Gender differences in colorectal cancer screening barriers and information needs

Discrimination in the medical setting among LGBTQ+ adults and associations with cancer screening

PURPOSE

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and other sexual and gender diverse (LGBTQ+) individuals experience disparities in cancer screening. We examined whether experience of LGBTQ+ -related discrimination in medical settings was associated with cancer screening disparities.

METHODS

Participants were recruited via social media for a cross-sectional survey study. Those who self-reported as LGBTQ+ , being 40+ years of age, and residing in the US were eligible. Participants reported their clinical and demographic characteristics, cancer screening history, and experiences of discrimination in a medical setting. We examined the odds (OR) of ever undergoing cancer screening by experienced discrimination, stratified by sex assigned at birth.

RESULTS

Participants (n = 310) were on average 54.4 ± 9.0 years old and primarily White (92.9%). Most identified as lesbian (38.1%) or gay (40.0%) while 17.1% were transgender or gender diverse. Nearly half (45.5%) reported experiencing LGBTQ+ -related discrimination in the medical setting. Participants assigned female at birth with discriminatory experiences had significantly lower odds of ever undergoing colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy compared to those without discriminatory experiences (OR: 0.37; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.15-0.90). No significant differences in colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy uptake were observed in those assigned male at birth by discriminatory experiences (OR: 2.02; 95% CI 0.59-6.91). Pap tests, mammogram, and stool colorectal cancer screening did not differ by discriminatory experience.

CONCLUSION

Discrimination in medical settings was commonly reported by LGBTQ+ individuals in this study. When treating LGBTQ+ patients, clinicians should ask about prior experiences and continue to promote cancer screening. Future studies should examine discrimination as a key driver of LGBTQ+ disparities in cancer screening.

Sex Difference of Colon Adenoma Pathway and Colorectal Carcinogenesis

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common causes of cancer morbidity in both sexes but shows sex differences. First, sex-specific differences in tumor recurrence and survival rates have been reported. For example, the development of CRC is found about 1.5 times higher and 4-8 years earlier in males compared to females, suggesting the protective role of estrogen in the disease. Furthermore, female patients have a higher risk of developing right-sided (proximal) colon cancer than male patients, which is known to have more aggressive clinical character compared to left-sided (distal) colon cancer. That is, left and right CRCs show differences in carcinogenic mechanism, that the chromosomal instability pathway is more common in left colon cancer while the microsatellite instability and serrated pathways are more common in right colon cancer. It is thought that there are sex-based differences on the background of carcinogenesis of CRC. Sex differences of CRC have two aspects, sexual dimorphism (biological differences in hormones and genes) and gender differences (non-biological differences in societal attitudes and behavior). Recently, sex difference of colon adenoma pathway and sexual dimorphism in the biology of gene and protein expression, and in endocrine cellular signaling in the CRC carcinogenesis have been accumulated. In addition, behavioral patterns can lead to differences in exposure to risk factors such as drinking or smoking, diet and physical activity. Therefore, understanding sex/gender-related biological and sociocultural differences in CRC risk will help in providing strategies for screening, treatment and prevention protocols to reduce the mortality and improve the quality of life. In this review, sex/gender differences in colon adenoma pathway and various aspects such as clinicopathological, biological, molecular, and socio-cultural aspects of CRC were described.

Beyond the treatment: The role of race, sex, and education in health trajectories between cancer survivors and noncancer older adults

INTRODUCTION

The number of older, long-term cancer survivors is increasing. However, little is known about how cancer and aging affect the health trajectories of older adults differently. In addition, the impact of race, sex, and education on the processes of aging and the cancer experience needs further investigation. The current study aims to address this knowledge gap by combining two National Cancer Institute (NIC)-funded longitudinal studies conducted in Cleveland from 1998 to 2010.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The unique cross-sequential design facilitates a comparison between the health changes in long-term (five years +) older cancer survivors (breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer) and demographically matched older adults without a history of cancer in the same geographic area within the same period. The study also captured comprehensive information on how socioeconomic status interacts with cancer and aging over time. General linear models were employed in the data analysis.

RESULTS

The findings showed that early cancer experience did not affect long-term cancer survivors' health status in later life. Conversely, comorbidities, being an African American, being female, and having education less than a college degree significantly decreased the health trajectory in later life for all older adults. Moreover, compared to other groups, older African American cancer survivors reported a dramatic decrease in self-reported health after controlling for other conditions.

DISCUSSION

Study findings can inform public policy and social services to offer comprehensive treatment plans and help individuals overcome their diseases and lead longer and healthier lives.

Development and psychometric evaluation of the Aversion to Bowel Cancer Screening Scale

OBJECTIVE

Avoidance of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is well documented with emotional barriers deterring screening intention and uptake. However, the assessment of such aversion is limited by the available instruments focusing on siloed emotions or screening procedures, limiting relevance to the complete process of decision-making in the CRC context.

METHODS

To address this gap, psychometric properties of the newly developed Aversion to Bowel Cancer Screening Scale (ABCSS) were assessed using data from 640 CRC screening eligible asymptomatic community members. Item review and piloting reduced 179 items to the initial 29-item scale. Using a holdout sample technique, exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, reliability and validity checks were conducted.

RESULTS

A three-factor model (Fecal Occult Blood Test [FOBT] Aversion, Colonoscopy Aversion and Health Conscientiousness) with 21 items was identified. Analyses of the 21-item ABCSS indicated excellent reliabilities for the scale and subscales (α = .91 to .95). Correlations with relevant existing measures, intention and behaviour indicated good construct validity.

CONCLUSION

The ABCSS is a valid measure of aversion to CRC screening for asymptomatic community members facing the decision to undertake CRC screening. This instrument may provide a more comprehensive understanding of the decision-making process for CRC screening.

Utilization of Recommended Preventive Health Screenings Between Transgender and Cisgender Older Adults in Sexual and Gender Minority Communities

ObjectivesTransgender older adults are among the most health disparate populations in the United States; they also face some of the most significant barriers in accessing high quality, affordable, preventive healthcare services. We compare utilization rates of eight recommended preventive health screenings for adults aged 50 and older, by gender identity. Methods: We analyzed data from 2514 lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender adults aged 50 and older, testing associations between gender identities and screening service utilizations by applying a series of multivariate logistic regression analyses, controlling for sociodemographics. Results: Compared to cisgender LGB participants, transgender participants had significantly lower odds to have met four of the recommended screenings. Transgender men had significantly lower odds than transgender women to have met two of the recommended screenings. Discussion: Increasing transgender older adults' access to preventative health screening tests is critical to reduce the health burden in this aging population.

Impact of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias on colorectal cancer screening utilization, knowledge, and associated health disparities

Background: Colorectal cancer screening can detect colorectal cancer at an early stage and reduce mortality. None of the existing clinical practice guidelines provide specific recommendations for colorectal cancer screening in patients with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD). Limited studies have assessed the impacts of ADRD on colorectal cancer screening use and knowledge, and no studies have focused on the associated health disparities. Objectives: To examine the utilization, knowledge, and associated health disparities of colorectal cancer screening in older adults with ADRD. Methods: This study used the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey from 2015 to 2018. Two types of colorectal cancer screening, including fecal occult blood test (FOBT) and colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy, were measured. The colorectal cancer screening knowledge was evaluated by asking if the participants have heard of two screening methods and whether they knew Medicare pays for colorectal cancer screenings. Logistic regression models were used to examine the impact of ADRD diagnosis on the utilization and knowledge of colorectal cancer screening. Results: The overall colorectal cancer screening rate in older adults increased from 86.4% to 88.96% from 2015 to 2018. Patients with AD were 39% (OR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.50-0.76) less likely and those with RD were 25% (OR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.62-0.91) less likely to use any colorectal cancer screening when compared to older adults without ADRD. The rate of knowledge of colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy remained high between 84.23% and 84.57% while the knowledge of FOBT increased from 64.32% to 78.69% during the study period. Compared to older adults without ADRD, those with AD were 77% (OR: 1.77; 95% CI: 1.12-2.81) more likely to hear of colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy. The rate of knowledge of Medicare pay for colorectal cancer screening increased from 42.19% to 45.27% during the study period. Compared to older adults without ADRD, those with AD were 19% (OR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.70-0.94) less likely to know that Medicare pays for colorectal cancer screening. Conclusion: ADRD was significantly associated with colorectal cancer screening utilization and knowledge. In addition, this study identified health disparities in race/ethnicity, gender, and urban/rural residence in colorectal cancer screening use and knowledge.

