Addressing Racial Disparity in Colorectal Cancer Screening With CT Colonography: Experience in an African-American Cohort

Predictors of CT Colonography Use: Results From the 2019 National Health Interview Cross-Sectional Survey

PURPOSE

CT colonography (CTC) is a minimally invasive screening test with high sensitivity for colonic polyps (>1 cm). Prior studies suggest that CTC utilization remains low. However, there are few studies evaluating recent CTC utilization and predictors of CTC utilization. Our purpose was to estimate recent nationwide CTC utilization and evaluate predictors of CTC utilization using 2019 nationally representative cross-sectional survey data.

METHODS

Participants between ages 50 and 75 without colorectal cancer history in the 2019 National Health Interview Survey cross-sectional data were included. Proportion of participants reporting utilization of CTC was estimated, accounting for complex survey design elements. Multiple variable logistic regression analyses evaluated predictors of CTC utilization. Analyses were conducted accounting for complex survey design elements to obtain valid estimates for the civilian, noninstitutionalized US population.

RESULTS

In all, 13,709 respondents were included, and 1.4% reported undergoing CTC, of whom 39.9% underwent CTC within the last year, 18.5% within the last 2 years, 13.0% within the last 3 years, 7.8% within the last 5 years, 11.2% within the last 10 years, and 9.6% underwent CTC 10 years ago or more. Multiple variable logistic regression analyses revealed that Hispanic (odds ratio 2.67, 95% confidence interval 1.66-4.29, P < .001) and Black (odds ratio 2.47, 95% confidence interval 1.60-3.82, P < .001) participants were more likely than White participants to undergo CTC.

CONCLUSION

Survey results suggest that nationwide utilization of CTC remains low. Black and Hispanic participants were more likely than White participants to report undergoing CTC. Promotion of CTC may reduce racial and ethnic disparities in colorectal cancer screening.

Health Care Disparities in Radiology-A Review of the Current Literature

INTRODUCTION

Health care disparities exist in all medical specialties, including radiology. Raising awareness of established health care disparities is a critical component of radiology's efforts to mitigate disparities. Our primary objective is to perform a comprehensive review of the last 10 years of literature pertaining to disparities in radiology care. Our secondary objective is to raise awareness of disparities in radiology.

METHODS

We reviewed English-language medicine and health services literature from the past 10 years (2010-2020) for research that described disparities in any aspect of radiologic imaging using radiology search terms and key words for disparities in OVID. Relevant studies were identified with adherence to the guidelines set forth by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement.

RESULTS

The search yielded a total 1,890 articles. We reviewed the citations and abstracts with the initial search yielding 1,890 articles (without duplicates). Of these, 1,776 were excluded based on the criteria set forth in the methods. The remaining unique 114 articles were included for qualitative synthesis.

DISCUSSION

We hope this article increases awareness and inspires action to address disparities and encourages research that further investigates previously identified disparities and explores not-yet-identified disparities.

Screening for Colorectal Cancer: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in the US.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the effectiveness, test accuracy, and harms of screening for CRC to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for relevant studies published from January 1, 2015, to December 4, 2019; surveillance through March 26, 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

English-language studies conducted in asymptomatic populations at general risk of CRC.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers independently appraised the articles and extracted relevant study data from fair- or good-quality studies. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, test accuracy in detecting cancers or adenomas, and serious adverse events.

