Spatial mapping of colorectal cancer screening uptake and associated factors

OBJECTIVE

Over the past decades, it has been understood that the availability of screening tests has contributed to a steady decline in incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC). However, it is also seen that there is a geographic disparity in the use of such tests across small areas. The aim of this study is to examine small-area level barrier factors that may impact CRC screening uptake and to delineate coldspot (low uptake of screening) counties in Florida.

METHODS

Data on the percentages of county-level CRC screening uptakes in 2016 and county-level barrier factors for screening were obtained from the Florida Department of Health, Division of Public Health Statistics & Performance Management. Bayesian spatial beta models were used to produce posterior probability of deceedance to identify coldspots for CRC screening rates.

RESULTS

Unadjusted screening rates using sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy test ranged from 56.8 to 85%. Bayesian spatial beta models were fitted to the proportion data. At an ecological level, we found that an increasing rate of CRC screening uptake for either of the test types (colon/rectum exam, stool-based test) was strongly associated with a higher health insurance coverage, and lower percentage of population that speak English less than very well (immigration) at county level. Eleven coldspot counties out of 67 total were also identified.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that health insurance disparities in the use of CRC screening tests are an important factor that may need more attention for resource allocation and health policy targeting small areas with low uptake of screening.

Effectiveness of Colonoscopy Screening vs Sigmoidoscopy Screening in Colorectal Cancer

Importance

Randomized clinical screening trials have shown that sigmoidoscopy screening reduces colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality. Colonoscopy has largely replaced sigmoidoscopy for CRC screening, but long-term results from randomized trials on colonoscopy screening are still lacking.

Objective

To estimate the additional screening benefit of colonoscopy compared with sigmoidoscopy.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This comparative effectiveness simulation study pooled data on 358 204 men and women randomly assigned to sigmoidoscopy screening or usual care in 4 randomized sigmoidoscopy screening trials conducted in Norway, Italy, the US, and UK with inclusion periods in the years 1993 to 2001. The primary analysis of the study was conducted from January 19 to December 30, 2021.

Intervention

Invitation to endoscopic screening.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary outcomes were CRC incidence and mortality. Using pooled 15-year follow-up data, colonoscopy screening effectiveness was estimated assuming that the efficacy of colonoscopy in the proximal colon was similar to that observed in the distal colon in the sigmoidoscopy screening trials. The simulation model was validated using data from Norwegian participants in a colonoscopy screening trial.

Results

This analysis included 358 204 individuals (181 971 women [51%]) aged 55 to 64 years at inclusion with a median follow-up time ranging from 15 to 17 years. Compared with usual care, colonoscopy prevented an estimated 50 (95% CI, 42-58) CRC cases per 100 000 person-years, corresponding to 30% incidence reduction (rate ratio, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.66-0.75]), and prevented an estimated 15 (95% CI, 11-19) CRC deaths per 100 000 person-years, corresponding to 32% mortality reduction (rate ratio, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.61-0.76]). The additional benefit of colonoscopy screening compared with sigmoidoscopy was 12 (95% CI, 10-14) fewer CRC cases and 4 (95% CI, 3-5) fewer CRC deaths per 100 000 person-years, corresponding to percentage point reductions of 6.9 (95% CI, 6.0-7.9) for CRC incidence and 7.6 (95% CI, 5.7-9.6) for CRC mortality. The number needed to switch from sigmoidoscopy to colonoscopy screening was 560 (95% CI, 486-661) to prevent 1 CRC case and 1611 (95% CI, 1275-2188) to prevent 1 CRC death.

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this comparative effectiveness study assessing long-term follow-up after CRC screening suggest that there was an additional preventive effect on CRC incidence and mortality associated with colonoscopy screening compared with sigmoidoscopy screening, but the additional preventive effect was less than what was achieved by introducing sigmoidoscopy screening where no screening existed. The results probably represent the upper limit of what may be achieved with colonoscopy screening compared with sigmoidoscopy screening.

CRC screening with sigmoidoscopy extends life by 110 d; other cancer screening tests do not extend life

SOURCE CITATION

Bretthauer M, Wieszczy P, Løberg M, et al. Estimated lifetime gained with cancer screening tests: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. JAMA Intern Med. 2023;183:1196-1203. 37639247.

Assessing Guidelines on the Need for Colonoscopy After Initial Flexible Sigmoidoscopy in Young Patients With Outlet-Type Rectal Bleeding

BACKGROUND

Although young-age-of-onset colorectal cancer is increasing in incidence, lack of screening leads to symptomatic presentation, often with rectal bleeding. Because most cancers in patients younger than 50 years are left-sided, flexible sigmoidoscopy is a reasonable way of investigating bleeding in these patients.

OBJECTIVE

To predict which patients undergoing flexible sigmoidoscopy for outlet-type rectal bleeding need a full colonoscopy.

DESIGN

Findings at colonoscopy were compared with published indications for colonoscopy after flexible sigmoidoscopy, which were as follows: 1) any number of advanced adenomas defined as a tubular adenoma of >9 mm diameter, a tubulovillous or villous adenoma of any size, or any adenoma with high-grade dysplasia; 2) 3 or more tubular adenomas of any size or histology; 3) any sessile serrated lesion; and 4) 20 or more hyperplastic polyps.

SETTING

Charity Hospital with volunteer specialists.

PATIENTS

Patients were included if they were younger than 57 years, had outlet-type rectal bleeding, and underwent flexible sigmoidoscopy at least to the descending colon followed by colonoscopy with biopsy of all resected lesions.

INTERVENTIONS

Flexible sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy with excision of all removable lesions.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Findings at colonoscopy.

RESULTS

There were 66 patients who had a colonoscopy between 5 and 811 days after sigmoidoscopy and also had complete data. There were 43 men and 23 women with a mean age of 39.5 years. Analysis of flexible sigmoidoscopy criteria for finding proximal high-risk lesions on colonoscopy showed a sensitivity of 76.9%, a specificity of 67.9%, a positive predictive value of 37%, a negative predictive value of 92.3%, and an accuracy of 69.7%.

