Uptake of faecal immunochemical test screening among nonparticipants in a flexible sigmoidoscopy screening programme

Analysis of the effectiveness of two noninvasive fecal tests used to screen for colorectal cancer in average-risk adults

OBJECTIVES

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States. Although a significant proportion of CRC cases and deaths are preventable by screening, the morbidity and mortality from CRC remains high and is attributed to suboptimal screening rates. Low levels of population CRC screening uptake may be due to reluctance toward invasiveness of some screening tests, embarrassment, exposure to anesthesia, and grueling preparation, especially for the invasive screening tests. Noninvasive tests overcome many of these barriers because they are more convenient and potentially more attractive to patients compared to invasive tests. This study uses Markov cohort simulation model developed with the help of TreeAge pro software to compare two noninvasive fecal CRC screens, fecal immunohistochemical test (FIT) and multitarget stool DNA test (Mt-sDNA) with no screening in order to identify the more effective noninvasive fecal test to screen for colorectal cancer in average-risk adults.

STUDY DESIGN

Simulation study developed with Markov model using TreeAge pro software, which included a hypothetical cohort at the average risk of developing colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Markov model was used to compare population-level CRC-related cases and deaths averted, life-years gained (LYG), and colonoscopies required for two noninvasive CRC screening strategies compared with no screening: annual fecal immunohistochemical testing (FIT) and 3-yearly multitarget stool DNA testing (Mt-sDNA). The model simulated the natural history of the adenoma-carcinoma sequence in average-risk persons starting at age 50 years, and natural history parameters were estimated from the literature and via verification to data on precancerous lesions (i.e. adenomas) and CRC incidence. Screening strategies were then superimposed on the natural history component of the model, allowing for precancerous lesions to be detected and removed, or CRC to be detected and treated at a potentially earlier stage. The sensitivity and specificity for each screen for precancerous lesions and CRC were the performance parameters used to estimate the effectiveness.

RESULTS

Annual FIT was more effective than three yearly Mt-sDNA in reducing CRC cases, averting CRC-related deaths, and increasing the LYG compared to no screening. On average, annual FIT resulted in 3.5 fewer CRC cases, and 2.9 fewer CRC deaths per 1000 persons screened compared to 3-yearly Mt-sDNA. Annual FIT usage resulted in a 0.18 LYG compared to Mt-sDNA, which allowed 0.16 LYG, and an annual FIT screening led to a total of 203 more colonoscopies performed compared to Mt-sDNA. One-way sensitivity analysis conducted over the sensitivity rates of each screen by type of lesion showed that FIT remained the more effective strategy for all ranges of sensitivity. Threshold analysis results identified the lowest FIT sensitivity value at which Mt-sDNA performed better for conventional high-risk adenomas and CRC detection to be 0.16 and 0.052, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Both the noninvasive screens were effective compared to no screening. Additionally, annual FIT as a first step noninvasive screening test for CRC appears to be more effective compared to three-yearly Mt-sDNA.

A Randomized Controlled Trial Testing Provision of Fecal and Blood Test Options on Participation for Colorectal Cancer Screening

Suboptimal participation is commonly observed in colorectal cancer screening programs utilizing fecal tests. This randomized controlled trial tested whether the offer of a blood test as either a "rescue" strategy for fecal test nonparticipants or an upfront choice, could improve participation. A total of 1,800 people (50-74 years) were randomized to control, rescue, or choice groups (n = 600/group). All were mailed a fecal immunochemical test (FIT, OC-Sensor, Eiken Chemical Company) and a survey assessing awareness of the screening tests. The rescue group was offered a blood test 12 weeks after FIT nonparticipation. The choice group was given the opportunity to choose to do a blood test (Colvera, Clinical Genomics) instead of FIT at baseline. Participation with any test after 24 weeks was not significantly different between groups (control, 37.8%; rescue, 36.9%; choice, 33.8%; P > 0.05). When the rescue strategy was offered after 12 weeks, an additional 6.5% participated with the blood test, which was greater than the blood test participation when offered as an upfront choice (1.5%; P < 0.001). Awareness of the tests was greater for FIT than for blood (96.2% vs. 23.1%; P < 0.0001). In a population familiar with FIT screening, provision of a blood test either as a rescue of FIT nonparticipants or as an upfront choice did not increase overall participation. This might reflect a lack of awareness of the blood test for screening compared with FIT.

