Screening for colorectal cancer by once only sigmoidoscopy: a feasibility study in Turin, Italy

Impact of postal correspondence letters on participation in cancer screening: a rapid review

The purpose of this rapid review was to identify and synthesize evidence on the impact of postal correspondence letters on participation in cancer screening and to determine whether impact varied by cancer site or inclusion of the participant's physician's name within the letter (i.e., physician-linked). PubMed and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for English-language systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up until October 2019. One reviewer completed citation screening and data extraction with 30% verification by a second reviewer. Systematic reviews and RCTs were appraised using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2 and Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tools, respectively, by one reviewer with complete verification by a second reviewer. Findings from systematic reviews and RCTs were examined separately and presented narratively. Six systematic reviews and 18 RCTs of generally low quality were included. Evidence generally demonstrated a positive impact of a letter as compared to no letter or usual practice on screening participation. This finding was consistent for breast cancer and cervical screening participation but inconsistent for colorectal cancer screening participation. Studies comparing physician-linked letters to no letters or usual practice reported similar effect estimates as those examining letters in general. Limited and inconsistent evidence was identified on the impact of physician-linked letters as compared to non-physician-linked letters on screening participation. Evidence identified in this rapid review, and other contextual and implementation considerations, may be useful for jurisdictions considering how to promote cancer screening participation.

CT colonography for population screening of colorectal cancer: hints from European trials

CT colonography (CTC) is a minimally invasive radiological investigation of the colon. Robust evidence indicates that CTC is safe, well tolerated and highly accurate for the detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) and large polyps, which are the targets of screening. Randomized controlled trials were carried out in Europe to evaluate CTC as the primary test for population screening of CRC in comparison with faecal immunochemical test (FIT), sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy. Main outcomes were participation rate and detection rate. Participation rate for screening CTC was in the range of 25-34%, whereas the detection rate of CTC for CRC and advanced adenoma was in the range of 5.1-6.1%. Participation for CTC screening was lower than that for FIT, similar to that for sigmoidoscopy and higher than that for colonoscopy. The detection rate of CTC was higher than that of one FIT round, similar to that of sigmoidoscopy and lower than that of colonoscopy. However, owing to the higher participation rate in CTC screening with respect to colonoscopy screening, the detection rates per invitee of CTC and colonoscopy would be comparable. These results justify consideration of CTC in organized screening programmes for CRC. However, assessment of other factors such as polyp size threshold for colonoscopy referral, management of extracolonic findings and, most importantly, the forthcoming results of cost-effectiveness analyses are crucial to define the role of CTC in primary screening.

Reinvitation to screening colonoscopy: a randomized-controlled trial of reminding letter and invitation to educational meeting on attendance in nonresponders to initial invitation to screening colonoscopy (REINVITE)

OBJECTIVES

The response rate to initial invitation to population-based primary screening colonoscopy within the NordICC trial (NCT 00883792) in Poland is around 50%. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of a reinvitation letter and invitation to an educational intervention on participation in screening colonoscopy in nonresponders to initial invitation.

METHODS

Within the NordICC trial framework, individuals living in the region of Warsaw, who were drawn from Population Registries and assigned randomly to the screening group, received an invitation letter and a reminder with a prespecified screening colonoscopy appointment date. One thousand individuals, aged 55 to 64 years, who did not respond to both the invitation and the reminding letter were assigned randomly in a 1:1 ratio to the reinvitation group (REI) and the educational meeting group (MEET). The REI group was sent a reinvitation letter and reminder 6 and 3 weeks before the new colonoscopy appointment date, respectively. The MEET group was sent an invitation 6 weeks before an educational meeting date. Outcome measures were participation in screening colonoscopy within 6 months and response rate within 3 months from the date of reinvitation or invitation to an educational meeting.

RESULTS

The response rate and the participation rate in colonoscopy were statistically significantly higher in the REI group compared with the MEET group (16.5 vs. 4.3%; P<0.001 and 5.2 vs. 2.1%; P=0.008, respectively).

CONCLUSION

A simple reinvitation letter results in a higher response rate and participation rate to screening colonoscopy than invitation to tailored educational meeting in nonresponders to previous invitations. (NCT01183156).

