Randomized trial to increase colorectal cancer screening in an ethnically diverse sample of first-degree relatives

Interventions to promote colorectal cancer screening among people with a family history of colorectal cancer: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

The global incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) is rising, with people having a family history of CRC (PFH-CRC) facing double the risk compared to the average-risk population. Despite this, CRC screening uptake among PFH-CRC remains low. There is a lack of systematic mapping of interventions promoting CRC screening in this high-risk population.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a scoping review to identify the types of interventions targeting PFH-CRC, their effectiveness in increasing CRC screening uptake, and the elements associated with the outcomes.

METHODS

The Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping review was followed. The search for eligible articles was conducted from the inception of each database until 17 July 2024 in PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane, PsycINFO and Web of Science with no restrictions on language.

RESULTS

Thirty studies from 1995 to 2023 across 13 countries were included; mostly from high-income countries. There was considerable variability in study design, intervention characteristics, and screening outcomes. Eleven studies used theoretical frameworks in intervention development. Fourteen studies reported statistically significant increases in screening uptake among PFH-CRC, most using complex, multiple-component interventions. Tailored print materials and patient navigation more consistently demonstrated increased screening uptake, while counselling yielded mixed results.

CONCLUSION

Interventions for promoting CRC screening uptake in PFH-CRC commonly incorporate print material, patient navigation and counselling, often combined into complex interventions. Future research should include more implementation studies to translate these interventions into real-world settings. Additionally, there are gaps in research from low- and middle-income countries, highlighting the need for further research in these resource-limited settings.

Effects of health education on screening rate of first-degree relatives of cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To synthesize the effects of educational intervention on the screening rate of first-degree relatives of cancer patients.

METHODS

A total of eight Chinese and English databases were searched (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus, Medline and China Biology Medicine disc) from the time of library establishment to June 2023, for randomized controlled trials investigating the effects of educational intervention on screening rate of first-degree relatives of cancer patients. Two researchers independently screened and evaluated the quality of studies. RevMan 5.3 software was used to calculate the pooled effect size.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies involving 5628 participants were chosen to include in the meta-analysis. The results revealed that health education can increase screening rate of first-degree relatives of cancer patients (RR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.16-1.65, P = 0.0002). The effect shown after short-term follow-up (≤6 months) was insignificant in terms of improving screening rate (RR = 1.46, 95% CI = 0.94-2.26, P = 0.09), but after long-term follow-up (＞6 months) the improvement was greater (RR = 1.37, 95% CI = 1.13-1.65, P = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Health education is effective in increasing the screening rate of first-degree relatives of cancer patients. The effect is more evident after long-term than short-term follow-up.

The Effect of Individual Education on the Participation of Relatives of Cancer Patients in General Health and Cancer Screenings: A One Group Pretest-Post Test Study

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether or not there were changes in the behaviors of relatives of cancer patients such as learning the warning signs of cancer, engaging in cancer prevention strategies, and participating in screenings after education sessions in the clinic. Methods: This one-group pretest-posttest study was conducted with 238 relatives in a medical oncology clinic in Antalya, Turkey. Individual education sessions were conducted as an intervention, banners were hung about cancer, and general health information on checkups in the form of leaflets were distributed to each relative regarding cancer screenings. Reminder messages were sent to individuals to participate in screenings one and two months after the first interview. The posttest data were collected by phone in the third month. Four questionnaires were prepared based on the literature and national cancer screening standards. The face validity of the tools was evaluated by three experts and 15 relatives who not included as participants. Results: The rate of having a mammography increased from 19.8% to 33.9%, rates of having the fecal occult blood test increased from 16.9% to 23.8%, and rates of having the HPV test increased from 43.5% to 49.6%. The rate of having blood pressure checks within the last 12 months increased from 75.8% to 83.1%, rates of blood cholesterol measurement increased from 68.5% to 79%, and rates of blood glucose measurement increased from 70.2% to 79%. Conclusion: Education provided to the relatives increased participation in screenings.

Colorectal cancer patients advocating screening to their siblings: a randomized behavioral intervention

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Siblings of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients are at increased risk of developing CRC, but screening rates remain low. Through a randomized behavioral intervention, this study aimed to determine whether patients can advocate screening to their siblings using a tailored educational package.

