The Role of Patient Navigation on Colorectal Cancer Screening Completion and Education: a Review of the Literature

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

DISCUSSION

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

Evaluating Disparities in Colon Cancer Survival in American Indian/Alaskan Native Patients Using the National Cancer Database

BACKGROUND

Studies demonstrate higher mortality rates from colon cancer in American Indian/Alaskan Native (AI/AN) patients compared to non-Hispanic White (nHW). We aim to identify factors that contribute to survival disparities.

METHODS

We used the National Cancer Database to identify AI/AN (n = 2127) and nHW (n = 527,045) patients with stage I-IV colon cancer from 2004 to 2016. Overall survival among stage I-IV colon cancer patients was estimated by Kaplan-Meier analysis; Cox proportional hazard ratios were used to identify independent predictors of survival.

RESULTS

AI/AN patients with stage I-III disease had significantly shorter median survival than nHW (73 vs 77 months, respectively; p < 0.001); there were no differences in survival for stage IV. Adjusted analyses demonstrated that AI/AN race was an independent predictor of higher overall mortality compared to nHW (HR 1.19, 95% CI 1.01-1.33, p = 0.002). Importantly, compared to nHW, AI/AN were younger, had more comorbidities, had greater rurality, had more left-sided colon cancers, had higher stage but lower grade tumors, were less frequently treated at an academic facility, were more likely to experience a delay in initiation of chemotherapy, and were less likely to receive adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III disease. We found no differences in sex, receipt of surgery, or adequacy of lymph node dissection.

CONCLUSION

We found patient, tumor, and treatment factors that potentially contribute to worse survival rates observed in AI/AN colon cancer patients. Limitations include the heterogeneity of AI/AN patients and the use of overall survival as an endpoint. Additional studies are needed to implement strategies to eliminate disparities.

Patient Navigation Plus Tailored Digital Video Disc Increases Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Low-Income and Minority Patients Who Did Not Attend a Scheduled Screening Colonoscopy: A Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Up to 50% of people scheduled for screening colonoscopy do not complete this test and no studies have focused on minority and low-income populations. Interventions are needed to improve colorectal cancer (CRC) screening knowledge, reduce barriers, and provide alternative screening options. Patient navigation (PN) and tailored interventions increase CRC screening uptake, however there is limited information comparing their effectiveness or the effect of combining them.

PURPOSE

Compare the effectiveness of two interventions to increase CRC screening among minority and low-income individuals who did not attend their screening colonoscopy appointment-a mailed tailored digital video disc (DVD) alone versus the mailed DVD plus telephone-based PN compared to usual care.

METHODS

Patients (n = 371) aged 45-75 years at average risk for CRC who did not attend a screening colonoscopy appointment were enrolled and were randomized to: (i) a mailed tailored DVD; (ii) the mailed DVD plus phone-based PN; or (iii) usual care. CRC screening outcomes were from electronic medical records at 12 months. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to study intervention effects.

RESULTS

Participants randomized to tailored DVD plus PN were four times more likely to complete CRC screening compared to usual care and almost two and a half times more likely than those who were sent the DVD alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Combining telephone-based PN with a mailed, tailored DVD increased CRC screening among low-income and minority patients who did not attend their screening colonoscopy appointments and has potential for wide dissemination.

Adapting a Remotely Delivered Patient Navigation Program for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Primary Care: Important Considerations for Rural Contexts

INTRODUCTION

Colonoscopy is a critical component of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and patient navigation (PN) improves colonoscopy completion. A lay navigator remotely providing navigation across rural primary care organizations (PCOs) could increase PN access. In preparation for the Colonoscopy Outreach for Rural Communities (CORC) study, we examined partners' perspectives on contextual factors that could influence CORC program implementation, and adaptations to mitigate potential barriers.

METHODS

We interviewed 29 individuals from 6 partner PCOs and the community-based organization (CBO) delivering the PN program. An analysis approach informed by Miles, Huberman, and Saldana identified critical themes. Results are reported using the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications-Enhanced (FRAME).

RESULTS

Potential barriers included that rural patients are hard to reach remotely and might mistrust the navigator, and the CBO is unfamiliar with the patient communities and does not have patient care experience or pre-existing communication pathways with the PCOs. Program content and navigator training was adapted to mitigate these challenges.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study highlights contextual factors to account for before implementing a remote, centralized patient navigation program serving rural communities. Gathering partner perspectives led to intervention adaptations intended to address potential barriers while leaving the core components of the evidence-based intervention intact.

Care Delivery Interventions for Individuals with Cancer: A Literature Review and Focus on Gastrointestinal Malignancies

BACKGROUND

Gastrointestinal malignancies represent a particularly challenging condition, often requiring a multidisciplinary approach to management in order to meet the unique needs of these individuals and their caregivers.

