed using methylome data derived by CRC and Crohn's disease (CD) tissues and CRC-derived circulating cell-free DNAs (ccfDNAs). In total, 32 and 33 differentially methylated sites of CpGs (DMCs) emerged in CRFR1 and CRFR2, respectively, between healthy and diseased tissues. The methylation patterns were verified in patient-derived ccfDNA samples by qMSP and associated with clinicopathological characteristics. An automated machine learning (AutoML) technology was applied to ccfDNA samples for classification analysis. In silico analysis revealed increased methylation of both CRFRs in CRC tissue and ccfDNA-derived datasets. CRFR1 hypermethylation was also noticed in gene body DMCs of CD patients. CRFR1 hypermethylation was further validated in CRC adjuvant-derived ccfDNA samples, whereas CRFR1 hypomethylation, observed in metastasis-derived ccfDNAs, was correlated to disease aggressiveness and adverse prognostic characteristics. AutoML analysis based on CRFRs methylation status revealed a three-feature high-performing biosignature for CRC diagnosis with an estimated AUC of 0.929. Monitoring of CRFRs methylation-based signature in CRC tissues and ccfDNAs may be of high diagnostic and prognostic significance in CRC.

Cost-Effectiveness of Multitarget Stool DNA Testing vs Colonoscopy or Fecal Immunochemical Testing for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Alaska Native People

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of multitarget stool DNA testing (MT-sDNA) compared with colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) for Alaska Native adults.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A Markov model was used to evaluate the 3 screening test effects over 40 years. Outcomes included colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality, costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). The study incorporated updated evidence on screening test performance and adherence and was conducted from December 15, 2016, through November 6, 2019.

RESULTS

With perfect adherence, CRC incidence was reduced by 52% (95% CI, 46% to 56%) using colonoscopy, 61% (95% CI, 57% to 64%) using annual FIT, and 66% (95% CI, 63% to 68%) using MT-sDNA. Compared with no screening, perfect adherence screening extends life by 0.15, 0.17, and 0.19 QALYs per person with colonoscopy, FIT, and MT-sDNA, respectively. Colonoscopy is the most expensive strategy: approximately $110 million more than MT-sDNA and $127 million more than FIT. With imperfect adherence (best case), MT-sDNA resulted in 0.12 QALYs per person vs 0.05 and 0.06 QALYs per person by FIT and colonoscopy, respectively. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses supported the base-case analysis. Under varied adherence scenarios, MT-sDNA either dominates or is cost-effective (ICERs, $1740-$75,868 per QALY saved) compared with FIT and colonoscopy.

CONCLUSION

Each strategy reduced costs and increased QALYs compared with no screening. Screening by MT-sDNA results in the largest QALY savings. In Markov model analysis, screening by MT-sDNA in the Alaska Native population was cost-effective compared with screening by colonoscopy and FIT for a wide range of adherence scenarios.

Can Cost-effectiveness Analysis Inform Genotype-Guided Aspirin Use for Primary Colorectal Cancer Prevention?

BACKGROUND

Inherited genetic variants can modify the cancer-chemopreventive effect of aspirin. We evaluated the clinical and economic value of genotype-guided aspirin use for colorectal cancer chemoprevention in average-risk individuals.

METHODS

A decision analytical model compared genotype-guided aspirin use versus no genetic testing, no aspirin. The model simulated 100,000 adults ≥50 years of age with average colorectal cancer and cardiovascular disease risk. Low-dose aspirin daily starting at age 50 years was recommended only for those with a genetic test result indicating a greater reduction in colorectal cancer risk with aspirin use. The primary outcomes were quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

RESULTS

The mean cost of using genotype-guided aspirin was $187,109 with 19.922 mean QALYs compared with $186,464 with 19.912 QALYs for no genetic testing, no aspirin. Genotype-guided aspirin yielded an ICER of $66,243 per QALY gained, and was cost-effective in 58% of simulations at the $100,000 willingness-to-pay threshold. Genotype-guided aspirin was associated with 1,461 fewer polyps developed, 510 fewer colorectal cancer cases, and 181 fewer colorectal cancer-related deaths. This strategy prevented 1,078 myocardial infarctions with 1,430 gastrointestinal bleeding events, and 323 intracranial hemorrhage cases compared with no genetic testing, no aspirin.

CONCLUSIONS

Genotype-guided aspirin use for colorectal cancer chemoprevention may offer a cost-effective approach for the future management of average-risk individuals.

IMPACT

A genotype-guided aspirin strategy may prevent colorectal cancer, colorectal cancer-related deaths, and myocardial infarctions, while minimizing bleeding adverse events. This model establishes a framework for genetically-guided aspirin use for targeted chemoprevention of colorectal cancer with application toward commercial testing in this population.

Identifying key factors for the effectiveness of pancreatic cancer screening: A model-based analysis

Pancreatic cancer (PC) survival is poor, as detection usually occurs late, when treatment options are limited. Screening of high‐risk individuals may enable early detection and a more favorable prognosis. Knowledge gaps prohibit establishing the effectiveness of screening. We developed a Microsimulation Screening Analysis model to analyze the impact of relevant uncertainties on the effect of PC screening in high‐risk individuals. The model simulates two base cases: one in which lesions always progress to PC and one in which indolent and faster progressive lesions coexist. For each base case, the effect of annual and 5‐yearly screening with endoscopic ultrasonography/magnetic resonance imaging was evaluated. The impact of variance in PC risk, screening test characteristics and surgery‐related mortality was evaluated using sensitivity analyses. Screening resulted in a reduction of PC mortality by at least 16% in all simulated scenarios. This reduction depended strongly on the natural disease course (annual screening: −57% for “Progressive‐only” vs −41% for “Indolent Included”). The number of screen and surveillance tests needed to prevent one cancer death was impacted most by PC risk. A 10% increase in test sensitivity reduced mortality by 1.9% at most. Test specificity is important for the number of surveillance tests. In conclusion, screening reduces PC mortality in all modeled scenarios. The natural disease course and PC risk strongly determines the effectiveness of screening. Test sensitivity seems of lesser influence than specificity. Future research should gain more insight in PC pathobiology to establish the true value of PC screening in high‐risk individuals.

What's new?

About 10 percent of pancreatic cancers occur in individuals with inherited risk factors. While screening such high‐risk individuals can facilitate the detection of precursor lesions and early‐stage cancer, the extent to which benefits outweigh harms, including overdiagnosis, remains unknown. Here, using a microsimulation model, the authors explored uncertainties concerning the early detection of pancreatic cancer and analyzed the impact of these uncertainties on the effect of screening. In all simulated scenarios, screening was associated with reduced pancreatic cancer mortality. The effectiveness of screening was most strongly impacted by characteristics of natural disease course and level of pancreatic cancer risk

Calculation of Stop Ages for Colorectal Cancer Screening Based on Comorbidities and Screening History

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Routine screening for colorectal cancer typically is recommended until age 74 years. Although it has been proposed that a screening stop age could be determined based on sex and comorbidity, less is known about the impact of screening history. We investigated the effects of screening history on the selection of an optimal age to stop screening.

METHODS

We used the Microsimulation Screening Analysis-Colon model to estimate the harms and benefits of screening with biennial fecal immunochemical tests by sex, comorbidity status, and screening history. The optimal screening stop age was determined based on the incremental number needed for 1 additional life-year per 1000 screened individuals compared with the threshold provided by stopping screening at 76 years in the average-health population with a perfect screening history (attended all required screening, diagnostic, and follow-up tests) to biennial fecal immunochemical testing from age 50 years.