Optimising colorectal cancer screening acceptance: a review

The study aims to review available evidence concerning effective interventions to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening acceptance. We performed a literature search of randomised trials designed to increase individuals' use of CRC screening on PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects. Small (≤ 100 subjects per arm) studies and those reporting results of interventions implemented before publication of the large faecal occult blood test trials were excluded. Interventions were categorised following the Continuum of Cancer Care and the PRECEDE-PROCEED models and studies were grouped by screening model (opportunistic vs organised). Multifactor interventions targeting multiple levels of care and considering factors outside the individual clinician control, represent the most effective strategy to enhance CRC screening acceptance. Removing financial barriers, implementing methods allowing a systematic contact of the whole target population, using personal invitation letters, preferably signed by the reference care provider, and reminders mailed to all non-attendees are highly effective in enhancing CRC screening acceptance. Physician reminders may support the diffusion of screening, but they can be effective only for individuals who have access to and make use of healthcare services. Educational interventions for patients and providers are effective, but the implementation of organisational measures may be necessary to favour their impact. Available evidence indicates that organised programmes allow to achieve an extensive coverage and to enhance equity of access, while maximising the health impact of screening. They provide at the same time an infrastructure allowing to achieve a more favourable cost-effectiveness profile of potentially effective strategies, which would not be sustainable in opportunistic settings.

A comparison of different strategies used to invite subjects with a positive faecal occult blood test to a colonoscopy assessment. A randomised controlled trial in population-based screening programmes

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this parallel randomised controlled trial was to compare compliance with different modalities used to invite patients with a positive immunochemical faecal occult blood test (FIT+) for a total colonoscopy (TC).

METHOD

FIT+ patients from nine Italian colorectal cancer screening programmes were randomised to be invited for a TC initially by mail or by phone and, for non-compliers, to be recalled by mail, for counselling with a general practitioner, or to meet with a specialist screening practitioner (nurse or healthcare assistant).

RESULTS

In all, 3777 patients were randomised to different invitation strategies. Compliance with an initial invitation by mail and by phone was similar (86.0% vs. 84.0%, relative risk - RR: 1.02; 95%CI 0.97-1.08). Among non-responders to the initial invitation, compliance with a recall by appointment with a specialist practitioner was 50.4%, significantly higher than with a mail recall (38.1%; RR:1.33; 95%CI 1.01-1.76) or with a face-to-face counselling with the GP (30.8%; RR:1.45;95%CI 1.14-1.87).

CONCLUSION

Compliance with an initial invitation for a TC by mail and by phone was similar. A personal meeting with a specialist screening practitioner was associated with the highest compliance among non-compliers with initial invitations, while the involvement of GPs in this particular activity seemed less effective.

Methods to increase participation in organised screening programs: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The European Community recommends the implementation of population-based screening programmes for cervical, breast, and colorectal cancers. This recommendation is supported by many observational studies showing that organised programmes effectively reduce mortality and control the inappropriate use of screening tests. We conducted a systematic review of studies assessing the efficacy of interventions to increase participation in organised population-based screening programs.

METHODS

We included all studies on interventions aimed at increasing screening participation published between 1/1999 and 7/2012. For those published before 1999, we considered the Jepson et al. (2000) review (Health Technol Assess 4:1-133, 2000).

RESULTS

Including studies from the Jepson review, we found 69 with quantitative information on interventions in organised screening: 19 for cervical, 26 for breast, 20 colorectal cancers, and 4 for cervical and breast cancer together.Effective interventions were: postal (breast RR = 1,37 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI): 1.25-1.51; cervical RR = 1.71 95% CI: 1.60-1.83; colorectal RR = 1.33 95% CI: 1.17-1.51) and telephone reminders (with heterogeneous methods for implementation); GP's signature on invitation letter (breast RR = 1.13 95% CI: 1.11-1.16; cervical RR = 1.20 95% CI: 1.10-1.30; colorectal RR = 1.15 95% CI: 1.07-1.24); scheduled appointment instead of open appointment (breast RR = 1.26 95% CI: 1.02-1.55; cervical RR = 1.49 95% CI: 1.27-1.75; colorectal RR = 1.79 95% CI: 1.65-1.93). Mailing a kit for self-sampling cervical specimens increased participation in non-responders (RR = 2.37 95% CI: 1.44-3.90).