The relative effectiveness of fecal immunochemical test-based colorectal cancer screening to detect adenomas and cancer in different demographic and socioeconomic groups. A nationwide cohort study

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed at analyzing the relative effectiveness in removal of adenomas and detection of cancer of implementing colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in different demographic and socioeconomic groups.

METHODS

This register-based retrospective cohort study included residents aged 50-72 years. Those randomly selected to be invited for CRC screening from 1 March 2014 to 30 June 2015 were classified as invited; those invited from 1 January 2016 to 31 December 2017 were classified as not yet invited. Strata-specific relative risks (RRs) of having adenomas removed and CRC detected were estimated.

RESULTS

A total of 1 343 090 individuals were included. The RR of having adenomas removed were higher among men compared with women [RRwomen = 6.41 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.08-8.09), RRmen = 7.74 (95% CI: 6.16-9.73), P < 0.01] and among Danes compared with immigrants [RRDanes = 4.71 (95% CI: 3.73-5.93), RRWestern = 4.76 (95% CI: 3.39-6.69), RRnon-Western = 3.35 (95% CI: 2.39-4.69), P = 0.03]. Regarding detection of CRC, the effectiveness increased with increasing age ranging from RR = 1.53 (95% CI: 0.93- 2.51) to RR = 1.97 (95% CI: 1.22-3.17) (P = 0.04) and was higher among men compared with women (RRwomen = 1.75 (95% CI: 1.10-2.76), RRmen = 2.07 (95% CI: 1.32-3.26), P = 0.02.

CONCLUSION

Attention must be paid to the potential differences in screening effectiveness among diverse subpopulations; first, by securing equal opportunities for participation across subpopulations and second, by considering sex and age-specific screening programs.

The Black Panther, Masculinity Barriers to Medical Care, and Colorectal Cancer Screening Intention Among Unscreened American Indian/Alaska Native, Black, and White Men

Objective

To determine if masculinity barriers to medical care and the death from colorectal cancer (CRC) of actor Chadwick Boseman (The Black Panther) influenced CRC early-detection screening intent among unscreened American Indian/Alaska Native (AIAN) and Non-Hispanic-Black (Black) men compared with Non-Hispanic-White (White) men.

Methods

Using a consumer-panel, we surveyed U.S. men aged 18-75 years (N = 895) using the 24-item Masculinity Barriers to Medical Care (MBMC) scale. We calculated the median score to create binary exposures to evaluate associations with CRC screening intent and conducted multivariable logistic regression to evaluate independent associations stratified by race/ethnicity.

Results

Overall, Black respondents were most likely to have a high MBMC score (55%) compared to White (44%) and AIAN (51%) men (p = 0.043). AIAN men were least likely to report CRC screening intent (51.1%) compared with Black (68%) and White men (64%) (p < 0.001). Black men who reported the recent death of Chadwick Boseman increased their awareness of CRC were more likely (78%) to report intention to screen for CRC compared to those who did not (56%) (p < 0.001). Black men who exhibited more masculinity-related barriers to care were more likely to intend to screen for CRC (OR: 1.76, 95% CI: 0.98-3.16) than their counterparts, as were Black men who reported no impact of Boseman's death on their CRC awareness (aOR: 2.96, 95% CI: 1.13-7.67). Conversely, among AIAN men, those who exhibited more masculinity-related barriers to care were less likely to have CRC screening intent (aOR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.27-0.82) compared with their counterparts.

Conclusions

Masculinity barriers to medical care play a significant role in intention to screen for CRC. While Black men were most likely to state that The Black Panther's death increased their awareness of CRC, it did not appear to modify the role of masculine barriers in CRC screening intention as expected. Further research is warranted to better understand how masculine barriers combined with celebrity-driven health-promotion interventions influence the uptake of early-detection screening for CRC.

Impact

Our study provides formative data to develop behavioral interventions focused on improving CRC screening completion among diverse men.

Long-Term patterns of cancer incidence among patients with and without type 2 diabetes in the United Kingdom

AIMS

Studies using contemporary cohorts are needed to assess the association between type 2 diabetes and cancer.

METHODS

Using the United Kingdom Clinical Practice Research Datalink, we matched patients with type 2 diabetes between 1988 and 2019 to patients without type 2 diabetes. Poisson regression models were fit to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for cancer. In secondary analyses, we determined whether the strength of the association varied with calendar time and whether patients with type 2 diabetes had a higher incidence of being diagnosed with multiple cancers during the follow-up period.

RESULTS

890,214 patients with type 2 diabetes were matched to an equal number of patients without type 2 diabetes. Patients with type 2 diabetes had a higher cancer incidence than patients without type 2 diabetes (IRR 1.19, 95% CI 1.18-1.21). The IRR was higher 2010 onwards (IRR: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.23-1.28) compared with the association in previous years. Overall, patients with type 2 diabetes had a 5% higher incidence of being diagnosed with multiple cancers (IRR: 1.05, 95% CI: 1.04-1.07).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this large population-based study indicate that type 2 diabetes is associated with an increased risk of several cancers.

Using Facebook to promote the uptake of colorectal cancer screening

Background

The use of social media presents a unique opportunity for cancer screening programs to motivate individuals to get screened. However, we need a better understanding of what types of social media messages for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening are preferred. The objective of this study was to develop social media messages promoting CRC screening uptake to identify messages preferred by the target audience.

Methods

We conducted a qualitative descriptive study and collected data through focus groups with Facebook users of screen-eligible age. Participants were presented with social media messages and asked to provide feedback. Messages were informed by the Health Belief Model, current evidence regarding screening communication and health communication and social media best practices. Focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed and analysis was completed by two independent coders. If messages generated sufficient discussion, we developed a recommendation regarding the use of the message in a future social media campaign. Recommendations included: strongly consider using this message, consider using this message, proceed with caution, and do not use this message. General considerations about social media campaigns were also noted.

Results

A total of 45 individuals participated in six focus groups. We developed recommendations for 7 out of the 18 messages tested; 1 was classified as strongly consider using this message, 4 as consider using this message and 2 as proceed with caution. The data suggest that participants preferred social media messages that were believed to be credible, educational, and with a positive or reassuring tone. Preferred messages tended to increase awareness about CRC risk and screening and prompted participants to ask questions, and to want to learn more about what they could do to lower their risk. Messages that were viewed as humorous, strange or offensive or that had a negative or excessively fearful tone were less well received by study participants.

Conclusions

Facebook users prefer social media messages for CRC that have a positive or reassuring tone, are educational, and that have a credible ad sponsor. Campaign planners should proceed with caution when considering messages that use humor or a fearful tone to avoid undermining their campaign objectives.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-022-12732-w.

The unmet needs for identifying the ideal bowel preparation

Colonoscopy, since it was first employed over 60 years ago, is now the gold standard method for visualizing the mucosa of the colon, but should be of good quality. Many factors affect quality, including the type of health service organization, type of facility, staff, equipment, patient characteristics, and bowel preparation (BP). The adequacy of bowel cleansing is critical, but, unfortunately, may be inadequate in up to one‐third of procedures. The current article will present and discuss the main BPs and their drawbacks, which include patient‐dependent and procedure‐dependent factors. Cleansing quality depends on the ease/complexity of solution preparation, volume, taste, and timing of consumption. Consequently, important positive factors include simple instructions, easy preparation of the solution, low volume, pleasant taste, short drinking time (e.g. <30 min), and splitting the dose between the evening before and the morning of the colonoscopy (or even better, only one dose in the early morning to avoid night‐time problems), and short onset of action. The BP solution must also be safe with negligible side effects. Furthermore, a positive experience supports patient willingness to repeat the procedure.

De Novo Colorectal and Pancreatic Cancer in Liver-Transplant Recipients: Identifying the Higher-Risk Populations

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies are common after liver transplantation. The aim of this study was to identify the risk and timing of the more common GI malignancies, colorectal and pancreatic cancer, to aid in optimizing potential posttransplant screening practices.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

Data from the United Network for Organ Sharing database of all adult liver-transplant recipients from 1997 to 2017 were analyzed and a comparison made with cancer incidence from general population data using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data. Of 866 de novo GI malignancies, 405 colorectal and 216 pancreas were identified. The highest cumulative incidence for colorectal cancer occurred in recipients with primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), recipients over the age of 50 with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)/cholangiocarcinoma (CCA), and females >50 years with alcohol-associated liver disease and HCC/CCA, with risk increasing above the general population within 5 years of transplant. Patients with PSC and HCC/CCA or NASH and HCC/CCA have the highest cumulative incidence of pancreatic cancer also rising within 5 years following transplant, with those patients >50 years old conferring the highest risk.