RESULTS

For persons age 76 years, 157 women and 108 men with a perfect screening history would need to be screened to gain 1 life-year per 1000 screened individuals. Previously unscreened women with no comorbid conditions and no history of screening could undergo an initial screening through 90 years, whereas unscreened men could undergo initial screening through 88 years, before this balance is reached. As screening adherence improved or as comorbidities increased, the optimal age to stop screening decreased to a point that, regardless of sex, individuals with severe comorbidities and a perfect screening history should stop screening at age 66 years or younger.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the harm-benefit balance, the optimal stop age for colorectal cancer screening ranges from 66 years for unhealthy individuals with a perfect screening history to 90 years for healthy individuals without prior screening. These findings can be used to assist patients and clinicians in making decisions about screening participation.

Development and Validation of Three Regional Microsimulation Models for Predicting Colorectal Cancer Screening Benefits in Europe

Background. Validated microsimulation models have been shown to be useful tools in providing support for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening decisions. Aiming to assist European countries in reducing CRC mortality, we developed and validated three regional models for evaluating CRC screening in Europe. Methods. Microsimulation Screening Analysis–Colon (MISCAN-Colon) model versions for Italy, Slovenia, and Finland were quantified using data from different national institutions. These models were validated against the best available evidence for the effectiveness of screening from their region (when available): the Screening for COlon REctum (SCORE) trial and the Florentine fecal immunochemical test (FIT) screening study for Italy; the Norwegian Colorectal Cancer Prevention (NORCCAP) trial and the guaiac fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) Finnish population-based study for Finland. When published evidence was not available (Slovenia), the model was validated using cancer registry data. Results. Our three models reproduced age-specific CRC incidence rates and stage distributions in the prescreening period. Moreover, the Italian and Finnish models replicated CRC mortality reductions (reasonably) well against the best available evidence. CRC mortality reductions were predicted slightly larger than those observed (except for the Florentine FIT study), but consistently within the corresponding 95% confidence intervals. Conclusions. Our findings corroborate the MISCAN-Colon reliability in supporting decision making on CRC screening. Furthermore, our study provides the model structure for an additional tool (EU-TOPIA CRC evaluation tool: http://miscan.eu-topia.org) that aims to help policymakers and researchers monitoring or improving CRC screening in Europe.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of alternative colon cancer screening strategies in the context of the French national screening program

BACKGROUND

A nationwide colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program was set up in France from 2009 for average-risk, asymptomatic people aged 50-74 years based on an immunochemical fecal occult blood test [faecal immunochemical test (FIT)] every 2 years, followed by colonoscopy if positive. The European standard recommends a participation rate of 45% for the program to be cost-effective, yet the latest published rate in France was 34%. The objective of this study was to compare the cost effectiveness of screening alternatives taking real-world participation rates into account.

METHODS

Eight screening strategies were compared, based either on a screening test (Guaiac or FIT testing, blood-based, stool DNA, computed tomography colonography, colon capsules, and sigmoidoscopy) followed by full colonoscopy if positive or direct colonoscopy. A microsimulation model was used to estimate the cost effectiveness associated with each strategy.

RESULTS

Compared with no screening, FIT was associated with a 14.0 quality-adjusted life year (QALY) increase of €50,520 per 1000 individuals, giving an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €3600/QALY. Only stool DNA and blood-based testing were associated with a QALY increase compared with FIT, with stool DNA weakly dominated by blood-based testing, and the latter associated with an ICER of €154,600/QALY compared with FIT. All other strategies were dominated by FIT.

CONCLUSION

FIT every 2 years appears to be the most cost-effective CRC screening strategy when taking into account a real-world participation rate of 34%.

[Estimated impact of the current colorectal screening program in France]

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer and the second most deadly in France. A Cochrane meta-analysis has confirmed the benefits of colorectal cancer screening. A nationwide colorectal screening program was set up in France in 2009 for medium-risk, asymptomatic people aged 50 to 74 years. It has been based, since 2015, on the Fecal Immunochemical Test. The participation rate for 2016-2017 was 34%, which is lower than the European objectives. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of the program at the current participation rate and at rates of 45% and 65%.

METHODS

The epidemiological impact of the program was estimated from the results of an individual simulation model adapted from the Microsimulation Screening Analysis Colon model, calibrated and transposed to the French context. An initial analysis was conducted to estimate the individual impact of screening and a second for the entire eligible population, at various participation rates.

RESULTS

The test is associated with a lifetime reduction in the risk of colorectal cancer of 24% for men and 21% for women, and a reduction in the risk of death from colorectal cancer of 51% and 43% respectively. At the current level of participation, the program reduces incidence by 5% and mortality by 14% compared to no organized screening. The impact would be reduced by an additional 3% and 8% for participation rates of 45% and 65% respectively. Similarly, mortality would decrease by an additional 8% and 22%.

CONCLUSION

These results confirm that in a population at medium risk for colorectal cancer, the organised programme is an effective strategy for reducing its incidence. They also confirm that the achievement of European objectives remains a key issue for improving the effectiveness of organized screening. An evolution of immunological test delivery modalities could help to achieve these participation objectives.

Mailed FIT (fecal immunochemical test), navigation or patient reminders? Using microsimulation to inform selection of interventions to increase colorectal cancer screening in Medicaid enrollees

Colorectal cancer (CRC) can be effectively prevented or detected with guideline concordant screening, yet Medicaid enrollees experience disparities. We used microsimulation to project CRC screening patterns, CRC cases averted, and life-years gained in the population of 68,077 Oregon Medicaid enrollees 50-64 over a five year period starting in January 2019. The simulation estimated the cost-effectiveness of five intervention scenarios - academic detailing plus provider audit and feedback (Detailing+), patient reminders (Reminders), mailing a Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) directly to the patient's home (Mailed FIT), patient navigation (Navigation), and mailed FIT with Navigation (Mailed FIT + Navigation) - compared to usual care. Each intervention scenario raised CRC screening rates compared to usual care, with improvements as high as 11.6 percentage points (Mailed FIT + Navigation) and as low as 2.5 percentage points (Reminders) after one year. Compared to usual care, Mailed FIT + Navigation would raise CRC screening rates 20.2 percentage points after five years - averting nearly 77 cancer cases (a reduction of 113 per 100,000) and exceeding national screening targets. Over a five year period, Reminders, Mailed FIT and Mailed FIT + Navigation were expected to be cost effective if stakeholders were willing to pay $230 or less per additional year up-to-date (at a cost of $22, $59, and $227 respectively), whereas Detailing+ and Navigation were more costly for the same benefits. To approach national CRC screening targets, health system stakeholders are encouraged to implement Mailed FIT with or without Navigation and Reminders.

Overestimated Sensitivity of Fecal Immunochemical Tests in Screening Cohorts With Registry-Based Follow-up

OBJECTIVES

Several recent studies have reported very high estimates of sensitivity and specificity of fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) at seemingly high levels of precision using registry-based follow-up of participants in very large FIT-based screening programs. We aimed to assess the validity of estimates of diagnostic performance parameters derived by this indirect approach.

METHODS

We modeled expected values of sensitivity and specificity of colorectal cancer detection in studies using the indirect approach and their deviation from true values under a broad range of plausible assumptions, and we compared these expected values with recently reported estimates of FIT sensitivity and specificity from such studies.

RESULTS

Using a sensitivity of 75% and specificity of 93.6% (from studies using a direct approach, i.e., colonoscopy follow-up of all participants), the indirect approach would be expected to yield sensitivities between 84.5% and 91.1% and specificities between 93.4% and 93.6% under a range of realistic assumptions regarding colonoscopic follow-up rates of positive FITs and clinical manifestation rates of preclinical colorectal cancer.

