Personalized colorectal cancer screening: study protocol of a mixed-methods study on the effectiveness of tailored intervals based on prior f-Hb concentration in a fit-based colorectal cancer screening program (PERFECT-FIT)

Interval cancer risk after the upper age limit of screening has been reached: Informing risk stratification in FIT-based colorectal cancer screening

Upper age limits are currently fixed for all fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs. A risk-stratified upper age limit may be beneficial. Therefore, we assessed differences in interval CRC risk among individuals who had reached the upper age limit of screening (75 years). Individuals with a negative FIT (<47 μg Hb/g feces) in the final round of the Dutch CRC screening program were selected from the national screening database and linked to the national cancer registry to identify CRCs diagnosed within 24 months (interval CRCs). Survival analyses assessed whether sex and last fecal hemoglobin (f-Hb) concentration were associated with interval CRC risk. A multivariable logistic regression assessed whether sex, last f-Hb concentration and screening round were associated with stage distribution (early vs. late). Last f-Hb concentrations were considered detectable when they were >0 μg Hb/g feces. Among 305,761 individuals with a complete follow-up (24 months), 661 were diagnosed with interval CRC (21.6 per 10,000 negative FITs). Individuals with detectable f-Hb (15%) were 5 times more likely to be diagnosed with interval CRC than those without (HR 4.87, 95%CI: 4.19-5.65). Moreover, their cancers were more often detected at a late stage compared to individuals without detectable f-Hb (OR 1.45, 95%CI: 1.06-2.01). Our results show that interval CRC risk among individuals aged ≥75 differs substantially by last f-Hb concentration, indicating a uniform age to stop screening is suboptimal. Future research, taking into account multiple screening rounds and FIT results, should determine the optimal risk-stratified screening strategy.

Fecal Hemoglobin Levels in Prior Negative Screening and Detection of Colorectal Neoplasia: A Dose-Response Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Prior studies have shown that individuals with fecal hemoglobin (f-Hb) concentrations just below the positivity cutoff have an increased colorectal cancer risk compared with those with no or low f-Hb. Understanding the dose-response association between f-Hb in a prior screening round and the detection of colorectal neoplasia is crucial for tailoring risk-based screening recommendations.

METHODS

We searched the literature to identify studies reporting the association between f-Hb in prior screening round and colorectal neoplasia detection in an average-risk population. Analysis involved a 2-stage approach using log-log regression models to assess dose-response relationships across studies, with effect sizes pooled using a random effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed by excluding individual studies in sensitivity analyses. Subgroup analyses examined variations in effects by outcome definitions and detection methods.

RESULTS

This systematic review and meta-analysis included 13 studies with 4,493,672 individuals. All studies demonstrated a positive association between f-Hb in prior screenings and colorectal neoplasia detection. Pooled analysis revealed that individuals with f-Hb concentrations of 5, 10, 20, and 40 μg/g had a 3-, 5-, 8-, and 13-fold higher risk of colorectal neoplasia, respectively, compared with individuals with 0 μg/g. Although significant heterogeneity (I2 = 97.5%, P < .001) was observed, sensitivity analyses confirmed the consistency of findings. Subgroup analyses indicated that f-Hb concentrations from previous negative tests were especially predictive of advanced neoplasia in subsequent screenings.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that the risk of detecting colorectal neoplasia increases with prior f-Hb concentrations in negative tests, supporting the development of risk-stratified screening strategies based on these concentrations.

A systems based qualitative analysis exploring the potential to implement risk stratified bowel cancer screening in England

BACKGROUND

Improving bowel cancer screening programmes through the introduction of risk stratification has been discussed, but not widely implemented in many countries. This study aimed to gain an understanding of system and programmatic aspects that need to be addressed to enable a move towards implementation.

METHODS

The Engineering Better Care Framework was used to support exploration and thematic analysis of the views of stakeholders involved in delivery of bowel cancer screening in England. Semi-structured interviews (n = 11) were conducted to gain a better understanding of the problem, and to identify elements that would contribute to a well-designed programme and anticipate barriers to delivery.