PURPOSE

In this literature review, we sought to describe care delivery interventions that strive to improve the quality of life and care for patients with a focus on gastrointestinal malignancies.

CONCLUSION

We highlight patient-centered care delivery interventions, including patient-reported outcomes, hospital-at-home interventions, and other models of care for individuals with cancer. By demonstrating the relevance and utility of these different care models for patients with gastrointestinal malignancies, we hope to highlight the importance of developing and testing new interventions to address the unique needs of this population.

Characteristics of patient navigation programs in the Cancer Moonshot ACCSIS colorectal cancer screening initiative

BACKGROUND

Although patient navigation has shown promise for increasing participation in colorectal cancer screening and follow-up, little evidence is available to guide implementation of patient navigation in clinical practice. We characterize 8 patient navigation programs being implemented as part of multi-component interventions of the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Moonshot Accelerating Colorectal Cancer Screening and Follow-Up Through Implementation Science (ACCSIS) initiative.

METHODS

We developed a data collection template organized by ACCSIS framework domains. The template was populated by a representative from each of the 8 ACCSIS research projects. We report standardized descriptions of 1) the socio-ecological context in which the navigation program was being conducted, 2) navigation program characteristics, 3) activities undertaken to facilitate program implementation (eg, training), and 4) outcomes used in program evaluation.

RESULTS

ACCSIS patient navigation programs varied broadly in their socio-ecological context and settings, the populations they served, and how they were implemented in practice. Six research projects adapted and implemented evidence-based patient navigation programs; the remaining projects developed new programs. Five projects began navigation when patients were due for initial colorectal cancer screening; 3 projects began navigation later in the screening process, when patients were due for follow-up colonoscopy after an abnormal stool-test result. Seven projects relied on existing clinical staff to deliver the navigation; 1 hired a centralized research navigator. All project researchers plan to evaluate the effectiveness and implementation of their programs.

CONCLUSIONS

Our detailed program descriptions may facilitate cross-project comparisons and guide future implementation and evaluation of patient navigation programs in clinical practice.

Patient navigation for colorectal cancer screening in deprived areas: the COLONAV cluster randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of a Patient Navigation Intervention targeting deprived patients for Colo-Rectal Cancer (CRC) screening participation.

METHODS

A cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted in 5 districts. Peer Lay Patient Navigators were recruited to operate in deprived areas. Eligible participants had to be between 50 and 74 years old, live in these deprived areas and receive an invitation to the nationally organized Colo-Rectal Cancer (CRC) screening during the study period. The theory-driven navigation intervention was deployed for 18 months. A population Health Intervention Research assessment method was used to assess effectiveness and context interaction. The primary criterion was screening participation at 12 months.

RESULTS

Twenty-four thousand two hundred eighty-one individuals were included inside 40 clusters. The increase in participation in the intervention group was estimated at 23%, (ORa = 1.23, CI95% [1.07-1.41], p = 0.003). For the subgroup of individuals who participated, the time delay to participating was reduced by 26% (ORa = 0.74, CI95% [0.57-0.96], p = 0.021). Main factors modulating the effect of the intervention were: closeness of navigator profiles to the targeted population, navigators' abilities to adapt their modus operandi, and facilitating attachment structure.

CONCLUSION

The ColoNav Intervention succeeded in demonstrating its effectiveness, for CRC screening. Patient Navigation should be disseminate with broader health promotion goals in order to achieve equity in health care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov NCT02369757 24/02/2015.

Evaluating Uptake of Evidence-Based Interventions in 355 Clinics Partnering With the Colorectal Cancer Control Program, 2015-2018

PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES

Colorectal cancer screening rates remain suboptimal in the US. The Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) seeks to increase screening in health system clinics through implementation of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) and supporting activities (SAs). This program provided an opportunity to assess the uptake of EBIs and SAs in 355 clinics that participated from 2015 to 2018.

INTERVENTION APPROACH

The 30 funded awardees of CRCCP partnered with clinics to implement at least 2 of 4 EBIs that CDC prioritized (patient reminders, provider reminders, reducing structural barriers, provider assessment and feedback) and 4 optional strategies that CDC identified as SAs (small media, professional development and provider education, patient navigation, and community health workers).

EVALUATION METHODS

Clinics completed 3 annual surveys to report uptake, implementation, and integration and perceived sustainability of the priority EBIs and SAs.