DISCUSSION

Very high sensitivities of FITs recently reported with seemingly very high levels of precision by several large-scale registry-based studies, which are in line with expected results based on our model calculations, are likely to be strongly overestimated and need to be interpreted with due caution.

Colorectal cancer screening with faecal immunochemical testing, sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy: a microsimulation modelling study

OBJECTIVE

To estimate benefits and harms of different colorectal cancer screening strategies, stratified by (baseline) 15-year colorectal cancer risk.

DESIGN

Microsimulation modelling study using MIcrosimulation SCreening ANalysis-Colon (MISCAN-Colon).

SETTING

A parallel guideline committee (BMJ Rapid Recommendations) defined the time frame and screening interventions, including selection of outcome measures.

POPULATION

Norwegian men and women aged 50-79 years with varying 15-year colorectal cancer risk (1-7%).

COMPARISONS

Four screening strategies were compared with no screening: biennial or annual faecal immunochemical test (FIT) or single sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy at 100% adherence.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Colorectal cancer mortality and incidence, burdens, and harms over 15 years of follow-up. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

Over 15 years of follow-up, screening individuals aged 50-79 at 3% risk of colorectal cancer with annual FIT or single colonoscopy reduced colorectal cancer mortality by 6 per 1000 individuals. Single sigmoidoscopy and biennial FIT reduced it by 5 per 1000 individuals. Colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, and annual FIT reduced colorectal cancer incidence by 10, 8, and 4 per 1000 individuals, respectively. The estimated incidence reduction for biennial FIT was 1 per 1000 individuals. Serious harms were estimated to be between 3 per 1000 (biennial FIT) and 5 per 1000 individuals (colonoscopy); harms increased with older age. The absolute benefits of screening increased with increasing colorectal cancer risk, while harms were less affected by baseline risk. Results were sensitive to the setting defined by the guideline panel. Because of uncertainty associated with modelling assumptions, we applied a GRADE rating of low certainty evidence to all estimates.

CONCLUSIONS

Over a 15 year period, all screening strategies may reduce colorectal cancer mortality to a similar extent. Colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy may also reduce colorectal cancer incidence, while FIT shows a smaller incidence reduction. Harms are rare and of similar magnitude for all screening strategies.

All-cause mortality versus cancer-specific mortality as outcome in cancer screening trials: A review and modeling study

BACKGROUND

All-cause mortality has been suggested as an end-point in cancer screening trials in order to avoid biases in attributing the cause of death. The aim of this study was to investigate which sample size and follow-up is needed to find a significant reduction in all-cause mortality.

METHODS

A literature review was conducted to identify previous studies that modeled the effect of screening on all-cause mortality. Microsimulation modeling was used to simulate breast cancer, lung cancer, and colorectal cancer screening trials. Model outputs were: cancer-specific deaths, all-cause deaths, and life-years gained per year of follow-up.

RESULTS

There were large differences between the evaluated cancers. For lung cancer, when 40 000 high-risk people are randomized to each arm, a significant reduction in all-cause mortality could be expected between 11 and 13 years of follow-up. For breast cancer, a significant reduction could be found between 16 and 26 years of follow-up for a sample size of over 300 000 women in each arm. For colorectal cancer, 600 000 persons in each arm were required to be followed for 15-20 years. Our systematic literature review identified seven papers, which showed highly similar results to our estimates.

CONCLUSION

Cancer screening trials are able to demonstrate a significant reduction in all-cause mortality due to screening, but require very large sample sizes. Depending on the cancer, 40 000-600 000 participants per arm are needed to demonstrate a significant reduction. The reduction in all-cause mortality can only be detected between specific years of follow-up, more limited than the timeframe to detect a reduction in cancer-specific mortality.

Circulating Tumor DNA Analysis: Clinical Implications for Colorectal Cancer Patients. A Systematic Review

Background

Liquid biopsies could improve diagnosis, prognostication, and monitoring of colorectal cancer (CRC). Mutation, chromosomal copy number alteration, and methylation analysis in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) from plasma or serum has gained great interest. However, the literature is inconsistent on preferred candidate markers, hampering a clear direction for further studies and clinical translation. This review assessed the potential of ctDNA analysis for clinical utility.

Methods

A systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines was conducted up to December 3, 2018, followed by methodological quality assessment. Primary endpoints were accuracy for detection, prognostication, and monitoring.

Results

Eighty-four studies were included. For CRC detection, sensitivity was 75% using ctDNA mutation analysis and up to 96% using copy number analysis. Septin 9 (SEPT9) hypermethylation analysis showed sensitivities of 100% and specificities of 97%. Regarding prognostication, ctDNA KRAS mutations were associated with oncological outcome and could predict response to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy. For monitoring, sequential ctDNA KRAS mutation analysis showed promise for detection of relapses or therapy resistance.

Conclusions

This comprehensive overview of ctDNA candidate markers demonstrates SEPT9 methylation analysis to be promising for CRC detection, and KRAS mutation analysis could assist in prognostication and monitoring. Prospective evaluation of marker panels in clinical decision making should bring ctDNA analysis into practice.

The Impact of Transitioning From Guaiac-Fecal Occult Blood Testing to Fecal Immunochemical Testing in a Canadian Colon Cancer Screening Program

Objectives

To determine the impact of transitioning from guaiac-based fecal occult blood testing (gFOBT) to fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) on the detection rate of adenomas, advanced adenomas (AA) and colorectal cancer (CRC).

Background

Recently, the health region in Edmonton, Alberta switched from gFOBT to FIT for CRC screening.

Study

A retrospective analysis of all patients, aged 50 to 74 years, referred for colonoscopy from January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2014 due to a positive gFOBT (at least one of three samples positively using the guaiac-based Hemoccult II SENSA in 2013) or FIT (≥75 µg/g of stool, using the Polymedco OC FIT-CHEK in 2014). The primary outcomes were the number of colon cancers, AA and adenomas detected in 2013 and 2014. A comparison between the two tests was also made for the composite outcome of detection of either AA or CRC.

Results

Six hundred and forty-nine patients underwent colonoscopy due to a positive gFOBT in 2013, and 2167 patients for a positive FIT in 2014. FIT compared with gFOBT detected more CRC (67 compared with 34), AA (770 compared with 147) and adenomas (1575 versus 320). By multivariable regression analysis adjusted for different demographics and endoscopic metrics, positive FIT was independently associated with higher adenoma detection rate (odds ratio [OR] 2.62; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.13 to 3.21, P < 0.001), AA detection rate (OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.43 to 2.33, P < 0.001), and the composite outcome of AA and CRC (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.60 to 2.59, P < 0.001).

Conclusions

Adoption of FIT compared with gFOBT led to higher detection of colon cancer, AA and adenomas.

Modeling in Colorectal Cancer Screening: Assessing External and Predictive Validity of MISCAN-Colon Microsimulation Model Using NORCCAP Trial Results

BACKGROUND

Microsimulation models are increasingly being used to inform colorectal cancer (CRC) screening recommendations. MISCAN-Colon is an example of such a model, used to inform the Dutch CRC screening program and US Preventive Services Task Force guidelines. Assessing the validity of these models is essential to provide transparency regarding their performance. In this study, we tested the external and predictive validity of MISCAN-Colon.