RESULTS

There is enthusiasm for introducing risk stratification and it is considered to be beneficial to improving the current screening programme. A major barrier impacting implementation is a lack of consensus on the best approach for risk stratified screening. Many interviewees recognised this as a bottle-neck and were in favour of processes that would enable more joined up decision-making to enable balanced consideration of the differing, and often nuanced potential of different strategies for risk stratification. Several key considerations and design elements were identified: evidence demonstrating benefit of a particular strategy, feasibility of programme delivery (data availability, workforce capacity, public and patient acceptability, impact on equity), as well as changes to design of patient communication materials, the bowel cancer screening system, consent and follow-up services.

CONCLUSIONS

System level issues and clarification of remaining uncertainties require resolution in order to move towards implementation. Moving this agenda forward requires consensus across different stakeholders in the first instance on the best use of risk. This will enable outlining key outstanding evidence gaps and establishing evidence thresholds for implementation. There are opportunities to design an optimal system based on harnessing existing infrastructure and learnings from other screening programmes.

Does Colonoscopy as a First Screening Test Still Make Sense?-Counterpoint

Colonoscopy has been widely regarded as the gold standard for its high diagnostic accuracy and preventive potential. However, its invasive nature, high cost, and suboptimal participation rates limit its utility at the population level. Non-invasive screening tests, notably the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and multitarget stool DNA tests, present promising alternatives that may improve screening participation and reduce barriers to participation. Among these, FIT has demonstrated a consistent advantage in enhancing participation, which subsequently contributes to better long-term outcomes in CRC prevention. FIT-based two-step screening offers several practical advantages, including cost-effectiveness, non-invasiveness, and greater flexibility. Moreover, the quantitative nature of FIT allows for adjustable sensitivity thresholds and the ability of risk stratification, making it adaptable across diverse populations and scenarios. Through serial testing, FIT can increase cumulative detection rates over time. This approach facilitates the identification of high-risk individuals, allowing for more judicious use of colonoscopy resources and reducing unnecessary invasive procedures, especially among low-risk populations. Notably, evidence indicates that participation to FIT-based screening is consistently higher than to colonoscopy, which enhances the detection of early-stage cancers and advanced adenomas in the long run. Given the constraints of limited endoscopic capacity, the aging population, and the recent lowering of the recommended screening age due to the rising incidence of early-onset CRC, FIT emerges as a practical, flexible solution. The role of two-step FIT screening in improving participation and enabling risk-stratified, personalized approaches to CRC prevention is pivotal, advocating for its expanded integration into future screening paradigms.

Colonoscopy findings after increasing two-stool faecal immunochemical test (FIT) cut-off: Cross-sectional analysis of the SCREESCO randomized trial

BACKGROUND

We determined the impact of an increased two-stool faecal immunochemical test (FIT) cut-off on colonoscopy positivity and relative sensitivity and specificity in the randomized controlled screening trial screening of Swedish colons conducted in Sweden.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional analysis of participants in the FIT arm that performed FIT between March 2014 and 2020 within the study registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02078804, who had a faecal haemoglobin concentration of at least 10 µg/g in at least one of two stool samples and who underwent a colonoscopy (n = 3841). For each increase in cut-off, we computed the positive predictive value (PPV), numbers needed to scope (NNS), sensitivity and specificity for finding colorectal cancer (CRC) and advanced neoplasia (AN; advanced adenoma or CRC) relative to cut-off 10 µg/g.

RESULTS

The PPV for AN increased from 23.0% (95% confidence intervals [CI]: 22.3%-23.6%) at cut-off 10 µg/g to 28.8% (95% CI: 27.8%-29.7%) and 33.1% (95% CI: 31.9%-34.4%) at cut-offs 20 and 40 µg/g, respectively, whereas the NNS to find a CRC correspondingly decreased from 41 to 27 and 19. The PPV for AN was higher in men than women at each cut-off, for example 31.5% (95% CI: 30.1%-32.8%) in men and 25.6% (95% CI: 24.3%-27.0%) in women at 20 µg/g. The relative sensitivity and relative specificity were similar in men and women at each cut-off.

CONCLUSION

A low cut-off of around 20-40 µg/g allows detection and removal of many AN compared to 10 µg/g while reducing the number of colonoscopies in both men and women.