METHODS

CRC survivors were recruited and randomized into relaying either tailored materials (intervention group) or existing national screening guidelines (control group) to their siblings. Siblings could respond to the study team if they were interested in learning about CRC screening. Study outcomes were patient advocacy rates (number of patients who had successfully contacted at least 1 eligible sibling) between groups and the proportion of eligible siblings who responded.

RESULTS

Between May 2017 and March 2021, 219 CRC patients were randomized to the intervention (n = 110) and control (n = 109) groups. Patient advocacy rates were high and did not differ significantly between groups. However, only 14.3% of eligible siblings (n = 85) responded to the study team. Siblings of patients from the intervention group were more likely to respond (adjusted odds ratio, 1.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-3.0; P < .05). Moreover, after controlling for potential confounders, siblings aged ≥60 years were significantly less likely to respond (adjusted odds ratio, .3; 95% confidence interval, .1-.7; P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

CRC patients are willing advocates of screening, and siblings contacted by patients from the intervention group were also more likely to reach out to the study team. However, overall sibling response rates were low despite advocacy, suggesting that patient-led advocacy should at best be used as an adjunct to other, multipronged CRC screening promotion modalities.

Mapping psychosocial interventions in familial colorectal cancer: a rapid systematic review

Background

Approximately 5% of colorectal cancer (CRC) cases are part of a well-defined inherited genetic syndrome and up to approximately 30% of these cases have a clinically defined familial basis. Psychosocial interventions in familial colorectal cancer address aspects mainly focused on affective, cognitive and behavioural outcomes. The present review aims to systematically map out the available psychosocial interventions for individuals with a family history of CRC and describe the current state of the research.

Methods

An extensive electronic search was conducted to investigate the literature published until June 2020. Inclusion criteria consisted of quantitative studies published in English that explored the impact of psychosocial interventions for familial CRC, clearly defined the psychosocial intervention offered and included participants with a family history of CRC.

Results

The analysis included 52 articles. Genetic counselling, educational interventions, psychological interventions and multimodal interventions were identified across the studies. In terms of diagnoses, Lynch Syndrome, Familial Adenomatous Polyposis, Familial Colorectal Cancer were the main conditions included in the studies. Affective, cognitive, behavioural aspects and quality of life emerged as the most frequently explored outcomes. The studies included individuals with both personal and familial history of CRC or family history alone.

Conclusions

Our rapid review provides an overview of the literature exploring the impact of psychosocial interventions for familial CRC. The psychosocial interventions identified had an overwhelmingly positive impact across all types of outcomes measured. Genetic counselling appeared to be most beneficial, and this is expected as it is purposively designed to address genetic conditions. Further quantitative analysis of primary empirical research is needed to determine the efficacy and effectiveness of psychosocial interventions as well as the mechanisms through which they exert their effect.

Examining aspects of successful community-based programs promoting cancer screening uptake to reduce cancer health disparity: A systematic review

Certain minorities in the US are disproportionately burdened with higher cancer incidence and mortality rates. Programs encouraging timely uptake of cancer screening measures serve to reduce cancer health disparities. A systematic literature review was conducted to assess the effectiveness and the qualities of these programs, and to elucidate characteristics of success programs to aid in designing of future ones. We focused on community-based programs rather than clinic-based programs as the former are more likely to reach disadvantaged populations, and on prevention programs for breast, cervical, and/or colon cancers as longstanding screening recommendations for these cancers exist. PubMed, CINAHL and EBSCO databases were searched for articles that utilized community organizations and community health workers. Fourteen programs described in 34 manuscripts were identified. While 10 of 14 programs reported statistically significant increases in cancer prevention knowledge and/or increase in screening rates, only 7 of them enrolled large numbers of participants (defined as ≥1000). Only 7 programs had control groups, only 4 programs independently verified screening uptake, and 2 programs had long-term follow-up (defined as more than one screening cycle). Only one program demonstrated elimination of cancer health disparity at a population level. While most community-based cancer prevention programs have demonstrated efficacy in terms of increased knowledge and/or screening uptake, scalability and demonstration in reduction at a population level remain a challenge.