CONCLUSIONS

These data identify a high-risk cohort that warrants consideration for intensified individualized screening practices for colorectal cancer after liver transplantation. In addition to recipients with PSC, further study of recipients with NASH and HCC/CCA and females with alcohol-associated liver disease and HCC/CCA may be better tailored to colorectal cancer screening ideals. Higher-risk patient populations for pancreatic cancer (PSC and NASH with HCC/CCA) would benefit from further study to determine potential screening practices. GI malignancies occur at higher rates in liver-transplant patients compared with the general population. In the era of individualized medicine, this study identifies the highest-risk transplant recipients (PSC and NASH cirrhosis with coexisting HCC/CCA) who may benefit from altered screening practices for these malignancies.

Factors Associated with the Use of Fecal Immunochemical Tests and Colonoscopy in the INSEF Portuguese Population

Introduction

The incidence of colorectal cancer is increasing worldwide. However, the screening uptake is generally low. We analyzed the association between sociodemographic, economic, and access-to-healthcare factors and the use of exams that are the basis for colorectal cancer screening in Portugal.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional study based on data from the 1st National Health Examination Survey. We used Poisson regression to estimate prevalence ratios and study factors associated with the use of fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) and colonoscopy in a Portuguese population aged 50-74 years (n = 2,489).

Results

45.7% of the individuals reported using FIT in the previous 2 years; 37.3% reported using colonoscopy in the previous 5 years. The use of FIT was associated with age group, health region, and having a family doctor. It was higher in older individuals (47.6% in the age group 70-74 years vs. 38.1% in the age group 50-54 years; adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] = 1.32; 95% CI 1.05-1.65), and in individuals assigned to a family doctor (47.6 vs. 30.3%; aPR = 1.50; 95% CI 1.14-1.98). Colonoscopy was associated with age group, health region, higher education, economic capacity, and having a family doctor. It was higher in older individuals (45.3% in the age group 70-74 years vs. 25.6% in the age group 50-54 years; aPR = 1.85; 95% CI 1.42-2.40), individuals with a higher economic capacity (40.5 vs. 32.4%; aPR = 1.19; 95% CI 1.01-1.40), and individuals assigned to a family doctor (38.7 vs. 25.6%; aPR = 1.43; 95% CI 1.08-1.91).

Discussion/Conclusion

In our analysis, the use of FIT and colonoscopy was influenced by sociodemographic, economic, and access-to-healthcare factors. This is relevant to guide interventions in this area. It is essential to ensure an equitable and uniform implementation of the screening program, with family doctors as an important part of the process.

Barriers and facilitators towards colonoscopy: a qualitative systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Colonoscopy is integral in the early detection of colorectal cancer (CRC), be it for screening, diagnostic or therapeutic intentions. Despite the presence of multiple screening modalities, colonoscopy remains integral in providing a definitive CRC diagnosis. However, uptake rates remain low worldwide with minimal understanding towards stakeholders' perspectives. This systematic review is the first to outline the barriers and facilitators faced by providers and patients in receiving colonoscopy specifically.

METHODS

Using PRISMA guidelines, our systematic review consolidates findings from Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Web of Science Core collection. All perceptions of healthcare providers and screening participants aged 45 and above towards colonoscopy were included.

RESULTS

Forty-five articles were included in our review. Five major analytical themes were identified - procedural perceptions, personal experiences, thoughts and concerns, societal influences, doctor-patient relationship and healthcare system. The discrepancies in knowledge between patients and providers have evidently reduced in the present decade, potentially attributable to the rising influence of social media. The sharing of providers' personal experiences, involvement of patients' family in colonoscopy recommendations and propagation of patients' positive recounts were also more apparent in the past compared to the present decade, highlighting the need to reevaluate the balance between medical confidentiality and personal touch. Additionally, Asian patients were reportedly more apathetic towards CRC diagnosis due to their strong belief in destiny, a crucial association consistent with present studies.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights pertinent gaps in our healthcare system, providing crucial groundwork for interventions to be enacted in engendering higher colonoscopy uptake rates.

Intention for Screening Colonoscopy among Previous Non-Participants: Results of a Representative Cross-Sectional Study in Germany

Early detection of colorectal cancer has the potential to reduce mortality at population level. Colonoscopy is the preferred modality for colon cancer screening and prevention, but attendance rates are low. To exploit colonoscopy's preventive potential, it is necessary to identify the factors influencing uptake, especially among previous non-participants. This analysis of cross-sectional data involved 936 non-participants in screening colonoscopy aged 55 years or older in Germany. Differences between non-participants with and without future participation intentions were investigated in terms of socio-demographic factors, health status, attitudes and beliefs, and medical counselling. Logistic regression models were fitted to estimate associations between intention to participate and selected factors. Intention to participate was lower among women than among men. For both genders, intention to participate was positively associated with younger age. For women, higher socioeconomic status and counselling were positively associated with intention to participate. Men showed a positive association with favouring joint decision-making. The results draw attention to starting points for improving acceptance of and participation in screening colonoscopy. This includes good medical counselling and successful physician-patient communication, for which the information and communication skills of both medical professions and the general public should be strengthened. Gender differences should be considered.

Sexual Dimorphism in Colon Cancer

A higher incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) is found in males compared to females. Young women (18-44 years) with CRC have a better survival outcome compared to men of the same age or compared to older women (over 50 years), indicating a global incidence of sexual dimorphism in CRC rates and survival. This suggests a protective role for the sex steroid hormone estrogen in CRC development. Key proliferative pathways in CRC tumorigenesis exhibit sexual dimorphism, which confer better survival in females through estrogen regulated genes and cell signaling. Estrogen regulates the activity of a class of Kv channels (KCNQ1:KCNE3), which control fundamental ion transport functions of the colon and epithelial mesenchymal transition through bi-directional interactions with the Wnt/β-catenin signalling pathway. Estrogen also modulates CRC proliferative responses in hypoxia via the novel membrane estrogen receptor GPER and HIF1A and VEGF signaling. Here we critically review recent clinical and molecular insights into sexual dimorphism of CRC biology modulated by the tumor microenvironment, estrogen, Wnt/β-catenin signalling, ion channels, and X-linked genes.

Gender, having a positive FIT and type of hospital are important factors for colonoscopy experience in colorectal cancer screening - findings from the SCREESCO study

OBJECTIVES

Assessing the experience of screening procedures is crucial for improving the quality and acceptance of colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening. The aim of the study was to investigate the colonoscopy experience and associated factors among individuals who underwent a colonoscopy in the Screening of Swedish Colons (SCREESCO) study.

METHODS

Participants in the Screening of Swedish Colons (SCREESCO; n = 7593) randomized clinical trial (colonoscopy vs. faecal immunochemical test (FIT)) were enrolled. The primary outcome was overall colonoscopy experience measured with a study-specific questionnaire. Secondary endpoints were measured using multiple regression analyses with factors that included sex, randomization group, geographical regions, university hospital, complications, sedation, clean bowel, time to cecum, and presence of polyps or cancer.

RESULTS

A total of 6572 (87%) individuals responded to the questionnaire. The majority was satisfied with the information, care and treatment. Women reported more worry, discomfort and pain, but also better information, care and treatment compared with men. The FIT group was more worried and perceived more discomfort and pain than the colonoscopy group. Type of hospital (geographical region; university hospital vs. not university hospital) was also a significant predictor for the colonoscopy experience.

CONCLUSIONS

Although most participants were satisfied with the colonoscopy experience, the study has highlighted areas for improvement. Important factors for colonoscopy experience were gender, randomization group, and type of hospital and therefore crucial to bear in mind when designing screening programs.