RESULTS

In our sample of 355 clinics, uptake of 4 EBIs and 2 SAs significantly increased over time. By year 3, 82% of clinics implemented patient reminder systems, 88% implemented provider reminder systems, 82% implemented provider assessment and feedback, 76% implemented activities to reduce structural barriers, 51% implemented provider education, and 84% used small media. Most clinics that implemented these strategies (>90%) considered them fully integrated into the health system or clinic operations and sustainable by year 3. Fewer clinics used patient navigation (30%) and community health workers (19%), with no increase over the years of the study.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH

Clinics participating in the CRCCP reported high uptake and perceived sustainability of EBIs that can be integrated into electronic medical record systems but limited uptake of patient navigation and community health workers, which are uniquely suited to reduce cancer disparities. Future research should determine how to promote uptake and assess cost-effectiveness of CRCCP interventions.

National Survey of Patient Factors Associated with Colorectal Cancer Screening Preferences

Recommended colorectal cancer screening modalities vary with respect to safety, efficacy, and cost. Better understanding of the factors that influence patient preference is, therefore, critical for improving population adherence to colorectal cancer screening. To address this knowledge gap, we conducted a panel survey focused on three commonly utilized colorectal cancer screening options [fecal immunochemical test or guaiac-based fecal occult blood test (FIT/gFOBT), multi-target stool DNA (mt-sDNA) test, and colonoscopy] with a national sample of U.S. adults, ages 40-75 years and at average risk of colorectal cancer, in November 2019. Of 5,097 panelists invited to participate, 1,595 completed the survey (completion rate, 31.3%). Our results showed that when presented a choice between two colorectal cancer screening modalities, more respondents preferred mt-sDNA (65.4%) over colonoscopy, FIT/gFOBT (61%) over colonoscopy, and mt-sDNA (66.9%) over FIT/gFOBT. Certain demographic characteristics and awareness of and/or experience with various screening modalities influenced preferences. For example, uninsured people were more likely to prefer stool-based tests over colonoscopy [OR, 2.53; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.22-5.65 and OR, 2.73; 95% CI, 1.13-7.47]. People who had heard of stool-based screening were more likely to prefer mt-sDNA over FIT/gFOBT (OR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.26-3.40). People who previously had a stool-based test were more likely to prefer FIT/gFOBT over colonoscopy (OR, 2.75; 95% CI, 1.74-4.41), while people who previously had a colonoscopy were less likely to prefer mt-sDNA or FIT/gFOBT over colonoscopy (OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.24-0.63 and OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.26-0.62). Our survey demonstrated broad patient preference for stool-based tests over colonoscopy, contrasting the heavy reliance on colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening in clinical practice and highlighting the importance of considering patient preference in colorectal cancer screening recommendations. PREVENTION RELEVANCE: Our national survey demonstrated broad patient preference for stool-based tests over colonoscopy, contrasting the heavy reliance on colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening in clinical practice and highlighting the importance of considering patient preference in colorectal screening recommendations.

Which communication strategies can improve interventions aimed at tackling social inequalities in organized cancer screening in France?

Interventions to increase participation in cancer screening programs have been developed and evaluated by our research team. The results observed provide an opportunity to consider which methods of communication should be encouraged to improve those interventions. The objective of this commentary is to recommend communication strategies which should be adopted to efficiently reach and support disadvantaged individuals to engage in cancer screening, as a healthy behaviour.

Variation in Colorectal Cancer Screening Practices According to Cardiovascular Disease Status and Race/Ethnicity

PURPOSE

To assess current estimates of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening practices in relation to cardiovascular disease (CVD) status and whether this association varies by race/ethnicity.

METHODS

Cross-sectional analysis of the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data from 2012, 2014, 2016, and 2018 among US adults aged 50-75 years (n = 807,937). Participants' self-reported CRC screening practices were categorized as being up-to-date, not up-to-date, or never screened. Multinomial logistic regression was used to assess whether self-reported prevalent CVD was associated with CRC screening practices after adjusting for several potentially confounding variables; additional analyses were stratified by race/ethnicity.

RESULTS

One-quarter of US adults had never been screened for CRC, while 67.0% reported being up-to-date with CRC screening. The proportion of Hispanics who had never been screened (35.3%) was higher than non-Hispanic Whites (23.5%) and Blacks (20.6%). Adults with CVD were less likely to never have been screened (adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 0.92; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.88-0.95) or not to be up-to-date (aOR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.86-0.94) on CRC screening than those without CVD.

CONCLUSION

The presence of CVD is associated with better adherence to CRC screening guidelines. Poor CRC screening utilization in Hispanics should be a priority for further investigation and intervention.