RESULTS

The review included 33 studies (n = 10 776 276) on the effectiveness of screening, 59 (n = 3 491 045) on the test performance of screening tests, and 131 (n = 26 987 366) on the harms of screening. In randomized clinical trials (4 trials, n = 458 002), intention to screen with 1- or 2-time flexible sigmoidoscopy vs no screening was associated with a decrease in CRC-specific mortality (incidence rate ratio, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.68-0.80]). Annual or biennial guaiac fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) vs no screening (5 trials, n = 419 966) was associated with a reduction of CRC-specific mortality after 2 to 9 rounds of screening (relative risk at 19.5 years, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.84-0.98]; relative risk at 30 years, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.65-0.93]). In observational studies, receipt of screening colonoscopy (2 studies, n = 436 927) or fecal immunochemical test (FIT) (1 study, n = 5.4 million) vs no screening was associated with lower risk of CRC incidence or mortality. Nine studies (n = 6497) evaluated the test accuracy of screening computed tomography (CT) colonography, 4 of which also reported the test accuracy of colonoscopy; pooled sensitivity to detect adenomas 6 mm or larger was similar between CT colonography with bowel prep (0.86) and colonoscopy (0.89). In pooled values, commonly evaluated FITs (14 studies, n = 45 403) (sensitivity, 0.74; specificity, 0.94) and stool DNA with FIT (4 studies, n = 12 424) (sensitivity, 0.93; specificity, 0.85) performed better than high-sensitivity gFOBT (2 studies, n = 3503) (sensitivity, 0.50-0.75; specificity, 0.96-0.98) to detect cancers. Serious harms of screening colonoscopy included perforations (3.1/10 000 procedures) and major bleeding (14.6/10 000 procedures). CT colonography may have harms resulting from low-dose ionizing radiation. It is unclear if detection of extracolonic findings on CT colonography is a net benefit or harm.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

There are several options to screen for colorectal cancer, each with a different level of evidence demonstrating its ability to reduce cancer mortality, its ability to detect cancer or precursor lesions, and its risk of harms.

PPV and Detection Rate of mt-sDNA Testing, FIT, and CT Colonography for Advanced Neoplasia: A Hierarchic Bayesian Meta-Analysis of the Noninvasive Colorectal Screening Tests

BACKGROUND. Noninvasive tests for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and prevention limit the need for invasive colonoscopy to follow up positive test results. However, the relative performance characteristics of available noninvasive tests have not yet been adequately compared. OBJECTIVE. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic performance of the available noninvasive CRC screening tests, including multitarget stool DNA (mt-sDNA) testing, fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), and CT colonography (CTC), with an emphasis on comparison of PPV and detection rate (DR) for advanced neoplasia (AN; encompassing cases of advanced adenomas and CRC). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION. After systematic searches of MEDLINE and Google Scholar databases, 10 mt-sDNA, 27 CTC, and 88 FIT published screening studies involving 25,132, 33,493, and 2,355,958 asymptomatic adults, respectively, were included. Meta-analysis with hierarchic Bayesian modeling was conducted in accordance with Cochrane Collaboration and PRISMA guidelines to determine test positivity rates (TPRs) leading to optical colonoscopy, as well as PPVs and DRs for both AN and CRC. Different positivity thresholds were considered for FIT and CTC. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS. Point estimates (with 95% credible intervals) from pooled Bayesian meta-analysis combining all thresholds for FIT and stratifying CTC results by a polyp size threshold of 6 mm or larger (CTC6) and 10 mm or larger (CTC10) were calculated. TPR was 13.5% (10.9-16.6%) for mt-sDNA testing, 6.4% (5.8-7.2%) for FIT, 13.4% (11.4-15.6%) for CTC6, and 6.6% (5.2-7.7%) for CTC10. AN PPV was 26.9% (95% credible interval, 21.8-33.2%) for mt-sDNA testing, 31.8% (29.3-34.5%) for FIT, 34.4% (27.2-41.0%) for CTC6, and 61.0% (54.0-70.0%) for CTC10. CRC PPV was 2.4% (1.5-3.9%) for mt-sDNA testing, 4.9% (4.3-5.3%) for FIT, 3.5% (2.5-4.8%) for CTC6, and 6.0% (4.3-8.0%) for CTC10. The DR for AN was 3.4% (95% credible interval, 2.5-4.8%) for mt-SDNA, 2.0% (1.8-2.3%) for FIT, 4.8% (4.0-6.5%) for CTC6, and 4.0% (3.0-4.6%) for CTC10. When FIT is restricted to a lower threshold (< 10 μg Hb/g feces), its performance profile is similar to that of mt-sDNA testing, although available data are limited. AN PPV odds ratios (relative to CTC10 as the reference) were 0.24 (95% credible interval, 0.17-0.33) for mt-sDNA testing, 0.30 (0.24-0.45) for FIT, and 0.33 (0.25-0.47) for CTC6. CONCLUSION. Among noninvasive CRC screening tests, CTC with a polyp size threshold of 10 mm or larger most effectively targets AN, preserving detection while also decreasing unnecessary colonoscopies compared with mt-sDNA testing and FIT. CLINICAL IMPACT. CTC performed with a polyp size threshold for colonoscopy referral set at 10 mm or larger represents the most effective and efficient noninvasive screening test for CRC prevention and detection.

