A risk prediction tool for colorectal cancer screening: a qualitative study of patient and provider facilitators and barriers

Polygenic scores in cancer

Since the publication of the first genome-wide association study for cancer in 2007, thousands of common alleles that are associated with the risk of cancer have been identified. The relative risk associated with individual variants is small and of limited clinical significance. However, the combined effect of multiple risk variants as captured by polygenic scores (PGSs) may be much greater and therefore provide risk discrimination that is clinically useful. We review the considerable research efforts over the past 15 years for developing statistical methods for PGSs and their application in large-scale genome-wide association studies to develop PGSs for various cancers. We review the predictive performance of these PGSs and the multiple challenges currently limiting the clinical application of PGSs. Despite this, PGSs are beginning to be incorporated into clinical multifactorial risk prediction models to stratify risk in both clinical trials and clinical implementation studies.

Colorectal Cancer Screening in the Middle East: What, Why, Who, When, and How?

The incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) in the Middle East is increasing, especially among those younger than 50 years. Risk factors including obesity, sedentary lifestyle, and dietary changes are associated with the epidemiologic shift and are a result of socioeconomic changes happening in the region. Worldwide, CRC screening is associated with decreased incidence and mortality of CRC, but screening uptake is still low in the Middle East because of cultural barriers and lack of awareness; in addition, most countries do not have national screening programs. Knowledge of CRC screening and participation rates vary among different countries, but overall they are low. Both primary and secondary prevention approaches are needed in the Middle East, and cost-effectiveness is important in choosing screening modalities. Although colonoscopy is considered the most robust screening method, stool-based testing may be an acceptable screening strategy in resource-limited settings, and focusing on high-risk individuals such as those with hereditary CRC might be the most cost-effective strategy. In addition to financial limitations in many countries in the Middle East, human displacement places an extra toll on cancer control strategies in the region.

Predicting attitudes towards screening for neurodegenerative diseases using OCT and artificial intelligence: Findings from a literature review

Recent developments in artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning raise the possibility of screening and early diagnosis for neurodegenerative diseases, using 3D scans of the retina. The eventual value of such screening will depend not only on scientific metrics such as specificity and sensitivity but, critically, also on public attitudes and uptake. Differential screening rates for various screening programmes in England indicate that multiple factors influence uptake. In this narrative literature review, some of these potential factors are explored in relation to predicting uptake of an early screening tool for neurodegenerative diseases using AI. These include: awareness of the disease, perceived risk, social influence, the use of AI, previous screening experience, socioeconomic status, health literacy, uncontrollable mortality risk, and demographic factors. The review finds the strongest and most consistent predictors to be ethnicity, social influence, the use of AI, and previous screening experience. Furthermore, it is likely that factors also interact to predict the uptake of such a tool. However, further experimental work is needed both to validate these predictions and explore interactions between the significant predictors.

Exploring a novel method for optimising the implementation of a colorectal cancer risk prediction tool into primary care: a qualitative study

Background

We developed a colorectal cancer risk prediction tool (‘CRISP’) to provide individualised risk-based advice for colorectal cancer screening. Using known environmental, behavioural, and familial risk factors, CRISP was designed to facilitate tailored screening advice to patients aged 50 to 74 years in general practice. In parallel to a randomised controlled trial of the CRISP tool, we developed and evaluated an evidence-based implementation strategy.

Methods

Qualitative methods were used to explore the implementation of CRISP in general practice. Using one general practice in regional Victoria, Australia, as a ‘laboratory’, we tested ways to embed CRISP into routine clinical practice. General practitioners, nurses, and operations manager co-designed the implementation methods with researchers, focussing on existing practice processes that would be sustainable. Researchers interviewed the staff regularly to assess the successfulness of the strategies employed, and implementation methods were adapted throughout the study period in response to feedback from qualitative interviews.

The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) underpinned the development of the interview guide and intervention strategy. Coding was inductive and themes were developed through consensus between the authors. Emerging themes were mapped onto the CFIR domains and a fidelity checklist was developed to ensure CRISP was being used as intended.

Results

Between December 2016 and September 2019, 1 interviews were conducted, both face-to-face and via videoconferencing (Zoom). All interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded. Themes were mapped onto the following CFIR domains: (1) ‘characteristics of the intervention’: CRISP was valued but time consuming; (2) ‘inner setting’: the practice was open to changing systems; 3. ‘outer setting’: CRISP helped facilitate screening; (4) ‘individual characteristics’: the practice staff were adaptable and able to facilitate adoption of new clinical processes; and (5) ‘processes’: fidelity checking, and education was important.

