Towards risk-stratified colorectal cancer screening. Adding risk factors to the fecal immunochemical test: Evidence, evolution and expectations

Feasibility and Colonoscopy Yield Using the Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT)-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening in a Latin America Country

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Organized colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is not widely practiced in Latin America and the results of regional studies may help overcome barriers for implementation of national screening programs. We aimed to describe the implementation and findings of a fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based program in Brazil.

METHODS

In a prospective population-based study, asymptomatic individuals (50-75 years old) from Sao Paulo city were invited to undergo FIT for CRC screening. Participants with positive FIT (≥10 μg Hb/g feces) were referred for colonoscopy. Subjects were classified into groups according to the presence of CRC, precursor lesions, and other benign findings, possibly related to bleeding.

RESULTS

Of a total of 9881 subjects, 7.8% had positive FIT and colonoscopy compliance was 68.9% (n = 535). Boston scale was considered adequate in 99% and cecal intubation rate was 99.4%. CRC was diagnosed in 5.9% of the cases, adenoma in 63.2%, advanced adenoma in 31.4%, and advanced neoplasia in 33.0%. Age was positively associated with CRC (P = .03). Higher FIT concentrations were associated with increased detection of CRC (P < .008), advanced adenoma (P < .001), and advanced neoplasia (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of a FIT-based CRC screening program was feasible in a low-resource setting, and there was a high yield for neoplasia in individuals with a positive FIT. This approach could be used as a model to plan and disseminate organized CRC screening more broadly in Brazil and Latin America.

The urinary and sexual outcomes of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

To compare the urinary and sexual outcomes between robot-assisted rectal cancer (RC) surgery (RRCS) and laparoscopic RC surgery (LRCS) using a meta-analysis, searches were conducted of the Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, CNKI, and Wanfang databases. The International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) was the primary outcome. Eleven studies (790 patients with RRCS and 888 with LRCS) were included. The IPSS scores were significantly lower for RRCS than LRCS from baseline to 3 months (weighted mean difference [WMD] =  - 1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI]: - 1.8,-0.62, I2 = 89.9%), to 6 months (WMD =  - 1.13, 95% CI: - 1.74, - 0.52, I2 = 93.3%), and to 12 months (WMD =  - 0.93, 95% CI: - 1.59, - 0.26, I2 = 93.8%). The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) scores were significantly higher for RRCS than LRCS from baseline to 3 months (WMD = 3.36, 95% CI: 1.28, 5.44, I2 = 92.7%). The female sexual function index (FSFI) scores were significantly higher for RRCS than LRCS from baseline to 3 months (WMD = 1.31, 95% CI: 0.87, 1.76, I2 = 0), to 6 months (WMD = 2.36, 95% CI: 1.93, 2.79, I2 = 24.3%), and to 12 months (WMD = 1.67, 95% CI: 0.41, 2.93, I2 = 90.9%). RRCS also achieved a better recovery of the urological and sexual function than LRCS for patients with RC. Larger-scale prospective randomized control trials are needed to verify these results.

Evaluating body mass index's impact on Da Vinci Robotic rectal cancer surgery, a retrospective study

Robotic surgery addresses laparoscopic shortcomings and yields comparable results for low and high body mass index (BMI) patients. However, the impact of BMI on postoperative complications in robotic colorectal surgery remains debated. This study assessed the implications of BMI on short outcomes and postoperative complications, highlighting its unique role in the outcomes. Retrospective analysis of 119 patients who underwent robotic-assisted surgery for rectal cancer (January 2022 to March 2023). Patients grouped by BMI: normal weight (BMI < 23.9 kg/m2), overweight (BMI ≥ 23.9 kg/m2 and BMI < 27.9 kg/m2), and obese (BMI ≥ 27.9 kg/m2). Investigated BMI's impact on surgical outcomes and postoperative complications. Statistically significant differences (P < 0.05) in Clavien-Dindo, ASA scores. The obese group had a longer time to flatus (P = 0.002) and a higher re-operation rate than other groups (P = 0.01). The overweight group had a higher anastomotic fistula rate than the obese group. Overall complications showed no significant differences among BMI cohorts (P = 0.0295). There were no significant differences in TNM stages and comorbidities. BMI had no significant impact on overall postoperative complications in robotic surgery for rectal cancer. However, higher BMI correlated with a longer time to flatus and increased re-operation rate.

