A delay in colonoscopy after positive fecal tests leads to higher incidence of colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Cost-effectiveness analysis of single colonoscopy versus single fecal test for colorectal cancer diagnosis and treatment

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Regular endoscopy or fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is ideal for screening colorectal cancer. However, only a limited number of individuals undergo regular screening. This study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of a single colonoscopy with a single FIT performed for colorectal cancer screening.

METHODS

A microsimulation model was constructed based on real-world observational data collected from three institutions between 2019 and 2022 that compared colonoscopy-based screening with FIT-based screening. The total costs of diagnosis and treatment of the detected lesions using the two strategies were calculated. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per life year gained (LYG) of the colonoscopy-based strategy was calculated.

RESULTS

Data from 11 407 patients undergoing colonoscopies and 59 176 patients undergoing FITs were used to establish a model. In the base case analysis of screening strategies, colonoscopy was more cost-effective than FIT (ICER 415 193 yen/LYG). The ICER of the colonoscopy-based strategy among 60- to 69-year-old patients was lowest at 394 200 yen/LYG, whereas that in 20- to 29-year-old patients was highest. Monte Carlo simulations showed that the colonoscopy-based strategy was more cost-effective than the FIT-based strategy (net monetary benefit [NMB]: 5 695 957 yen vs 5 348 253 yen). When the adenoma detection rate in the colonoscopy was over 30% or the positive FIT rate was lower than 8.6% in the FIT-based strategy, the NMB of the colonoscopy-based strategy exceeded that of the FIT-based strategy.

CONCLUSION

In the microsimulation model, colonoscopy is recommended as a one-time screening procedure in patients aged >60 years with >30% ADR or <8.6% positive FIT rate.

Risk Factors for Suboptimal Colon Cancer Diagnosis and Management at a Safety-Net Hospital System

INTRODUCTION

Colon cancer (CC) is the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States. Quality measures have been introduced by the American Gastroenterological Association and Commission on Cancer for optimal management of CC. In this study, we sought to identify factors that may hinder the timely diagnosis and treatment of CC at a safety-net hospital system.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review was performed for patients aged ≥18 y diagnosed with CC from 2018 to 2021. Primary outcomes were time from positive fecal immunochemical test to colonoscopy, time from diagnosis to surgery, and time from diagnosis to adjuvant chemotherapy. Secondary end points were demographic characteristics associated with suboptimal outcomes in any of the above measures.

RESULTS

One hundred ninety patients were diagnosed with nonmetastatic CC. The majority were Hispanic and non-English-speaking. 74.1% of patients with a positive fecal immunochemical test received a colonoscopy within 180 d. 59.6% of nonemergent cases received surgery within 60 d of diagnosis. 77% of those eligible received adjuvant chemotherapy within 120 d of diagnosis. No clinically significant demographic factor was associated with delay in colonoscopy, surgery, or adjuvant chemotherapy. Most frequent cause of delay in surgery (38.0%) was optimization of comorbidities. Most frequent cause of delay in adjuvant chemotherapy (71.4%) was delay in surgery itself.

CONCLUSIONS

No clinically significant demographic factor was associated with experiencing delays in diagnostic colonoscopy, surgery, or adjuvant chemotherapy.

Colonoscopy vs the Fecal Immunochemical Test: Which is Best?

Although there is no debate around the effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening in reducing disease burden, there remains a question regarding the most effective and cost-effective screening modality. Current United States guidelines present a panel of options that include the 2 most commonly used modalities, colonoscopy and stool testing with the fecal immunochemical test (FIT). Large-scale comparative effectiveness trials comparing colonoscopy and FIT for colorectal cancer outcomes are underway, but results are not yet available. This review will separately state the "best case" for FIT and colonoscopy as the screening tool of first choice. In addition, the review will examine these modalities from a health economics perspective to provide the reader further context about the relative advantages of these commonly used tests.

Reducing the Risk of Delayed Colorectal Cancer Diagnoses Through an Ambulatory Safety Net Collaborative

BACKGROUND

An estimated 12 million adults in the United States experience delayed diagnoses and other diagnostic errors annually. Ambulatory safety nets (ASNs) are an intervention to reduce delayed diagnoses by identifying patients with abnormal results overdue for follow-up using registries, workflow redesign, and patient navigation. The authors sought to co-design a collaborative and implement colorectal cancer (CRC) ASNs across various health care settings.