METHODS

We validated MISCAN-Colon using the Norwegian Colorectal Cancer Prevention (NORCCAP) trial, a randomized controlled trial that examined the effectiveness of once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening. We simulated the study population and design of the NORCCAP trial in MISCAN-Colon and compared 10- to 12-year model-predicted hazard ratios (HRs) for overall and distal CRC incidence and mortality to those observed. In addition, we compared the numbers of screen-detected neoplasia. Finally, we predicted the trial's future results to allow for the assessment of predictive validity.

RESULTS

MISCAN-Colon predicted an HR for overall CRC incidence (0.85), distal CRC incidence (0.82), overall CRC mortality (0.68), and distal CRC mortality (0.62). These were within the limits of the 95% confidence intervals of the NORCCAP trial results. Similar results were observed for the number of screen-detected cancers. The model significantly underestimated the number of screen-detected adenomas. Model-predicted HRs for CRC incidence and mortality up to 15- to 17-year follow-up were 0.84 and 0.72, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Although the underestimation of screen-detected adenomas requires further investigation, MISCAN-Colon is able to make a valid replication of the CRC incidence and mortality reduction of an FS screening trial, which suggests that it can be considered a useful tool to support decision making on CRC screening.

Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses of a colorectal cancer screening programme in a high adenoma prevalence scenario using MISCAN-Colon microsimulation model

Background

The Basque Colorectal Cancer Screening Programme began in 2009 and the implementation has been complete since 2013. Faecal immunological testing was used for screening in individuals between 50 and 69 years old. Colorectal Cancer in Basque country is characterized by unusual epidemiological features given that Colorectal Cancer incidence is similar to other European countries while adenoma prevalence is higher. The object of our study was to economically evaluate the programme via cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses with microsimulation models.

Methods

We applied the Microsimulation Screening Analysis (MISCAN)-Colon model to predict trends in Colorectal Cancer incidence and mortality and to quantify the short- and long-term effects and costs of the Basque Colorectal Cancer Screening Programme. The model was calibrated to the Basque demographics in 2008 and age-specific Colorectal Cancer incidence data in the Basque Cancer Registry from 2005 to 2008 before the screening begun. The model was also calibrated to the high adenoma prevalence observed for the Basque population in a previously published study. The multi-cohort approach used in the model included all the cohorts in the programme during 30 years of implementation, with lifetime follow-up. Unit costs were obtained from the Basque Health Service and both cost-effectiveness analysis and budget impact analysis were carried out.

Results

The goodness-of-fit of the model adaptation to observed programme data was evidence of validation. In the cost-effectiveness analysis, the savings from treatment were larger than the added costs due to screening. Thus, the Basque programme was dominant compared to no screening, as life expectancy increased by 29.3 days per person. The savings in the budget analysis appeared 10 years after the complete implementation of the programme. The average annual budget was €73.4 million from year 2023 onwards.

Conclusions

This economic evaluation showed a screening intervention with a major health gain that also produced net savings when a long follow-up was used to capture the late economic benefit. The number of colonoscopies required was high but remain within the capacity of the Basque Health Service. So far in Europe, no other population Colorectal Cancer screening programme has been evaluated by budget impact analysis.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-018-4362-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Cost-effectiveness of High-performance Biomarker Tests vs Fecal Immunochemical Test for Noninvasive Colorectal Cancer Screening

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Biomarker assays could increase the accuracy of noninvasive detection of colorectal cancer (CRC); fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) are estimated to miss 27%-47% of CRCs and 70%-80% of advanced adenomas per round of screening. We investigated the conditions under which biomarker screens would be cost-effective compared with FIT screens of average-risk individuals.

METHODS

We used the MISCAN-Colon microsimulation model to estimate the effects of various CRC screening test characteristics on life-years gained (LYG) and; age-specific all-cause mortality was based on the 2010 Dutch life tables. Simulated CRC incidence rate and CRC stage distribution were calibrated to observed data in The Netherlands from 1999 through 2003 (before opportunities for screening). Survival rates after diagnosis of CRC at an age younger than 75 years were based on CRC relative survival data from 1985 through 2004; survival for individuals diagnosed at an age of 75 years or older was adjusted to fit the observed age-increasing mortality/incidence ratio. We modeled FIT along with hypothetical biomarker tests with different test performance levels. For each biomarker test we calculated the maximum unit cost for the test to be cost-effective compared with FIT, assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of €50,000 ($56,000) per LYG.

RESULTS

Biennial FIT screening of subjects 55-75 years old provided 84.9 LYG at a cost of €122,000 ($137,000) per 1000 participants. Considering a unit cost of €7 ($8) for FIT (including kit and analysis only, excluding organizational costs), a biomarker test that detects CRC with higher levels of specificity and sensitivity (100%) and advanced adenomas at a proportionally higher level of sensitivity (53%) should never exceed a cost of €51 ($57). The threshold cost could increase to more than €200 ($224) for high-performing biomarker tests in cases of limited colonoscopy capacity or higher uptake of this test.

CONCLUSIONS

By using the MISCAN-Colon microsimulation model to estimate effects of CRC screening tests, we found that for a biomarker test with increased overall performance to be cost-effective, it should not exceed 7-fold the unit cost of FIT. This maximum would increase substantially if colonoscopy becomes more expensive or scarce, or if the new test has higher screening uptake. These values could be used to estimate the added value of new biomarkers compared with current FIT screening.

Colorectal Cancer: Cost-effectiveness of Colonoscopy versus CT Colonography Screening with Participation Rates and Costs

Purpose To compare the cost-effectiveness of computed tomographic (CT) colonography and colonoscopy screening by using data on unit costs and participation rates from a randomized controlled screening trial in a dedicated screening setting. Materials and Methods Observed participation rates and screening costs from the Colonoscopy or Colonography for Screening, or COCOS, trial were used in a microsimulation model to estimate costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained with colonoscopy and CT colonography screening. For both tests, the authors determined optimal age range and screening interval combinations assuming a 100% participation rate. Assuming observed participation for these combinations, the cost-effectiveness of both tests was compared. Extracolonic findings were not included because long-term follow-up data are lacking. Results The participation rates for colonoscopy and CT colonography were 21.5% (1276 of 5924 invitees) and 33.6% (982 of 2920 invitees), respectively. Colonoscopy was more cost-effective in the screening strategies with one or two lifetime screenings, whereas CT colonography was more cost-effective in strategies with more lifetime screenings. CT colonography was the preferred test for willingness-to-pay-thresholds of €3200 per QALY gained and higher, which is lower than the Dutch willingness-to-pay threshold of €20 000. With equal participation, colonoscopy was the preferred test independent of willingness-to-pay thresholds. The findings were robust for most of the sensitivity analyses, except with regard to relative screening costs and subsequent participation. Conclusion Because of the higher participation rates, CT colonography screening for colorectal cancer is more cost-effective than colonoscopy screening. The implementation of CT colonography screening requires previous satisfactory resolution to the question as to how best to deal with extracolonic findings. ^© RSNA, 2018 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Cost Effectiveness of Screening Individuals With Cystic Fibrosis for Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Individuals with cystic fibrosis are at increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) compared with the general population, and risk is higher among those who received an organ transplant. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis to determine optimal CRC screening strategies for patients with cystic fibrosis.

METHODS

We adjusted the existing Microsimulation Screening Analysis-Colon model to reflect increased CRC risk and lower life expectancy in patients with cystic fibrosis. Modeling was performed separately for individuals who never received an organ transplant and patients who had received an organ transplant. We modeled 76 colonoscopy screening strategies that varied the age range and screening interval. The optimal screening strategy was determined based on a willingness to pay threshold of $100,000 per life-year gained. Sensitivity and supplementary analyses were performed, including fecal immunochemical test (FIT) as an alternative test, earlier ages of transplantation, and increased rates of colonoscopy complications, to assess if optimal screening strategies would change.