Sex differences in the impact of Affordable Care Act Medicaid expansion on colorectal cancer screening

Access to care varies by sex such that interactions with insurance status result in mixed patterns of preventive services utilization. We examined sex-specific effects of ACA Medicaid expansions on receipt of CRC screening. We used Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data (2008-2016) for adults aged 50-64 years with household income ≤138% of federal poverty level to examine self-reported lifetime use of guideline-recommended CRC screening services overall and by screening modality. We employed difference-in-difference models comparing changes in CRC screening in 20 Medicaid expansion states before and after the ACA to changes in 18 states that did not expand Medicaid during our study period. We divided the expansion period into implementation (2014) and post-expansion (2016) periods to account for possible lagged effects. We observed time-varying effects of Medicaid expansion that revealed relative increases in CRC screening occurring during the post-expansion period. Heterogeneous effects by sex and by screening modality were also observed: there was a significant relative increase of 16.2 percentage points (95% CI [2.2, 30.2]; p-value = 0.023) in lifetime colonoscopy use among women in expansion states relative to non-expansion states in the post-expansion period. There were no significant effects of Medicaid expansion among men. Health insurance expansion had a lagged but significant effect on CRC screening among low-income non-elderly women in Medicaid expansion states, but no effect for men. The observed increase in CRC screening among women suggests that barriers to CRC screening may differ by sex, and tailored interventions to increase CRC screening improve outcomes.

The role of cancer-related inflammation for prediction of poor survival in postmenopausal female patients with stage II/III colon cancer

OBJECTIVE

Cancer-related inflammation (CRI) is thought to be a successful predictor of prognosis in colon cancers (CC), but opinions on how to use it are highly variable. In this study, the role of CRI cells in survival for CC patients was investigated by considering gender and menopausal status.

METHODS

163 stage II/III CC patients who underwent curative surgery between 1995 and 2015 were included in the study. The relationship between CRI cells was examined using a standard methodology.

RESULTS

High neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) had a better relationship with prognostic factors, especially in postmenopausal women (gender, p = 0.037, positive surgical margin, p = 0.001; MSI, p < 0.001; Crohn's-like reaction, p = 0.001, etc). Also, the reproducibility of the study was better in postmenopausal women (intra-observer agreement = 0.72, intra-class correlation = 0.722, correlation of estimates = 0.718). In univariate analysis, 5-year survival was worse in postmenopausal women with high NLR (OS, p = 0.001; RFS, p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, high NLR was independently a worse biomarker for OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.29; 95% CI, 1.18-2.12; p = 0.001) and RFS (HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.21-2.59; p < 0.001) in postmenopausal women.

CONCLUSIONS

NLR had an independent poor prognostic significance in postmenopausal female patients, and the use of a standard approach for methodology improved successful results.

Sex Differences in Perceptions toward Falls among Older Adults Living in the Community in Singapore

Fall prevention strategies informed by understanding sex differences in the perception of falls may be fruitful. Objectives: In the current research, we examined the consequence of having a recent fall episode on sex differences in fall perception based on the postulation that having a recent fall can lead to perceived susceptibility and attenuate male stereotypic perceptions toward falls. Methods and Results: Examining 549 older adults (337 women) living in the community, men reported higher falls efficacy, less negative perception related to the effect of a fall, and lower tendency to restrict activities to prevent falls. These sex differences were observed only among those who did not have a recent fall episode, and no significant sex differences were observed among those who fell. Discussion: The findings suggest that a recent fall episode may underlie sex differences in falls perception. The implications of sex differences in perceptions in falls for healthcare delivery and outcomes are discussed.

Afterthoughts on colonoscopy. Was it that bad?

OBJECTIVES

Colorectal cancer is among the top three most common cancers globally. In order to reduce the health burden, it is important to improve the uptake of colorectal cancer screening by understanding the barriers and facilitators encountered. There are numerous reports in the literature on the views of the general public on cancer screening. However, the experiences of colonoscopy patients are not as well studied. This paper maps their perceptions.

METHODS

Keyword searches for terms such as 'colorectal', 'colonoscopy' and 'qualitative' were conducted on 3 December 2019 in five databases: Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Web of Science Core Collection. Qualitative articles that quoted colonoscopy-experienced patients with no prior history of colorectal cancer were included for the thematic analysis. The systematic review was then synthesized according to PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

The major themes were distilled into three categories: pre-procedure, during and post-procedure. The factors identified in the pre-procedure phase include the troublesome bowel preparation, poor quality of information provided and the dynamics within a support network. Perceptions of pain, emotional discomfort and the role of providers mark the experience during the procedure. The receipt of results, opportunities given for discussion and finances relating to colonoscopy are important post-procedure events.

CONCLUSION

Understanding colorectal cancer screening behaviour is fundamental for healthcare providers and authorities to develop system and personal level changes for the improvement of colorectal cancer screening services. The key areas include patient comfort, the use of clearer instructional aids and graphics, establishing good patient rapport, and the availability of individualized options for sedation and the procedure.

Understanding barriers and facilitators to participation in colorectal cancer screening: A French qualitative study

Based on the theory of social representations, this study aims to identify the main determinants to participation in colorectal cancer screening. Six focus groups (N = 29 participants belonging to the general population) were conducted, followed by a theoretical thematic analysis. Screening obstacles are a lack of test's accessibility, a low preoccupation for prevention and the negative image of colorectal cancer. Conversely, screening facilitators are the ease of the new test, being encouraged to get screened and appointment reminder. This study advances understanding of adherence to screening by addressing the beliefs and knowledge surrounding it.

Gender- and Race-Based Differences in Barriers and Facilitators to Early Detection of Colon Cancer

Background: Early detection of colon cancer is essential to successful treatment and survival, yet most patients are diagnosed only after onset of symptoms. Previous studies suggest differences in colon cancer screening and presentation by gender and race, but reasons for this are not understood. The purpose of this study was to identify barriers and facilitators to early detection of colon cancer and to compare by gender and race. Materials and Methods: In the Colon Cancer Patterns of Care in Chicago study, non-Hispanic Black and White (NHB, NHW) patients aged 30-79 newly diagnosed with colon cancer between 2010 and 2014 (n = 249) underwent in-depth semistructured interviews regarding the pathway to colon cancer diagnosis. Mixed qualitative and quantitative methods were used to analyze patient narratives and to compare response patterns by gender and race within prespecified domains: health care access factors, provider-related factors, patient-related factors, and diagnostic workup factors. Results: Women reported more barriers than facilitators to early detection than men (barrier: facilitator ratio of 0.60 vs. 0.48). Thematic differences were seen, with women reporting more barriers related to health care access, scheduling of follow-ups, symptom recognition, and inappropriate or inconclusive diagnostic tests. Fewer women than men reported facilitators related to provider factors such as ease of scheduling follow-ups and receiving referrals for screening or a specialist. NHBs and NHWs reported similar ratios of barriers to facilitators (0.55 vs. 0.53), but more NHBs than NHWs reported barriers related to health care access, scheduling follow-ups, and clinical delays, and fewer NHBs reported facilitators related to health care accessibility (existing relationship with provider, ease of scheduling follow-ups). Conclusions: In this diverse population of patients recently diagnosed with colon cancer, we identified substantive gender- and race-based differences in the types and burden of barriers and facilitators to early detection experienced in the path to diagnosis. These differences should be explored further as they may contribute to disparities in the diagnosis and prognosis of colon cancer.

Predictors of Undergoing Colonoscopy, Does Time Horizon Matter?

When talking to patients about undergoing diagnostic colonoscopy, their doctors can present the risk of developing colorectal cancer (CRC) in different time horizons. Studies on time horizons suggest that people have different psychological associations for the near and distant future, which potentially influence their judgments and actions. The aim of this study was to examine what factors predict patients’ intentions to undergo diagnostic colonoscopy. We particularly focused on examining the role of the time horizon in which the probability of developing malignant CRC was presented, when taking into account the following factors: the perception of risk (perceived susceptibility to and perceived severity of CRC), expected discomfort related to the procedure, a previous colonoscopy, and subjective numeracy. Using the Health Belief Model, we sought to determine whether the intention to undergo a preventive colonoscopy is affected by the time horizon. We hypothesized that the risk of developing CRC in a proximal time horizon would be more threatening to an individual than a distal one and would consequently increase an individual’s behavioral intention to undergo a colonoscopy. We examined the effects of two different time horizons: the risk of developing a disease in the next few years and total lifetime risk. A total of 144 respondents (77 women and 67 men) aged 50–59 years participated in the study. We found that risk perception and expected discomfort significantly affected participants’ intention to undergo a colonoscopy. No empirical evidence was found to confirm that presenting a person with the risk of developing malignant CRC in the coming years, as compared to their lifetime risk, increases the behavioral intention to undergo a diagnostic colonoscopy.

Breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening in adults with diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

Individuals with diabetes are at increased risk of developing and dying from cancer. Evidence-based guidelines recommend universal screening for breast, cervical and colorectal cancer; however, evidence on the uptake of these tests in individuals with diabetes is mixed. We conducted a meta-analysis to quantify the association between diabetes and participation in breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL were searched systematically for publications between 1 January 1997 and 18 July 2018. The search was supplemented by handsearching of reference lists of the included studies and known literature reviews. Abstracts and full texts were assessed in duplicate according to the following eligibility criteria: study conducted in the general population; diabetes included as a predictor vs a comparison group without diabetes; and breast (mammography), cervical (Papanicolaou smear) or colorectal (faecal and endoscopic tests) cancer screening uptake included as an outcome. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed using the most-adjusted estimates for each cancer site.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven studies (25 cross-sectional, 12 cohorts) were included, with 27 studies on breast, 19 on cervical and 18 on colorectal cancer screening. Having diabetes was associated with significantly lower likelihood of breast (adjusted OR 0.83 [95% CI 0.77, 0.90]) and cervical (OR 0.76 [95% CI 0.71, 0.81]) cancer screening, relative to not having diabetes. Colorectal cancer screening was comparable across groups with and without diabetes (OR 0.95 [95% CI 0.86, 1.06]); however, women with diabetes were less likely to receive a colorectal cancer screening test than women without diabetes (OR 0.86 [95% CI 0.77, 0.97]).

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

Our findings suggest that women with diabetes have suboptimal breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening rates, compared with women without diabetes, although the absolute differences might be modest. Given the increased risk of cancer in this population, higher quality prospective evidence is necessary to evaluate the contribution of diabetes to cancer screening disparities in relation to other patient-, provider- and system-level factors.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration ID CRD42017073107.

Lung cancer screening patient-provider discussion: Where do we stand and what are the associated factors?

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective of this study was to estimate the percentage of individuals possibly eligible for lung cancer screening that report having discussed screening with a health care provider. The secondary objective was to investigate the associated factors of having patient-provider lung cancer screening discussion.

METHODS

Data from the Health Information National Trends Survey 2017 were used (n = 3217). Lung cancer screening eligibility was based on the criteria utilized by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Gender, race, educational attainment, health insurance coverage, and usual source of health care were covariates. Current or former smokers ages 55-77 (n = 706) were considered potentially eligible for lung cancer screening (dependent variable).

RESULTS

Only 12.24% of individuals potentially eligible for lung cancer screening report prior discussion regarding lung cancer screening with a health care provider. Being eligible for lung cancer screening based on Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services eligibility criteria was positively associated with the odds of a patient-provider lung cancer screening discussion (odds ratio = 3.95, 95% confidence interval = 2.48-6.30). Unlike gender, race, education, or insurance coverage, a usual source of health care was positively associated with a patient-provider screening discussion (odds ratio = 2.48, 95% confidence interval = 1.31-4.70).

CONCLUSION

Individuals potentially eligible for lung cancer screening are more likely to have screening discussions with a health care provider. Having a usual source of health care may increase the odds of such a discussion, while patients are not discriminated based on race, gender, education, and insurance coverage. However, the relatively low rate (12.24%) of reported patient-provider lung cancer screening discussion indicates that significant barriers still remain.

Time to fecal immunochemical test completion for colorectal cancer screening

OBJECTIVES

Fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) can efficiently screen for colorectal cancer (CRC), but little is known on the timing to their completion. We investigate the time to return of a FIT following an order and describe patient characteristics associated with FIT return.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

METHODS

We identified 63,478 members of Kaiser Permanente Washington, aged 50 to 74 years, who received a FIT order from 2011 through 2012. Patient characteristics were ascertained through administrative and electronic health record data sources. We compared time from FIT order to return by patient characteristics using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression methods.

RESULTS

About half (53.7%) of members completed a FIT. Median time from order to return was 13 days (mean, 44.5 days; interquartile range, 6-42 days). There was higher completion of FITs among Asian patients (hazard ratio [HR], 1.43; 95% CI, 1.38-1.48), black patients (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.08-1.19), and Hispanic patients (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.04-1.16) compared with white patients; among patients with recent CRC testing (vs no testing in past 2 years; HR, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.86-1.95); and among patients with Medicare insurance (vs commercial; HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.24-1.37). Factors associated with decreased FIT completion included younger age (50-54 years vs 70-74 years; HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.82-0.92), obesity (vs normal body mass index; HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.86-0.91), and higher Charlson Comorbidity Index score (≥3 vs 0; HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.79-0.87).

CONCLUSIONS

Time to return of FIT varies by patient characteristics. We observed greater FIT completion among people of color, suggesting that racial disparities in CRC may not be due to patient completion of the test after an order is received.

Impact of The Affordable Care Act's Elimination of Cost-Sharing on the Guideline-Concordant Utilization of Cancer Preventive Screenings in the United States Using Medical Expenditure Panel Survey

Currently available evidence regarding the association of the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) elimination of cost-sharing and the utilization of cancer screenings is mixed. We determined whether the ACA’s zero cost-sharing policy affected the guideline-concordant utilization of cancer screenings, comparing adults (≥21 years) from 2009 with 2011–2014 data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. Study participants were categorized as: 21–64 years with any private insurance, ≥65 years with Medicare only, and 21–64 years uninsured, with a separate sample for each type of screening test. Adjusted weighted prevalence and prevalence ratios (PR (95%CI)) were estimated. In 2014 (vs. 2009), privately-insured women reported 2% (0.98 (0.97–0.99)) and 4% (0.96 (0.93–0.99)) reduction in use of Pap tests and mammography, respectively. Privately-insured non-Hispanic Asian women had 16% (0.84 (0.74–0.97)) reduction in mammography in 2014 (vs. 2009). In 2011 (vs. 2009), privately-insured and Medicare-only men reported 9% (1.09 (1.03–1.16)) and 13% (1.13 (1.02–1.25)) increases in colorectal cancer (CRC) screenings, respectively. Privately-insured women reported a 6–7% rise in 2013–2014 (vs. 2009), and Hispanic Medicare beneficiaries also reported 40–44%, a significant rise in 2011–2014 (vs. 2009), in the utilization of CRC screenings. While the guideline-concordant utilization of Pap tests and mammography declined in the post-ACA period, the elimination of cost-sharing appeared to have positively affected CRC screenings of privately-insured males, females, and Hispanic Medicare-only beneficiaries. Greater awareness about the zero cost-sharing policy may help in increasing the uptake of cancer screenings.

Healthy behavioral choices and cancer screening in persons living with HIV/AIDS are different by sex and years since HIV diagnosis

PURPOSE

The prevalence of non-AIDS-related malignancies is on the rise among people aging with HIV population, but the evidence on healthy behaviors including cancer screening practices in this population subgroup is extremely limited. Therefore, we investigated the prevalence of healthy behaviors and sex-specific cancer screening among persons living with HIV, by sex and time since HIV diagnosis.

METHODS

We included 517 persons living with HIV from the Florida Cohort. Data were obtained from the baseline and follow-up questionnaires, electronic medical records, and Enhanced HIV/AIDS Reporting System. The prevalence of self-reported, age-appropriate cancer screening (anal, colorectal, prostate, breast, and cervical), and healthy behaviors (sustaining healthy body weight, refraining from smoking and alcohol and engaging in physical activity) was compared by sex and years since HIV diagnosis (≤ 13 vs. > 13 years).

RESULTS

In the analyses by sex, females were more likely to be obese than males (56.5% vs. 22.2%, p < 0.0001). Distribution of healthy behaviors did not differ by time since diagnosis among males and females. In the analysis of age-appropriate screening among males, 64.8% never had an anal Pap-smear, 36.2% never had a colonoscopy, and 38.9% never had prostate cancer screening. In the analysis of age-appropriate screening among females, 50.0% never had an anal Pap-smear, 46.5% never had a colonoscopy, 7.9% never had a cervical Pap-smear, and 12.7% never had a mammogram. The difference in anal Pap-smear by sex was statistically significant (p < 0.0001). Among males, the age-adjusted prevalence of never having a colonoscopy was higher in those who had HIV for ≤ 13 years (50.8% vs. 30.6%, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of selected healthy behaviors and cancer screening differed by sex and/or years since HIV diagnosis suggesting a need for tailored cancer prevention efforts among persons living with HIV via long-term sex-specific interventions.

Eliciting vulnerable patients' preferences regarding colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Patient preferences are important to consider in the decision-making process for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Vulnerable populations, such as racial/ethnic minorities and low-income, veteran, and rural populations, exhibit lower screening uptake. This systematic review summarizes the existing literature on vulnerable patient populations' preferences regarding CRC screening.