Validity and Reliability of the Instruments to Measure Colorectal Cancer Screening Benefits and Barriers-Turkish Version

BACKGROUND

Perceptions of benefits and barriers are important determinants in understanding colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) behaviors. There is a need for standardized Turkish tools that measure the benefits and barriers of fecal occult blood test (FOBT) and colonoscopy (COL).

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the "Instruments to Measure CRCS Benefits and Barriers."

METHODS

This methodological study was carried out in 2 stages in primary care and in 394 adults between the ages of 50 and 70 years. In the first stage, some items of the scales demonstrated low/unacceptable corrected item-total and factor loadings, and in the second stage, it was decided to add emoji-based facial scales, which include emoji expressions.

RESULTS

Results with the emoji-based facial scales included internal consistency coefficients of 0.85 for FOBT benefits, 0.79 for FOBT barriers, 0.84 for COL benefits, and 0.86 for COL barriers; the item-total correlations of FOBT varied between 0.39 and 0.73, whereas those of COL varied between 0.38 and 0.76. The factor loadings of all items were higher than 0.40.

CONCLUSIONS

The emoji-based facial scale for CRC Screening Benefits and Barriers is a valid and reliable tool for measuring the benefits and barriers perceptions of 50- to 70-year-old Turkish adults.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The Instruments to Measure CRCS Benefits and Barriers-Turkish version can provide insights for nurses and healthcare professionals to understand individuals' perceived FOBT and COL benefits and barriers and to develop effective interventions to increase CRCS rates.

Scripted tours through a giant inflatable colon: An innovative and effective educational tool in urban communities

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer-related death among men and women in the US and mortality rates are increasing among young adults. Although CRC is largely preventable with screening and often curable when detected at an early stage, many age-appropriate individuals remain unscreened or are not currently up-to-date with screening. We aimed to examine the impact of providing guided, scripted tours through an inflatable colon on three domains: CRC knowledge, likelihood of communicating about CRC with others, and the intention to be screened for CRC in a diverse, urban population. The inflatable walk-through colon was exhibited at five community events in Franklin County, Ohio between March 2015 and August 2016. A pre and posttest research design and composite scores were stratified into three age groups (<45 years, 45-49 years and ≥ 50 years of age). Descriptive statistics were used to describe and compare demographic characteristics. Logistic regression was used to examine potential associations between demographic factors and the three outcomes of interest. These tours led to statistically significant increases in CRC knowledge, communication, and intention to undergo CRC screening among participants in all three age cohorts. In addition, the intention of undergo screening after a tour among individuals<45 years of age were nearly three times that of those older than 50 (OR = 2.66; 95%CI = 1.49-4.75). Overall, this study supports the use of scripted tours through an inflatable colon exhibit as a potentially effective intervention to increase age-appropriate CRC screening uptake.

Increasing Cancer Screening Rates in Primary Care

Screening for cancer has contributed to substantial reductions in death from several cancers and is one of the most cost-effective preventive interventions in all of health care. In the United States, primary care clinicians, their clinical teams, and the systems in which they work are primarily responsible for ensuring that screening occurs. In order to achieve the highest possible population-wide screening rates, primary care clinicians must embrace the responsibility to screen their entire enrolled patient population, institute several overarching general approaches to screening, and implement a combination of evidence-based interventions.

Evolution of a longitudinal, multidisciplinary, and scalable patient navigation matrix model

This Longitudinal patient navigation Matrix Model was developed to overcome barriers across the cancer care continuum by offering prepatients, patients, and their families with support services. The extraordinary heterogeneity of patient needs during cancer screening, risk assessment, treatment, and survivorship as well as the vast heterogeneity of oncology care settings make it nearly impossible to follow a static navigation model. Our model of patient cancer navigation is unique as it enhances the traditional model by being highly adaptable based on both patient and family needs and scalable based on institutional needs and resources (eg, clinical volumes, financial resources, and community‐based resources). This relatively new operational model for system‐wide and systematic navigation incorporates a carefully cultivated supportive care program that evolved over the last decade from a bottom up approach that identified patient and family needs and developed appropriate resources. A core component of this model includes shifting away from department‐centric operations. This model does not require a patient to opt in or independently be able to report their needs or ask for services—it is an opt out model. The multidisciplinary “cross‐training” model can also facilitate reimbursement and sustainability by clarifying the differentiating actions that define navigation services: identification of barriers to quality care and specific actions taken to overcome those barriers, across the full continue of cancer care from community engagement to survivorship or end‐of‐life care.

Time to Follow-up After Colorectal Cancer Screening by Health Insurance Type

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that patients with Medicaid insurance or Medicaid-like coverage would have longer times to follow-up and be less likely to complete colonoscopy compared with patients with commercial insurance within the same healthcare systems.