RESULTS

Colonoscopy every 5 years, starting at an age of 40 years, was the optimal colonoscopy strategy for patients with cystic fibrosis who never received an organ transplant; this strategy prevented 79% of deaths from CRC. Among patients with cystic fibrosis who had received an organ transplant, optimal colonoscopy screening should start at an age of 30 or 35 years, depending on the patient's age at time of transplantation. Annual FIT screening was predicted to be cost-effective for patients with cystic fibrosis. However, the level of accuracy of the FIT in this population is not clear.

CONCLUSIONS

Using a Microsimulation Screening Analysis-Colon model, we found screening of patients with cystic fibrosis for CRC to be cost effective. Because of the higher risk of CRC in these patients, screening should start at an earlier age with a shorter screening interval. The findings of this study (especially those on FIT screening) may be limited by restricted evidence available for patients with cystic fibrosis.

Cost Effectiveness of Age-Specific Screening Intervals for People With Family Histories of Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Relative risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) decreases with age among individuals with a family history of CRC. However, no screening recommendations specify less frequent screening with increasing age. We aimed to determine whether such a refinement would be cost effective.

METHODS

We determined the relative risk for CRC for individuals based on age and number of affected first-degree relatives (FDRs) using data from publications. For each number of affected FDRs, we used the Microsimulation Screening Analysis model to estimate costs and effects of colonoscopy screening strategies with different age ranges and intervals. Screening was then optimized sequentially, starting with the youngest age group, and allowing the interval of screening to change at certain ages. Strategies with an incremental cost effectiveness ratio below $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year were considered cost effective.

RESULTS

For people with 1 affected FDR (92% of those with a family history), screening every 3 years beginning at an age of 40 years is most cost effective. If no adenomas are found, the screening interval can gradually be extended to 5 and 7 years, at ages 45 and 55 years, respectively. From a cost-effectiveness perspective, individuals with more affected FDRs should start screening earlier and at shorter intervals. However, frequency can be reduced if no abnormalities are found.

CONCLUSIONS

Using a microsimulation model, we found that for individuals with a family history of CRC, it is cost effective to gradually increase the screening interval if several subsequent screening colonoscopies have negative results and no new cases of CRC are found in family members.

Cost-Effectiveness of Screening Individuals With Cystic Fibrosis for Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Individuals with cystic fibrosis are at increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) compared to the general population, and risk is higher among those who received an organ transplant. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis to determine optimal CRC screening strategies for patients with cystic fibrosis.

METHODS

We adjusted the existing Microsimulation Screening Analysis-Colon microsimulation model to reflect increased CRC risk and lower life expectancy in patients with cystic fibrosis. Modeling was performed separately for individuals who never received an organ transplant and patients who had received an organ transplant. We modeled 76 colonoscopy screening strategies that varied the age range and screening interval. The optimal screening strategy was determined based on a willingness to pay threshold of $100,000 per life-year gained. Sensitivity and supplementary analyses were performed, including fecal immunochemical test (FIT) as an alternative test, earlier ages of transplantation, and increased rates of colonoscopy complications, to assess whether optimal screening strategies would change.

RESULTS

Colonoscopy every 5 years, starting at age 40 years, was the optimal colonoscopy strategy for patients with cystic fibrosis who never received an organ transplant; this strategy prevented 79% of deaths from CRC. Among patients with cystic fibrosis who had received an organ transplant, optimal colonoscopy screening should start at an age of 30 or 35 years, depending on the patient's age at time of transplantation. Annual FIT screening was predicted to be cost-effective for patients with cystic fibrosis. However, the level of accuracy of the FIT in population is not clear.

CONCLUSIONS

Using a Microsimulation Screening Analysis-Colon microsimulation model, we found screening of patients with cystic fibrosis for CRC to be cost-effective. Due to the higher risk in these patients for CRC, screening should start at an earlier age with a shorter screening interval. The findings of this study (especially those on FIT screening) may be limited by restricted evidence available for patients with cystic fibrosis.

Impact of adenoma detection on the benefit of faecal testing vs. colonoscopy for colorectal cancer

Colonoscopy quality, as measured by adenoma detection rates, varies widely across providers and is inversely related to patients' post-colonoscopy cancer risk. This has unknown consequences for the benefits of faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) vs. primary colonoscopy screening for colorectal cancer. Using an established microsimulation model, we predicted the lifetime colorectal cancer incidence and mortality benefits of annual FIT vs. 10-yearly colonoscopy screening at differing ADR levels (quintiles; averages 15.3-38.7%), with colonoscopy performance assumptions estimated from community-based data on physician ADRs and patients' post-colonoscopy risk of cancer. For patients receiving FIT screening with follow-up colonoscopy by physicians from the highest ADR quintile, simulated lifetime cancer incidence and mortality were 28.8 and 5.4 per 1,000, respectively, vs. 20.6 and 4.4 for primary colonoscopy screening (risk ratios, RR = 1.40; 95% probability interval (PI), 1.19-1.71 for incidence, and RR = 1.22; 95%PI, 1.02-1.54 for mortality). With every 5% point ADR decrease, lifetime cancer incidence was predicted to increase on average 9.0% for FIT vs. 12.3% for colonoscopy, and mortality increased 9.9% vs. 13.3%. In ADR quintile 1, simulated mortality was lower for FIT than colonoscopy screening (10.1 vs. 11.8; RR = 0.85; 95%PI, 0.83-0.90), while incidences were more similar. This suggests that relative cancer incidence and mortality reductions for FIT vs. colonoscopy screening may differ by ADR, with fewer predicted deaths with colonoscopy screening in higher ADR settings and fewer deaths with annual FIT screening in lower ADR settings.

International variation in the prevalence of preclinical colorectal cancer: Implications for predictive values of noninvasive screening tests and potential target populations for screening

Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) is implemented in an increasing number of countries. We aimed to assess international variation in the prevalence of preclinical CRC and the resulting variation in positive and negative predictive values (PPVs, NPVs) of existing and potential CRC screening tests in various countries. Using age‐ and sex‐specific CRC incidence data and transition rates from preclinical to clinical CRC we estimated overall and age‐ and sex‐specific prevalence of preclinical CRC in the target population aged 50–74 years in different parts of the world. These prevalence estimates were used to derive PPVs and NPVs for existing and potential noninvasive screening tests with varying levels of sensitivity and specificity. Within all regions and countries, prevalence strongly increases with age and is higher in men than in women. In addition, major variation was seen between regions and countries, with overall prevalence varying between 1 and 0.1%. As a result, PPVs are expected to strongly vary between ∼10% for men in high incidence countries, such as Australia and Germany, and 1% for women in low incidence countries, whereas NPVs are expected to be consistently well above 99%. Variation in CRC prevalence profoundly affects expected PPVs of screening tests, and PPVs should be carefully considered when decisions on screening tests and strategies are made for specific populations and health care systems. Here, we provide estimates of preclinical CRC and expected PPVs and NPVs of noninvasive screening tests, which may enhance the empirical basis for planning of population‐based CRC screening strategies.

What's new?

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is implemented in an increasing number of countries, usually in a two‐step approach consisting in a noninvasive test followed by colonoscopy in case of a positive result. Prevalence of preclinical colorectal cancer strongly affects screening efficiency, but such data is scarce. Here, the authors provide detailed age‐ and sex‐specific preclinical CRC prevalence estimates for various countries and geographical regions and show their implications on expected positive and negative predictive values of existing and potential noninvasive screening tests. Knowledge of these predictive values should enhance the empirical basis for decisions on CRC screening tests and target populations.

