Barriers Associated with Inadequate Follow-up of Abnormal Fecal Immunochemical Test Results in a Safety-Net System: A Mixed-Methods Analysis

Cost-Effectiveness of Noninvasive Colorectal Cancer Screening in Community Clinics

Importance

Several noninvasive tests for colorectal cancer screening are available, but their effectiveness in settings with low adherence to screening and follow-up colonoscopy is not well documented.

Objective

To assess the cost-effectiveness of and outcomes associated with noninvasive colorectal cancer screening strategies, including new blood-based tests, in a population with low adherence to screening and ongoing surveillance colonoscopy.

Design, Setting, and Participants

The validated microsimulation model used for the decision analytical modeling study projected screening outcomes from 2025 to 2124 for a simulated cohort of 10 million individuals aged 50 years in 2025 and representative of a predominantly Hispanic or Latino patient population served by a Federally Qualified Health Center in Southern California. The simulated population had low adherence to first-step noninvasive testing (45%), second-step follow-up colonoscopy after an abnormal noninvasive test result (40%), and ongoing surveillance colonoscopy among patients with high-risk findings at follow-up colonoscopy (80%).

Exposures

Colorectal cancer screening strategies included no screening, an annual or biennial fecal immunochemical test, a triennial multitarget stool DNA test, and a triennial blood-based test. Using a blood-based test was assumed to increase first-step adherence by 17.5 percentage points.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Outcomes included colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, life-years gained and quality-adjusted life-years gained relative to no screening, costs, and net monetary benefit assuming a willingness to pay of $100 000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained.

Results

Under realistic adherence assumptions, a program of annual fecal immunochemical testing was the most effective and cost-effective strategy, yielding 121 life-years gained per 1000 screened individuals and a net monetary benefit of $5883 per person. Triennial blood testing was the least effective, yielding 23 life-years gained per 1000, and was not cost-effective, with a negative net monetary benefit. Annual fecal immunochemical testing with 45% first-step adherence and 80% adherence to follow-up and surveillance colonoscopy yielded greater benefit than triennial blood testing with perfect adherence (88 vs 77 life-years gained per 1000).

Conclusions and Relevance

This study suggests that in a federally qualified health care setting, prioritizing the convenience of blood tests over less costly and more effective existing stool-based tests could result in higher costs and worse population-level outcomes. Novel screening modalities should be carefully evaluated for performance in community settings before widespread adoption.

Diagnostic Accuracy of a Blood-Based Biomarker Panel for Colorectal Cancer Detection: A Pilot Study

Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of death worldwide. Despite its preventability through screening, compliance still needs to improve due to the invasiveness of current tools. There is a growing demand for validated molecular biomarker panels for minimally invasive blood-based CRC screening. This study assessed the diagnostic accuracy of four promising blood-based CRC biomarkers, individually and in combination. Methods: This case-control study involved plasma samples from 124 CRC cases and 124 age- and sex-matched controls. Biomarkers tested included methylated DNA encoding the Septin-9 gene (mSEPT9) using Epi proColon® 2.0 CE, insulin-like growth factor binding protein 2 (IGFBP2), dickkopf-3 (DKK3), and pyruvate kinase M2 (PKM2) by ELISA. Diagnostic accuracy was measured using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC), area under the curve (AUC), as well as sensitivity and specificity. Results: Diagnostic accuracy for mSEPT9, IGFBP2, DKK3, and PKM2 was 62.9% (95% CI: 56.8-62.9%), 69.7% (95% CI: 63.1-69.7%), 61.6% (95% CI: 54.6-61.6%), and 50.8% (95% CI: 43.4-50.8%), respectively. The combined biomarkers yielded an AUC of 74.4% (95% CI: 68.1-80.6%), outperforming all biomarkers except IGFBP2. Conclusions: These biomarkers show potential for developing a minimally invasive CRC detection tool as an alternative to existing approaches, potentially increasing adherence, early detection, and survivorship.