Precision Colorectal Cancer Fecal Immunological Test Screening With Fecal-Hemoglobin-Concentration-Guided Interscreening Intervals

Importance

Given a gradient relationship between fecal hemoglobin (f-Hb) concentration and colorectal neoplasia demonstrated previously, using f-Hb-guided interscreening interval has increasingly gained attention in population-based fecal immunological test (FIT), but it is very rare to address how to implement such a precision strategy and whether it can economize the use of FIT and colonoscopy.

Objective

To demonstrate the applicability of personalized colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with f-Hb-guided screening intervals to reduce the number of FITs and colonoscopy with as equivalent efficacy as universal biennial screening.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A retrospective cohort study for developing f-Hb-guided precision interscreening interval was conducted using data on a Taiwanese biennial nationwide FIT screening program that enrolled more than 3 million participants aged 50 to 74 years between 2004 and 2014. The cohort was followed up over time until 2019 to ascertain colorectal neoplasia and causes of death. A comparative study was further designed to compare the use of FIT and colonoscopy between the personalized f-Hb-guided group and the universal biennial screening group given the equivalent efficacy of reducing CRC-related outcomes.

Main Outcomes and Measurements

A spectrum of f-Hb-guided intervals was determined by using the Poisson regression model given the equivalent efficacy of a universal biennial screening. The use of FIT and colonoscopy for the pragmatic f-Hb-guided interval group was measured compared with the universal biennial screening group. Data analysis was performed from September 2022 to October 2023.

Results

Using data from the 3 500 250 participants (mean [SD] age, 57.8 [6.0] years) enrolled in the Taiwanese biennial nationwide FIT screening program, an incremental increase in baseline f-Hb associated with colorectal neoplasia and CRC mortality consistently was observed. Participants with different f-Hb levels were classified into distinct risk categories. Various screening intervals by different f-Hb levels were recommended. Using the proposed f-Hb-guided screening intervals, it was found that the personalized method was imputed to reduce the number of FIT tests and colonoscopies by 49% and 28%, respectively, compared with the universal biennial screening.

Conclusion and Relevance

The gradient relationship between f-Hb and colorectal neoplasia and CRC mortality was used to develop personalized FIT screening with f-Hb-guided screening intervals. Such a precision interscreening interval led to the reduced use of FIT test and colonoscopy without compromising the effectiveness of universal biennial screening.

Implementation considerations for risk-tailored cancer screening in the population: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Risk-tailored screening has emerged as a promising approach to optimise the balance of benefits and harms of existing population cancer screening programs. It tailors screening (e.g., eligibility, frequency, interval, test type) to individual risk rather than the current one-size-fits-all approach of most organised population screening programs. However, the implementation of risk-tailored cancer screening in the population is challenging as it requires a change of practice at multiple levels i.e., individual, provider, health system levels. This scoping review aims to synthesise current implementation considerations for risk-tailored cancer screening in the population, identifying barriers, facilitators, and associated implementation outcomes.

METHODS

Relevant studies were identified via database searches up to February 2023. Results were synthesised using Tierney et al. (2020) guidance for evidence synthesis of implementation outcomes and a multilevel framework.

RESULTS

Of 4138 titles identified, 74 studies met the inclusion criteria. Most studies in this review focused on the implementation outcomes of acceptability, feasibility, and appropriateness, reflecting the pre-implementation stage of most research to date. Only six studies included an implementation framework. The review identified consistent evidence that risk-tailored screening is largely acceptable across population groups, however reluctance to accept a reduction in screening frequency for low-risk informed by cultural norms, presents a major barrier. Limited studies were identified for cancer types other than breast cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation strategies will need to address alternate models of delivery, education of health professionals, communication with the public, screening options for people at low risk of cancer, and inequity in outcomes across cancer types.

Development and validation of colorectal cancer risk prediction tools: A comparison of models

BACKGROUND

Identification of individuals at elevated risk can improve cancer screening programmes by permitting risk-adjusted screening intensities. Previous work introduced a prognostic model using sex, age and two preceding faecal haemoglobin concentrations to predict the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) in the next screening round. Using data of 3 screening rounds, this model attained an area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.78 for predicting advanced neoplasia (AN). We validated this existing logistic regression (LR) model and attempted to improve it by applying a more flexible machine-learning approach.