METHODS

A working group was convened to co-design implementation guidance, measures, and the collaborative model. Collaborative sites were recruited through a medical professional liability insurance program and chose to begin with developing an ASN for positive at-home CRC screening or overdue surveillance colonoscopy. The 18-month Breakthrough Series Collaborative ran from January 2022 to July 2023, with sites continuing to collect data while sustaining their ASNs. Data were collected from sites monthly on patients in the ASN, including the proportion that was successfully contacted, scheduled, and completed a follow-up colonoscopy.

RESULTS

Six sites participated; four had an operational ASN at the end of the Breakthrough Series, with the remaining sites launching three months later. From October 2022 through February 2024, the Collaborative ASNs collectively identified 5,165 patients from the registry as needing outreach. Among patients needing outreach, 3,555 (68.8%) were successfully contacted, 2,060 (39.9%) were scheduled for a colonoscopy, and 1,504 (29.1%) completed their colonoscopy.

CONCLUSION

The Collaborative successfully identified patients with previously abnormal CRC screening and facilitated completion of follow-up testing. The CRC ASN Implementation Guide offers a comprehensive road map for health care leaders interested in implementing CRC ASNs.

Black-White disparities in colorectal cancer outcomes: a simulation study of screening benefit

The US Black population has higher colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence rates and worse CRC survival than the US White population, as well as historically lower rates of CRC screening. The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results incidence rate data in people diagnosed between the ages of 20 and 45 years, before routine CRC screening is recommended, were analyzed to estimate temporal changes in CRC risk in Black and White populations. There was a rapid rise in rectal and distal colon cancer incidence in the White population but not the Black population, and little change in proximal colon cancer incidence for both groups. In 2014-2018, CRC incidence per 100 000 was 17.5 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 15.3 to 19.9) among Black individuals aged 40-44 years and 16.6 (95% CI = 15.6 to 17.6) among White individuals aged 40-44 years; 42.3% of CRCs diagnosed in Black patients were proximal colon cancer, and 41.1% of CRCs diagnosed in White patients were rectal cancer. Analyses used a race-specific microsimulation model to project screening benefits, based on life-years gained and lifetime reduction in CRC incidence, assuming these Black-White differences in CRC risk and location. The projected benefits of screening (via either colonoscopy or fecal immunochemical testing) were greater in the Black population, suggesting that observed Black-White differences in CRC incidence are not driven by differences in risk. Projected screening benefits were sensitive to survival assumptions made for Black populations. Building racial disparities in survival into the model reduced projected screening benefits, which can bias policy decisions.

Changes in the Number of Gastrointestinal Cancers and Stage at Diagnosis with COVID-19 Pandemic in Japan: A Multicenter Cohort Study

This retrospective cohort study compared the number of newly diagnosed patients, stage at diagnosis, and detection process of gastrointestinal cancers based on hospital-based cancer registry data at two tertiary Japanese hospitals. The pre-COVID-19 period was from January 2017 to February 2020, with phase 1 (midst of COVID-19 pandemic) from March to December 2020 and phase 2 (the transition period to the "new normal") from January to December 2021. Each month, the number of patients diagnosed with esophageal, gastric, colorectal, pancreatic, liver, and biliary tract cancers were aggregated, classified by stage and detection process, and compared, including a total of 6453 patients. The number of colorectal Stage 0-II patients decreased significantly in phase 1 and increased in phase 2. The total number of colorectal cancer patients returned to pre-COVID-19 levels (mean monthly patients [SD]: 41.61 [6.81] vs. 36.00 [6.72] vs. 46.00 [11.32]). The number of patients with gastric cancer Stage I significantly decreased in phase 2 following phase 1. The number of gastric cancer patients decreased significantly from pre-COVID-19 levels (30.63 [6.62] vs. 22.40 [5.85] vs. 24.50 [4.15]). During phase 2, the number of patients diagnosed after screening with colorectal cancer increased significantly, whereas that with gastric cancer remained considerably lower. The number of Stage III colorectal and gastric cancer patients increased significantly from the pre-COVID-19 levels. Thus, gastric cancer may not be optimally screened during phases 1 and 2. There was a significant increase in patients with Stage III colorectal and gastric cancers from the pre-COVID-19 period; hence, the stage at diagnosis may have progressed.

Older Age at First Screening Colonoscopy is Associated With an Increased Risk of Colorectal Adenomas and Cancer

INTRODUCTION

The goal of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is to detect precancerous polyps before cancer development or identification of cancer at an early stage. Guidelines have recommended screening colonoscopy to start at age 45. Our aim was to determine the impact of delays in performing the first screening colonoscopy on the risk of adenoma or CRC detection.