Role of demographics in noninvasive testing for colorectal cancer screening: do targeted cut-off values improve detection?

BACKGROUND

Fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is a yearly alternative colorectal screening modality for average risk individuals unwilling or unable to undergo invasive colorectal cancer (CRC) screening due to cost and accessibility. This study aimed to determine whether FIT should be interpreted within the context of patient demographics and medical history.

METHODS

Patients >50 years old who had a FIT followed by colonoscopy within 1 year were analyzed based on age, race, BMI, social and medical comorbidities. False positive (FP) and false negative (FN) FIT results within each patient demographic and medical history variable were determined by comparing with the gold standard of colonoscopy using χ2 analysis.

RESULTS

One thousand twenty-five patients were reviewed. 21.8% of FIT results were positive. Factors which differed in positive FIT rates were age (P=0.003), smoking (P<0.001), alcohol (P=0.001), and hypertension (P<0.001). The difference in rates of FP and FN FIT outcomes among each variable underwent further subanalysis. The FP was 66.8% and the FN rate was 12.8%. Higher FN outcomes were noted in those above 70, males and smokers, though the result was only statistically significant for males (P=0.009). Females were observed to have higher FP rates (P=0.019).

CONCLUSIONS

Females had higher FP FIT rates compared to males, indicating that sex may influence FIT outcomes and should be accounted for when interpreting FIT results. This information can be utilized to identify populations at higher risk of FP or FN FIT results to target CRC screening. Additionally, recalculating the FP and FN rates for each variable may help determine new FIT targets.

Interval colorectal cancers after negative faecal immunochemical test in the New Zealand Bowel Screening Pilot

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the diagnostic performance of faecal immunochemical test (FIT), identify risk factors for FIT-interval colorectal cancers (FIT-IC) and describe long-term outcomes of participants with colorectal cancers (CRC) in the New Zealand Bowel Screening Pilot (BSP).

DESIGN

From 2012 to 2017, the BSP offered eligible individuals, aged 50-74 years, biennial screening using a quantitative FIT with positivity threshold of 15 µg haemoglobin (Hb)/g faeces. Retrospective review of prospectively maintained data extracted from the BSP Register and New Zealand Cancer Registry identified any CRC reported in participants who returned a definitive FIT result. Further details were obtained from hospital records. FIT-ICs were primary CRC diagnosed within 24 months of a negative FIT. Factors associated with FIT-ICs were identified using logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of 387 215 individuals invited, 57.4% participated with 6.1% returning positive FIT results. Final analysis included 520 CRC, of which 111 (21.3%) met FIT-IC definition. Overall FIT sensitivity for CRC was 78.7% (95% CI=74.9% to 82.1%), specificity was 94.1% (95% CI=94.0% to 94.2%). In 78 (70.3%) participants with FIT-IC, faecal Hb was reported as undetectable. There were no significant associations between FIT-IC and age, sex, ethnicity and deprivation. FIT-ICs were significantly associated with proximal tumour location, late stage at diagnosis, high-grade tumour differentiation and subsequent round screens. Median follow-up time was 74 (2-124) months. FIT-IC had significantly poorer overall survival.

CONCLUSION

FIT sensitivity in BSP compared favourably to published data. FIT-ICs were more likely to be proximal tumours with poor long-term outcomes. Further lowering of FIT threshold would have minimal impact on FIT-IC.

The usefulness of fecal hemoglobin and calprotectin tests in diagnosing significant bowel diseases: a prospective study

OBJECTIVES

Although colonoscopy remains the gold standard for determining bowel diseases, it's invasive and expensive. New non-invasive diagnostic methods are urgently needed as an initial screening modality. We aimed to investigate the value of fecal calprotectin (FC) and fecal immunochemical test (FIT) in differentiation of significant and non- significant bowel diseases.