LIMITATIONS

A large number of exclusions for inadequate colonoscopy or inadequate data resulted in a reduced patient number in the study.

CONCLUSIONS

Our criteria for follow-up colonoscopy based on the findings at initial flexible sigmoidoscopy in young patients with outlet-type rectal bleeding are reliable enough to be used in routine clinical practice, provided this is audited. See Video Abstract.

GUA DE EVALUACIN PARA LA NECESIDAD DE COLONOSCOPIA DESPUS DE UNA SIGMOIDOSCOPIA FLEXIBLE INICIAL EN PACIENTES JVENES CON RECTORRAGIA

ANTECEDENTES:Si bien la edad de aparición temprana del cáncer colorrectal está aumentando en incidencia, la falta de pruebas de detección conduce a una presentación sintomática, a menudo con sangrado rectal. Debido a que la mayoría de los cánceres en pacientes menores de 50 años son del lado izquierdo, la sigmoidoscopia flexible es una forma razonable de investigar el sangrado en estos pacientes.OBJETIVO:Predecir qué pacientes sometidos a sigmoidoscopia flexible por rectorragia necesitan una colonoscopia completa.DISEÑO:Los resultados de la colonoscopia se compararon con las indicaciones publicadas para la colonoscopia después de una sigmoidoscopia flexible. Estos fueron: 1. Cualquier número de adenomas avanzados, definidos como un adenoma tubular > 9 mm, un adenoma tubulovelloso o velloso de cualquier tamaño, o cualquier adenoma con displasia de alto grado. 2. Tres o más adenomas tubulares de cualquier tamaño o histología. 3. Cualquier lesión serrada sésil. 4. Veinte o más pólipos hiperplásicos.ENTORNO CLINICO:Hospital de Caridad con especialistas voluntarios.PACIENTES:Menores de 57 años, con rectorragia, sometidos a sigmoidoscopia flexible al menos hasta el colon descendente, seguida de colonoscopia con biopsia de todas las lesiones resecadas.INTERVENCIONES:sigmoidoscopia flexible y colonoscopia con escisión de todas las lesiones removibles.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACIÓN:Hallazgos en la colonoscopia.RESULTADOS:66 casos a los que se les realizó una colonoscopia entre 5 y 811 días después de la sigmoidoscopia, que también tenían datos completos. 43 hombres y 23 mujeres con una edad media de 39,5 años. El análisis de los criterios de sigmoidoscopia flexible para encontrar lesiones proximales de alto riesgo en la colonoscopia mostró una sensibilidad del 76,9 %, una especificidad del 67,9 %, un valor predictivo positivo del 37 %, un valor predictivo negativo del 92,3 % y una precisión del 69,7 %.LIMITACIONES:Gran número de exclusiones por colonoscopia inadecuada o datos inadecuados que causan un número reducido de pacientes en el estudio.CONCLUSIÓN:Nuestros criterios para la colonoscopia de seguimiento basados en los hallazgos de la sigmoidoscopia flexible inicial en pacientes jóvenes con rectorragia son lo suficientemente confiables para ser utilizados en la práctica clínica habitual, siempre que se audite. (Traducción- Dr. Ingrid Melo ).

Lower participation among immigrants in colorectal cancer screening in Norway

Introduction

Organized cancer screening programs should be equally accessible for all groups in society. We assessed differences in participation in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among different immigrant groups.

Methods

Between 2012 and 2019, 140,000 individuals aged 50 to 74 years were randomly invited to sigmoidoscopy or repeated faecal immunochemical test (FIT) in a CRC screening trial. In this study, we included 46,919 individuals invited to sigmoidoscopy and 70,018 invited to the first round of FIT between 2012 and 2017. We examined difference in participation between non-immigrants and immigrants, and within different immigrant groups by geographic area of origin, using logistic regression models, adjusted for several sociodemographic factors and health factors.

Results

In total, we included 106,695 non-immigrants and 10,242 immigrants. The participation rate for FIT was 60% among non-immigrants, 58% among immigrants from Western countries and 37% among immigrants from non-Western countries. The participation rate for sigmoidoscopy was 53% among non-immigrants, 48% among immigrants from Western countries and 23% among immigrants from non-Western countries. Compared to non-immigrants, multivariate adjusted odds ratio for non-participation in FIT screening was 1.13 (95% confidence interval 1.04-1.23) and 1.82 (1.69-1.96) for immigrants from Western and non-Western countries. The corresponding numbers in sigmoidoscopy screening were 1.34 (1.21-1.48) and 2.83 (2.55-3.14). The lowest participation was observed in immigrants from Eastern Europe, Northern Africa and Western Asia, and South-Central Asia.

Conclusion

Participation in CRC screening in Norway was particularly low among non-Western immigrants, which could put them at increased risk for late stage diagnosis of CRC. Participation was lower in sigmoidoscopy screening than in FIT screening, especially among immigrants from non-Western countries.

Trends in colorectal cancer screening in the United States, 2012 to 2020

OBJECTIVES

Despite recommendations to increase the uptake of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, trends in CRC screening vary with sociodemographic status. We aimed to evaluate trends in CRC screening in the US population and subpopulations.

METHODS

A total of 1,082,924 participants aged 50 to 75 from five cycles (2012, 2014, 2016, 2018, and 2020) of the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System were involved. Multivariable logistic regression models were performed to evaluate linear trends in CRC screening utilization from 2012 to 2018. Rao-Scott chi-square tests were used to assess the differences in CRC screening utilization between 2018 and 2020.

RESULTS

The estimated percentage reporting up-to-date with CRC screening increased significantly (P for trend <0.001), from 62.8% (95% CI, 62.4%-63.2%) in 2012 to 66.7% (95% CI, 66.3%-67.2%) in 2018 and 70.4% (95% CI, 69.8%-71.0%) in 2020, in accordance with 2008 US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations. Trends followed similar patterns in most subgroups, although with different magnitudes in several subgroups, primarily those underweight showed a stable percentage over time (P for trend  =  0.170). In 2020, 72.4% of participants reported they were up to date with CRC screening, including the utilization of stool DNA tests and virtual colonoscopy. Colonoscopy was the most commonly used test in 2020 (64.5%), followed by FOBT (12.6%), stool DNA test (5.8%), sigmoidoscopy (3.8%), and virtual colonoscopy (2.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

In this nationally representative survey of the US population from 2012 through 2020, the percentage reporting up to date with CRC screening has increased, but not equally among all subgroups.