Effect of once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy screening on the outcomes of subsequent faecal occult blood test screening

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the outcomes of biennial guaiac faecal occult blood test (gFOBT) screening after once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening.

METHODS

Between 1994 and 1999, as part of the UK FS Screening Trial (UKFSST), adults aged 55-64 were randomly allocated to an intervention group (offered FS screening) or a control group (not contacted). From 2006, a subset of UKFSST participants (20,895/44,041 intervention group; 41,497/87,149 control group) were invited to biennial gFOBT screening by the English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme. We analysed gFOBT uptake, test positivity, yield of colorectal cancer (CRC), and positive predictive value (PPV) for CRC, advanced adenomas (AAs), and advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACN: AA/CRC).

RESULTS

Uptake of gFOBT at first invitation was 1.9% lower (65.7% vs. 67.6%, p < 0.01) among intervention versus control group participants. Positivity was 0.4% lower (2.0% vs. 2.4%, p < 0.01) and CRC yield was 0.08% lower (0.19% vs. 0.27%, p = 0.14). PPVs were also lower in the intervention versus control group, at 10.3% vs. 12.3% ( p = 0.44) for CRC, 22.7% vs. 31.4% ( p < 0.01) for AA, and 33.0% vs. 43.7% ( p < 0.01) for ACN. Among those who refused FS ( n = 5532), gFOBT uptake at first invitation was 47.7%, CRC yield was 0.25%, and PPV for ACN was 46.2%. Among FS attenders ( n = 15,363), uptake was 72.2%, CRC yield was 0.18%, and PPV for ACN was 27.9%.

CONCLUSIONS

Uptake, positivity and PPV of gFOBT screening were reduced following prior offer of FS screening. However, a quarter of FS screened participants receiving a diagnostic examination after positive gFOBT were diagnosed with ACN.

Faecal immunochemical test in subjects not attending screening computed tomography colonography and colonoscopy in a randomized trial

The aim of this study was to evaluate the participation and yield of the faecal immunochemical test (FIT) in nonattendees for computed tomography colonography (CTC) or optical colonoscopy (OC) screening, in the setting of a randomized trial. In the SAVE trial, 16087 individuals were randomly assigned and invited to one of four interventions for colorectal cancer screening: (i) biennial FIT for three rounds; (ii) reduced-preparation CTC; (iii) full-preparation CTC; and (iv) OC. Nonattendees of reduced-preparation CTC, full-preparation CTC and OC groups were invited to FIT. Here, we analysed the participation rate and the detection rate for cancer or advanced adenoma (advanced neoplasia) of FIT among nonattendees for reduced-preparation CTC, full-preparation CTC and OC. Nonattendees were 1721 of 2395 (71.9%) eligible invitees in the reduced-preparation CTC group, 1818 of 2430 (74.8%) in the full-preparation CTC group and 883 of 1036 (85.2%) in the OC group. Participation rates for FIT were 20.2% (347/1721) in nonattendees for reduced-preparation CTC, 21.4% (389/1818) in nonattendees for full-preparation CTC and 25.8% (228/883) in nonattendees for OC. Differences between both CTC groups and the OC group were statistically significant (P≤0.01), whereas the difference between reduced-preparation and full-preparation CTC groups was not statistically significant (P=0.38). The detection rate of FIT was not statistically significantly different among nonattendees for reduced-preparation CTC (0.9%; 3/347), nonattendees for full-preparation CTC (1.8%; 7/389) and nonattendees for OC (1.3%; 3/228) (P>0.05). Offering FIT to nonattendees for CTC or OC increases the overall participation in colorectal cancer screening and enables the detection of additional advanced neoplasia.

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.

Full-spectrum (FUSE) versus standard forward-viewing colonoscopy in an organised colorectal cancer screening programme

OBJECTIVE

Miss rate of polyps has been shown to be substantially lower with full-spectrum endoscopy (FUSE) compared with standard forward-viewing (SFV) colonoscopy in a tandem study at per polyp analysis. However, there is uncertainty on whether FUSE is also associated with a higher detection rate of colorectal neoplasia, especially advanced lesions, in per patient analysis.

