Participation and Ease of Use in Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Comparison of 2 Fecal Immunochemical Tests

The Reliability of Patient-Performed Fecal Calprotectin Testing in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND

Home use of a buffer-containing extraction device for fecal calprotectin determination can bypass the labor-intensive extraction procedure and potentially prevent degradation at room temperature.

METHODS

In this prospective cross-sectional observational study, 2 CALiaGold tubes (extraction device) and one native tube were filled from the same bowel movement by patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Afterwards patients completed a questionnaire including whether they preferred the extraction device or the normal sampling method. All tubes were sent to the laboratory and when they arrived, 2 more CALiaGold tubes were filled at the laboratory from the native sample. The fecal calprotectin concentrations in all tubes were measured by a particle-enhanced turbidimetric immunoassay.

RESULTS

Fifty-three patients were included in the study. Fecal calprotectin levels were significantly higher in samples extracted by the patient compared to the analyst-performed extractions. When patients were divided into 3 groups (i.e., fecal calprotectin levels <50 ug/g, 50 to 200 µg/g, and >200 µg/g) a substantial concordance was found (Cohen kappa 0.654). Patients sampling imprecision was higher (P < 0.018, median CV 16%) compared to the analyst. Most patients preferred this extraction device.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient-performed fecal calprotectin extraction seems a realistic alternative sampling method and is preferred by most patients.

What can We Learn From High-Performing Screening Programs to Increase Bowel Cancer Screening Participation in Australia?

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most diagnosed cancer in men and women and second most common cause of cancer death in Australia; Australia’s CRC incidence and mortality are among the world’s highest. The Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program began in 2006; however, only 33% of those approached for the first time by the Program between 2018 and 2019 returned the kit. Of the 5.7 million kits sent during this period, only 44% were returned. Our aim was to identify practices and features of national bowel cancer screening programs in countries with similar programs but higher screening participation, to identify potential interventions for optimising Australian CRC screening participation.

Methods

We searched published and grey literature for CRC screening programs reporting at least 50% screening participation using postal invitation and free return of iFOBT home kits. Interviews were conducted with cancer registry staff and academic researchers, focused on participant and practitioner engagement in screening.

Results

National programs in Netherlands, Scotland, Denmark, and Finland reported over 50% screening participation rates for all invitation rounds. Shared characteristics include small populations within small geographic areas relative to Australia; relatively high literacy; a one-sample iFOBT kit; national registration systems for population cancer screening research; and screening program research including randomised trials of program features.

Conclusions

Apart from the one-sample kit, we identified no single solution to persistent Australian low uptake of screening. Research including randomised trials within the program promises to increase participation.

Impact

This screening program comparison suggests that within-program intervention trials will lead to increased Australian screening participation.

Two sides of every coin: individuals' experiences of undergoing colorectal cancer screening by faecal immunochemical test and colonoscopy

BACKGROUND

Acceptability of the recommended screening procedure represents a crucial determinant of the impact of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes. This study aims to explore how individuals in CRC screening experience the screening procedure.

METHODS

Study participants (n = 44), aged 60-62 years, screened by faecal immunochemical test (FIT) and/or colonoscopy, were recruited from the Screening of Swedish Colons (SCREESCO) study. Data were collected through six focus group discussions and 20 individual telephone interviews and analyzed using qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

The analysis resulted in 30 subcategories together forming four categories describing individuals' experiences of the CRC screening procedure: From no worries to bothering emotions; Varying logistical concerns; Being well treated, but inconsistently informed and involved and Expectations not matching reality. Some subcategories only applied to either FIT or colonoscopy screening, while others applied to both screening procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Undergoing CRC screening by FIT or colonoscopy is an individual experience. Strategies to improve patient experiences may include using one-sample FITs and optimizing bowel preparation and scheduling of colonoscopies according to individual preferences. Ensuring that needs for emotional support are acknowledged, together with clear and adequate information delivered at right time are further important aspects to consider.

Colorectal Cancer Screening: Have We Addressed Concerns and Needs of the Target Population?

Despite the recognized benefits of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, uptake is still suboptimal in many countries. In addressing this issue, one important element that has not received sufficient attention is population preference. Our review provides a comprehensive summary of the up-to-date evidence relative to this topic. Four OVID databases were searched: Ovid MEDLINE® ALL, Biological Abstracts, CAB Abstracts, and Global Health. Among the 742 articles generated, 154 full texts were selected for a more thorough evaluation based on predefined inclusion criteria. Finally, 83 studies were included in our review. The general population preferred either colonoscopy as the most accurate test, or fecal occult blood test (FOBT) as the least invasive for CRC screening. The emerging blood test (SEPT9) and capsule colonoscopy (nanopill), with the potential to overcome the pitfalls of the available techniques, were also favored. Gender, age, race, screening experience, education and beliefs, the perceived risk of CRC, insurance, and health status influence one’s test preference. To improve uptake, CRC screening programs should consider offering test alternatives and tailoring the content and delivery of screening information to the public’s preferences. Other logistical measures in terms of the types of bowel preparation, gender of endoscopist, stool collection device, and reward for participants can also be useful.

Implementation Strategies for Interventions Aiming to Increase Participation in Mail-Out Bowel Cancer Screening Programs: A Realist Review

Background: Bowel cancer is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer and the third most common cause of cancer-related death, with 1,849,518 new cases of bowel diagnosed and 880,792 deaths reported globally in 2018 alone. Survival can be improved through early detection via national mail-out bowel cancer screening programs; however, participation remains low in many countries. Behavior change is therefore required to increase participation. This realist review aims to (a) identify the behavior change techniques (BCTs) used in each intervention, (b) understand the mechanisms of action (MoAs) responsible for the BCT effectiveness, and (c) apply a behavior change model to inform how MoAs can be combined to increase screening participation.