METHODS

We analyzed colonoscopy and histopathology data of average CRC risk patients who had their first screening colonoscopy between 2010 and 2017. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine the association between demographic variables and the risk of adenomas or CRC.

RESULTS

A total of 1155 average risk patients underwent their initial screening colonoscopy during the study period. Median age was 54 years (range of 45-87) and 58.2% were females. In multivariable analysis, older age at first screening colonoscopy was significantly associated with the detection of adenomatous polyps (odds ratio 1.05, 95% confidence interval 1.04-1.07, P <0.001) and CRC (odds ratio 1.11, 95% confidence interval 1.06-1.16, P <0.001). The association between age and risk of adenomatous polyps (F-test 35.43, P =0.0019) and CRC (F-test 36.94, P =0.0017) fit an exponential growth model. It was estimated that the detection rate doubled every 14.20 years and 4.75 years for adenomas and CRC, respectively.

CONCLUSION

We found that older age at the initial performance of a screening colonoscopy was associated with increased detection of adenomatous polyps and CRC. This work highlights the need for guideline adherence for the prevention of CRC development.

Postponing colonoscopy for 6 months in high-risk population increases colorectal cancer detection in China

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Colonoscopy is an important colorectal cancer (CRC) screening modality; however, not all high-risk groups identified by fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and/or high-risk factor questionnaire (HRFQ) undergo colonoscopy in time. The impact of delays in colonoscopy on CRC detection among high-risk populations remains poorly understood, warranting further clarification.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted among CRC high-risk population identified by Tianjin CRC screening program. According to the colonoscopy results after HRFQ and FIT, patients were classified into CRC, advanced adenoma, non-advanced adenoma, and normal groups. The time interval between CRC screening and colonoscopy was investigated and its relationship with colonoscopy results. Logistic regression was performed to explore the risk factors of CRC detection.

RESULTS

Among the high-risk population without a history of CRC or polyps, 49,810 underwent HRFQ, FIT, and colonoscopy, and a time interval of fewer than 6 months was found for 79.56% of patients (n = 39,630). People with positive FIT were more likely to undergo colonoscopy within 6 months, and detection rates of CRC and/or advanced adenoma were positively related to time intervals. Similar results were found in people with a negative FIT but positive HRFQ. A time interval longer than 6 months was a significant predictor of CRC detection in high-risk populations.

CONCLUSION

For high-risk people identified by CRC screening, especially those with a positive FIT, a time interval of 6 months was associated with an increased probability of CRC detection. Our findings emphasize that populations at high risk should undergo colonoscopy at least within 6 months.

Barriers to colonoscopy in UK colorectal cancer screening programmes: Qualitative interviews with ethnic minority groups

OBJECTIVE

People from ethnic minority backgrounds are less likely to attend colonoscopy, following faecal immunochemical test screening, and are more likely to be diagnosed with colorectal cancer at an advanced stage as a result. The aim of this research was to explore the barriers and facilitators to attending colonoscopy, perceived by ethnic minority groups living in the United Kingdom.

METHODS

Semi-structured online and telephone interviews were conducted with thirty men and women of Black-African (n = 5), Black-Caribbean (n = 5), South Asian (n = 10) and White British (n = 10) descent. Participants were eligible for screening, but had not necessarily been invited for colonoscopy. All interviews were conducted in the participant's first language and were assessed using Framework-analysis, in line with a conceptual framework developed from previous interviews with healthcare professionals.

RESULTS

Five thematic groups of barriers and facilitators were developed: 'Locus of control', 'Cultural attitudes and beliefs', 'Individual beliefs, knowledge and personal experiences with colonoscopy and cancer', 'Reliance on family and friends' and 'Health concerns'. Differences were observed, between ethnic groups, for: 'Locus of control', 'Cultural attitudes and beliefs' and 'Reliance on family and friends'. Black and South Asian participants frequently described the decision to attend colonoscopy as lying with 'God' (Muslims, specifically), 'the doctor', or 'family' (Locus of control). Black and South Asian participants also reported relying on friends and family for 'language, transport and emotional support' (Reliance on family and friends). Black-African participants, specifically, described cancer as 'socially taboo' (Cultural attitudes and beliefs).

CONCLUSIONS

The results highlight several targets for culturally-tailored interventions to make colonoscopy more equitable.

Supply and quality of colonoscopy according to the characteristics of gastroenterologists in the French population-based colorectal-cancer screening program

BACKGROUND

Since its complete roll-out in 2009, the French colorectal cancer screening program (CRCSP) experienced 3 major constraints [use of a less efficient Guaiac-test (gFOBT), stopping the supply of Fecal-Immunochemical-Test kits (FIT), and suspension of the program due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)] affecting its effectiveness.