METHODS

Consecutive subjects undergoing colonoscopy following a positive faecal immunochemical test (FIT) by experienced endoscopists and performed in the context of a regional colorectal cancer population-screening programme were randomised between colonoscopy with either FUSE or SFV colonoscopy in seven Italian centres. Randomisation was stratified by gender, age group and screening history. Primary outcomes included detection rates of advanced adenomas (A-ADR), adenomas (ADR) and sessile-serrated polyps (SSPDR).

RESULTS

Of 741 eligible subjects, 658 were randomised to either FUSE (n=328) or SFV (n=330) colonoscopy and included in the analysis. Overall, 293/658 and 143/658 subjects had at least one adenoma (ADR 44.5%) and advanced adenoma (A-ADR 21.7%), respectively, while SSP was the most advanced lesion in 18 cases (SSPDR 2.7%). ADR and A-ADR were 43.6% and 19.5% in the FUSE arm, and 45.5% and 23.9% in the SFV arm, with no difference for both ADR (OR for FUSE: 0.96, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.14) and A-ADR (OR for FUSE: 0.82, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.09). No difference in SSPDR or multiplicity was detected between the two arms. In the per polyp analysis, the mean number of adenomas and proximal adenomas per patient was 0.81±1.25 and 0.47±0.93 in the FUSE arm, and 0.85±1.33 and 0.48±0.96 in the SFV colonoscopy arm (p=NS for both comparisons).

CONCLUSIONS

No statistically significant difference in ADR and A-ADR between FUSE and SFV colonoscopy was detected in a per patient analysis in FIT-positive patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN10357435.

Recommendations on Fecal Immunochemical Testing to Screen for Colorectal Neoplasia: A Consensus Statement by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer

The use of the fecal occult blood test (FOBT) for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is supported by randomized trials demonstrating effectiveness in cancer prevention and widely recommended by guidelines for this purpose. The fecal immunochemical test (FIT), as a direct measure of human hemoglobin in stool has a number of advantages relative to conventional FOBT and is increasingly used relative to that test. This review summarizes current evidence for FIT in colorectal neoplasia detection and the comparative effectiveness of FIT relative to other commonly used CRC screening modalities. Based on evidence, guidance statements on FIT application were developed and quality metrics for program implementation proposed.

Split-dose preparation for colonoscopy increases adenoma detection rate: a randomised controlled trial in an organised screening programme

OBJECTIVE

Although a split regimen of bowel preparation has been associated with higher levels of bowel cleansing, it is still uncertain whether it has a favourable effect on the adenoma detection rate (ADR). The present study was aimed at evaluating whether a split regimen was superior to the traditional 'full-dose, day-before' regimen in terms of ADR.

DESIGN

In a multicentre, randomised, endoscopist-blinded study, 50-69-year-old subjects undergoing first colonoscopy after positive-faecal immunochemical test within an organised colorectal cancer organised screening programmes were 1:1 randomised to receive low-volume 2-L polyethylene glycol (PEG)-ascorbate solution in a 'split-dose' (Split-Dose Group, SDG) or 'day-before' regimen (Day-Before Group, DBG). The primary endpoint was the proportion of subjects with at least one adenoma. Secondary endpoints were the detection rates of advanced adenomas and serrated lesions at per-patient analysis and the total number of lesions.

RESULTS

690 subjects were included in the study. At per-patient analysis, the proportion of subjects with at least one adenoma was significantly higher in the SDG than in the DBG (183/345, 53.0% vs 141/345, 40.9%, relative risk (RR) 1.22, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.46); corresponding figures for advanced adenomas were 26.4% (91/345) versus 20.0% (69/345, RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.73). At per-polyp analysis, the total numbers of both adenomas and advanced adenomas per subject were significantly higher in the SDG (1.15 vs 0.8, p <0.001; 0.36 vs 0.22, p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In an organised screening setting, the adoption of a split regimen resulted into a higher detection rate of clinically relevant neoplastic lesions, thus improving the effectiveness of colonoscopy. Based on such evidence, the adoption of a split regimen for colonoscopy should be strongly recommended.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02178033.