Conclusions

These results describe a novel method for exploring implementation strategies for a colorectal cancer risk prediction tool in the context of a parallel RCT testing clinical efficacy. The study identified successful and unsuccessful implementation strategies using an adaptive methodology over time. This method emphasised the importance of co-design input to make an intervention like CRISP sustainable for use in other practices and with other risk tools.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13012-022-01205-8.

A scoping review of risk-stratified bowel screening: current evidence, future directions

PURPOSE

In this scoping review, we examined the international literature on risk-stratified bowel screening to develop recommendations for future research, practice and policy.

METHODS

Six electronic databases were searched from inception to 18 October 2021: Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Forward and backwards citation searches were also undertaken. All relevant literature were included.

RESULTS

After de-deduplication, 3,629 records remained. 3,416 were excluded at the title/abstract screening stage. A further 111 were excluded at full-text screening stage. In total, 102 unique studies were included. Results showed that risk-stratified bowel screening programmes can potentially improve diagnostic performance, but there is a lack of information on longer-term outcomes. Risk models do appear to show promise in refining existing risk stratification guidelines but most were not externally validated and less than half achieved good discriminatory power. Risk assessment tools in primary care have the potential for high levels of acceptability and uptake, and therefore, could form an important component of future risk-stratified bowel screening programmes, but sometimes the screening recommendations were not adhered to by the patient or healthcare provider. The review identified important knowledge gaps, most notably in the area of organisation of screening services due to few pilots, and what risk stratification might mean for inequalities.

CONCLUSION

We recommend that future research focuses on what organisational challenges risk-stratified bowel screening may face and a consideration of inequalities in any changes to organised bowel screening programmes.

Do difficulties in emotional processing predict procedure pain and shape the patient's colonoscopy experience?

OBJECTIVES

Pain and fear of colonoscopy are inter-related; they make the colonoscopy experience unpleasant and impede adherence to colorectal cancer screening and prevention campaigns. According to previous research, fear and pain have been found to depend on patients' maladaptive cognitions and exaggerated emotional responses. The present study investigated whether emotional processing difficulties predicted colonoscopy pain and the associated catastrophising thoughts.

DESIGN

Prospective, observational, blinded.

METHOD

A sample of 123 patients was assessed for specific emotional processing difficulties (ie, suppression of emotions, unprocessed emotions, failure to control emotions, avoidance of emotional triggers and impoverished emotional experience) and anxiety-related variables (ie, worry, anxiety and depression) before colonoscopy. A trained medical doctor rated patients' behavioural manifestations of pain during colonoscopy. After complete recovery from sedation, the patients rated the endoscopy experience using perceived pain and situation-specific pain catastrophising scales.

RESULTS

About half of the patients were above the cut-off for anxiety before the procedure. Notwithstanding sedation, behavioural manifestations of pain during colonoscopy indicated probable or moderate pain for about one-third of the patients. Failure to control emotions, poor emotional experience and avoiding emotional triggers were positively correlated with behavioural manifestations of pain, self-reported pain and pain catastrophising. Regression analyses, controlling for gender, age, colonoscopy experience and sedation, revealed that avoidance of emotional triggers uniquely contributed to predicting pain outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Early identification of emotional processing difficulties associated with pain catastrophising can help define personalised psychological preparation paths to manage negative emotions in patients who fear colonoscopy pain.

Derivation and validation of a predictive model for advanced colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults

OBJECTIVE

Knowing risk for advanced colorectal neoplasia (AN) could help patients and providers choose among screening tests, improving screening efficiency and uptake. We created a risk prediction model for AN to help decide which test might be preferred, a use not considered for existing models.

DESIGN

Average-risk 50-to-80-year olds undergoing first-time screening colonoscopy were recruited from endoscopy units in Indiana. We measured sociodemographic and physical features, medical and family history and lifestyle factors and linked these to the most advanced finding. We derived a risk equation on two-thirds of the sample and assigned points to each variable to create a risk score. Scores with comparable risks were collapsed into risk categories. The model and score were tested on the remaining sample.