Is there a place for sigmoidoscopy in colorectal cancer screening? A systematic review and critical appraisal of cost-effectiveness models

INTRODUCTION

Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) is effective in reducing both incidence and mortality. Colonoscopy and stool tests are most frequently used for this purpose. Sigmoidoscopy is an alternative screening measure with a strong evidence base. Due to its distinct characteristics, it might be preferred by subgroups. The aim of this systematic review is to analyze the cost-effectiveness of sigmoidoscopy for CRC screening compared to other screening methods and to identify influencing parameters.

METHODS

A systematic literature search for the time frame 01/2010-01/2023 was conducted using the databases MEDLINE, Embase, EconLit, Web of Science, NHS EED, as well as the Cost-Effectiveness Registry. Full economic analyses examining sigmoidoscopy as a screening measure for the general population at average risk for CRC were included. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated. All included studies were critically assessed based on a questionnaire for modelling studies.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies are included in the review. Compared to no screening, sigmoidoscopy is a cost-effective screening strategy for CRC. When modelled as a single measure strategy, sigmoidoscopy is mostly dominated by colonoscopy or modern stool tests. When combined with annual stool testing, sigmoidoscopy in 5-year intervals is more effective and less costly than the respective strategies alone. The results of the studies are influenced by varying assumptions on adherence, costs, and test characteristics.

CONCLUSION

The combination of sigmoidoscopy and stool testing represents a cost-effective screening strategy that has not received much attention in current guidelines. Further research is needed that goes beyond a narrow focus on screening technology and models different, preference-based participation behavior in subgroups.

Screening for Colorectal Cancer in Asymptomatic Average-Risk Adults: A Guidance Statement From the American College of Physicians (Version 2)

DESCRIPTION

The purpose of this updated guidance statement is to guide clinicians on screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) in asymptomatic average-risk adults. The intended audience is all clinicians. The population is asymptomatic adults at average risk for CRC.

METHODS

This updated guidance statement was developed using recently published and critically appraised clinical guidelines from national guideline developers since the publication of the American College of Physicians' 2019 guidance statement, "Screening for Colorectal Cancer in Asymptomatic Average-Risk Adults." The authors searched for national guidelines from the United States and other countries published in English using PubMed and the Guidelines International Network library from 1 January 2018 to 24 April 2023. The authors also searched for updates of guidelines included in the first version of our guidance statement. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument was used to assess the quality of eligible guidelines. Two guidelines were selected for adoption and adaptation by raters on the basis of the highest average overall AGREE II quality scores. The evidence reviews and modeling studies for these 2 guidelines were also used to synthesize the evidence of diagnostic test accuracy, effectiveness, and harms of CRC screening interventions and to develop our guidance statements.

GUIDANCE STATEMENT 1

Clinicians should start screening for colorectal cancer in asymptomatic average-risk adults at age 50 years.

GUIDANCE STATEMENT 2

Clinicians should consider not screening asymptomatic average-risk adults between the ages of 45 to 49 years. Clinicians should discuss the uncertainty around benefits and harms of screening in this population.

GUIDANCE STATEMENT 3

Clinicians should stop screening for colorectal cancer in asymptomatic average-risk adults older than 75 years or in asymptomatic average-risk adults with a life expectancy of 10 years or less.

GUIDANCE STATEMENT 4A

Clinicians should select a screening test for colorectal cancer in consultation with their patient based on a discussion of benefits, harms, costs, availability, frequency, and patient values and preferences.

GUIDANCE STATEMENT 4B

Clinicians should select among a fecal immunochemical or high-sensitivity guaiac fecal occult blood test every 2 years, colonoscopy every 10 years, or flexible sigmoidoscopy every 10 years plus a fecal immunochemical test every 2 years as a screening test for colorectal cancer.

GUIDANCE STATEMENT 4C

Clinicians should not use stool DNA, computed tomography colonography, capsule endoscopy, urine, or serum screening tests for colorectal cancer.

Association between use of low-dose aspirin and detection of colorectal polyps and cancer in a screening setting

BACKGROUND

The possible protective effect of aspirin on risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) is still highly debated.

METHODS

We used data from Bowel Cancer Screening in Norway, a trial randomizing individuals from general population, aged 50-74 years, to flexible sigmoidoscopy or faecal immunochemical test (FIT), to study the association between aspirin use and detection of CRC and two CRC precursors: adenomas and advanced serrated lesions (ASL). Prescriptions of low-dose aspirin were obtained from Norwegian prescription database. Logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Among 64,889 screening participants (24,159 sigmoidoscopy, 40,730 FIT), 314 (0.5%) had CRC, 6,208 (9.6%) adenoma and 659 (1.0%) ASL. Overall and short-term use (<3 years) of low-dose aspirin, versus no use, were not associated with any colorectal lesion. Long-term use (≥3 years) was associated with lower detection of CRC (overall OR 0.66, 95%CI 0.46-0.93; sigmoidoscopy: 0.56, 0.33-0.97; FIT: 0.72, 0.45-1.15), adenomas in sigmoidoscopy arm (overall OR 0.95, 95%CI 0.87-1.03; sigmoidoscopy: 0.89, 0.80-0.99; FIT: 1.03, 0.89-1.18), but not ASLs. We did not observe significant differences in the effect of aspirin according to the location of colorectal lesions.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that long-term use of aspirin might have a protective effect against adenomas and colorectal cancer, but not ASLs.