METHODS

A total of 35,009 patients aged 50-64years with a positive fecal immunochemical test were evaluated in Northern and Southern California Kaiser Permanente systems and in a North Texas safety-net system between 2011 and 2012. Kaplan-Meier estimation was used between 2016 and 2017 to calculate the probability of having follow-up colonoscopy by coverage type. Among Kaiser Permanente patients, Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios and 95% CIs for the association between coverage type and receipt of follow-up, adjusting for sociodemographics and health status.

RESULTS

Even within the same integrated system with organized follow-up, patients with Medicaid were 24% less likely to complete follow-up as those with commercial insurance. Percentage receiving colonoscopy within 3 months after a positive fecal immunochemical test was 74.6% for commercial insurance, 63.10% for Medicaid only, and 37.5% for patients served by the integrated safety-net system.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found that patients with Medicaid were less likely than those with commercial insurance to complete follow-up colonoscopy after a positive fecal immunochemical test and had longer average times to follow-up. With the future of coverage mechanisms uncertain, it is important and timely to assess influences of health insurance coverage on likelihood of follow-up colonoscopy and identify potential disparities in screening completion.

Effects of patient navigation on satisfaction with cancer care: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Patient navigation (PN) is a model of healthcare coordination designed to reduce barriers to achieving optimal health outcomes. Systematic reviews evaluating whether PN is associated with higher patient satisfaction with cancer care are lacking.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review to synthesize evidence of comparative studies evaluating the effectiveness of PN programs to improve satisfaction with cancer-related care. We included studies reported in English that: (1) evaluated a PN intervention designed to increase satisfaction with cancer care; and (2) involved a randomized controlled trial (RCT) or non-RCT approach. Standardized forms were used to abstract data from studies. These data were evaluated for methodological quality, summarized qualitatively, and synthesized under a random effects model.

RESULTS

The initial search yielded 831 citations. Nine met inclusion criteria. Five had adequate data (1 RCT and 4 non-RCTs) to include in the meta-analysis. Methodological quality of included studies ranged from weak to strong, with half rated as weak. Findings of the RCTs showed a statistically significant increase in satisfaction with cancer care involving PN (standardized mean difference (SMD) = 2.30; 95% confidence interval 1.79, 2.80, p < 0.001). Pooled results from non-RCTs showed no significant association between PN and satisfaction with cancer-related care (standardized mean difference = 0.39; 95% confidence interval - 0.02, 0.80, p = 0.06).

CONCLUSIONS

Although PN has been widely implemented to improve cancer care, high-quality studies are needed to characterize the relationship between PN and satisfaction with cancer-related care.

New insights into colorectal cancer screening and early detection tests

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a common cancer in both men and women worldwide. Creating a diagnostic panel is necessary for early diagnosis which could lead to a better long-term survival in cancer patients. Colonoscopy every 10 years, starting at age 50, is the preferred CRC screening test. Many studies have been worked on potential diagnostic biomarkers of CRC. In this article, we described the recent evolutions in the development of CRC noninvasive screening assays. Recently, a multifunctional fecal DNA test has been available commercially in the USA. A few other US FDA-approved tests like Epi proColon® (Epigenomics AG, Berlin, Germany) are also available now. Although a new marker class for fecal occult blood test, a novel biomarker based on fecal bacteria in CRC patients and circulating tumor cells are under investigation, there is still a strong need to do more research for CRC screening strategies.

Patient navigation to reduce social inequalities in colorectal cancer screening participation: A cluster randomized controlled trial

Despite free colorectal cancer screening in France, participation remains low and low socioeconomic status is associated with a low participation. Our aim was to assess the effect of a screening navigation program on participation and the reduction in social inequalities in a national-level organized mass screening program for colorectal cancer by fecal-occult blood test (FOBT). A multicenter (3 French departments) cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted over two years. The cluster was a small geographical unit stratified according to a deprivation index and the place of residence. A total of 14,556 subjects (72 clusters) were included in the control arm where the FOBT program involved the usual postal reminders, and 14,373 subjects (66 clusters) were included in the intervention arm. Intervention concerned only non-attended subjects with a phone number available defined as the navigable population. A screening navigator was added to the usual screening organization to identify and eliminate barriers to CRC screening with personalized contact. The participation rate by strata increased in the intervention arm. The increase was greater in affluent strata than in deprived ones. Multivariate analyses demonstrated that the intervention mainly with phone navigation increased individual participation (OR=1.19 [1.10, 1.29]) in the navigable population. For such interventions to reduce social inequalities in a country with a national level organized mass screening program, they should first be administered to deprived populations, in accordance with the principle of proportionate universalism. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01555450.