METHODS

We searched the CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases for articles published between January 1, 1996 and December 31, 2017. We screened studies for eligibility and systematically abstracted and compared study designs and outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 43 articles met the inclusion criteria, out of 2,106 articles found in our search. These 43 articles were organized by the primary sub-population(s) whose preferences were reported: 27 report on preferences among racial/ethnic minorities, eight among low-income groups, six among veterans, and two among rural populations. The majority of studies (n=34) focused on preferences related to test modality. No single test modality was overwhelmingly supported by all sub-populations, although veterans seemed to prefer colonoscopy. Test attributes such as accuracy, sensitivity, cost, and convenience were also noted as important features. Furthermore, a preference for shared decision-making between vulnerable patients and providers was found.

CONCLUSION

The heterogeneity in study design, populations, and outcomes of the selected studies revealed a wide spectrum of CRC screening preferences within vulnerable populations. More decision aids and discrete choice experiments that focus on vulnerable populations are needed to gain a more nuanced understanding of how vulnerable populations weigh particular features of screening methods. Improved CRC screening rates may be achieved through the alignment of vulnerable populations' preferences with screening program design and provider practices. Collaborative decision-making between providers and vulnerable patients in preventive care decisions may also be important.

Use of Two Self-referral Reminders and a Theory-Based Leaflet to Increase the Uptake of Flexible Sigmoidoscopy in the English Bowel Scope Screening Program: Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial in London

Background

We previously initiated a randomized controlled trial to test the effectiveness of two self-referral reminders and a theory-based leaflet (sent 12 and 24 months after the initial invitation) to increase participation within the English Bowel Scope Screening program.

Purpose

This study reports the results following the second reminder.

Methods

Men and women included in the initial sample (n = 1,383) were re-assessed for eligibility 24 months after their invitation (12 months after the first reminder) and excluded if they had attended screening, moved away, or died. Eligible adults received the same treatment they were allocated 12 months previous, that is, no reminder ("control"), or a self-referral reminder with either the standard information booklet ("Reminder and Standard Information Booklet") or theory-based leaflet designed using the Behavior Change Wheel ("Reminder and Theory-Based Leaflet"). The primary outcome was the proportion screened within each group 12 weeks after the second reminder.

Results

In total, 1,218 (88.1%) individuals were eligible. Additional uptake following the second reminder was 0.4% (2/460), 4.8% (19/399), and 7.9% (29/366) in the control, Reminder and Standard Information Booklet, and Reminder and Theory-Based Leaflet groups, respectively. When combined with the first reminder, the overall uptake for each group was 0.7% (3/461), 14.5% (67/461), and 21.5% (99/461). Overall uptake was significantly higher in the Reminder and Standard Information Booklet and Reminder and Theory-Based Leaflet groups than in the control (odds ratio [OR] = 26.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 8.1-84.0, p < .001 and OR = 46.9, 95% CI = 14.7-149.9, p < .001, respectively), and significantly higher in the Reminder and Theory-Based Leaflet group than in the Reminder and Standard Information Booklet group (OR = 1.8, 95% CI = 1.3-2.6, p < .001).

Conclusion

A second reminder increased uptake among former nonparticipants. The added value of the theory-based leaflet highlights a potential benefit to reviewing the current information booklet.

Trials Registry Number

ISRCTN44293755.

Patient-rated importance of key information on screening colonoscopy in Germany: a survey of statutory health insurance members

BACKGROUND

Primary colonoscopic screening is considered to be of great benefit but also has the potential to cause severe harm. Thus, eligible subjects should be supported in making an informed choice whether to participate.

OBJECTIVES

To identify information on screening colonoscopy that colonoscopy-naïve subjects rate as particularly important for decision making.

DESIGN

Survey of German statutory health insurance members using a written questionnaire in November 2015.

STUDY POPULATION

Colonoscopy-naïve individuals aged 50 to 65 years.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Importance of key information about screening colonoscopy, including potential risks and benefits, baseline risk of colorectal cancer/polyps and practical aspects of the procedure, as well as associations between participants' characteristics and their judgement of information as to being 'very important'.

RESULTS

Of 1871 respondents (overall response rate: 31%), a subgroup of 370 colonoscopy-naïve subjects was eligible for inclusion (average age: 55 years, 47% male). Information on the risks was rated as very important by most respondents, unimportant by 6%. Information on the benefits was considered unimportant by 26%. Regression analysis showed that less educated persons regarded most items to be more often relevant than highly educated subjects. A greater proportion of women than men rated details regarding pain and practical aspects as very important. Subjects with a low educational level living alone were identified as the group with the least interest in information on risks.

CONCLUSION

Cultivating awareness around the central meaning of the (quantitative) benefits of screening in informed decision making should be focused on more in future information materials. The high requirement of less educated people to become more informed provides a strong motivation for further efforts to develop evidence-based information that adequately informs this group. Tailoring information according to gender-specific needs may be warranted in light of the observed differences in information preferences between women and men.

Emotional predictors of bowel screening: the avoidance-promoting role of fear, embarrassment, and disgust

Background

Despite considerable efforts to address practical barriers, colorectal cancer screening numbers are often low. People do not always act rationally, and investigating emotions may offer insight into the avoidance of screening. The current work assessed whether fear, embarrassment, and disgust predicted colorectal cancer screening avoidance.

Methods

A community sample (N = 306) aged 45+ completed a questionnaire assessing colorectal cancer screening history and the extent that perceptions of cancer risk, colorectal cancer knowledge, doctor discussions, and a specifically developed scale, the Emotional Barriers to Bowel Screening (EBBS), were associated with previous screening behaviours and anticipated bowel health decision-making.

Results

Step-wise logistic regression models revealed that a decision to delay seeking healthcare in the hypothetical presence of bowel symptoms was less likely in people who had discussed risk with their doctor, whereas greater colorectal cancer knowledge and greater fear of a negative outcome predicted greater likelihood of delay. Having previously provided a faecal sample was predicted by discussions about risk with a doctor, older age, and greater embarrassment, whereas perceptions of lower risk predicted a lower likelihood. Likewise, greater insertion disgust predicted a lower likelihood of having had an invasive bowel screening test in the previous 5 years.

Conclusions

Alongside medical and demographic factors, fear, embarrassment and disgust are worthy of consideration in colorectal cancer screening. Understanding how specific emotions impact screening decisions and behaviour is an important direction for future work and has potential to inform screening development and communications in bowel health.

National Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Obese Adults

INTRODUCTION

Obesity is a major risk factor for colorectal cancer (CRC), particularly among men. The purpose of this study was to characterize the prevalence of guideline-adherent CRC screening among obese adults using nationally representative data, assess trends in screening strategies, and identify obesity-specific screening barriers.

METHODS

Data from 8,550 respondents aged 50-75 years in the 2010 National Health Interview Survey, representing >70 million adults, were analyzed in 2015 using multivariable logistic regression. Prevalence of guideline-adherent CRC screening, endoscopic versus fecal occult blood test screening, and reasons for non-adherence were compared across BMI categories.

RESULTS

Obese class III men (BMI ≥40), compared with normal-weight men, were significantly less likely to be adherent to screening guidelines (38.7% vs 55.8%, AOR=0.35, 95% CI=0.17, 0.75); less likely to have used an endoscopic test (36.7% vs 53.0%, AOR=0.37, 95% CI=0.18, 0.79); and had a trend toward lower fecal occult blood test use (4.2% vs 8.9%, AOR=0.42, 95% CI=0.14, 1.27). Among women, odds of guideline adherence and use of different screening modalities were similar across all BMI categories. Reasons for non-adherence differed by gender and BMI; lacking a physician screening recommendation differed significantly among men (29.7% obese class III vs 15.4% non-obese, p=0.04), and pain/embarrassment differed significantly among women (11.6% obese class III vs 2.6% non-obese, p=0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite elevated risk, severely obese men were significantly under-screened for CRC. Addressing the unique screening barriers of obese adults may promote screening uptake and lessen disparities among the vulnerable populations most affected by obesity.

Are we catching women in the safety net? Colorectal cancer outcomes by gender at a safety net hospital

BACKGROUND

Our goal was to evaluate presentation and outcomes for colorectal cancer across gender in a safety net hospital (SNH).

METHODS

An institutional Tumor Registry was reviewed for colorectal cancer resections 12/2009-2/2016. Patients were stratified into male and female cohorts. The main outcome measures were stage at presentation and oncologic outcomes across gender.