Effect of flexible sigmoidoscopy-based screening on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to estimate the effect of flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS)-based screening on colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality by conducting an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library searched for RCTs from database inception to December 2022. The methodological quality of the RCTs was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool. RevMan 5.4 was used for this meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Four RCTs involving 457, 871 patients were included. This meta-analysis revealed that FS-based screening was associated with a 20% relative risk reduction in CRC incidence [RR = 0.80; 95% CI (0.75, 0.86); P < 0.00001], and a 24% reduction in CRC mortality [RR = 0.76; 95% CI (0.70, 0.82); P < 0.00001]. In addition, this meta-analysis revealed that FS-based screening reduced the incidence[RR = 0.68; 95% CI (0.60, 0.77); P < 0.00001] and mortality[RR = 0.64; 95% CI (0.49, 0.83); P = 0.0007] of distal CRC, but had no significant effect on proximal colon cancer.

CONCLUSION

FS-based screening appeared to be effective in reducing distal CRC incidence and mortality in patients at average risk compared to no intervention, but had no significant effect on proximal colon cancer.

Patient-reported outcome measures show FIT as an acceptable investigation to rule out colorectal cancer in the two-week wait cohort

INTRODUCTION

Use of faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) for symptomatic patients is increasing. FIT is recommended as a triage tool from primary care to the two-week wait (TWW) suspected cancer pathway, but there is still little known about patient attitudes.

AIM

The aim of this study was to explore patient opinions of FIT and how it might be applied in the TWW pathway.

METHODS

A telephone survey was conducted for patients from the TWW pathway who had undergone both conventional colonic investigation and FIT. Five questions explored expectations, attitudes towards results and experience of the investigations using a Likert scale 1-5. Differences in opinion were compared using median and mode scores and visualised using bar charts.

RESULTS

One hundred and nine TWW patients agreed to answer the five questions. All had taken a stool sample for FIT, 50 underwent colonoscopy, 51 had a CT colonography and 8 underwent flexible sigmoidoscopy. Most patients (85%) scored 5 (completely satisfied) with these conventional colonic investigation methods they underwent for ruling out colorectal cancer (median 5). However, 30% of patients scored 5 (completely satisfied) if using a negative FIT to not require additional colonic investigation. The median score to perform FIT was 5 (very easy) compared with a median of 4 (easy) to undergo the other colonic investigations.

CONCLUSIONS

Symptomatic patients can perform FIT with little difficulty, and often would have been happy to avoid conventional colonic investigations with a negative result. However, shared decision-making should be employed to identify those who would be dissatisfied with relying on FIT for further investigation decisions.

Sigmoid volvulus: Evaluating identification strategies and contemporary multicenter outcomes

BACKGROUND

There is limited epidemiologic data on sigmoid volvulus (SV) from non-endemic regions. Therefore, we performed a multicenter study to report contemporary outcomes and appraise literature-based methods that pair diagnostic and procedural codes to identify SV.

METHOD

Using an automated search for patients with 'volvulus' in our system from 2011 to 2021, we reviewed electronic charts to clarify the diagnosis, automatically replicate three strategies to identify SV, and retrieved 6-month outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 895 patients, 109 had SV. Literature-based strategies poorly identified SV. At the index admission, patients underwent endoscopic reduction alone (33%), emergent (16.5%), semi-elective (34%), or elective (16.5%) surgery. Endoscopic reduction alone had high recurrence rates and delayed surgery was associated with worse outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Literature-based strategies to identify SV suffer from misclassification bias which affects patient counseling. In this large series, one-third of patients do not undergo during their index admission despite improved outcomes with earlier surgery.

15-Year Benefits of Sigmoidoscopy Screening on Colorectal Cancer Incidence and Mortality : A Pooled Analysis of Randomized Trials

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) by sex and age in randomized trials is uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the 15-year effect of sigmoidoscopy screening on CRC incidence and mortality.

DESIGN

Pooled analysis of 4 large-scale randomized trials of sigmoidoscopy screening.

SETTING

Norway, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Italy.

PARTICIPANTS

Women and men aged 55 to 64 years at enrollment.

INTERVENTION

Sigmoidoscopy screening.

MEASUREMENTS

Primary end points were cumulative incidence rate ratio (IRR) and mortality rate ratio (MRR) and rate differences after 15 years of follow-up comparing screening versus usual care in intention-to-treat analyses. Stratified analyses were done by sex, cancer site, and age at screening.

RESULTS

Analyses comprised 274 952 persons (50.7% women), 137 493 in the screening and 137 459 in the usual care group. Screening attendance was 58% to 84%. After 15 years, the rate difference for CRC incidence was 0.51 cases (95% CI, 0.40 to 0.63 cases) per 100 persons and the IRR was 0.79 (CI, 0.75 to 0.83). The rate difference for CRC mortality was 0.13 deaths (CI, 0.07 to 0.19 deaths) per 100 persons, and the MRR was 0.80 (CI, 0.72 to 0.88). Women had less benefit from screening than men for CRC incidence (IRR for women, 0.84 [CI, 0.77 to 0.91]; IRR for men, 0.75 [CI, 0.70 to 0.81]; P = 0.032 for difference) and mortality (MRR for women, 0.91 [CI, 0.77 to 1.17]; MRR for men, 0.73 [CI, 0.64 to 0.83]; P = 0.025 for difference). There was no statistically significant difference in screening effect between persons aged 55 to 59 years and those aged 60 to 64 years.

LIMITATION

Data from the U.K. trial were less granular because of privacy regulations.

CONCLUSION

This pooled analysis of all large randomized trials of sigmoidoscopy screening demonstrates a significant and sustained effect of sigmoidoscopy on CRC incidence and mortality for 15 years.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Health Fund of South-East Norway.

Screening for Colorectal Cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second-leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Screening reduces CRC incidence and mortality. 2021 US Preventive Service Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines and available evidence support routine screening from ages 45 to 75, and individualized consideration of screening ages 76 to 85. USPSTF guidelines recommend annual guaiac fecal occult blood testing, annual fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), annual to every 3-year multitarget stool DNA-FIT, every 5-year sigmoidoscopy, every 10-year sigmoidoscopy with annual FIT, every 5-year computed tomographic colonography, and every 10-year colonoscopy as options for screening. The "best test is the one that gets done."