Factors associated with colorectal cancer screening in a peer-counseling intervention study in partnership with African American churches

Colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality is 47% higher in African American men and 34% higher in African American women compared to non-Hispanic white men and women. This analysis assessed factors associated with CRC screening among 163 African American participants of a peer-counseling intervention study (2016-2018). In a one-group pre/post-test pilot study, trained Community Health Advisors (CHAs) at 9 African American churches in Los Angeles (LA) promoted CRC screening via one-on-one counseling, print materials and telephone reminder calls. Participants completed telephone surveys 3-6 months after the intervention. We fit bivariate and multivariate mixed effects logistic regression models to assess correlates, including participants' demographic characteristics, access to care, cancer-related knowledge and attitudes and receipt of CHA counseling of (1) discussion of CRC screening with provider and (2) receipt of CRC screening during follow-up. After controlling for gender and education, receipt of CHA counseling (OR 3.77) was significantly associated with discussing CRC screening with a provider during follow-up but not with CRC screening. Instead, a routine check-up in the past 12 months (OR 4.47) and discussion of CRC screening with a provider (OR 3.07) were significantly associated with CRC screening during follow-up. Residence in South LA (OR 0.38) was significantly associated with lack of CRC screening. Findings confirm the important role of health care providers and suggest that residence in South LA constitutes an additional barrier to CRC screening. Further research and additional resources are needed to address disparities in the uptake of CRC screening among African Americans, especially in South LA.

Interventions for increasing colorectal cancer screening uptake among African-American men: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

African-American men have the lowest 5-year survival rate in the U.S. for colorectal cancer (CRC) of any racial group, which may partly stem from low screening adherence. It is imperative to synthesize the literature evaluating the effectiveness of interventions on CRC screening uptake in this population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, Medline, CINAHL, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched for U.S.-based interventions that: were published after 1998-January 2020; included African-American men; and evaluated CRC screening uptake explicitly. Checklist by Cochrane Collaboration and Joanna Brigg were utilized to assess risk of bias, and meta-regression and sensitivity analyses were employed to identify the most effective interventions.

RESULTS

Our final sample comprised 41 studies with 2 focused exclusively on African-American men. The most frequently adopted interventions were educational materials (39%), stool-based screening kits (14%), and patient navigation (11%). Most randomized controlled trials failed to provide details about the blinding of the participant recruitment method, allocation concealment method, and/or the outcome assessment. Due to high heterogeneity, meta-analysis was conducted among 17 eligible studies. Interventions utilizing stool-based kits or patient navigation were most effective at increasing CRC screening completion, with odds ratios of 9.60 (95% CI 2.89-31.82, p = 0.0002) and 2.84 (95% CI 1.23-6.49, p = 0.01). No evidence of publication bias was present for this study registered with the International Prospective Registry of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO 2019 CRD42019119510).

CONCLUSIONS

Additional research is warranted to uncover effective, affordable interventions focused on increasing CRC screening completion among African-American men. When designing and implementing future multicomponent interventions, employing 4 or fewer interventions types may reduce bias risk. Since only 5% of the interventions solely focused on African-American men, future theory-driven interventions should consider recruiting samples comprised solely of this population.

Colorectal cancer patients can be advocates for colorectal cancer screening for their siblings: A study on siblings' perspectives

OBJECTIVE

This study was performed to explore in-depth, the issues and barriers pertaining to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening amongst the siblings of CRC patients in view of their higher risk of developing CRC.

METHODS

A qualitative study of siblings of CRC patients was performed from August 2017 to October 2018. Semi-structured interviewed were performed until data saturation was achieved. The data was then thematically analysed.

RESULTS

A total of 36 siblings of CRC patients, with a median age of 59 (range 39-78) years old completed the interviews. All the interviews were conducted alone with the participants. Each interview lasted between 30 and 45 minutes. None of the participants has undergone screening colonoscopy prior to the interviews. After thematic analysis, five themes were identified. These include: (i) Misunderstanding their own risk of developing colorectal cancer; (ii) Misperceptions of the role of "screening" for colorectal cancer.; (iii) Misconception of the CRC screening modality for FDRs; (iv) Barriers and facilitators of undergoing screening; (v) Misperceptions of national healthcare policies.