CT colonography's role in the COVID-19 pandemic: a safe(r), socially distanced total colon examination

Purpose

To describe the favorable procedural profile of CT colonography (CTC) during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Conclusion

Postponement of cancer screening due to COVID-19 has resulted in a backlog of individuals needing to undergo structural examination of the colon. The experience during the initial COVID-19 surge with urgent evaluation of the colon for transplant patients prior to transplant suggests that CTC can be done in a lower risk manner as compared to other structural examinations. The procedural profile of CTC is advantageous during this pandemic as maintaining social distancing and preserving healthcare supplies including PPE are of paramount importance. CTC is an important option to utilize in the screening armamentarium to allow effective screening of average risk asymptomatic individuals in the COVID-19 era.

Use of Screening CT Colonography by Age and Race: A Study of Potential Access Barriers Related to Medicare Noncoverage Based on Data From the ACR's National CT Colonography Registry

OBJECTIVE

The primary objectives of this investigation were to evaluate the use of screening CT colonography (CTC) examinations by age comparing individuals of Medicare-eligible age to younger cohorts and to determine if the association between use of CTC and Medicare-eligible age varies by race. Although the Affordable Care Act requires commercial insurance coverage of screening CTC, Medicare does not cover screening CTC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using the ACR's CTC registry, the distribution of procedures by age was evaluated using a negative binomial model with patient age (to capture overall trend), indicator of Medicare-eligible age (to capture immediate changes in trend at age 65), and their interaction (to capture gradual changes after age 65) as independent variables. The association between the number of screening CTCs and age was compared by racial identity.

RESULTS

The CTC registry contained data on 12,648 screening examinations. Between ages 52 and 64, the number of screening examinations increased; each additional age year was associated with a 5.3% (P < .001) increase in the number of screenings. However, after age 65, the number of screening examinations decreased by -6.9% per additional year of age above 65 compared with the trend between ages 52 and 64 (P < .001). The modal age group for CTC use was 65 to 69 years in white and 55 to 59 in black individuals.

CONCLUSION

After age 65, the number of screening CTC examinations decreased, likely due, at least in part, to lack of Medicare coverage. Medicare noncoverage may have a disproportionate impact on black patients and other racial minorities.

Nationwide, Longitudinal Trends in CT Colonography Utilization: Cross-Sectional Survey Results From the 2010 and 2015 National Health Interview Survey

PURPOSE

Colon cancer screening reduces deaths from colorectal cancer. Screening rates have plateaued; however, studies have found that giving patients a choice between different screening tests improves adherence. CT colonography is a minimally invasive screening test with high sensitivity for colonic polyps (>1 cm). With increasing insurance coverage of CT colonography nationwide, there are limited estimates of CT colonography utilization over time. Our purpose was to estimate CT colonography utilization over time using nationally representative cross-sectional survey data.

METHODS

We utilized 2010 and 2015 National Health Interview Survey cross-sectional data. Participants between ages 50 and 75 without colorectal cancer history were included. Accounting for complex survey design elements, logistic regression analyses evaluated changes in CT colonography utilization over time, adjusted for potential confounders, and stratified by insurance and age.

RESULTS

Overall, 21,686 respondents were included (8,965 in 2010, 12,721 in 2015). Reported CT colonography utilization decreased from 1.2% to 0.9% (odds ratio [OR] 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86-0.98). Stratified analyses revealed no changes in utilization in patients with private insurance (P = .35) and in patients younger than 65 (P = .07). Overall awareness of CT colonography decreased from 20.5% to 15.9% (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.91-0.95). Reported optical colonoscopy utilization increased from 57.9% to 63.6% (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.02-1.05).

CONCLUSION

Despite increasing self-reported utilization of optical colonoscopy from 2010 to 2015, survey results suggest that CT colonography awareness (∼16%) and utilization (∼1%) remain low. Improved public awareness and coverage expansion to Medicare-aged populations will promote improved CT colonography utilization and overall colorectal cancer screening rates.