METHODS

In this prospective study, consecutive individuals were included if they underwent colonoscopy for symptoms of lower gastrointestinal (GI) tract, positive fecal occult blood test, surveillance for IBD or colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Diagnostic value of FC and FIT in discriminating significant bowel diseases (advanced neoplasia, active inflammatory bowel diseases or bowel inflammation due to other causes) and non-significant bowel diseases (normal, asymptomatic diverticulum, non-adenomatous polyp, or non-advanced neoplasia) were evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 201 individuals included, 107 patients had significant bowel diseases. FC and FIT had an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.722 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.653-0.792) and 0.797 (95%CI 0.734-0.860), respectively, for determining significant bowel diseases. Combination of FC and FIT predicted significant bowel diseases with an AUC, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 0.832 (95% CI 0.775-0.890), 77.6%, 74.5%, and 76.1%, respectively. Moreover, combination of FC and FIT was more sensitive among patients with lower GI symptoms than asymptomatic individuals (80.8% vs. 74.1%) to identify significant bowel diseases.

CONCLUSIONS

A single measurement of FC or FIT is not sufficiently accurate to identify patients with significant bowel disease. However, combination of FC and FIT can help increase the sensitivity, especially in patients with lower GI symptoms.

Cost-effectiveness of risk-tailored screening strategy for colorectal cancer: A systematic review

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Though one-size-fits-all age-based screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) is effective in reducing the incidence and mortality, the evidence regarding on personized screening based on individual risk factors has been growing. The study aimed to perform a systematic review to synthesize economic evidence of risk-tailored CRC screening strategies.

METHODS

This systematic review was conducted in EMBASE, Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Econlit, and National Institute for Health Research Economic Evaluation Database from inception to June 30, 2021. We calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of cost per life year or quality-adjusted life year gained for the risk-tailored screening compared with no screening or uniform screening. A strategy was cost-effective with less cost and equal or more effectiveness than the comparator along with lower ICER than the willingness-to-pay threshold.

RESULTS

Our review finally comprised seven studies. Five studies reported the results of comparisons of risk-tailored CRC screening with no screening, and supported that risk-tailored screening was cost-effective. All of seven studies reported the ICERs of risk-tailored screening and age-based screening. Disparities in the discrimination of risk-prediction tool, accuracy of adopted techniques, uptake rate of screening and cost estimation impacted the cost-effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies on the economic evaluation of risk-tailored CRC screening are limited, and current evidence is not sufficient to support the replacement of risk-tailored screening for traditional age-based screening.

Postoperative complications observed with robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for the treatment of rectal cancer: An updated meta-analysis of recently published studies

BACKGROUND

This is an updated meta-analysis comparing the postoperative complications observed with robotic versus laparoscopic surgery (LS) for the treatment of rectal cancer.

METHODS

Cochrane central, MEDLNE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online), EMBASE (Excerpta Medica dataBASE), Google Scholar, Web of Science and http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for studies (published after the year 2015), comparing robotic versus LS for the treatment of rectal cancer. The postoperative outcomes were considered as the endpoints in this analysis. RevMan 5.4 was used to carry out the statistical analysis. Risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to represent the results following data analysis.

RESULTS

A total number of 22,744 participants were included in this study whereby 9178 participants were assigned to the robotic surgery and 13,566 participants were assigned to the LS group. The time period of patients' enrollment varied from years 2007 to 2017. Our results showed that overall complications (RR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.71-1.17; P = .45), wound complications (RR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.64-1.04; P = .09), anastomotic leak (RR: 1.12, 95% CI: 0.88-1.42; P = .37), anastomotic bleeding (RR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.29-2.64; P = .82), stoma-related complications (RR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.24-3.21; P = .85), intra-abdominal abscess (RR: 0.53. 95% CI: 0.22-1.31; P = .17), urinary tract infection (RR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.53-1.66; P = .83), enterocolitis (RR: 1.35, 95% CI: 0.38-4.71; P = .64), reoperation (RR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.46-1.54; P = .58), and mortality (RR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.34-1.62; P = .46) were not significantly different between robotic-assisted versus LS for rectal cancer. Postoperative ileus (RR: 1.21, 95% CI: 0.81-1.81; P = .34), readmission (RR: 1.17, 95% CI: 0.75-1.83; P = .48), and urinary retention (RR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.21-1.23; P = .14) were also similarly manifested.