RESULTS

Among 3025 subjects in the derivation set (mean age 57.3 (6.5) years; 52% women), AN prevalence was 9.4%. The 13-variable model (c-statistic=0.77) produced three risk groups with AN risks of 1.5% (95% CI 0.72% to 2.74%), 7.06% (CI 5.89% to 8.38%) and 27.26% (CI 23.47% to 31.30%) in low-risk, intermediate-risk and high-risk groups (p value <0.001), containing 23%, 59% and 18% of subjects, respectively. In the validation set of 1475 subjects (AN prevalence of 8.4%), model performance was comparable (c-statistic=0.78), with AN risks of 2.73% (CI 1.25% to 5.11%), 5.57% (CI 4.12% to 7.34%) and 25.79% (CI 20.51% to 31.66%) in low-risk, intermediate-risk and high-risk subgroups, respectively (p<0.001), containing proportions of 23%, 59% and 18%.

CONCLUSION

Among average-risk persons, this model estimates AN risk with high discrimination, identifying a lower risk subgroup that may be screened non-invasively and a higher risk subgroup for which colonoscopy may be preferred. The model could help guide patient-provider discussions of screening options, may increase screening adherence and conserve colonoscopy resources.

Risk prediction models for colorectal cancer: Evaluating the discrimination due to added biomarkers

Most risk prediction models for colorectal cancer (CRC) are based on questionnaires and show a modest discriminatory ability. Therefore, we aim to develop risk prediction models incorporating plasma biomarkers for CRC to improve discrimination. We assessed the predictivity of 11 biomarkers in 736 men in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study and 639 women in the Nurses' Health Study. We used stepwise logistic regression to examine whether a set of biomarkers improved the predictivity on the basis of predictors in the National Cancer Institute's (NCI) Colorectal Cancer Risk Assessment Tool. Model discrimination was assessed using C-statistics. Bootstrap with 500 randomly sampled replicates was used for internal validation. The models containing each biomarker generated a C-statistic ranging from 0.50 to 0.59 in men and 0.50 to 0.54 in women. The NCI model demonstrated a C-statistic (95% CI) of 0.67 (0.62-0.71) in men and 0.58 (0.54-0.63) in women. Through stepwise selection of biomarkers, the C-statistic increased to 0.70 (0.66-0.74) in men after adding growth/differentiation factor 15, total adiponectin, sex hormone binding globulin and tumor necrosis factor receptor superfamily member 1B (P for difference = 0.008); and increased to 0.62 (0.57-0.66) in women after further including insulin-like growth factor 1 and insulin-like growth factor-binding protein 3 (P for difference = .06). The NCI + selected biomarkers model was internally validated with a C-statistic (95% CI) of 0.73 (0.70-0.77) in men and 0.66 (0.61-0.70) in women. Circulating plasma biomarkers may improve the performance of risk factor-based prediction model for CRC.

How to optimize the design and implementation of risk prediction tools: focus group with patients with IgA nephropathy

Background

IgA nephropathy (IgAN) is a common type of chronic immune-mediated kidney disease with variable risk of progression to end-stage kidney disease. Risk stratification helps clinicians weight the potential risks and benefits of immunosuppressive therapy for individual patients, and can inform patient-centred communication. No prior research examined barriers of risk predication tools (RPT) specific to IgAN. The purpose of this study was to explore determinants (facilitators, barriers) of RPT use from the patient perspective.

Methods

We conducted a single focus group with English-speaking adults aged 18 or older with biopsy-proven IgAN. We asked about how they would use an IgAN RPT, and how to improve its design and implementation. We analyzed the transcript using constant comparison to inductively derive themes, and complied with qualitative research reporting criteria.

Results

The 5 participants were Caucasian men who varied in age from 35 to 55. The glomerular filtration rate ranged from 29 to 71 mL/min/1.73m², and proteinuria ranged from 0.36 to 1.41 g/d. Participants identified both benefits and harms of the risk score. They said physicians should first ask patients for permission to use it. To make it more useful, participants offered suggestions to enhance RTP design: visual display, information on how to interpret the risk score, risk categories, health implications, modifiable risk factors, multiple scenarios, and comparison with similar patients. They offered additional suggestions to enhance RPT implementation: it should not replace patient-provider discussion, it should be accompanied by self-management education so that patients can take an active role in their health. Participants appreciated information from members of the multidisciplinary team in addition to physicians. Participants also said that physicians should monitor patient emotions or concerns on an ongoing basis.

Conclusions

Patients with IgAN identified numerous ways to enhance the design and use of an RPT. Others could use this information to design and implement RPTs for patients with other conditions, but should employ user-centred design to develop RPTs that address patient preferences.