CONCLUSIONS

Identifying and addressing the identified barriers for these siblings to undergo screening colonoscopy is easily attainable. A multi-pronged approach should also be adopted to address the various concerns so as to reduce the incidence of CRC amongst these higher risk individuals.

Achieving Health Equity in Preventive Services: A Systematic Review for a National Institutes of Health Pathways to Prevention Workshop

BACKGROUND

Disadvantaged populations in the United States experience disparities in the use of preventive health services.

PURPOSE

To examine effects of barriers that create health disparities in 10 recommended preventive services for adults, and to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions to reduce them.

DATA SOURCES

English-language searches of Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO, SocINDEX, and the Veterans Affairs Health Services database (1 January 1996 to 5 July 2019); reference lists.

STUDY SELECTION

Trials, observational studies with comparison groups, and systematic reviews of populations adversely affected by disparities that reported effects of barriers on use of any of the 10 selected preventive services or that reported the effectiveness of interventions to reduce disparities in use of a preventive service by improving intermediate or clinical outcomes.

DATA EXTRACTION

Dual extraction and assessment of study quality, strength of evidence, and evidence applicability.

DATA SYNTHESIS

No studies reported effects of provider-specific barriers on preventive service use. Eighteen studies reporting effects of patient barriers, such as insurance coverage or lack of a regular provider, on preventive service use had mixed and inconclusive findings. Studies of patient-provider interventions (n = 12), health information technologies (n = 11), and health system interventions (n = 88) indicated higher cancer screening rates with patient navigation; telephone calls, prompts, and other outreach methods; reminders involving lay health workers; patient education; risk assessment, counseling, and decision aids; screening checklists; community engagement; and provider training. Single studies showed that clinician-delivered and technology-assisted interventions improved rates of smoking cessation and weight loss, respectively.

LIMITATION

Insufficient or low strength of evidence and applicability for most interventions except patient navigation, telephone calls and prompts, and reminders involving lay health workers.

CONCLUSION

In populations adversely affected by disparities, patient navigation, telephone calls and prompts, and reminders involving lay health workers increase cancer screening.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Institutes of Health Office of Disease Prevention through an interagency agreement with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (PROSPERO: CRD42018109263).

Promoting guideline-based cancer genetic risk assessment for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer in ethnically and geographically diverse cancer survivors: Rationale and design of a 3-arm randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Although national guidelines for cancer genetic risk assessment (CGRA) for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) have been available for over two decades, less than half of high-risk women have accessed these services, especially underserved minority and rural populations. Identification of high-risk individuals is crucial for cancer survivors and their families to benefit from biomedical advances in cancer prevention, early detection, and treatment.

METHODS

This paper describes community-engaged formative research and the protocol of the ongoing randomized 3-arm controlled Genetic Risk Assessment for Cancer Education and Empowerment (GRACE) trial. Ethnically and geographically diverse breast and ovarian cancer survivors at increased risk for hereditary cancer predisposition who have not had a CGRA are recruited through the three statewide cancer registries. The specific aims are to: 1) compare the effectiveness of a targeted intervention (TP) vs. a tailored counseling and navigation(TCN) intervention vs. usual care (UC) on CGRA utilization at 6 months post-diagnosis (primary outcome); compare the effectiveness of the interventions on genetic counseling uptake at 12 months after removal of cost barriers (secondary outcome); 2) examine potential underlying theoretical mediating and moderating mechanisms; and 3) conduct a cost evaluation to guide dissemination strategies.

DISCUSSION

The ongoing GRACE trial addresses an important translational gap by developing and implementing evidence-based strategies to promote guideline-based care and reduce disparities in CGRA utilization among ethnically and geographically diverse women. If effective, these interventions have the potential to reach a large number of high-risk families and reduce disparities through broad dissemination.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03326713; clinicaltrials.gov.

Obesity, physical activity, and dietary behaviors in an ethnically-diverse sample of cancer survivors with early onset disease

PURPOSE

To assess weight status, physical activity, and dietary behaviors in an ethnically-diverse sample of breast and colorectal cancer survivors with early onset disease (≤ 50 years).

METHODS

Breast and colorectal cancer survivors, diagnosed between 1999 and 2009 with early-stage cancer diagnosed by 50 years of age, were identified through a population-based cancer registry and surveyed. Descriptive and regression analyses were conducted to characterize the sample and identify correlates of lifestyle behaviors.