RESULTS

170 women (48.6%) and 180 men (51.4%) were evaluated; 129 (84.1%) females and 143 (79.4%) males underwent curative resection. There were no significant differences in prior colorectal cancer screening. On presentation, there were similar rates of stage IV disease across genders (p = 0.3). After median follow-up of 26.5 months (female) and 29.9 months (male), there were no significant differences in overall survival, survival by stage, or disease-free survival by gender (all p = 0.7). The local (1.4% females vs. 2.6% males, p = 0.7) and distant recurrence (16.6% females vs. 14.9% males, p = 0.7) were similar across gender.

CONCLUSION

With equal access to treatment, there were no significant differences in overall survival, survival by stage, or local or distant recurrence rates by gender. These findings stress the importance of the SNH system, and need for continued support.

Opportunities to Expand Colorectal Cancer Screening Participation

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Screen for Life: National Colorectal Cancer Action Campaign has operated continuously since 1999 to promote colorectal cancer screening. The campaign's most recent formative research cycle was conducted in 2015 and included 16 focus groups in four United States cities with adults aged 50-75 years who had not received colorectal cancer screening as recommended. The most common reason for screening nonparticipation was aversion to some aspect of colonoscopy, such as preparation, the invasive nature of the test, or the possibility of complications. Other reasons for screening nonparticipation were absence of symptoms, lack of screening awareness/provider recommendation, and lack of family history. Screening promotion messages that resonated with participants included the following: multiple screening tests are available; colorectal cancer may not cause symptoms; screening should begin at age 50; and most cases of colorectal cancer occur in individuals with no family history of the disease. Efforts to increase colorectal cancer screening participation may be supported by disseminating messages that counter common concerns about screening. Raising awareness of the range of colorectal cancer screening options may be especially critical given that many unscreened individuals were unwilling to undergo a colonoscopy.

Ethical issues with colorectal cancer screening-a systematic review

RATIONALE, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is widely recommended and implemented. However, sometimes CRC screening is not implemented despite good evidence, and some types of CRC screening are implemented despite lack of evidence. The objective of this article is to expose and elucidate relevant ethical issues in the literature on CRC screening that are important for open and transparent deliberation on CRC screening.

METHODS

An axiological question-based method is used for exposing and elucidating ethical issues relevant in HTA. A literature search in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed Bioethics subset, ISI Web of Knowledge, Bioethics Literature Database (BELIT), Ethics in Medicine (ETHMED), SIBIL Base dati di bioetica, LEWI Bibliographic Database on Ethics in the Sciences and Humanities, and EUROETHICS identified 870 references of which 114 were found relevant according to title and abstract. The content of the included papers were subject to ethical analysis to highlight the ethical issues, concerns, and arguments.

RESULTS

A wide range of important ethical issues were identified. The main benefits are reduced relative CRC mortality rate, and potentially incidence rate, but there is no evidence of reduced absolute mortality rate. Potential harms are bleeding, perforation, false test results, overdetection, overdiagnosis, overtreatment (including unnecessary removal of polyps), and (rarely) death. Other important issues are related to autonomy and informed choice equity, justice, medicalization, and expanding disease.

CONCLUSION

A series of important ethical issues have been identified and need to be addressed in open and transparent deliberation on CRC screening.

Cancer screening in Portugal: sex differences in prevalence, awareness of organized programmes and perception of benefits and adverse effects

BACKGROUND

Cancer screening has contributed to downward trends in cancer mortality, but is also associated with adverse effects, which highlights the importance of promoting the participation based on informed decisions.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to describe the use of cancer screening (either in organized programmes or as opportunistic screening), awareness of organized programmes and perception of its potential benefits and adverse effects, depicting possible sex differences.

DESIGN AND METHODS

We evaluated 1624 Portuguese-speaking dwellers, aged between 16 and 79 years, through face-to-face interviews. To quantify sex differences, adjusted prevalence ratios and respective 95% confidence intervals were computed using Poisson regression.

RESULTS

Among eligible age groups, the lifetime prevalence of screening for breast and cervical cancers was 89.8 and 71.9%, respectively. The prevalence was 23.7% for colorectal cancer and no significant sex differences were observed. Prostate cancer screening was reported by 63.8% of men. Over half of the participants referred that cancers such as prostate, skin, lung and stomach should be screened for, in addition to those for which organized programmes are recommended. Reassurance by negative results was identified as the main potential benefit of screening by nearly one-third of men and women. Anxiety while waiting for results was the most mentioned potential adverse effect (60.4%); men refer less often this and financial costs, although statistical significance of these results was borderline.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides a benchmark to plan and monitor the effects of awareness-raising interventions, as well as for international comparisons across countries with different cancer prevention and control structures.

The information needs of adult cancer survivors across the cancer continuum: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To provide an updated synthesis of the literature that investigates the self-reported information needs of people diagnosed with cancer across the cancer continuum.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review of the literature published from August 2003 to June 2015 and expanded an existing typology summarizing the information needs of people diagnosed with cancer.

RESULTS

The majority of the included studies (n=104) focused on questions relevant to the diagnosis/active treatment phase of the cancer continuum (52.9%) and thus the most frequently identified information needs related to this phase (33.4%). Information needs varied across the continuum and the results highlight the importance of recognising this fact.

CONCLUSION

People diagnosed with cancer experience discrete information needs at different points from diagnosis to survival. Much of the research conducted in this area has focused on their information needs during the diagnosis and treatment of cancer, and literature relating to information needs following completion of treatment is sparse.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Further research is needed to discern the specific nature of the treatment concerns and identify the information needs that survivors experience during recurrence of cancer, metastasis or changes in diagnosis, and the end of life phase of the cancer continuum.

Barriers and facilitators associated with colonoscopy completion in individuals with multiple chronic conditions: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

A recommendation to undergo a colonoscopy, an invasive procedure that requires commitment and motivation, planning (scheduling and finding a driver) and preparation (diet restriction and laxative consumption), may be uniquely challenging for individuals with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs). This qualitative study aimed to describe the barriers and facilitators to colonoscopy experienced by such patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Semistructured focus groups were conducted with male Veterans who were scheduled for outpatient colonoscopy and either failed to complete the procedure or completed the examination. Focus group recordings were transcribed and analyzed by an inductive grounded approach using constant comparative analysis.

RESULTS

Forty-four individuals aged 51-83 years participated in this study (23 adherent and 21 nonadherent). Participants had an average of 7.4 chronic conditions (range 2-14). The five most common chronic conditions were hypertension (75%), hyperlipidemia (75%), osteoarthritis/degenerative joint disease (59%), atherosclerotic heart disease (48%), and diabetes mellitus (36%). We identified four unique themes that influenced motivation to undergo a colonoscopy: competing medical priorities, low perceived benefit, a prior negative colonoscopy experience, and pre-existing medical conditions. Additionally, we identified four themes that influenced individuals' ability to complete the examination: difficulty with bowel cleansing, difficulty with travel, worry about exacerbation of pre-existing conditions, and heightened concerns about potential complications.

CONCLUSION

MCCs are common in individuals referred for colonoscopy and generate unique barriers to colonoscopy completion related to medication, dietary changes, transportation, preparation processes, symptoms exacerbation, and complication concerns. Future research should examine whether tailored interventions that include education and support in addressing the unique barriers can enhance colonoscopy completion.

Relationship between socioeconomic status and accessibility for endoscopic resection among gastric cancer patients: using National Health Insurance Cohort in Korea: poverty and endoscopic resection

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer is one of the most common types of cancer among patients in Korea. We measured the inequity in accessibility to endoscopic mucosal/submucosal resection (EMR) for early and curable gastric cancer treatment among different income classes in patients diagnosed from late 2011 to 2013.

METHODS

Data were obtained from the National Health Insurance Cooperation Claim Data from patients diagnosed from late 2011 until the end of 2013, to provide a total of 1,671 patients with newly diagnosed carcinoma in situ of gastric and gastric cancer among 1,025,340 enrollees. Multiple logistic regression analysis was conducted to investigate the associations between independent variables and the rate of treatment with EMR.

RESULTS

Among 1671 gastric cancer patients, 317 (19.0 %) subjects were treated with EMR. The 'lowest' income group was associated with a statistically significant lower rate of EMR treatment [odds ratio (OR) = 0.55, 95 % confidence index (CI) 0.34-0.89] compared to the 'highest' income group. The ORs for the 'low-middle' and 'middle-high' income groups were both higher than for the reference group, although these were not significantly different. According to the subgroup analysis by gender, rate of EMR treatment of 'lowest' income group (OR = 0.37, 95 % CI 0.18-0.74) was significantly lower only among men.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, we suggest that although universal health insurance in Korea has covered EMR treatment since August 2011, patients from the lowest income group are less likely to receive this treatment. Thus, we need to detect more eligible early-stage gastric cancer and treatment for individuals of low socioeconomic status.

