A large proportion of fecal immunochemical test-positive participants in colorectal cancer screening is symptomatic

Detection of cancers and advanced adenomas in asymptomatic participants in colorectal cancer screening: a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES

To assess detection rates for colorectal cancer (CRC) and advanced adenomas in asymptomatic CRC screening participants and bowel symptoms in association with CRC and advanced adenoma.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Two screening centres.

PARTICIPANTS

42 554 men and women, aged 50-74 years, participating in a randomised CRC screening trial. 36 059 participants underwent a sigmoidoscopy (and follow-up colonoscopy if positive sigmoidoscopy) and 6495 underwent a colonoscopy after a positive faecal immunochemical test (FIT).

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Proportion of asymptomatic participants diagnosed with CRC or advanced adenomas. Prevalence of bowel symptoms (rectal bleeding, change in bowel habits, diarrhoea, constipation, bloating, alternating bowel habits, general symptoms, other bowel symptoms) recorded by the endoscopist and their association with CRC and advanced adenomas.

RESULTS

Among sigmoidoscopy participants, 7336 (20.3%) reported at least one symptom. 120 (60%) out of 200 individuals with screen-detected CRC and 1301 (76.5%) out of 1700 with advanced adenoma were asymptomatic. Rectal bleeding was associated with detection of CRC and advanced adenoma (OR 4.3, 95% CI 3.1 to 6.1 and 1.8, 95% CI 1.5 to 2.1, respectively), while change in bowel habits only with CRC detection (OR 3.8, 95% CI 2.4 to 6.1). Among the FIT positives, 2173 (33.5%) reported at least one symptom. Out of 299 individuals with screen-detected CRC and 1639 with advanced adenoma, 167 (55.9%) and 1 175 (71.7%) were asymptomatic, respectively. Detection of CRC was associated with rectal bleeding (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.4 to 2.3), change in bowel habits (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.4 to 3.5) and abdominal pain (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.2 to 2.7).

CONCLUSIONS

Some bowel symptoms increased the likelihood of being diagnosed with CRC or advanced adenoma. However, the majority of individuals with these findings were asymptomatic. Asymptomatic individuals should be encouraged to participate in CRC screening.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01538550.

Impact of colorectal cancer screening participation in remote northern Canada: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Screening provides earlier colorectal cancer (CRC) detection and improves outcomes. It remains poorly understood if these benefits are realized with screening guidelines in remote northern populations of Canada where CRC rates are nearly twice the national average and access to colonoscopy is limited.

AIM

To evaluate the participation and impact of CRC screening guidelines in a remote northern population.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included residents of the Northwest Territories, a northern region of Canada, age 50-74 who underwent CRC screening by a fecal immunohistochemical test (FIT) between January 1, 2014 to March 30, 2019. To assess impact, individuals with a screen-detected CRC were compared to clinically-detected CRC cases for stage and location of CRC between 2014-2016. To assess participation, we conducted subgroup analyses of FIT positive individuals exploring the relationships between signs and symptoms of CRC at the time of screening, wait-times for colonoscopy, and screening outcomes. Two sample Welch t-test was used for normally distributed continuous variables, Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon Tests for data without normal distribution, and Chi-square goodness of fit test for categorical variables. A P value of < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant.

RESULTS

6817 fecal tests were completed, meaning an annual average screening rate of 25.04%, 843 (12.37%) were positive, 629 individuals underwent a follow-up colonoscopy, of which, 24.48% had advanced neoplasia (AN), 5.41% had CRC. There were no significant differences in stage, pathology, or location between screen-detected cancers and clinically-detected cancers. In assessing participation and screening outcomes, we observed 49.51% of individuals referred for colonoscopy after FIT were ineligible for CRC screening, most often due to signs and symptoms of CRC. Individuals were more likely to have AN if they had signs and symptoms of cancer at the time of screening, waited over 180 d for colonoscopy, or were indigenous [respectively, estimated RR 1.18 95%CI of RR (0.89-1.59)]; RR 1.523 (CI: 1.035, 2.240); RR 1.722 (CI: 1.165, 2.547)].

CONCLUSION

Screening did not facilitate early cancer detection but facilitated higher than anticipated AN detection. Signs and symptoms of CRC at screening, and long colonoscopy wait-times appear contributory.

The Performance of Colorectal Cancer Screening in Brazil: The First Two Years of the Implementation Program in Barretos Cancer Hospital

Colorectal cancer is the second most common cancer in Brazil. Yet, a nationally organized colorectal screening program is not implemented. Barretos Cancer Hospital (BCH) is one of the largest Brazilian institution that cares for underserved patients. BCH developed a fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based organized colorectal cancer screening program to improve colorectal cancer outcomes.This study aims to present the quality/performance measures of the first 2 years of the FIT-based colorectal cancer screening program and its impact on the colorectal cancer disease stage. Between 2015 and 2017, a total of 6,737 individuals attending the Outpatient Department of Prevention or the Mobile Unit of BCH, which visits 18 cities of Barretos county, ages 50 to 65 years, were personally invited by a health agent/nurse practitioner. Exclusion criteria were personal history of colorectal cancer, adenomatous polyps, inflammatory bowel disease, and colonoscopy, or flexible sigmoidoscopy performed in the past 5 years. European Union (EU) guidelines for colorectal cancer screening programs were evaluated. Overall, 92.8% returned the FIT, with an inadequate examination rate of 1.5%. Among the 6,253 adequately tested, 12.5% had a positive result. The colonoscopy compliance and completion rates were 84.6 and 98.2%, respectively. The PPVs were 60.0%, 16.5%, and 5.6% for adenoma, advanced adenoma, and cancer, respectively. Stage distribution of screen-detected cancers shows earlier stages than clinically diagnosed colorectal cancer cancers reported at BCH and Brazilian cancer registries. Our colorectal cancer screening program achieved desirable quality metrics, aligned with the EU guidelines. The observed shift toward earlier colorectal cancer stages suggests an exciting opportunity to improve colorectal cancer-related cancers in Brazil.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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