Gastrointestinal Conditions: Colorectal Cancer Screening and Prevention

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third leading cause of cancer death in the United States. CRC screening reduces CRC deaths. Although the median age at diagnosis is 67 years, the incidence in younger individuals has been increasing, and younger patients are more likely to present with more advanced disease. In the past, guidelines recommended initiating screening at age 50 years. However, guidelines from multiple organizations now recommend initiating screening at age 45 years. Screening should start even earlier in individuals with genetic risks for CRC. Recommendations about when to discontinue screening vary, but all guidelines recommend continuing at least to age 75 years. After age 75 years, screening should be based on patients' life expectancy, medical status, and values and goals. Colonoscopy is considered the gold standard screening test, but many patients decline colonoscopy because of its invasive nature and associated bowel preparation. Other tests recommended in guidelines include guaiac-based fecal occult blood test, fecal immunochemical and DNA tests, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and computed tomography colonography. Recommended screening intervals vary for each of these tests. Two newer screening tests, not yet included in guidelines, are Epi proColon (methylated septin DNA) assay (which detects methylation of the SEPT9 gene associated with CRC) and capsule colonography. All patients also should be informed about lifestyle and diet-related interventions that can decrease CRC risk.

Colorectal cancer screening by fecal immunochemical test or colonoscopy in France: how many people are actually covered? Focus on the Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur region

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with fecal immunochemical test (FIT) remains low in France, particularly in the Provence-Alpes-Côte-d'Azur (PACA) region. The aim of this study was to compare insured persons (50-74 years) who had FIT and/or colonoscopy in PACA with the general French population.

METHODS

FIT and colonoscopy rates were calculated according to SP-France and National Health Data System data.

RESULTS

The rate of FIT in 2016-2017 was lower in PACA than in France (25.6 vs. 29.1%, P < 0.001). Conversely, in 2013-2017, the rate of colonoscopy in the past 5 years was higher in PACA than in France (23.1 vs. 20.1%, P < 0.001). Total rate for FIT within 2 years and/or colonoscopy within 5 years was 46.0% in PACA vs. 46.5% in France (P < 0.001). Overuse was higher for diagnostic (1.21) than therapeutic colonoscopies (1.05). Therapeutic colonoscopy occurred more with FIT than without (47.88 vs. 38.7%, P < 0.001). According to USA criteria, persons with FIT within 2 years and/or sigmoidoscopy and/or colonoscopy within 10 years was 59.4% in PACA vs. 54.7% in France (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Low participation in FIT in France must be improved to increase the rate of therapeutic colonoscopies and reduce the incidence of CRC. The higher colonoscopy rate in PACA could explain the lower CRC mortality. Efforts should be focused on the more than 40% of French insured who are not screened by either FIT or colonoscopy.

Do presenting symptoms, use of pre-diagnostic endoscopy and risk of emergency cancer diagnosis vary by comorbidity burden and type in patients with colorectal cancer?

BACKGROUND

Cancer patients often have pre-existing comorbidities, which can influence timeliness of cancer diagnosis. We examined symptoms, investigations and emergency presentation (EP) risk among colorectal cancer (CRC) patients by comorbidity status.

METHODS

Using linked cancer registration, primary care and hospital records of 4836 CRC patients (2011-2015), and multivariate quantile and logistic regression, we examined variations in specialist investigations, diagnostic intervals and EP risk.

RESULTS

Among colon cancer patients, 46% had at least one pre-existing hospital-recorded comorbidity, most frequently cardiovascular disease (CVD, 18%). Comorbid versus non-comorbid cancer patients more frequently had records of anaemia (43% vs 38%), less frequently rectal bleeding/change in bowel habit (20% vs 27%), and longer intervals from symptom-to-first relevant test (median 136 vs 74 days). Comorbid patients were less likely investigated with colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy, independently of symptoms (adjusted OR = 0.7[0.6, 0.9] for Charlson comorbidity score 1-2 and OR = 0.5 [0.4-0.7] for score 3+ versus 0. EP risk increased with comorbidity score 0, 1, 2, 3+: 23%, 35%, 33%, 47%; adjusted OR = 1.8 [1.4, 2.2]; 1.7 [1.3, 2.3]; 3.0 [2.3, 4.0]) and for patients with CVD (adjusted OR = 2.0 [1.5, 2.5]).

CONCLUSIONS

Comorbid individuals with as-yet-undiagnosed CRC often present with general rather than localising symptoms and are less likely promptly investigated with colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy. Comorbidity is a risk factor for diagnostic delay and has potential, additionally to symptoms, as risk-stratifier for prioritising patients needing prompt assessment to reduce EP.

Higher Adenoma Detection Rates at Screening Associated With Lower Long-Term Colorectal Cancer Incidence and Mortality

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Detection and removal of adenomas reduces colorectal cancer (CRC) risk. The impact of adenoma detection rates (ADRs) on long-term CRC incidence and mortality is unknown. We investigated this using data from the UK Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening Trial.

METHODS

Of 167,882 UK Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening Trial participants, 40,085 were in the intervention arm and underwent flexible sigmoidoscopy screening at 13 trial centers. The median follow-up time was 17 years. At each center, 1 endoscopist performed most flexible sigmoidoscopies. Multivariable logistic regression was used to classify centers into high-, intermediate-, and low-detector groups based on their main endoscopist's ADR. We calculated the incidence and mortality of distal and all-site CRC, and estimated hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs using Cox regression.

RESULTS

Five, 4, and 4 centers, respectively, were classified into the high-detector, intermediate-detector, and low-detector groups. The average ADRs in each respective group were 15%, 12%, and 9%. Distal CRC incidence and mortality were reduced among those screened compared with controls in all groups, and effects of screening varied significantly by detector ranking, with larger reductions in incidence and mortality seen in the high-detector group (incidence: HR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.27-0.42; mortality: HR, 0.22, 95% CI, 0.13-0.37) than in the low-detector group (incidence: HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.44-0.68; mortality: HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.34-0.86). Similar results were observed for all-site CRC, with larger effects seen in the high-detector (incidence: HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.50-0.67; mortality: HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.39-0.69) than in the low-detector group (incidence: HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.61-0.85; mortality: HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.51-0.92), although the heterogeneity was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher ADRs at screening provide greater long-term protection against CRC incidence and mortality. Isrctn.org, number: ISRCTN28352761.