CONCLUSION

Although some interventions did prove to be effective, some specific variables may influence their effectiveness in and applicability to organised population-based screening programs.

Once-only sigmoidoscopy in colorectal cancer screening: follow-up findings of the Italian Randomized Controlled Trial--SCORE

BACKGROUND

A single flexible sigmoidoscopy at around the age of 60 years has been proposed as an effective strategy for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effect of flexible sigmoidoscopy screening on CRC incidence and mortality. A questionnaire to assess the eligibility and interest in screening was mailed to 236,568 men and women, aged 55-64 years, who were randomly selected from six trial centers in Italy. Of the 56,532 respondents, interested and eligible subjects were randomly assigned to the intervention group (invitation for flexible sigmoidoscopy; n = 17,148) or the control group (no further contact; n = 17,144), between June 14, 1995, and May 10, 1999. Flexible sigmoidoscopy was performed on 9911 subjects. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses were performed to compare the CRC incidence and mortality rates in the intervention and control groups. Per-protocol analysis was adjusted for noncompliance.

RESULTS

A total of 34,272 subjects (17,136 in each group) were included in the follow-up analysis. The median follow-up period was 10.5 years for incidence and 11.4 years for mortality; 251 subjects were diagnosed with CRC in the intervention group and 306 in the control group. Overall incidence rates in the intervention and control groups were 144.11 and 176.43, respectively, per 100,000 person-years. CRC-related death was noted in 65 subjects in the intervention group and 83 subjects in the control group. Mortality rates in the intervention and control groups were 34.66 and 44.45, respectively, per 100,000 person-years. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the rate of CRC incidence was statistically significantly reduced in the intervention group by 18% (rate ratio [RR] = 0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.69 to 0.96), and the mortality rate was non-statistically significantly reduced by 22% (RR = 0.78; 95% CI = 0.56 to 1.08) compared with the control group. In the per-protocol analysis, both CRC incidence and mortality rates were statistically significantly reduced among the screened subjects; CRC incidence was reduced by 31% (RR = 0.69; 95% CI = 0.56 to 0.86) and mortality was reduced by 38% (RR = 0.62; 95% CI = 0.40 to 0.96) compared with the control group.

CONCLUSION

A single flexible sigmoidoscopy screening between ages 55 and 64 years was associated with a substantial reduction of CRC incidence and mortality.

Flexible sigmoidoscopy screening for colorectal cancer: uptake in a population-based pilot programme

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was is to examine uptake of population-based, flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening delivered by nurses in a socioeconomically and ethnically diverse area of London, England.

METHODS

All adults aged 58 and 59 years registered at 34 general practices in North London (n = 2260) were mailed an invitation to attend FS screening at the local hospital.

RESULTS

In total, 45% (1024/2260) accepted the invitation and attended, 5% (114/2260) accepted the invitation but failed to attend, 5% (111/2260) accepted the invitation but were unable to attend within the time-frame of the pilot study, 7% (165/2260) declined the offer, 27% (602/2260) did not respond, and 11% (244/2260) were ineligible or did not receive the invitation. Among those eligible to be screened, the uptake rate was 51% (1024/2016). Uptake did not differ by gender, but people living in the most affluent quintile of areas had a substantially higher uptake rate (63%) than those living in the most deprived quintile (38%).

CONCLUSION

Uptake of FS screening delivered as a population-based programme was over 50% among the eligible population in a socioeconomically and ethnically diverse area of London. Disparities in uptake should be addressed to avoid exacerbating health inequalities.