Recommendations on Fecal Immunochemical Testing to Screen for Colorectal Neoplasia: A Consensus Statement by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer

The use of the fecal occult blood test (FOBT) for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is supported by randomized trials demonstrating effectiveness in cancer prevention and widely recommended by guidelines for this purpose. The fecal immunochemical test (FIT), as a direct measure of human hemoglobin in stool has a number of advantages relative to conventional FOBT and is increasingly used relative to that test. This review summarizes current evidence for FIT in colorectal neoplasia detection and the comparative effectiveness of FIT relative to other commonly used CRC screening modalities. Based on evidence, guidance statements on FIT application were developed and quality metrics for program implementation proposed.

Improving Participation in Colorectal Cancer Screening: a Randomised Controlled Trial of Sequential Offers of Faecal then Blood Based Non-Invasive Tests

BACKGROUND

Poor participation rates are often observed in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs utilising faecal occult blood tests. This may be from dislike of faecal sampling, or having benign bleeding conditions that can interfere with test results. These barriers may be circumvented by offering a blood-based DNA test for screening. The aim was to determine if program participation could be increased by offering a blood test following faecal immunochemical test (FIT) non-participation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

People were invited into a CRC screening study through their General Practice and randomised into control or intervention (n=600/group). Both groups were mailed a FIT (matching conventional screening programs). Participation was defined as FIT completion within 12wk. Intervention group non-participants were offered a screening blood test (methylated BCAT1/IKZF1). Overall participation was compared between the groups.

RESULTS

After 12wk, FIT participation was 82% and 81% in the control and intervention groups. In the intervention 96 FIT non- participants were offered the blood test - 22 completed this test and 19 completed the FIT instead. Total screening in the intervention group was greater than the control (88% vs 82%, p<0.01). Of 12 invitees who indicated that FIT was inappropriate for them (mainly due to bleeding conditions), 10 completed the blood test (83%).

CONCLUSIONS

Offering a blood test to FIT non-participants increased overall screening participation compared to a conventional FIT program. Blood test participation was particularly high in invitees who considered FIT to be inappropriate for them. A blood test may be a useful adjunct test within a FIT program.

Optimising colorectal cancer screening acceptance: a review

The study aims to review available evidence concerning effective interventions to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening acceptance. We performed a literature search of randomised trials designed to increase individuals' use of CRC screening on PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects. Small (≤ 100 subjects per arm) studies and those reporting results of interventions implemented before publication of the large faecal occult blood test trials were excluded. Interventions were categorised following the Continuum of Cancer Care and the PRECEDE-PROCEED models and studies were grouped by screening model (opportunistic vs organised). Multifactor interventions targeting multiple levels of care and considering factors outside the individual clinician control, represent the most effective strategy to enhance CRC screening acceptance. Removing financial barriers, implementing methods allowing a systematic contact of the whole target population, using personal invitation letters, preferably signed by the reference care provider, and reminders mailed to all non-attendees are highly effective in enhancing CRC screening acceptance. Physician reminders may support the diffusion of screening, but they can be effective only for individuals who have access to and make use of healthcare services. Educational interventions for patients and providers are effective, but the implementation of organisational measures may be necessary to favour their impact. Available evidence indicates that organised programmes allow to achieve an extensive coverage and to enhance equity of access, while maximising the health impact of screening. They provide at the same time an infrastructure allowing to achieve a more favourable cost-effectiveness profile of potentially effective strategies, which would not be sustainable in opportunistic settings.

Likely effect of adding flexible sigmoidoscopy to the English NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme: impact on colorectal cancer cases and deaths

Background:

From 2013, once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) at age 55 is being phased into the England National Health Service Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (NHSBCSP), augmenting biennial guaiac faecal occult blood testing (gFOBT) at ages 60–74. Here, we project the impact of this change on colorectal cancer (CRC) cases and deaths prevented in England by mid-2030.

Methods:

We simulated the life-course of English residents reaching age 55 from 2013 onwards. Model inputs included population numbers, invitation rates and CRC incidence and mortality rates. The impact of gFOBT and FS alone on CRC incidence and mortality were derived from published trials, assuming an uptake of 50% for FS and 57% for gFOBT. For FS plus gFOBT, we assumed the gFOBT effect to be 75% of the gFOBT alone impact.