FINDINGS

The majority of participants (n = 156) were female (83%), insured (84%), and racial/ethnic minorities (29% Asian, 24% Latino, 15% African American). Participants' mean age at response was 50 years and mean time since diagnosis was 9 years. Over half of survivors were overweight or obese. Few participants reported engaging in regular physical activity (31%) and adhering to minimum guidelines for fruit and vegetable consumption (32%). A substantial proportion of survivors consumed fast food in the past week (75%) and nearly half (48%) reported daily consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages. Lower income was associated with inadequate fruit and vegetable intake. Fast food and sugar-sweetened beverage consumption was significantly higher among racial/ethnic minority survivors compared to non-Latino whites.

CONCLUSIONS

High prevalence of overweight and suboptimal adherence to recommended nutrition and physical activity behaviors were observed among cancer survivors with early onset disease. Cancer survivors diagnosed at a young age may benefit from targeted interventions to address overweight and suboptimal nutrition and physical activity.

Interventions Promoting Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Latino Men: A Systematic Review

Introduction

Colorectal cancer, the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States, is also among the most preventable cancers. However, Latino men are less likely than non-Latino men to engage in preventive screening. Compared with 60% of non-Latino white men and women, only 42% of Latino men are up to date with colorectal cancer screening guidelines, which may result in diagnosis at advanced disease stages and increased deaths. We evaluated the literature on colorectal cancer screening interventions among Latino men to characterize intervention components effective in increasing colorectal cancer screening.

Methods

Two independent reviewers searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO to identify articles on intervention studies that promote colorectal cancer screening among Latino men. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled or comparative effectiveness trials, an outcome of any colorectal cancer screening test, published in English, US-based, results published from January 2004 through December 2016, Latino or Spanish-speaking male participants, and a minimum of one patient-level component. Two other reviewers independently assessed article quality and conducted data abstraction.

Results

Forty-four studies met the inclusion criteria; only 7 studies with 20% or more Latinos and 39% or more men were included in the final analyses. The most common intervention strategies included one-on-one interactions with a patient navigator and reducing structural barriers (eg, providing fecal occult blood tests). Interventions using small media produced mixed results.

Conclusion

Although intervention studies focused on colorectal cancer screening among men of racial/ethnic minorities are scarce, our findings highlight promising strategies that were effective at increasing colorectal cancer screening among Latino men. Additional research in the area of Latino men’s health is needed, especially to further develop and test theoretically grounded interventions that promote colorectal cancer screening with larger samples of men and across diverse geographic areas in the United States.

Understanding the contribution of family history to colorectal cancer risk and its clinical implications: A state-of-the-science review

Persons with a family history (FH) of colorectal cancer (CRC) or adenomas that are not due to known hereditary syndromes have an increased risk for CRC. An understanding of these risks, screening recommendations, and screening behaviors can inform strategies for reducing the CRC burden in these families. A comprehensive review of the literature published within the past 10 years has been performed to assess what is known about cancer risk, screening guidelines, adherence and barriers to screening, and effective interventions in persons with an FH of CRC and to identify FH tools used to identify these individuals and inform care. Existing data show that having 1 affected first-degree relative (FDR) increases the CRC risk 2-fold, and the risk increases with multiple affected FDRs and a younger age at diagnosis. There is variability in screening recommendations across consensus guidelines. Screening adherence is <50% and is lower in persons under the age of 50 years. A provider's recommendation, multiple affected relatives, and family encouragement facilitate screening; insufficient collection of FH, low knowledge of guidelines, and poor family communication are important barriers. Effective interventions incorporate strategies for overcoming barriers, but these have not been broadly tested in clinical settings. Four strategies for reducing CRC in persons with familial risk are suggested: 1) improving the collection and utilization of the FH of cancer, 2) establishing a consensus for screening guidelines by FH, 3) enhancing provider-patient knowledge of guidelines and communication about CRC risk, and 4) encouraging survivors to promote screening within their families and partnering with existing screening programs to expand their reach to high-risk groups. Cancer 2016. © 2016 American Cancer Society. Cancer 2016;122:2633-2645. © 2016 American Cancer Society.