How to enhance physician and public acceptance and utilisation of colon cancer screening recommendations

Colorectal Cancer (CRC) screening delivery is a multidisciplinary undertaking, aiming at reducing mortality from and incidence of CRC without adversely affecting the health status of participants. The adoption of a public health perspective involves commitment to ensure equity of access and sustainability of the program over time. We reviewed available evidence concerning predictors of CRC screening uptake and the impact of interventions to improve adoption of screening using conceptual frameworks defining the role of determinants of preventive behaviours and the reach and target of interventions. The results of this review indicate that policy measures aimed at supporting screening delivery, as well as organisational changes, influencing the operational features of preventive services, need to be implemented, in order to allow individual's motivation to be eventually realised. To ensure coverage and equity of access and to maximise the impact of the intervention, policies aimed at implementing organised programs should be adopted, ensuring that participation in screening and any follow-up assessment should not be limited by financial barriers. Participants and providers beliefs may determine the response to different screening modalities. To achieve the desired health impact, an active follow-up of people with screening abnormalities should be implemented, supported by the introduction of infrastructural changes and multidisciplinary team work, which can ensure sustainability over time of effective interventions. Continuous monitoring as well as the adoption of plans to evaluate for program effectiveness represent crucial steps in the implementation of a successful program.

Barriers to colorectal cancer screening: A case-control study

AIM: To investigate barriers to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in a community population.

METHODS: We conducted a community-based case-control study in an urban Chinese population by questionnaire. Cases were selected from those completing both a fecal occult blood test (FOBT) case and colonoscopy in a CRC screening program in 2004. Control groups were matched by gender, age group and community. Control 1 included those having a positive FOBT but refusing a colonoscopy. Control 2 included those who refused both an FOBT and colonoscopy.

RESULTS: The impact of occupation on willingness to attend a colorectal screening program differed by gender. P for heterogeneity was 0.009 for case vs control group 1, 0.01 for case versus control group 2, and 0.80 for control group 1 vs 2. Poor awareness of CRC and its screening program, characteristics of screening tests, and lack of time affected the screening rate. Financial support, fear of pain and bowel preparation were barriers to a colonoscopy as a screening test. Eighty-two percent of control group 1 and 87.1% of control group 2 were willing attend if the colonoscopy was free, but only 56.3% and 53.1%, respectively, if it was self-paid. Multivariate odds ratios for case vs control group 1 were 0.10 among those unwilling to attend a free colonoscopy and 0.50 among those unwilling to attend a self-paid colonoscopy.

CONCLUSION: Raising the public awareness of CRC and its screening, integrating CRC screening into the health care system, and using a painless colonoscopy would increase its screening rate.

Can colorectal cancer mass-screening organization be evidence-based? Lessons from failures: the experimental and pilot phases of the Lazio program

Background

Screening programmes should be organized to translate theoretical efficacy into effectiveness. An evidence-based organizational model of colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) should assure feasibility and high compliance.

Methods

A multidisciplinary Working Group (WG), reviewed literature and guidelines to define evidence-based recommendations. The WG identified the need for further local studies: physicians' CRCS attitudes, the effect of test type and provider on compliance, and individual reasons for non-compliance. A survey of digestive endoscopy services was conducted. A feasibility study on a target population of 300.000 has begun.

Results

Based on the results of population trials and on literature review the screening strategy adopted was Faecal Occult Blood Test (FOBT) every two years for 50–74 year olds and, for positives, colonoscopy. The immunochemical test was chosen because it has 20% higher compliance than the Guaiac. GPs were chosen as the preferred provider also for higher compliance. Since we observed that distance is the major determinant of non-compliance, we choose GPs because they are the closest providers, both geographically and emotionally, to the public.

The feasibility study showed several barriers: GP participation was low, there were administrative problems to involve GPs; opportunistic testing by the GPs; difficulties in access to Gastroenterology centres; difficulties in gathering colonoscopy results; little time given to screening activity by the gastroenterology centre.

Conclusion

The feasibility study highlighted several limits of the model. Most of the barriers that emerged were consequences of organisational choices not supported by evidence. The principal limit was a lack of accountability by the participating centres.

Reasons for noncompliance with five-yearly screening flexible sigmoidoscopy

OBJECTIVE

To determine factors influencing the low return rate observed in a program of flexible sigmoidoscopy for average risk screening for colorectal carcinoma.