CONCLUSIONS

In this updated meta-analysis, both robotic and laparoscopic surgeries were equally effective for the treatment of rectal cancer. Similar postoperative complications were observed. However, our analysis was restricted only to postoperative outcomes, parameters such as duration of surgery were not taken into consideration.

The Roadmap of Colorectal Cancer Screening

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common form of cancer in terms of incidence and the second in terms of mortality worldwide. CRC develops over several years, thus highlighting the importance of early diagnosis. National screening programs based on fecal occult blood tests and subsequent colonoscopy have reduced the incidence and mortality, however improvements are needed since the participation rate remains low and the tests present a high number of false positive results. This review provides an overview of the CRC screening globally and the state of the art in approaches aimed at improving accuracy and participation in CRC screening, also considering the need for gender and age differentiation. New fecal tests and biomarkers such as DNA methylation, mutation or integrity, proteins and microRNAs are explored, including recent investigations into fecal microbiota. Liquid biopsy approaches, involving novel biomarkers and panels, such as circulating mRNA, micro- and long-non-coding RNA, DNA, proteins and extracellular vesicles are discussed. The approaches reported are based on quantitative PCR methods that could be easily applied to routine screening, or arrays and sequencing assays that should be better exploited to describe and identify candidate biomarkers in blood samples.

Assessment of a Risk-Based Approach for Triaging Mammography Examinations During Periods of Reduced Capacity

Importance

Breast cancer screening, surveillance, and diagnostic imaging services were profoundly limited during the initial phase of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

Objective

To develop a risk-based strategy for triaging mammograms during periods of decreased capacity.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This population-based cohort study used data collected prospectively from mammography examinations performed in 2014 to 2019 at 92 radiology facilities in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Participants included individuals undergoing mammography. Data were analyzed from August 10 to November 3, 2020.

Exposures

Clinical indication for screening, breast symptoms, personal history of breast cancer, age, time since last mammogram/screening interval, family history of breast cancer, breast density, and history of high-risk breast lesion.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Combinations of clinical indication, clinical history, and breast cancer risk factors that subdivided mammograms into risk groups according to their cancer detection rate were identified using classification and regression trees.

Results

The cohort included 898 415 individuals contributing 1 878 924 mammograms (mean [SD] age at mammogram, 58.6 [11.2] years) interpreted by 448 radiologists, with 1 722 820 mammograms in individuals without a personal history of breast cancer and 156 104 mammograms in individuals with a history of breast cancer. Most individuals were aged 50 to 69 years at imaging (1 113 174 mammograms [59.2%]), and 204 305 (11.2%) were Black, 206 087 (11.3%) were Asian or Pacific Islander, 126 677 (7.0%) were Hispanic or Latina, and 40 021 (2.2%) were another race/ethnicity or mixed race/ethnicity. Cancer detection rates varied widely based on clinical indication, breast symptoms, personal history of breast cancer, and age. The 12% of mammograms with very high (89.6 [95% CI, 82.3-97.5] to 122.3 [95% CI, 108.1-138.0] cancers detected per 1000 mammograms) or high (36.1 [95% CI, 33.1-39.3] to 47.5 [95% CI, 42.4-53.3] cancers detected per 1000 mammograms) cancer detection rates accounted for 55% of all detected cancers and included mammograms to evaluate an abnormal mammogram or breast lump in individuals of all ages regardless of breast cancer history, to evaluate breast symptoms other than lump in individuals with a breast cancer history or without a history but aged 60 years or older, and for short-interval follow-up in individuals aged 60 years or older without a breast cancer history. The 44.2% of mammograms with very low cancer detection rates accounted for 13.1% of detected cancers and included annual screening mammograms in individuals aged 50 to 69 years (3.8 [95% CI, 3.5-4.1] cancers detected per 1000 mammograms) and all screening mammograms in individuals younger than 50 years regardless of screening interval (2.8 [95% CI, 2.6-3.1] cancers detected per 1000 mammograms).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this population-based cohort study, clinical indication and individual risk factors were associated with cancer detection and may be useful for prioritizing mammography in times and settings of decreased capacity.