Results:

By mid-2030, 8.5 million individuals will have been invited for once-only FS screening. Adding FS to gFOBT screening is estimated to prevent an extra 9627 (−10%) cases and 2207 (−12%) deaths by mid-2030. If FS uptake is 38% or 71%, respectively, an extra 7379 (−8%) or 13 689 (−15%) cases and 1691 (−9%) or 3154 (−17%) deaths will be prevented by mid-2030.

Conclusions:

Adding once-only FS at age 55 to the NHSBCSP will prevent ∼10 000 CRC cases and ∼2000 CRC deaths by mid-2030 if FS uptake is 50%. In 2030, one cancer was estimated to be prevented per 150 FS screening episodes, and one death prevented per 900 FS screening episodes. The actual reductions will depend on the FS invitation schedule and uptake rates.

Colorectal cancer screening: tests, strategies, and perspectives

Screening has a central role in colorectal cancer (CRC) control. Different screening tests are effective in reducing CRC-specific mortality. Influence on cancer incidence depends on test sensitivity for pre-malignant lesions, ranging from almost no influence for guaiac-based fecal occult blood testing (gFOBT) to an estimated reduction of 66–90% for colonoscopy. Screening tests detect lesions indirectly in the stool [gFOBT, fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), and fecal DNA] or directly by colonic inspection [flexible sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, CT colonography (CTC), and capsule endoscopy]. CRC screening is cost-effective compared to no screening but no screening strategy is clearly better than the others. Stool tests are the most widely used in worldwide screening interventions. FIT will soon replace gFOBT. The use of colonoscopy as a screening test is increasing and this strategy has superseded all alternatives in the US and Germany. Despite its undisputed importance, CRC screening is under-used and participation rarely reaches 70% of target population. Strategies to increase participation include ensuring recommendation by physicians, introducing organized screening and developing new, more acceptable tests. Available evidence for DNA fecal testing, CTC, and capsule endoscopy is reviewed.

The societal gain of medical development and innovation in gastroenterology

BACKGROUND

Gastroenterology has over the past 30 years evolved very rapidly. The societal benefits to which this has led are incompletely determined, yet form a mandate to determine the need for future innovations and further development of the field. A more thorough understanding of societal benefits may help to determine future goals and improve decision making.

AIMS

The objective of this article is to determine the societal gains of medical innovations in the field of gastroenterology in the past and future, using peptic ulcer disease as an example of past innovation and the implementation of colorectal cancer screening as an illustration of future gains.

METHODS

Literature searches were performed for data on peptic ulcer and colorectal cancer epidemiology, treatment outcomes, and costs. National and governmental databases in the Netherlands were searched to obtain the input for calculations of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), health-adjusted life expectancy (HALE), and the corresponding societal benefit.

RESULTS

Since 1980 the improvements in peptic ulcer treatment have had a limited impact on life expectancy, rising from 83.6 years to 83.7 years, but have led to a yearly gain of 46,000 QALYs, caused by improved quality of life. These developments in the field of peptic ulcer translated into a yearly gain of 1.8 billion to 7.8 billion euros in 2008 compared with the 1980s. Mortality due to colorectal cancer is high, with 21.6 deaths per 100,000 per year in the Netherlands (European Standardized Rate (ESR)). The future implementation of a nationwide call-recall colorectal cancer screening by means of biennial fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) is expected to result in a 50%-80% mortality reduction and thus a gain of an estimated 35,000 life years per year, corresponding to 26,000 QALYs per year. The effects of the implementation of FIT screening can be translated to a future societal gain of 1.0 billion to 4.4 billion euro.

CONCLUSIONS

The innovations and developments in the field of gastroenterology have led to significant societal gains in the past three decades. This process will continue in the near future as a result of further developments. These calculations provide a template for calculations on the need for specialist training as well as research and implementation of new developments in our field.