METHODS

Flexible sigmoidoscopy-based screening of average risk 55-64 yr olds has been ongoing since 1995. Greater than 3400 primary and 1000 follow up screening examinations have been performed. Participants with a primary screen in 1997-1999 and eligible for rescreening in 2002-2004 were studied. A questionnaire assessing possible reasons for noncompliance was sent to subjects who did not attend the five year repeat screening.

RESULTS

1672 primary screening flexible sigmoidoscopies were performed in 1997-1999 with 1362 being normal or having hyperplastic polyps only. The return rate was 45%: 48% of eligible males and 39% of eligible females had returned (p = 0.001 for difference). 709 questionnaires were mailed with a 50% response rate and 162 requests for repeat flexible sigmoidoscopy were generated. 27% of all respondents had undergone further bowel evaluation since the original normal sigmoidoscopy. Of eligible subjects who refused further screening, 65% did so because of concerns over procedural pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Reasons for nonattendance relate to uptake of other bowel investigations and pain felt at initial screening. Return rate can be raised with ongoing prompting to attend screening.

Uptake of population-based flexible sigmoidoscopy screening for colorectal cancer: a nurse-led feasibility study

OBJECTIVE

To assess uptake of once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) in a community sample to determine whether FS would be viable as a method of population-based screening for colorectal cancer.

METHODS

All adults aged 60-64 years registered at three General Practices in North West London, UK (510 men and women) were sent a letter of invitation to attend FS screening carried out by an experienced nurse, followed by a reminder if they did not make contact to confirm or decline the invitation. The primary outcome was attendance at the endoscopy unit for a FS test.

RESULTS

Of the 510 people invited to attend, 280 (55%) underwent FS. Among non-attenders, 91 (18%) were ineligible for screening or did not receive the invitation, 19 (4%) accepted the offer of screening but were unable to attend during the study period, 52 (10%) declined the offer, 41 (8%) did not respond to the invitation, and 27 (5%) accepted the offer of screening but did not attend. Attendance among those eligible to be screened, who had received the invitation, was 67%. People from more socioeconomically deprived neighbourhoods were less likely to attend (odds ratio [OR] = 0.90; confidence interval [CI] = 0.84-0.96; P = 0.003). Women were more likely to attend than men (OR = 1.44; CI = 1.01-2.05; P = 0.041).

CONCLUSIONS

Attendance rates in this pilot for nurse-led, population-based FS screening were higher than those reported in other FS studies, and comparable with adherence to fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) in the UK FOBT pilot. Having a female nurse endoscopist may have been responsible for increasing female uptake rates but this warrants confirmation in a larger study.

Colorectal cancer screening

Colorectal cancer is a major public health burden worldwide. There is clear-cut evidence that screening will reduce colorectal cancer mortality and the only contentious issue is which screening tool to use. Most evidence points towards screening with fecal occult blood testing. The immunochemical fecal occult blood tests have a higher sensitivity than the guaiac-based tests. In addition, their automation and haemoglobin quantification allows a threshold for colonoscopy to be selected that can be accommodated within individual health care systems.

Is the type of test used for mass colorectal cancer screening a determinant of compliance? A cluster-randomized controlled trial comparing fecal occult blood testing with flexible sigmoidoscopy

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of colorectal cancer screening has been proved, and three different screening tests are recommended by international guidelines: the faecal occult blood test, flexible sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy. While the effectiveness of a screening program depends on the compliance obtained, the role of the type of test on compliance has not yet been sufficiently studied.

AIMS

To measure the effect of the type of screening test used, i.e. faecal occult blood test or flexible sigmoidoscopy, on the compliance to colorectal cancer screening programs.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

A cluster-randomized two-arm trial was conducted. We randomly assigned 20 GP's practices that had an average of 150 patients between 50 and 74 years old.

RESULTS

1449 individuals were referred to faecal occult blood test and 1538 to flexible sigmoidoscopy. The faecal occult blood test obtained higher compliance: 17.2% (95%CI 12.5-25.7) versus 7.0% (95%CI 5.7-9.0). The socio-economic status was an effect modifier of the test type: the effect of the type of test was smaller in low socioeconomic classes.