Additional offer of sigmoidoscopy in colorectal cancer screening in Germany: rationale and protocol of the decision-analytic modelling approach in the SIGMO study

INTRODUCTION

In Germany, statutory insured persons are entitled to a stool test (faecal immunochemical test (FIT)) or colonoscopy for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, depending on age and sex, yet participation rates are rather low. Sigmoidoscopy is a currently not available screening measure that has a strong evidence base for incidence and mortality reduction. Due to its distinct characteristics, it might be preferred by some, who now reject colonoscopy. The objective of this study is to estimate the economic consequences of the additional offer of sigmoidoscopy for CRC screening in Germany compared with the present screening practice while considering the preferences of the general population.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A decision-analytic modelling approach will be developed that compares the present CRC screening programme in Germany (FIT, colonoscopy) with a programme extended by sigmoidoscopy from a societal perspective. A decision tree and Markov model will be combined to assess both short-term and long-term effects, such as CRC and adenoma detection rates, the number of CRC cases, CRC mortality as well as complications. The incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year gained for each alternative will be calculated. The model will incorporate the general population's preferences based on a discrete choice experiment. Further, input parameters will be taken from the literature, the German cancer registry and health insurance claims data.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the Ethics Committee of Hannover Medical School (ID: 8671_BO_K_2019). The findings of the study will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and/or international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

DRKS00019010.

Effects of the Colorectal Cancer Control Program

Although colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is highly effective, screening rates lag far below recommended levels, particularly for low-income people. The Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) funded $100 million in competitively awarded grants to 25 states from 2009-2015 to increase CRC screening rates among low-income, uninsured populations, in part by directly providing and paying for screening services. Using data from the 2001-2015 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) and a difference-in-differences strategy, we find no effects of CRCCP on the use of relatively cheap fecal occult blood tests (FOBT). We do, however, find that the CRCCP significantly increased the likelihood that uninsured 50-64-year-olds report ever having a relatively expensive endoscopic CRC screening (sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy) by 2.9 percentage points, or 10.7%. These effects are larger for women, minorities, and individuals who did not undertake other types of preventive care. We do not find that the CRCCP led to significant changes in CRC cancer detection. Our results indicate that the CRCCP was effective at increasing CRC screening rates among the most vulnerable.

Benign Colonic Strictures

CASE SUMMARY

A 46-year-old man with no significant medical or surgical history presented to the emergency department with a 1-week history of worsening constipation, abdominal distension, nausea, and nonbloody, nonbilious emesis. Workup included a CT scan that was notable for a 5.3 × 3.9 cm "apple core-type" mass located within the sigmoid colon with proximal large-bowel dilation. Carcinoembryonic antigen was 1.4. No metastatic disease was seen on chest, abdominal, or pelvic CT scans. Flexible sigmoidoscopy identified a sigmoid colon mass 30 cm from the anal verge with near complete obstruction. Biopsies of the mass did not show evidence of dysplasia or malignancy. The Gastroenterology service declined to place a stent without a malignancy diagnosis. The patient subsequently underwent exploratory laparotomy, sigmoid colectomy, and end colostomy. Recovery was uneventful. Final pathology showed diverticulitis with abscess formation and no evidence of malignancy. A completion colonoscopy was unremarkable, and the patient underwent colostomy reversal 3 months later.

Intestinal Ultrasound to Assess Disease Activity in Ulcerative Colitis: Development of a novel UC-Ultrasound Index

INTRODUCTION

Intestinal ultrasound [IUS] is useful to assess inflammation in ulcerative colitis [UC] patients. We aimed to develop an ultrasonographic activity index using endoscopy as the reference standard.

METHODS

Patients were included consecutively. IUS was performed within 3 weeks from endoscopy. IUS parameters and endoscopy were compared for each colonic segment [except the rectum]. The best parameters were used to construct a UC-IUS index, which was correlated with endoscopic disease activity using the Spearman's rank test.

RESULTS

In 60 patients, 207 colonic segments were evaluated endoscopically. Bowel wall thickness [BWT] > 2.1 mm was optimal to discriminate between Mayo 0 and Mayo 1-3 (sensitivity 82.6%; specificity 93.0%; area under the curve [AUC] 0.910), a cut-off of 3.2 mm was optimal to discriminate between Mayo 0-1 and Mayo 2-3 [sensitivity 89.1%; specificity 92.3%; AUC 0.946] and BWT > 3.9 mm was optimal for detection of Mayo 3 [sensitivity 80.6%; specificity 84.1%; AUC 0.909]. The presence of colour Doppler signal [CDS] predicted active disease, stretches of CDS were associated with Mayo 2-3, lack of haustrations predicted active disease and fat wrapping was associated with severe disease. Inter- and intra-rater intraclass correlation for BWT was substantial. Inter-rater agreement for CDS was substantial and ranged from slight to substantial for haustrations. Intra-rater agreement for CDS was substantial and ranged from moderate to almost perfect for haustrations. The index showed strong correlation with endoscopic disease activity [Mayo: ρ 0.830; p < 0.001, UCEIS: ρ 0.759; p < 0.001].

CONCLUSION

We developed an UC-IUS index which showed strong correlation with endoscopic disease activity using internal validation. It is currently being validated in prospective studies.

Colorectal Cancer Screening After Changes in US Preventive Services Task Force Guidelines With Increased Screening Options

INTRODUCTION

In 2016, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) added multitarget stool DNA and computed tomography colonography (CTC) as accepted colorectal cancer screening modalities to the already recommended tests: fecal immunochemical test (FIT), sigmoidoscopy, and colonoscopy. The aim of our study was to determine trends in screening after the USPSTF update, with the effect of additional tests on the use of existing colorectal cancer screening modalities and overall screening rates.