Methods: We systematically reviewed the literature for interventions aiming to increase participation in mail-out bowel cancer screening. We used a four-stage realist synthesis approach whereby (1) interventions were extracted from each study; (2) BCTs applied in each intervention were identified and coded using the BCT Taxonomy-v1; (3) the Theory and Techniques Tool was used to link BCTs to their MoA; and (4) BCTs and MoAs were categorized according to their effectiveness and what Health Action Process Approach (HAPA) stage of change they would affect.

Results: We identified 68 intervention trials using 26 unique BCTs and 13 MoAs to increase participation. Sixteen BCTs and 10 MoAs were identified within the interventions that successfully increased participation rates. Interventions targeting both stages of the HAPA model had a higher success rate (80%) than those targeting one stage of change (51%). When targeting only one stage, interventions targeting the volitional stage had a higher success rate (71%) than interventions targeting only the motivational stage of change (26%).

Conclusion: Importantly, this review identified a suite of BCTs and MoAs effective for increasing participation in mail-out bowel cancer screening programs. With increased participation in bowel cancer screening leading to improved survival, our findings are key to informing the improvement of policy and interventions that aim to increase screening using specific strategies at key stages of health decision-making.

Novel Toilet Paper-Based Point-Of-Care Test for the Rapid Detection of Fecal Occult Blood: Instrument Validation Study

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer screening by fecal occult blood testing has been an important public health test and shown to reduce colorectal cancer-related mortality. However, the low participation rate in colorectal cancer screening by the general public remains a problematic public health issue. This fact could be attributed to the complex and unpleasant operation of the screening tool.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to validate a novel toilet paper-based point-of-care test (ie, JustWipe) as a public health instrument to detect fecal occult blood and provide detailed results from the evaluation of the analytic characteristics in the clinical validation.

METHODS

The mechanism of fecal specimen collection by the toilet-paper device was verified with repeatability and reproducibility tests. We also evaluated the analytical characteristics of the test reagents. For clinical validation, we conducted comparisons between JustWipe and other fecal occult blood tests. The first comparison was between JustWipe and typical fecal occult blood testing in a central laboratory setting with 70 fecal specimens from the hospital. For the second comparison, a total of 58 volunteers were recruited, and JustWipe was compared with the commercially available Hemoccult SENSA in a point-of-care setting.

RESULTS

Adequate amounts of fecal specimens were collected using the toilet-paper device with small day-to-day and person-to-person variations. The limit of detection of the test reagent was evaluated to be 3.75 µg of hemoglobin per milliliter of reagent. Moreover, the test reagent also showed high repeatability (100%) on different days and high reproducibility (>96%) among different users. The overall agreement between JustWipe and a typical fecal occult blood test in a central laboratory setting was 82.9%. In the setting of point-of-care tests, the overall agreement between JustWipe and Hemoccult SENSA was 89.7%. Moreover, the usability questionnaire showed that the novel test tool had high scores in operation friendliness (87.3/100), ease of reading results (97.4/100), and information usefulness (96.1/100).

CONCLUSIONS

We developed and validated a toilet paper-based fecal occult blood test for use as a point-of-care test for the rapid (in 60 seconds) and easy testing of fecal occult blood. These favorable characteristics render it a promising tool for colorectal cancer screening as a public health instrument.

Mailed fecal immunochemical test outreach for colorectal cancer screening: Summary of a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-sponsored Summit

Uptake of colorectal cancer screening remains suboptimal. Mailed fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) offers promise for increasing screening rates, but optimal strategies for implementation have not been well synthesized. In June 2019, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention convened a meeting of subject matter experts and stakeholders to answer key questions regarding mailed FIT implementation in the United States. Points of agreement included: 1) primers, such as texts, telephone calls, and printed mailings before mailed FIT, appear to contribute to effectiveness; 2) invitation letters should be brief and easy to read, and the signatory should be tailored based on setting; 3) instructions for FIT completion should be simple and address challenges that may lead to failed laboratory processing, such as notation of collection date; 4) reminders delivered to initial noncompleters should be used to increase the FIT return rate; 5) data infrastructure should identify eligible patients and track each step in the outreach process, from primer delivery through abnormal FIT follow-up; 6) protocols and procedures such as navigation should be in place to promote colonoscopy after abnormal FIT; 7) a high-quality, 1-sample FIT should be used; 8) sustainability requires a program champion and organizational support for the work, including sufficient funding and external policies (such as quality reporting requirements) to drive commitment to program investment; and 9) the cost effectiveness of mailed FIT has been established. Participants concluded that mailed FIT is an effective and efficient strategy with great potential for increasing colorectal cancer screening in diverse health care settings if more widely implemented.

Fecal Immunochemical Test: The World's Colorectal Cancer Screening Test

The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is a tool used for colorectal cancer screening and its use is growing rapidly. FIT, applied as a qualitative or quantitative test, has far better sensitivity for hemoglobin than older, guaiac fecal occult blood tests. This translates into several advantages of FIT, including ability to screen using only 1 stool sample per cycle. This article reviews current understanding of FIT performance as a 1-time test and when applied programmatically. It outlines how to apply the test at the patient level and track performance at the program level. Future prospects for FIT application are highlighted.