METHODS

We trained an existing LR and a newly developed random forest (RF) model using updated data from 219,257 third-round participants of the Dutch CRC screening programme until 2018. For both models, we performed two separate out-of-sample validations using 1,137,599 third-round participants after 2018 and 192,793 fourth-round participants from 2020 onwards. We evaluated the AUC and relative risks of the predicted high-risk groups for the outcomes AN and CRC.

RESULTS

For third-round participants after 2018, the AUC for predicting AN was 0.77 (95% CI: 0.76-0.77) using LR and 0.77 (95% CI: 0.77-0.77) using RF. For fourth-round participants, the AUCs were 0.73 (95% CI: 0.72-0.74) and 0.73 (95% CI: 0.72-0.74) for the LR and RF models, respectively. For both models, the 5% with the highest predicted risk had a 7-fold risk of AN compared to average, whereas the lowest 80% had a risk below the population average for third-round participants.

CONCLUSION

The LR is a valid risk prediction method in stool-based screening programmes. Although predictive performance declined marginally, the LR model still effectively predicted risk in subsequent screening rounds. An RF did not improve CRC risk prediction compared to an LR, probably due to the limited number of available explanatory variables. The LR remains the preferred prediction tool because of its interpretability.

Diagnostic yield of a risk model versus faecal immunochemical test only: a randomised controlled trial in a colorectal cancer screening programme

BACKGROUND

Combining the faecal immunochemical test (FIT) result with risk factors for advanced neoplasia (AN) may increase the yield of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening without increasing the number of colonoscopies. We conducted a randomised controlled trial in the Dutch CRC screening programme to evaluate a previously developed risk model including FIT, age, sex, smoking status, and CRC family history.

METHODS

A total of 22,748 individuals aged 56-75 years were pre-randomised to the risk-model group or the FIT-only group. Both groups received the FIT; those allocated to the risk-model group also received a single-page questionnaire. Study participants with a positive result (FIT ≥ 15 µg Hb/g faeces and/or risk ≥0.10) were referred for colonoscopy. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of invitees in whom AN was detected.

RESULTS

In the risk-model group, 3113/11,364 invitees (27%) returned the FIT and questionnaire versus 3061/11,384 invitees (27%) in the FIT-only group (p = 0.40). The yield of AN was 3.70/1000 invitees in the risk-model group versus 3.43/1000 in the FIT-only group (absolute difference: 0.27/1000, 95%CI: -1.30 to 1.82, p = 0.82).

CONCLUSIONS

Combining FIT with risk factors for CRC did not increase the yield of AN compared to FIT-only in an existing CRC screening programme. There was no difference in participation between groups.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT04490551 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Socioeconomic inequalities in interval colorectal cancer are explained by differences in faecal haemoglobin concentration and age: a register-based cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the risk of interval colorectal cancer (CRC) in faecal immunochemical test (FIT) negative screening participants according to socioeconomic status.

DESIGN

In this register-based study, first round FIT negative (<20 µg hb/g faeces) screening participants (biennial FIT, citizens aged 50-74) were followed to estimate interval CRC risk. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression models estimated HRs based on socioeconomic status defined by educational level and income. Models were adjusted for age, sex and FIT concentration.

RESULTS

We identified 829 (0.7‰) interval CRC in 1 160 902 individuals. Interval CRC was more common in lower socioeconomic strata with 0.7‰ for medium-long higher education compared with 1.0‰ for elementary school and 0.4‰ in the highest income quartile compared with 1.2‰ in the lowest. These differences did not translate into significant differences in HR in the multivariate analysis, as they were explained by FIT concentration and age. HR for interval CRC was 7.09 (95% CI) for FIT concentrations 11.9-19.8 µg hb/g faeces, and 3.37 (95% CI) for FIT between 7.2 and 11.8 compared with those <7.2. The HR rose with increasing age ranging from 2.06 (95% CI 1.45 to 2.93) to 7.60 (95% CI 5.63 to 10.25) compared with those under 55 years.

CONCLUSION

Interval CRC risk increased with decreasing income, heavily influenced by lower income individuals more often being older and having increased FIT concentrations. Individualising screening interval based on age and FIT result, may decrease interval CRC rates, reduce the social gradient and thereby increase the screening efficiency.