Colorectal cancer screening: An updated review of the available options

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. However, colon cancer incidence and mortality is declining over the past decade owing to adoption of effective screening programs. Nevertheless, in some parts of the world, CRC incidence and mortality remain on the rise, likely due to factors including “westernized” diet, lifestyle, and lack of health-care infrastructure and resources. Participation and adherence to different national screening programs remain obstacles limiting the achievement of screening goals. Different modalities are available ranging from stool based tests to radiology and endoscopy with varying sensitivity and specificity. However, the availability of these tests is limited to areas with high economic resources. Recently, FDA approved a blood-based test (Epi procolon^®) for CRC screening. This blood based test may serve to increase the participation and adherence rates. Hence, leading to increase in colon cancer detection and prevention. This article will discuss various CRC screening tests with a particular focus on the data regarding the new approved blood test. Finally, we will propose an algorithm for a simple cost-effective CRC screening program.

Do Men and Women Need to Be Screened Differently with Fecal Immunochemical Testing? A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Background: Several studies suggest that test characteristics for the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) differ by gender, triggering a debate on whether men and women should be screened differently. We used the microsimulation model MISCAN-Colon to evaluate whether screening stratified by gender is cost-effective.Methods: We estimated gender-specific FIT characteristics based on first-round positivity and detection rates observed in a FIT screening pilot (CORERO-1). Subsequently, we used the model to estimate harms, benefits, and costs of 480 gender-specific FIT screening strategies and compared them with uniform screening.Results: Biennial FIT screening from ages 50 to 75 was less effective in women than men [35.7 vs. 49.0 quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained, respectively] at higher costs (€42,161 vs. -€5,471, respectively). However, the incremental QALYs gained and costs of annual screening compared with biennial screening were more similar for both genders (8.7 QALYs gained and €26,394 for women vs. 6.7 QALYs gained and €20,863 for men). Considering all evaluated screening strategies, optimal gender-based screening yielded at most 7% more QALYs gained than optimal uniform screening and even resulted in equal costs and QALYs gained from a willingness-to-pay threshold of €1,300.Conclusions: FIT screening is less effective in women, but the incremental cost-effectiveness is similar in men and women. Consequently, screening stratified by gender is not more cost-effective than uniform FIT screening.Impact: Our conclusions support the current policy of uniform FIT screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 26(8); 1328-36. ©2017 AACR.

Harms, benefits and costs of fecal immunochemical testing versus guaiac fecal occult blood testing for colorectal cancer screening

BACKGROUND

The ColonCancerCheck screening program for colorectal cancer (CRC) in Ontario, Canada, is considering switching from biennial guaiac fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) screening between age 50-74 years to the more sensitive, but also less specific fecal immunochemical test (FIT). The aim of this study is to estimate whether the additional benefits of FIT screening compared to gFOBT outweigh the additional costs and harms.

METHODS

We used microsimulation modeling to estimate quality adjusted life years (QALYs) gained and costs of gFOBT and FIT, compared to no screening, in a cohort of screening participants. We compared strategies with various age ranges, screening intervals, and cut-off levels for FIT. Cost-efficient strategies were determined for various levels of available colonoscopy capacity.

RESULTS

Compared to no screening, biennial gFOBT screening between age 50-74 years provided 20 QALYs at a cost of CAN$200,900 per 1,000 participants, and required 17 colonoscopies per 1,000 participants per year. FIT screening was more effective and less costly. For the same level of colonoscopy requirement, biennial FIT (with a high cut-off level of 200 ng Hb/ml) between age 50-74 years provided 11 extra QALYs gained while saving CAN$333,300 per 1000 participants, compared to gFOBT. Without restrictions in colonoscopy capacity, FIT (with a low cut-off level of 50 ng Hb/ml) every year between age 45-80 years was the most cost-effective strategy providing 27 extra QALYs gained per 1000 participants, while saving CAN$448,300.

INTERPRETATION

Compared to gFOBT screening, switching to FIT at a high cut-off level could increase the health benefits of a CRC screening program without considerably increasing colonoscopy demand.

Genetic Biomarker Prevalence Is Similar in Fecal Immunochemical Test Positive and Negative Colorectal Cancer Tissue

BACKGROUND

Fecal immunochemical test (FIT) screening detects most asymptomatic colorectal cancers. Combining FIT screening with stool-based genetic biomarkers increases sensitivity for cancer, but whether DNA biomarkers (biomarkers) differ for cancers detected versus missed by FIT screening has not been evaluated in a community-based population.

AIMS

To evaluate tissue biomarkers among Kaiser Permanente Northern California patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer within 2 years after FIT screening.

METHODS

FIT-negative and FIT-positive colorectal cancer patients 50-77 years of age were matched on age, sex, and cancer stage. Adequate DNA was isolated from paraffin-embedded specimens in 210 FIT-negative and 211 FIT-positive patients. Quantitative allele-specific real-time target and signal amplification assays were performed for 7 K-ras mutations and 10 aberrantly methylated DNA biomarkers (NDRG4, BMP3, SFMBT2_895, SFMBT2_896, SFMBT2_897, CHST2_7890, PDGFD, VAV3, DTX1, CHST2_7889).

RESULTS

One or more biomarkers were found in 414 of 421 CRCs (98.3%). Biomarker expression was not associated with FIT status, with the exception of higher SFMBT2_897 expression in FIT-negative (194 of 210; 92.4%) than in FIT-positive cancers (180 of 211; 85.3%; p = 0.02). There were no consistent differences in biomarker expression by FIT status within age, sex, stage, and cancer location subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

The biomarkers of a currently in-use multi-target stool DNA test (K-ras, NDRG4, and BMP3) and eight newly characterized methylated biomarkers were commonly expressed in tumor tissue specimens, independent of FIT result. Additional study using stool-based testing with these new biomarkers will allow assessment of sensitivity, specificity, and clinical utility.

Consequences of Increasing Time to Colonoscopy Examination After Positive Result From Fecal Colorectal Cancer Screening Test

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Delays in diagnostic testing after a positive result from a screening test can undermine the benefits of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, but there are few empirical data on the effects of such delays. We used microsimulation modeling to estimate the consequences of time to colonoscopy after a positive result from a fecal immunochemical test (FIT).

METHODS

We used an established microsimulation model to simulate an average-risk United States population cohort that underwent annual FIT screening (from ages 50 to 75 years), with follow-up colonoscopy examinations for individuals with positive results (cutoff, 20 μg/g) at different time points in the following 12 months. Main evaluated outcomes were CRC incidence and mortality; additional outcomes were total life-years lost and net costs of screening.

RESULTS

For individuals who underwent diagnostic colonoscopy within 2 weeks of a positive result from an FIT, the estimated lifetime risk of CRC incidence was 35.5/1000 persons, and mortality was 7.8/1000 persons. Every month added until colonoscopy was associated with a 0.1/1000 person increase in cancer incidence risk (an increase of 0.3%/month, compared with individuals who received colonoscopies within 2 weeks) and mortality risk (increase of 1.4%/month). Among individuals who received colonoscopy examinations 12 months after a positive result from an FIT, the incidence of CRC was 37.0/1000 persons (increase of 4%, compared with 2 weeks), and mortality was 9.1/1000 persons (increase of 16%). Total years of life gained for the entire screening cohort decreased from an estimated 93.7/1000 persons with an almost immediate follow-up colonoscopy (cost savings of $208 per patient, compared with no colonoscopy) to 84.8/1000 persons with follow-up colonoscopies at 12 months (decrease of 9%; cost savings of $100/patient, compared with no colonoscopy).