AIM

To describe the impact of the constraints in terms of changes in the quality of screening-colonoscopy (Quali-Colo).

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included screening-colonoscopies performed by gastroenterologists between Jan-2010 and Dec-2020 in people aged 50-74 living in Ile-de-France (France). The changes in Quali-colo (Proportion of colonoscopies performed beyond 7 mo (Colo_7 mo), Frequency of serious adverse events (SAE) and Colonoscopy detection rate) were described in a cohort of Gastroenterologists who performed at least one colonoscopy over each of the four periods defined according to the chronology of the constraints [gFOBT: Normal progress of the CRCSP using gFOBT (2010-2014); FIT: Normal progress of the CRCSP using FIT (2015-2018); STOP-FIT: Year (2019) during which the CRCSP experienced the cessation of the supply of test kits; COVID: Program suspension due to the COVID-19 health crisis (2020)]. The link between each dependent variable (Colo_7 mo; SAE occurrence, neoplasm detection rate) and the predictive factors was analyzed in a two-level multivariate hierarchical model.

RESULTS

The 533 gastroenterologists (cohort) achieved 21509 screening colonoscopies over gFOBT period, 38352 over FIT, 7342 over STOP-FIT and 7995 over COVID period. The frequency of SAE did not change between periods (gFOBT: 0.3%; FIT: 0.3%; STOP-FIT: 0.3%; and COVID: 0.2%; P = 0.10). The risk of Colo_7 mo doubled between FIT [adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.2 (1.1; 1.2)] and STOP-FIT [aOR: 2.4 (2.1; 2.6)]; then, decreased by 40% between STOP-FIT and COVID [aOR: 2.0 (1.8; 2.2)]. Regardless of the period, this Colo_7 mo’s risk was twice as high for screening colonoscopy performed in a public hospital [aOR: 2.1 (1.3; 3.6)] compared to screening-colonoscopy performed in a private clinic. The neoplasm detection, which increased by 60% between gFOBT and FIT [aOR: 1.6 (1.5; 1.7)], decreased by 40% between FIT and COVID [aOR: 1.1 (1.0; 1.3)].

CONCLUSION

The constraints likely affected the time-to-colonoscopy as well as the colonoscopy detection rate without impacting the SAE’s occurrence, highlighting the need for a respectable reference time-to-colonoscopy in CRCSP.

Robotic, self-propelled, self-steerable, and disposable colonoscopes: Reality or pipe dream? A state of the art review

Robotic colonoscopes could potentially provide a comfortable, less painful and safer alternative to standard colonoscopy. Recent exciting developments in this field are pushing the boundaries to what is possible in the future. This article provides a comprehensive review of the current work in robotic colonoscopes including self-propelled, steerable and disposable endoscopes that could be alternatives to standard colonoscopy. We discuss the advantages and disadvantages of these systems currently in development and highlight the technical readiness of each system to help the reader understand where and when such systems may be available for routine clinical use and get an idea of where and in which situation they can best be deployed.

Clinical Effectiveness of Faecal Immunochemical Test in the Early Detection of Colorectal Cancer-An Umbrella Review

Introduction: The colorectal cancer prognosis depends on the stage of the neoplasm; therefore, its early detection plays an important role. The aim of the study is evaluation of the sensitivity, specificity, and clinical effectiveness of the faecal immunochemical test in the early colorectal cancer detection. Methods: The clinical analysis was based on the results of the studies included in a systematic review conducted in accordance with the Cochrane Collaboration guidelines. The following medical information sources were searched: Medline (via PubMed), Embase (via Ovid), The Cochrane Library. Results: From 241 citations, 13 studies were included in this review. All included studies had a low risk of bias. The faecal immunochemical test is highly specific in all analysed populations ranging from 85% to 97%. In most of the found studies, sensitivity is over 75%. The faecal immunochemical test screening also determines a reduction in death (10-59%) due to colorectal cancer. Conclusions: The faecal immunochemical test is an effective and cost-effective method of conducting population-wide colorectal cancer screening. It is an alternative or complementary to other screening tests, including colonoscopy.

A delay in the diagnosis of colorectal cancer screened by fecal immunochemical tests during the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal cohort study

PURPOSE

There is concern that the COVID-19 pandemic may cause people to refrain from undergoing examination resulting in delayed detection of colorectal cancer (CRC). The purpose of this study was to investigate whether there was a delay in CRC detection due to withholding of screening.