METHODS

We prospectively compared monthly colorectal cancer overall screening rates and the mean total numbers of patients screened by multitarget stool DNA, colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, CTC, and FIT 6 months prior to the new USPSTF guidelines until 30 months after.

RESULTS

At completion of the study, 72,202 patients were eligible for screening. The overall rate of eligible patients screened for colorectal cancer did not change (80.9% vs 81.3%; P = 0.287). There was a significant increase in the percent of patients screened with multitarget stool DNA (1.6% to 15.6%; P = .001) and a significant decrease in the percent of patients screened using CTC (3.8 % to 1.5%; P = .004), FIT (9.3% to 4.9%; P = .003), and sigmoidoscopy (2.4% to 1.5%, P = .024). There was a nonsignificant decrease in the percent use of screening colonoscopy, from 82.9 % to 76.5% (P = .313).

CONCLUSION

While the overall colorectal cancer screening rate did not increase after the USPSTF update with additional recommended screening tests, practice patterns did change with a shift in the type of screening test used.

Screening for Colorectal Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Colorectal cancer is the third leading cause of cancer death for both men and women, with an estimated 52 980 persons in the US projected to die of colorectal cancer in 2021. Colorectal cancer is most frequently diagnosed among persons aged 65 to 74 years. It is estimated that 10.5% of new colorectal cancer cases occur in persons younger than 50 years. Incidence of colorectal cancer (specifically adenocarcinoma) in adults aged 40 to 49 years has increased by almost 15% from 2000-2002 to 2014-2016. In 2016, 26% of eligible adults in the US had never been screened for colorectal cancer and in 2018, 31% were not up to date with screening.

OBJECTIVE

To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for colorectal cancer in adults 40 years or older. The review also examined whether these findings varied by age, sex, or race/ethnicity. In addition, as in 2016, the USPSTF commissioned a report from the Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network Colorectal Cancer Working Group to provide information from comparative modeling on how estimated life-years gained, colorectal cancer cases averted, and colorectal cancer deaths averted vary by different starting and stopping ages for various screening strategies.

POPULATION

Asymptomatic adults 45 years or older at average risk of colorectal cancer (ie, no prior diagnosis of colorectal cancer, adenomatous polyps, or inflammatory bowel disease; no personal diagnosis or family history of known genetic disorders that predispose them to a high lifetime risk of colorectal cancer [such as Lynch syndrome or familial adenomatous polyposis]).

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes with high certainty that screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 50 to 75 years has substantial net benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 45 to 49 years has moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 76 to 85 years who have been previously screened has small net benefit. Adults who have never been screened for colorectal cancer are more likely to benefit.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF recommends screening for colorectal cancer in all adults aged 50 to 75 years. (A recommendation) The USPSTF recommends screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 45 to 49 years. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends that clinicians selectively offer screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 76 to 85 years. Evidence indicates that the net benefit of screening all persons in this age group is small. In determining whether this service is appropriate in individual cases, patients and clinicians should consider the patient's overall health, prior screening history, and preferences. (C recommendation).

Screening for Colorectal Cancer: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in the US.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the effectiveness, test accuracy, and harms of screening for CRC to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for relevant studies published from January 1, 2015, to December 4, 2019; surveillance through March 26, 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

English-language studies conducted in asymptomatic populations at general risk of CRC.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers independently appraised the articles and extracted relevant study data from fair- or good-quality studies. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, test accuracy in detecting cancers or adenomas, and serious adverse events.

RESULTS

The review included 33 studies (n = 10 776 276) on the effectiveness of screening, 59 (n = 3 491 045) on the test performance of screening tests, and 131 (n = 26 987 366) on the harms of screening. In randomized clinical trials (4 trials, n = 458 002), intention to screen with 1- or 2-time flexible sigmoidoscopy vs no screening was associated with a decrease in CRC-specific mortality (incidence rate ratio, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.68-0.80]). Annual or biennial guaiac fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) vs no screening (5 trials, n = 419 966) was associated with a reduction of CRC-specific mortality after 2 to 9 rounds of screening (relative risk at 19.5 years, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.84-0.98]; relative risk at 30 years, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.65-0.93]). In observational studies, receipt of screening colonoscopy (2 studies, n = 436 927) or fecal immunochemical test (FIT) (1 study, n = 5.4 million) vs no screening was associated with lower risk of CRC incidence or mortality. Nine studies (n = 6497) evaluated the test accuracy of screening computed tomography (CT) colonography, 4 of which also reported the test accuracy of colonoscopy; pooled sensitivity to detect adenomas 6 mm or larger was similar between CT colonography with bowel prep (0.86) and colonoscopy (0.89). In pooled values, commonly evaluated FITs (14 studies, n = 45 403) (sensitivity, 0.74; specificity, 0.94) and stool DNA with FIT (4 studies, n = 12 424) (sensitivity, 0.93; specificity, 0.85) performed better than high-sensitivity gFOBT (2 studies, n = 3503) (sensitivity, 0.50-0.75; specificity, 0.96-0.98) to detect cancers. Serious harms of screening colonoscopy included perforations (3.1/10 000 procedures) and major bleeding (14.6/10 000 procedures). CT colonography may have harms resulting from low-dose ionizing radiation. It is unclear if detection of extracolonic findings on CT colonography is a net benefit or harm.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

There are several options to screen for colorectal cancer, each with a different level of evidence demonstrating its ability to reduce cancer mortality, its ability to detect cancer or precursor lesions, and its risk of harms.

Colorectal Cancer Screening: An Updated Modeling Study for the US Preventive Services Task Force

Importance

The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) is updating its 2016 colorectal cancer screening recommendations.

Objective

To provide updated model-based estimates of the benefits, burden, and harms of colorectal cancer screening strategies and to identify strategies that may provide an efficient balance of life-years gained (LYG) from screening and colonoscopy burden to inform the USPSTF.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Comparative modeling study using 3 microsimulation models of colorectal cancer screening in a hypothetical cohort of 40-year-old US individuals at average risk of colorectal cancer.