CONCLUSIONS

By using a microsimulation model of an average-risk United States screening cohort, we estimated that delays of up to 12 months after a positive result from an FIT can produce proportional losses of up to nearly 10% in overall screening benefits. These findings indicate the importance of timely follow-up colonoscopy examinations of patients with positive results from FITs.

Nonbleeding adenomas: Evidence of systematic false-negative fecal immunochemical test results and their implications for screening effectiveness-A modeling study

BACKGROUND

If some adenomas do not bleed over several years, they will cause systematic false-negative fecal immunochemical test (FIT) results. The long-term effectiveness of FIT screening has been estimated without accounting for such systematic false-negativity. There are now data with which to evaluate this issue.

METHODS

The authors developed one microsimulation model (MISCAN [MIcrosimulation SCreening ANalysis]-Colon) without systematic false-negative FIT results and one model that allowed a percentage of adenomas to be systematically missed in successive FIT screening rounds. Both variants were adjusted to reproduce the first-round findings of the Dutch CORERO FIT screening trial. The authors then compared simulated detection rates in the second screening round with those observed, and adjusted the simulated percentage of systematically missed adenomas to those data. Finally, the authors calculated the impact of systematic false-negative FIT results on the effectiveness of repeated FIT screening.

RESULTS

The model without systematic false-negativity simulated higher detection rates in the second screening round than observed. These observed rates could be reproduced when assuming that FIT systematically missed 26% of advanced and 73% of nonadvanced adenomas. To reduce the false-positive rate in the second round to the observed level, the authors also had to assume that 30% of false-positive findings were systematically false-positive. Systematic false-negative FIT testing limits the long-term reduction of biennial FIT screening in the incidence of colorectal cancer (35.6% vs 40.9%) and its mortality (55.2% vs 59.0%) in participants.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the current study provide convincing evidence based on the combination of real-life and modeling data that a percentage of adenomas are systematically missed by repeat FIT screening. This impairs the efficacy of FIT screening. Cancer 2016;122:1680-8. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

A Blood Test for Methylated BCAT1 and IKZF1 vs. a Fecal Immunochemical Test for Detection of Colorectal Neoplasia

Objectives:

To compare the performance of a new blood test for colorectal cancer (CRC) to an established fecal immunochemical test (FIT) in a study population with the full range of neoplastic and non-neoplastic pathologies encountered in the colon and rectum.

Methods:

Volunteers were asked to complete a FIT prior to colonoscopy. Blood was collected after bowel preparation but prior to colonoscopy, and plasma was assayed for the presence of methylated BCAT1 and IKZF1 DNA using a multiplex real-time PCR assay. Sensitivity and specificity estimates for the blood test were calculated from true- and false-positive rates for neoplasia and compared with FIT at a range of fecal hemoglobin (Hb) concentration positivity thresholds.

Results:

In total, 1,381 volunteers (median age 64 years; 49% male) completed both tests prior to colonoscopy. Estimated sensitivity of the BCAT1/IKZF1 blood test for CRC was 62% (41/66; 95% confidence interval 49–74%) with a specificity of 92% (1207/1315; 90–93%). FIT returned the same specificity at a cutoff of 60 μg Hb/g, at which its corresponding sensitivity for cancer was 64% (42/66; 51–75%). In the range of commonly used FIT cutoffs, respective cancer sensitivity and specificity estimates with FIT were: 59% (46–71%) and 93% (92–95%) at 80 μg Hb/g, and 79% (67–88%) and 81% (78–83%) at 10 μg Hb/g. Although estimated sensitivities were not significantly different between the two tests for any stage of cancer, FIT showed a significantly higher sensitivity for advanced adenoma at the lower cutoffs. Specificity of FIT, but not of the BCAT1/IKZF1 blood test, deteriorated substantially in people with overt blood in the feces. When combining FIT (cutoff 10 μg Hb/g) with the BCAT1/IKZF1 blood test, sensitivity for cancer was 89% (79–96%) at 74% (72–77%) specificity.

Conclusions:

A test based on detection of methylated BCAT1/IKZF1 DNA in blood has comparable sensitivity but better specificity for CRC than FIT at the commonly used positivity threshold of 10 μg Hb/g. Further evaluation of the new test relative to FIT in the population screening context is now required to fully understand the potential advantages and disadvantages of these biomarkers in screening.

Screening for Colorectal Cancer Using a Multitarget Stool DNA Test: Modeling the Effect of the Intertest Interval on Clinical Effectiveness

BACKGROUND

A multitarget stool DNA (mt-sDNA) test was recently approved for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening for men and women, aged ≥ 50 years, at average risk of CRC. The guidelines currently recommend a 3-year interval for mt-sDNA testing in the absence of empirical data. We used clinical effectiveness modeling to project decreases in CRC incidence and related mortality associated with mt-sDNA screening to help inform interval setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Archimedes model (Archimedes Inc., San Francisco, CA) was used to conduct a 5-arm, virtual, clinical screening study of a population of 200,000 virtual individuals to compare the clinical effectiveness of mt-sDNA screening at 1-, 3-, and 5-year intervals compared with colonoscopy at 10-year intervals and no screening for a 30-year period. The study endpoints were the decrease in CRC incidence and related mortality of each strategy versus no screening. Cost-effectiveness ratios (US dollars per quality-adjusted life year [QALY]) of mt-sDNA intervals were calculated versus no screening.

RESULTS

Compared with 10-year colonoscopy, annual mt-sDNA testing produced similar reductions in CRC incidence (65% vs. 63%) and related mortality (73% vs. 72%). mt-sDNA testing at 3-year intervals reduced the CRC incidence by 57% and CRC mortality by 67%, and mt-sDNA testing at 5-year intervals reduced the CRC incidence by 52% and CRC mortality by 62%. At an average price of $600 per test, the annual, 3-year, and 5-year mt-sDNA screening costs would be $20,178, $11,313, and $7388 per QALY, respectively, compared with no screening.

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that screening every 3 years using a multitarget mt-sDNA test provides reasonable performance at acceptable cost.

The value of models in informing resource allocation in colorectal cancer screening: the case of The Netherlands

In May 2011, the Dutch government decided to implement a national programme for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening using biennial faecal immunochemical test screening between ages 55 and 75. Decision modelling played an important role in informing this decision, as well as in the planning and implementation of the programme afterwards. In this overview, we illustrate the value of models in informing resource allocation in CRC screening using the role that decision modelling has played in the Dutch CRC screening programme as an example.

Personalizing colonoscopy screening for elderly individuals based on screening history, cancer risk, and comorbidity status could increase cost effectiveness

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening decisions for elderly individuals are often made primarily on the basis of age, whereas other factors that influence the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of screening are often not considered. We investigated the relative importance of factors that could be used to identify elderly individuals most likely to benefit from CRC screening and determined the maximum ages at which screening remains cost effective based on these factors.

METHODS

We used a microsimulation model (Microsimulation Screening Analysis-Colon) calibrated to the incidence of CRC in the United States and the prevalence of adenomas reported in autopsy studies to determine the appropriate age at which to stop colonoscopy screening in 19,200 cohorts (of 10 million individuals), defined by sex, race, screening history, background risk for CRC, and comorbidity status. We applied a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained.