A risk-stratified approach to colorectal cancer prevention and diagnosis

Population screening and endoscopic surveillance are used widely to prevent the development of and death from colorectal cancer (CRC). However, CRC remains a major cause of cancer mortality and the increasing burden of endoscopic investigations threatens to overwhelm some health services. This Perspective describes the rationale for and approach to improved risk stratification and decision-making for CRC prevention and diagnosis. Limitations of current approaches will be discussed using the UK as an example of the challenges faced by a particular health-care system, followed by discussion of novel risk biomarker utilization. We explore how risk stratification will be advantageous to current health-care providers and users, enabling more efficient use of limited colonoscopy resources. We discuss risk stratification in the setting of population screening as well as the surveillance of high-risk groups and investigation of symptomatic patients. We also address challenges in the development and validation of risk stratification tools and identify key research priorities.

Faecal immunochemical test to triage patients with abdominal symptoms for suspected colorectal cancer in primary care: review of international use and guidelines

BACKGROUND

Recently, faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) have been introduced for investigation of primary care patients with low-risk symptoms of colorectal cancer (CRC), but recommendations vary across the world. This systematic review of clinical practice guidelines aimed to determine how FITs are used in symptomatic primary care patients and the underpinning evidence for these guidelines.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase and TRIP databases were systematically searched, from 1 November 2008 to 1 November 2018 for guidelines on the assessment of patients with symptoms suggestive of CRC. Known guideline databases, websites and references of related literature were searched. The following questions were addressed: (i) which countries use FIT for symptomatic primary care patients; (ii) in which populations is FIT used; (iii) what is the cut-off level used for haemoglobin in the faeces (FIT) and (iv) on what evidence are FIT recommendations based.

RESULTS

The search yielded 2433 publications; 25 covered initial diagnostic assessment of patients with symptoms of CRC in 15 countries (Asia, n = 1; Europe, n = 13; Oceania, n = 4; North America, n = 5; and South America, n = 2). In three countries (Australia, Spain and the UK), FIT was recommended for patients with abdominal symptoms, unexplained weight loss, change in bowel habit or anaemia despite a low level of evidence in the symptomatic primary care patient population.

CONCLUSIONS

Few countries recommend FITs in symptomatic patients in primary care either because of limited evidence or because symptomatic patients are directly referred to secondary care without triage. These results demonstrate a clear need for research on FIT in the symptomatic primary care population.

The use of electronic healthcare records for colorectal cancer screening referral decisions and risk prediction model development

BACKGROUND

The database used for the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) derives participant information from primary care records. Combining predictors with FOBTs has shown to improve referral decisions and accuracy. The richer data available from GP databases could be used to complement screening referral decisions by identifying those at greatest risk of colorectal cancer. We determined the availability of data for key predictors and whether this information could be used to inform more accurate screening referral decisions.

METHODS

An English BCSP cohort was derived using the electronic notifications received from the BCSP database to GP records. The cohort covered a period between 13th May 2009 to 17th January 2017. Completeness of variables and univariable associations were assessed. Risk prediction models were developed using Cox regression and multivariable fractional polynomials with backwards elimination. Optimism adjusted performance metrics were reported. The sensitivity and specificity of a combined approach using the negative FOBT model plus FOBT positive patients was determined using a probability equivalent to a 3% PPV NICE guidelines level.

RESULTS

292,059 participants aged 60-74 were derived for the BCSP screening cohort. A model including the screening test result had a C-statistic of 0.860, c-slope of 0.997, and R² of 0.597. A model developed for negative screening results only had a C-statistic of 0.597, c-slope of 0.940, and R² of 0.062. Risk predictors included in the models included; age, sex, alcohol consumption, IBS diagnosis, family history of gastrointestinal cancer, smoking status, previous negatives and whether a GP had ordered a blood test. For the combined screening approach, sensitivity increased slightly from 53.90% (FOBT only) to 58.82% but at the expense of an increased referral rate.

CONCLUSIONS

This research has identified several potential predictors for CRC in a BCSP population. A risk prediction model developed for BCSP FOBT negative patients was not clinically useful due to a low sensitivity and increased referral rate. The predictors identified in this study should be investigated in a refined algorithm combining the quantitative FIT result. Combining data from multiple sources enables fuller patient profiles using the primary care and screening database interface.