METHODS

The colonoscopy screening rate and the CRC detection rate were calculated for patients who underwent fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) from 2018 to 2021 in the longitudinal cohort. The stages of CRC cases detected as a result of positive FIT in each year were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 39,521 patients were initially screened by FIT over a 4-year period. The FIT-positive rate was 4.7% (441 /9,349) in 2018, 4.6% (420 /9,156) in 2019, 4.9% (453 /9,255) in 2020, and 4.3% (504 /11,760) in 2021. The colonoscopy screening rate for positive FIT results was lower in 2020 than in 2019 (25.8% vs. 38.1%, P < 0.001), and higher in 2021 than in 2020 (56.7% vs. 25.8%, P < 0.001). The CRC detection rate among colonoscopy recipients was higher in 2021 than in 2020 (13% vs. 4%, P = 0.014). Stage 1 or higher CRC accounted for 25.0% (1/4) in 2020, and 78% (18/23) in 2021. Among the CRC cases detected each year, 1 (14%), 1 (25%), and 10 (43%) did not undergo colonoscopy despite positive FIT results in the previous year.

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic has reduced the detection of CRC by screening colonoscopy following FIT and might have led to a delay in the detection of CRC.

The impact of cumulative colorectal cancer screening delays: A simulation study

OBJECTIVE

Annual fecal immunochemical tests can reduce colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. However, screening is a multi-step process and most patients do not perfectly adhere to guideline-recommended screening schedules. Our objective was to compare the reduction in colorectal cancer incidence and life-years gained based on US guideline-concordant fecal immunochemical test screening to scenarios with a range of delays.

METHOD

The Colorectal Cancer Simulated Population model for Incidence and Natural history (CRC-SPIN) microsimulation model was used to estimate the effect of systematic departures from fecal immunochemical test screening guidelines on lifetime screening benefit.

RESULTS

The combined effect of consistent modest delays in screening initiation (1 year), repeated fecal immunochemical test screening (3 months), and receipt of follow-up or surveillance colonoscopy (3 months) resulted in up to 1.3 additional colorectal cancer cases per 10,000, 0.4 additional late-stage colorectal cancer cases per 10,000 and 154.7 fewer life-years gained per 10,000. A 5-year delay in screening initiation had a larger impact on screening effectiveness than consistent small delays in repeated fecal immunochemical test screening or receipt of follow-up colonoscopy after an abnormal fecal immunochemical test. The combined effect of consistent large delays in screening initiation (5 years), repeated fecal immunochemical test screening (6 months), and receipt of follow-up or surveillance colonoscopy (6 months) resulted in up to 3.7 additional colorectal cancer cases per 10,000, 1.5 additional late-stage colorectal cancer cases per 10,000 and 612.3 fewer life-years gained per 10,000.

CONCLUSIONS

Systematic delays across the screening process can result in meaningful reductions in colorectal cancer screening effectiveness, especially for longer delays. Screening delays could drive differences in colorectal cancer incidence across patient groups with differential access to screening.

Evidence-Based Selection on the Appropriate FIT Cut-Off Point in CRC Screening Programs in the COVID Pandemic

Background: The COVID pandemic has forced the closure of many colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs. Resuming these programs is a priority, but fewer colonoscopies may be available. We developed an evidence-based tool for decision-making in CRC screening programs, based on a fecal hemoglobin immunological test (FIT), to optimize the strategy for screening a population for CRC.

Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data collected at a regional CRC screening program between February/2014 and November/2018. We investigated two different scenarios: not modifying vs. modifying the FIT cut-off value. We estimated program outcomes in the two scenarios by evaluating the numbers of cancers and adenomas missed or not diagnosed in due time (delayed).

Results: The current FIT cut-off (20-μg hemoglobin/g feces) led to 6,606 colonoscopies per 100,000 people invited annually. Without modifying this FIT cut-off value, when the optimal number of individuals invited for colonoscopies was reduced by 10–40%, a high number of CRCs and high-risk adenomas (34–135 and 73–288/100.000-people invited, respectively) will be undetected every year. When the FIT cut-off value was increased to where the colonoscopy demand matched the colonoscopy availability, the number of missed lesions per year was remarkably reduced (9–36 and 29–145/100.000 people, respectively). Moreover, the unmodified FIT scenario outcome was improved by prioritizing the selection process based on sex (males) and age, rather than randomly reducing the number invited.

Conclusions: Assuming a mismatch between the availability and demand for annual colonoscopies, increasing the FIT cut-off point was more effective than randomly reducing the number of people invited. Using specific risk factors to prioritize access to colonoscopies should be also considered.