CONCLUSIONS

The type of screening test used for colorectal cancer is a determinant of participation. In a low compliance area, better compliance will result from offering the faecal occult blood test than from the flexible sigmoidoscopy.

Colorectal cancer screening in average risk individuals

Colorectal cancer is the third leading type of cancer, and the second leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States. Prevention of colorectal cancer should be achievable by screening programs that detect adenomas in asymptomatic patients and lead to their removal. In this manuscript, we review the major screening modalities, the advantages and disadvantages of each approach, the data supporting their use, and various issues affecting the implementation of each test. Screening guidelines will be reviewed, and future techniques for colorectal cancer screening examined.

Reduction of clinically manifest colorectal cancer by endoscopic screening: empirical evaluation and comparison of screening at various ages

Endoscopic screening (sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy) with removal of precancerous lesions can prevent a large proportion of colorectal cancers (CRCs). However, there is lack of data regarding optimal age, time intervals and numbers of screening examinations. We developed and applied modified techniques of epidemiological analysis to evaluate the impact of various endoscopy-based screening strategies on prevention of clinically manifest CRCs between the ages of 50 and 79 in a population-based case-control study (294 cases, 254 controls) conducted in Saarland, Germany. We found a strong potential for reduction of CRC occurrence even with a single screening endoscopy. The optimal age for a single screening endoscopy appears to be around 55 (estimated potential for prevention of cases between the ages of 55 and 79 in case of 100% compliance: 77% (95% confidence interval (CI) 46-90%)). A single screening endoscopy at age 50 would have a lower impact due to failure to prevent CRC at higher ages. Similarly, screening at ages 60 or older would have a lower impact because it would fail to prevent CRC at lower ages. Repeated offers of screening examinations could provide substantial additional benefit with the levels of compliance to be expected in practice, but they would have to be weighed against the increased risks and costs.

Randomized Trial of Different Screening Strategies for Colorectal Cancer: Patient Response and Detection Rates

BACKGROUND

Although there is general consensus concerning the efficacy of colorectal cancer screening, there is a lack of agreement about which routine screening strategy should be adopted. We compared the participation and detection rates achievable through different strategies of colorectal cancer screening.

METHODS

From November 1999 through June 2001 we conducted a multicenter, randomized trial in Italy among a sample of 55-64 year olds in the general population who had an average risk of colorectal cancer. People with previous colorectal cancer, adenomas, inflammatory bowel disease, a recent (< or =2 years) colorectal endoscopy or fecal occult blood test (FOBT), or two first-degree relatives with colorectal cancer were excluded. Eligible subjects were randomly assigned, within the roster of their general practitioner, to 1) biennial FOBT (delivered by mail), 2) biennial FOBT (delivered by general practitioner or a screening facility), 3) patient's choice of FOBT or "once-only" sigmoidoscopy, 4) "once-only" sigmoidoscopy, or 5) sigmoidoscopy followed by biennial FOBT. An immunologic FOBT was used. Participation and detection rates of the strategies tested were compared using multivariable logistic regression models that adjusted for age, sex, and screening center. All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS

Of 28 319 people sampled, 1637 were excluded and 26 682 were randomly assigned to a screening arm. After excluding undelivered letters (n = 427), the participation rates for groups 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 were 30.1% (682/2266), 28.1% (1654/5893), 27.1% (970/3579), 28.1% (1026/3650), and 28.1% (3049/10 867), respectively. Of the 2858 subjects screened by FOBT, 122 (4.3%) had a positive test result, 10 (3.5 per 1000) had colorectal cancer, and 39 (1.4%) had an advanced adenoma. Among the 4466 subjects screened by sigmoidoscopy, 341 (7.6%) were referred for colonoscopy, 18 (4 per 1000) had colorectal cancer, and 229 (5.1%) harbored an advanced adenoma.

CONCLUSIONS

The participation rates were similar for sigmoidoscopy and FOBT. The detection rate for advanced neoplasia was three times higher following screening by sigmoidoscopy than by FOBT.