RESULTS

Less intensive screening history, higher background risk for CRC, and fewer comorbidities were associated with cost-effective screening at older ages. Sex and race had only a small effect on the appropriate age to stop screening. For some individuals likely to be screened in current practice (for example, 74-year-old white women with moderate comorbidities, half the average background risk for CRC, and negative findings from a screening colonoscopy 10 years previously), screening resulted in a loss of QALYs, rather than a gain. For some individuals unlikely to be screened in current practice (for example, 81-year-old black men with no comorbidities, an average background risk for CRC, and no previous screening), screening was highly cost effective. Although screening some previously screened, low-risk individuals was not cost effective even when they were 66 years old, screening some healthy, high-risk individuals remained cost effective until they reached the age of 88 years old.

CONCLUSIONS

The current approach to CRC screening in elderly individuals, in which decisions are often based primarily on age, is inefficient, resulting in underuse of screening for some and overuse of screening for others. CRC screening could be more effective and cost effective if individual factors for each patient are considered.

Evaluation of an assay for methylated BCAT1 and IKZF1 in plasma for detection of colorectal neoplasia

BACKGROUND

Specific genes, such as BCAT1 and IKZF1, are methylated with high frequency in colorectal cancer (CRC) tissue compared to normal colon tissue specimens. Such DNA may leak into blood and be present as cell-free circulating DNA. We have evaluated the accuracy of a novel blood test for these two markers across the spectrum of benign and neoplastic conditions encountered in the colon and rectum.

METHODS

Circulating DNA was extracted from plasma obtained from volunteers scheduled for colonoscopy for any reason, or for colonic surgery, at Australian and Dutch hospitals. The extracted DNA was bisulphite converted and analysed by methylation specific real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR). A specimen was deemed positive if one or more qPCR replicates were positive for either methylated BCAT1 or IKZF1 DNA. Sensitivity and specificity for CRC were estimated as the primary outcome measures.

RESULTS

Plasma samples were collected from 2105 enrolled volunteers (mean age 62 years, 54 % male), including 26 additional samples taken after surgical removal of cancers. The two-marker blood test was run successfully on 2127 samples. The test identified 85 of 129 CRC cases (sensitivity of 66 %, 95 % CI: 57-74). For CRC stages I-IV, respective positivity rates were 38 % (95 % CI: 21-58), 69 % (95 % CI: 53-82), 73 % (95 % CI: 56-85) and 94 % (95 % CI: 70-100). A positive trend was observed between positivity rate and degree of invasiveness. The colonic location of cancer did not influence assay positivity rates. Gender, age, smoking and family history were not significant predictors of marker positivity. Twelve methylation-positive cancer cases with paired pre- and post-surgery plasma showed reduction in methylation signal after surgery, with complete disappearance of signal in 10 subjects. Sensitivity for advanced adenoma (n = 338) was 6 % (95 % CI: 4-9). Specificity was 94 % (95 % CI: 92-95) in all 838 non-neoplastic pathology cases and 95 % (95 % CI: 92-97) in those with no colonic pathology detected (n = 450).

CONCLUSIONS

The sensitivity for cancer of this two-marker blood test justifies prospective evaluation in a true screening population relative to a proven screening test. Given the high rate of marker disappearance after cancer resection, this blood test might also be useful to monitor tumour recurrence.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ACTRN12611000318987 .

An Accurate Cancer Incidence in Barrett's Esophagus: A Best Estimate Using Published Data and Modeling

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Published estimates for the rate of progression from Barrett's esophagus (BE) to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) vary. We used simulation modeling to reconcile published data and more accurately estimate the incidence of EAC among people with BE.

METHODS

We calibrated the ERASMUS/UW model (a collaboration between Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands and the University of Washington, Seattle) for EAC to match the 0.18% annual rate of progression from population-based studies. This model was then used to simulate the design of prospective studies, introducing more endoscopic surveillance. We used the model to predict rates of progression for both types of studies and for different periods of follow-up, and compared the predicted rates with published data.

RESULTS

For the first 5 years of follow-up, the model reproduced the 0.19% mean annual rate of progression observed in population-based studies; the same disease model predicted a 0.36% annual rate of progression in studies with a prospective design (0.41% reported in published articles). After 20 years, these rates each increased to 0.63% to 0.65% annually, corresponding with a 9.1% to 9.5% cumulative cancer incidence. Between these periods, the difference between the progression rates of both study designs decreased from 91% to 5%.

CONCLUSIONS

In the first 5 years after diagnosis, the rate of progression from BE to EAC is likely to more closely approximate the lower estimates reported from population-based studies than the higher estimates reported from prospective studies in which EAC is detected by surveillance. Clinicians should use this information to explain to patients their short-term and long-term risks if no action is taken, and then discuss the risks and benefits of surveillance.

State disparities in colorectal cancer rates: Contributions of risk factors, screening, and survival differences

BACKGROUND

Northeastern states of the United States have shown more progress in reducing colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality rates than Southern states, and this has resulted in considerable disparities. This study quantified how the disparities in CRC rates between Louisiana (a Southern state) and New Jersey (a Northeastern state) would be affected if differences in risk factors, screening, and stage-specific CRC relative survival between the states were eliminated.

METHODS

This study used the Microsimulation Screening Analysis Colon microsimulation model to estimate age-adjusted CRC incidence and mortality rates in Louisiana from 1995 to 2009 under the assumption that 1) Louisiana had the same smoking and obesity prevalence observed in New Jersey, 2) Louisiana had the same CRC screening uptake observed in New Jersey, 3) Louisiana had the same stage-specific CRC relative survival observed in New Jersey, or 4) all the preceding were true.

RESULTS

In 2009, the observed CRC incidence and mortality rates in Louisiana were 141.4 cases and 61.9 deaths per 100,000 individuals, respectively. With the same risk factors and screening observed in New Jersey, the CRC incidence rate in Louisiana was reduced by 3.5% and 15.2%, respectively. New Jersey's risk factors, screening, and survival reduced the CRC mortality rate in Louisiana by 3.0%, 10.8%, and 17.4%, respectively. With all trends combined, the modeled rates per 100,000 individuals in Louisiana became lower than the observed rates in New Jersey for both incidence (116.4 vs 130.0) and mortality (44.7 vs 55.8).

CONCLUSIONS

The disparities in CRC incidence and mortality rates between Louisiana and New Jersey could be eliminated if Louisiana could attain New Jersey's levels of risk factors, screening, and survival. Priority should be given to enabling Southern states to improve screening and survival rates.

Optimal colorectal cancer screening in states' low-income, uninsured populations—the case of South Carolina

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether, given a limited budget, a state's low-income uninsured population would have greater benefit from a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program using colonoscopy or fecal immunochemical testing (FIT).

DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING

South Carolina's low-income, uninsured population.

STUDY DESIGN

Comparative effectiveness analysis using microsimulation modeling to estimate the number of individuals screened, CRC cases prevented, CRC deaths prevented, and life-years gained from a screening program using colonoscopy versus a program using annual FIT in South Carolina's low-income, uninsured population. This analysis assumed an annual budget of $1 million and a budget availability of 2 years as a base case.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

The annual FIT screening program resulted in nearly eight times more individuals being screened, and more important, approximately four times as many CRC deaths prevented and life-years gained than the colonoscopy screening program. Our results were robust for assumptions concerning economic perspective and the target population, and they may therefore be generalized to other states and populations.

CONCLUSIONS

A FIT screening program will prevent more CRC deaths than a colonoscopy-based program when a state's budget for CRC screening supports screening of only a fraction of the target population.