Tests and investigations for colorectal cancer screening

Worldwide, colorectal (CRC) is the third most common form of cancer, after lung and breast cancer, and the fourth most common cause of cancer death, although in developed countries CRC incidence is higher and it accounts for an even higher proportion of cancer deaths. Successful treatment of early-stage CRC confers substantial survival advantage, and there is now overwhelming evidence that screening average-risk individuals for CRC reduces the incidence and disease-specific mortality. In spite of considerable research for new biomarkers for CRC, the detection of blood in faeces remains the most effective screening tool. The best evidence to date for population-based CRC screening comes from randomised-controlled trials that used a guaiac-based faecal occult blood test (gFOBt) as the first-line screening modality, whereby test-positive individuals are referred for follow-up investigations, usually colonoscopy. A major innovation in the last ten years or so has been the development of other more analytically sensitive and specific screening techniques for blood in faeces. The faecal immunochemical test for haemoglobin (FIT) confers substantial benefits over gFOBt in terms of analytical sensitivity, specificity and practicality and FIT are now recommended for CRC screening by the European guidelines for quality assurance in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis. The challenge internationally is to develop high quality CRC screening programmes for which uptake is high. This is especially important for developing countries witnessing an increase in the incidence of CRC as populations adopt more westernised lifestyles. This review describes the tests available for CRC screening and how they are being used worldwide. The reader will gain an understanding of developments in CRC screening and issues that arise in choosing the most appropriate screening test (or tests) for organised population-based screening internationally and optimising the performance of the chosen test (or tests). Whilst a wide range of literature has been cited, this is not a systematic review. The authors provide FOBT CRC screening for a population of 14.6 million in the south of England and the senior author (SPH) was the lead author of the European guidelines for quality assurance in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis and leads the World Endoscopy Organization Colorectal Cancer Committee's Expert Working Group on 'FIT for Screening'.

What influences the decision to participate in colorectal cancer screening with faecal occult blood testing and sigmoidoscopy?

INTRODUCTION

Uptake is an important determinant of the effectiveness of population-based screening. Uptake of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening generally remains sub-optimal.

AIM

To determine factors influencing the decision whether to participate or not among individuals invited for faecal occult blood test (FOBT) or flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening.

METHODS

A questionnaire was sent to a stratified random sample of individuals aged 50-74, previously invited for a randomised CRC screening trial offering FOBT or FS, and a reference group from the same population not previously invited (screening naïve group). The questionnaire assessed reasons for (non)-participation, individuals' characteristics associated with participation, knowledge, attitudes and level of informed choice.

RESULTS

The response rate was 75% (n=341/452) for CRC screening participants, 21% (n=676/3212) for non-participants and 38% (n=192/500) for screening-naïve individuals. The main reasons for FOBT and FS participation were acquiring certainty about CRC presence and possible early CRC detection. Anticipated regret and positive attitudes towards CRC screening were strong predictors of actual participation and intention to participate in a next round. The main reason for non-participation in FOBT screening was lack of abdominal complaints. Non-participation in FS screening was additionally influenced by worries about burden. Eighty-one percent of participants and 12% of non-participants made an informed choice on participation.

CONCLUSION

Only 12% of non-participants made an informed choice not to participate. These results imply that governments and/or organizations offering screening should focus on adequately informing and educating target populations about the harms and benefits of CRC screening. This may impact uptake of CRC screening.

Colorectal cancer screening--optimizing current strategies and new directions

The first evidence that screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) could effectively reduce mortality dates back 20 years. However, actual population screening has, in many countries, halted at the level of individual testing and discussions on differences between screening tests. With a wealth of new evidence from various community-based studies looking at test uptake, screening-programme organization and the importance of quality assurance, population screening for CRC is now moving into a new realm, promising better results in terms of reducing CRC-specific morbidity and mortality. Such a shift in the paradigm requires a change from opportunistic, individual testing towards organized population screening with comprehensive monitoring and full-programme quality assurance. To achieve this, a combination of factors--including test characteristics, uptake, screenee autonomy, costs and capacity--must be considered. Thus, evidence from randomized trials comparing different tests must be supplemented by studies of acceptance and uptake to obtain the full picture of the effectiveness (in terms of morbidity, mortality and cost) the different strategies have. In this Review, we discuss a range of screening modalities and describe the factors to be considered to achieve a truly effective population CRC screening programme.