Performance of OC-Auto Micro 80 Fecal Immunochemical Test in an Integrated Academic-Community Health System

GOALS

We aimed to determine the performance of the OC-Auto Micro 80 fecal immunochemical test (FIT) in an average-risk population receiving care in an integrated, academic-community health system.

BACKGROUND

The FIT is the most used colorectal cancer (CRC) screening test worldwide. However, many Food and Drug Administration-cleared FIT products have not been evaluated in clinical settings.

STUDY

We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients (50 to 75 y old) in the University of Washington Medicine health care system who were screened for CRC by OC-Auto Micro 80 FIT between March 2016 and September 2021. We used electronic health records to extract patient-level and clinic-level factors, FIT use, colonoscopy, and pathology findings. The primary outcomes were the FIT positivity rate and neoplasms detected at colonoscopy. Secondary outcomes were FIT positivity by sex and safety-net versus non-safety-net clinical settings.

RESULTS

We identified 39,984 FITs completed by 26,384 patients; 2411 (6.0%) had a positive FIT result (>100 ng/mL of hemoglobin in buffer), and 1246 (51.7%) completed a follow-up colonoscopy. The FIT positive rate was 7.0% in men and 5.2% in women ( P <0.01). Among those who completed a colonoscopy after an abnormal FIT result, the positive predictive value for CRC, advanced adenoma, and advanced neoplasia was 3.0%, 20.9%, and 23.9%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In a retrospective analysis of a large heterogeneous population, the OC-Auto Micro 80 FIT for CRC screening demonstrated a positivity rate of 6.0% and a positive predictive value for CRC of 3.0%.

Implementing an Organized Colorectal Cancer Screening Program: Lessons Learned From an Academic-Community Practice

Introduction

The effectiveness of mailed fecal immunochemical test outreach might be enhanced through an organized colorectal cancer screening program, yet published real-world experiences are limited. We synthesized the process of implementing a colorectal cancer screening program that used mailed fecal immunochemical test outreach in a large integrated academic-community practice.

Methods

Data from a pilot mailed fecal immunochemical test program were shared with healthcare system leadership, which inspired the creation of a cross-institutional organized colorectal cancer screening program. In partnership with a centralized population health team and primary care, we defined (1) the institutional approach to colorectal cancer screening, (2) the target population and method for screening, (3) the team responsible for implementation, (4) the healthcare team responsible for decisions and care, (5) a quality assurance structure, and (6) a method for identifying cancer occurrence.

Results

The Fred Hutch/UW Medicine Population Health Colorectal Cancer Screening Program began in September 2021. The workflow for mailed fecal immunochemical test outreach included a mailed postcard, a MyChart message from the patient's primary care provider, a fecal immunochemical test kit with a letter signed by the primary care provider and program director, and up to 3 biweekly reminders. Patients without a colonoscopy 3 months after an abnormal fecal immunochemical test result received navigation through the program. In the first program year, we identified 9,719 patients eligible for outreach, and in an intention-to-treat analysis, 32% of patients completed colorectal cancer screening by fecal immunochemical test or colonoscopy.

Conclusions

Real-world experiences detailing how to implement organized colorectal cancer screening programs might increase adoption. In our experience, broadly disseminating pilot data, early institutional support, robust data management, and strong cross-departmental relationships were critical to successfully implementing a colorectal cancer screening program that benefits all patients.

One Barrier to Colorectal Cancer Screening Eliminated: On to the Next

Colorectal cancer screening is one of the best proven and most cost-effective of all preventive interventions. Screening lowers both incidence and mortality. Bearing some of the costs of colonoscopy, also known as cost-sharing, has been a barrier to completion of colonoscopy, both as a primary screen and as a second test to complete screening after an abnormal initial stool or radiologic screening test. While a newly published model concludes that eliminating cost-sharing for colonoscopy after an initial screen is cost-effective, the desired outcome has already been achieved. The Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services has announced the plan to eliminate this final out of pocket expense starting in 2023. While this is an important step, many barriers to screening for colorectal cancer and all other cancers remain. Eliminating downstream costs that result from an abnormal screen is a difficult to achieve but important goal. See related article by Fendrick et al., p. 653.