Systematic screening for the detection of atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF), the most common arrhythmia in clinical practice, is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Screening for AF in asymptomatic patients has been proposed as a way of reducing the burden of the disease by detecting people who would benefit from prophylactic anticoagulation therapy before the onset of symptoms. However, for screening to be an effective intervention, it must improve the detection of AF and provide benefit for those detected earlier as a result of screening.

OBJECTIVES

This review aims to answer the following questions.Does systematic screening increase the detection of AF compared with routine practice? Which combination of screening population, strategy and test is most effective for detecting AF compared with routine practice? What safety issues and adverse events may be associated with individual screening programmes? How acceptable is the intervention to the target population? What costs are associated with systematic screening for AF?

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (Ovid) and EMBASE (Ovid) up to 11 November 2015. We searched other relevant research databases, trials registries and websites up to December 2015. We also searched reference lists of identified studies for potentially relevant studies, and we contacted corresponding authors for information about additional published or unpublished studies that may be relevant. We applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing screening for AF with routine practice in people 40 years of age and older were eligible. Two review authors (PM and CT) independently selected trials for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (PM and CT) independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We used odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to present results for the primary outcome, which is a dichotomous variable. As we identified only one study for inclusion, we performed no meta-analysis. We used the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group) method to assess the quality of the evidence and GRADEPro to create a 'Summary of findings' table.

MAIN RESULTS

One cluster-randomised controlled trial met the inclusion criteria for this review. This study compared systematic screening (by invitation to have an electrocardiogram (ECG)) and opportunistic screening (pulse palpation during a general practitioner (GP) consultation for any reason, followed by an ECG if pulse was irregular) versus routine practice (normal case finding on the basis of clinical presentation) in people 65 years of age or older.Results show that both systematic screening and opportunistic screening of people over 65 years of age are more effective than routine practice (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.26; and OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.29, respectively; both moderate-quality evidence). We found no difference in the effectiveness of systematic screening and opportunistic screening (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.37; low-quality evidence). A subgroup analysis found that systematic screening and opportunistic screening were more effective in men (OR 2.68, 95% CI 1.51 to 4.76; and OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.29 to 4.19, respectively) than in women (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.62; and OR 1.2, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.93, respectively). No adverse events associated with screening were reported.The incremental cost per additional case detected by opportunistic screening was GBP 337, compared with GBP 1514 for systematic screening. All cost estimates were based on data from the single included trial, which was conducted in the UK between 2001 and 2003.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence suggests that systematic screening and opportunistic screening for AF increase the rate of detection of new cases compared with routine practice. Although these approaches have comparable effects on the overall AF diagnosis rate, the cost of systematic screening is significantly greater than the cost of opportunistic screening from the perspective of the health service provider. Few studies have investigated effects of screening in other health systems and in younger age groups; therefore, caution needs to be exercised in relation to transferability of these results beyond the setting and population in which the included study was conducted.Additional research is needed to examine the effectiveness of alternative screening strategies and to investigate the effects of the intervention on risk of stroke for screened versus non-screened populations.

Systematic Review and Meta-study Synthesis of Qualitative Studies Evaluating Facilitators and Barriers to Participation in Colorectal Cancer Screening

Screening reduces the incidence, morbidity, and mortality of colorectal cancer, yet participation tends to be low. We undertook a systematic review and meta-study synthesis of qualitative studies to identify facilitators and barriers to colorectal cancer screening participation. We searched major bibliographic databases for records published in all languages from inception to February 2015. Included primary studies that elicited views and perceptions towards colorectal cancer screening were appraised for relevance and quality. We used a two-stage synthesis to create an interpretation of colorectal cancer screening decisions grounded in primary studies; a thematic analysis to group themes and systematically compare studies and a meta-synthesis to generate an expanded theory of colorectal cancer screening participation. Ninety-four studies were included. The decision to participate in colorectal cancer screening depended on an individual's awareness of colorectal cancer screening. Awareness affected views of cancer, attitudes towards colorectal cancer screening modalities, and motivation for screening. Factors mediating awareness included public education to address misconceptions, primary care physician efforts to recommend screening, and the influence of friends and family. Specific barriers to participation in populations with lower participation rates included language barriers, logistical challenges to attending screening tests, and cultural beliefs. This study identifies key barriers, facilitators, and mediators to colorectal cancer screening participation. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 25(6); 907-17. ©2016 AACR.

Sex-based disparities in colorectal cancer screening

PURPOSE

Research suggests that recurrence and survival from colorectal cancer are worse in men than in women but the causes for this are unclear. Our aims were to (1) assess for sex differences in colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) within a large, contemporary population-based sample in California; and (2) examine the impact of income, education, and insurance status on sex differences in CRCS.

METHODS

Screening-eligible patients were identified from the 2007 US California Health Interview Survey. Up-to-date, CRCS was defined as fecal occult blood test within 1 year, flexible sigmoidoscopy within 5 years, or colonoscopy within 10 years. Logistic regression models were constructed to evaluate the relationship between sex and CRCS. Stratified analyses on the basis of self-reported income (low vs. high), education (≤ high school vs. > high school), and health insurance status (insured vs. uninsured) were performed to determine if sex differences in screening were modified by these parameters.

RESULTS

In total, 11,260 men and 17,705 women were identified: mean ages were 65 and 66 years, respectively, and 63% were white in both the sexes. In the entire cohort, only two thirds of men and women reported undergoing up-to-date CRCS. Women had decreased odds of CRCS than men, after adjusting for potential confounders. Stratified analyses indicated that sex disparities in CRCS persisted among the insured, educated, and high-income earners.

CONCLUSIONS

Women are less likely to undergo CRCS than men, but poor health care access is associated with low CRCS in both the sexes. Conventional strategies aimed at improving health care access should also include sex-specific interventions that raise awareness about preventive care to most effectively optimize CRCS.

Improving care of chronic conditions for women veterans: identifying opportunities for comparative effectiveness research

This article aims to critically analyze research focused on the findings for five chronic conditions: chronic pain, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, HIV and cancer among women veterans to identify opportunities for comparative effectiveness research. We provide a descriptive analysis from the relevant articles in prior systematic reviews. In order to identify potential gaps in research for these specific conditions, we also conducted a literature search to highlight studies focusing on women veterans published since the last systematic review. While the scientific knowledge base has grown for these chronic conditions among women veterans, the vast majority of the published literature remains descriptive and/or observational, with only a few studies examining gender differences and even fewer clinical trials. There is a need to conduct comparative effectiveness research on chronic conditions among women veterans to improve health and healthcare.

Diabetes and colorectal cancer screening among men and women in the USA: National Health Interview Survey: 2008, 2010

PURPOSE

Adults with diabetes are at increased risk of being diagnosed with and dying from colorectal cancer, but it is unclear whether colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) use is lower in this population. Using the 2008 and 2010 National Health Interview Survey data, we examined whether guideline-concordant CRCS is lower among men and women with self-reported diabetes.

METHODS

We calculated the weighted percentage of guideline-concordant CRCS and unadjusted and adjusted prevalence ratios (PR) comparing adults aged 51-75 years with diabetes (n = 6,514) to those without (n = 8,371). We also examined effect modification by age (51-64 and 65-75), race/ethnicity, and number of medical office visits (0-3, ≥ 4).

RESULTS

The unadjusted prevalence of CRCS among men with diabetes was significantly higher than men without (63.3 vs. 58.0 %; PR = 1.09 95 % CI 1.03-1.16). In adjusted models, this relationship was evident among older [adjusted PR (aPR) = 1.13 95 % CI 1.06-1.21] but not younger men (aPR = 0.99 95 % CI 0.91-1.08; p for interaction term ≤ 0.01). There was no significant association between diabetes and CRCS among women overall (56.6 vs. 57.9 %; PR = 0.98 95 % CI 0.92-1.04) or by age group. Race/ethnicity and the number of medical visits did not significantly modify the association between diabetes and CRCS for men or women.

CONCLUSIONS

Men and women with self-reported diabetes were not less likely to be up to date with CRCS than those without diabetes. Older men with diabetes were more likely to be up to date with CRCS than those without diabetes.