Primary and secondary prevention in colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer is an important public health problem: there are nearly one million cases of colorectal cancer diagnosed worldwide each year and half a million deaths. The geographic distribution of colorectal cancer follows the division between westernized versus developing countries, The highest rates are in North America, Australia and Europe. Rates in Africa and Asia are low, but are increasing in countries adopting western-style dietary habits. Given that the majority of cancers occur in older people, and with the ageing of the population in mind, this observation adds impetus to investigating prevention strategies to avoid some of this increase. High vegetable and fruit consumption has been associated with decreased risk of colorectal cancer in numerous observational studies, while high fibre intake seems to have a similar effect. Promising data have been obtained for aspirin and other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and dietary calcium. A physically active lifestyle and maintenance of normal body weight are behavioural tools for prevention of colorectal cancer. Faecal occult blood testing has been shown to be effective in the prevention of about 20% of deaths from colorectal cancer, but few population-based screening programs have been initiated. Sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy are potentially effective screening modalities; however, no randomized trial data have yet been reported. Overall, primary and secondary prevention, chemoprevention and screening research and implementation of these prevention strategies are priorities for reduction of colorectal cancer incidence and mortality.

Single flexible sigmoidoscopy screening to prevent colorectal cancer: baseline findings of a UK multicentre randomised trial

BACKGROUND

This randomised controlled trial is examining the hypothesis that a single flexible sigmoidoscopy screening offered at around age 60 years can lower the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer. We report here on acceptability, safety, feasibility, and yield.

METHODS

Men and women aged 55-64 years, in 14 UK centres, who responded to a mailed questionnaire that they would attend for flexible sigmoidoscopy screening if invited, were randomly assigned screening or control (ratio one to two). The control group was not contacted. Small polyps were removed during screening, and colonoscopy was undertaken if high-risk polyps (three or more adenomas, size 1 cm or greater, villous, severely dysplastic, or malignant) were found.

FINDINGS

Of 354,262 people asked about their interest in having flexible sigmoidoscopy screening, 194,726 (55%) responded positively, and 170,432 eligible individuals were randomised. Attendance among those assigned screening was 71% (40,674 of 57,254). 2131 (5%) were classified as high-risk and referred for colonoscopy; 38,525 with no polyps or only low-risk polyps detected were discharged. Distal adenomas were detected in 4931 (12.1%) and distal cancer in 131 (0.3%). Proximal adenomas were detected in 386 (18.8% of those undergoing colonoscopy) and proximal cancer in nine cases (0.4%). 62% of cancers were Dukes' stage A or locally excised. There was one perforation after flexible sigmoidoscopy and four after colonoscopy. An average of 48 people were screened, and two or three colonoscopy referrals generated, per centre each week. Interpretation Our flexible sigmoidoscopy screening regimen is acceptable, feasible, and safe. The prevalence of neoplasia is high, and colonoscopy referral rates of 5% are acceptable.

Psychological and behavioral factors associated with colorectal cancer screening among Ashkenazim

BACKGROUND

Psychological and behavioral factors related to annual colorectal cancer (CRC) screening were examined in a sample of Ashkenazi Jewish individuals. Identification of factors related to regular CRC screening in this population is important because of the possibility of a heightened incidence of CRC.

METHODS

Eligible participants were 171 Ashkenazi Jewish adults 40 years or older attending an educational program about breast cancer genetics. Compliance with recommended guidelines for digital rectal examination and fecal occult blood test in the past year were dependent measures. Demographic variables, family history of CRC, perceived risk, physician recommendation, and worry about cancer were independent measures.

RESULTS

Digital rectal examinations and fecal occult blood tests had been obtained in the past year by 46 and 31% of the participants, respectively. A logistic regression showed that physician recommendation was related significantly to obtaining digital rectal examinations. Physician recommendation and education were related significantly to obtaining fecal occult blood tests. Although participants with family histories of CRC perceived themselves as being at increased risk of developing CRC, and were more worried about developing colon cancer, they were no more likely to adhere to CRC screening guidelines than those without such histories.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, compliance with recommended CRC screening was low even among high-risk individuals. Physicians play a key role in motivating people to comply with CRC screening. Physicians need to en courage all asymptomatic patients 50 years and older to be screened for CRC.