Exposures

Screening from ages 45, 50, or 55 years to ages 70, 75, 80, or 85 years with fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), multitarget stool DNA testing, flexible sigmoidoscopy alone or with FIT, computed tomography colonography, or colonoscopy. All persons with an abnormal noncolonoscopy screening test result were assumed to undergo follow-up colonoscopy. Screening intervals varied by test. Full adherence with all procedures was assumed.

Main Outcome and Measures

Estimated LYG relative to no screening (benefit), lifetime number of colonoscopies (burden), number of complications from screening (harms), and balance of incremental burden and benefit (efficiency ratios). Efficient strategies were those estimated to require fewer additional colonoscopies per additional LYG relative to other strategies.

Results

Estimated LYG from screening strategies ranged from 171 to 381 per 1000 40-year-olds. Lifetime colonoscopy burden ranged from 624 to 6817 per 1000 individuals, and screening complications ranged from 5 to 22 per 1000 individuals. Among the 49 strategies that were efficient options with all 3 models, 41 specified screening beginning at age 45. No single age to end screening was predominant among the efficient strategies, although the additional LYG from continuing screening after age 75 were generally small. With the exception of a 5-year interval for computed tomography colonography, no screening interval predominated among the efficient strategies for each modality. Among the strategies highlighted in the 2016 USPSTF recommendation, lowering the age to begin screening from 50 to 45 years was estimated to result in 22 to 27 additional LYG, 161 to 784 additional colonoscopies, and 0.1 to 2 additional complications per 1000 persons (ranges are across screening strategies, based on mean estimates across models). Assuming full adherence, screening outcomes and efficient strategies were similar by sex and race and across 3 scenarios for population risk of colorectal cancer.

Conclusions and Relevance

This microsimulation modeling analysis suggests that screening for colorectal cancer with stool tests, endoscopic tests, or computed tomography colonography starting at age 45 years provides an efficient balance of colonoscopy burden and life-years gained.

Ischaemic colitis diagnosed by sigmoidoscopy during pregnancy

A 21-year-old woman visited out hospital for lower abdominal pain and bloody diarrhoea at 19 weeks of pregnancy. Endoscopic findings revealed longitudinal ulcerations with hyperaemia and oedema in the sigmoid colon. These findings and clinical presentation confirmed the diagnosis of ischaemic colitis. Conservative treatment, including fasting and intravenous hydration, was administered, and the patient made a good recovery. After discharge, there was no recurrence during pregnancy and postpartum period. It is important to make early diagnosis and treatment, and multidisciplinary teamwork between obstetricians, gastroenterologist and endoscopist is required.

Estimation of overdiagnosis in colorectal cancer screening with sigmoidoscopy and faecal occult blood testing: comparison of simulation models

OBJECTIVE

To estimate overdiagnosis of colorectal cancer (CRC) for screening with sigmoidoscopy and faecal occult blood testing (FOBT).

DESIGN

Simulation study using data from randomised trials.

SETTING

Primary screening, UK, Norway PARTICIPANTS: 152 850 individuals from the Nottingham trial and 98 678 individuals from the Norwegian Colorectal Cancer Prevention (NORCCAP) trial.

INTERVENTION

CRC screening.

OUTCOME MEASURE

We estimated overdiagnosis using long-term data from two randomised trials: the Nottingham trial comparing FOBT screening every other year to no-screening, and the NORCCAP trial comparing once-only sigmoidoscopy screening to no-screening. To estimate the natural growth of adenomas to CRC, we used the following microsimulation models: (i) the Microsimulation Screening Analysis; (ii) the CRC Simulated Population model for Incidence and Natural history; (iii) the Simulation Model of Colorectal Cancer; (iv) a model derived by the German Cancer Research Center. We defined overdiagnosed cancers as the difference between the observed number of CRCs in the no-screening arm and the expected number of cancers in screening arm (sum of observed and prevented by adenoma removal). The amount of overdiagnosis is defined as the number of overdiagnosed cancers over the number of cancers observed in the no-screening arm.

RESULTS

Overdiagnosis estimates were highly dependent on model assumptions. For FOBT screening with 2354 cancers observed in control arm, four out of five models predicted overdiagnosis, range 2.0% (2400 cancers expected in screening) to 7.6% (2533 cancers expected in screening). For sigmoidoscopy screening with 452 cancers observed in control arm, all models predicted overdiagnosis, range 25.2% (566 cancers expected in screening) to 128.1% (1031 cancers expected in screening).

CONCLUSIONS

The amount of overdiagnosis estimated based on the microsimulation models varied substantially. Microsimulation models may not give reliable estimates of the preventive effect of adenoma removal, and should be used with caution to inform guidelines.

Pain Severity Correlates With Biopsy-Mediated Colonic Afferent Activation But Not Psychological Scores in Patients With IBS-D

INTRODUCTION

Despite heterogeneity, an increased prevalence of psychological comorbidity and an altered pronociceptive gut microenvironment have repeatedly emerged as causative pathophysiology in patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Our aim was to study these phenomena by comparing gut-related symptoms, psychological scores, and biopsy samples generated from a detailed diarrhea-predominant IBS patient (IBS-D) cohort before their entry into a previously reported clinical trial.

METHODS

Data were generated from 42 patients with IBS-D who completed a daily 2-week bowel symptom diary, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression score, and the Patient Health Questionnaire-12 Somatic Symptom score and underwent unprepared flexible sigmoidoscopy. Sigmoid mucosal biopsies were separately evaluated using immunohistochemistry and culture supernatants to determine cellularity, mediator levels, and ability to stimulate colonic afferent activity.

RESULTS

Pain severity scores significantly correlated with the daily duration of pain (r = 0.67, P < 0.00001), urgency (r = 0.57, P < 0.0005), and bloating (r = 0.39, P < 0.05), but not with psychological symptom scores for anxiety, depression, or somatization. Furthermore, pain severity scores from individual patients with IBS-D were significantly correlated (r = 0.40, P < 0.008) with stimulation of colonic afferent activation mediated by their biopsy supernatant, but not with biopsy cell counts nor measured mediator levels.

DISCUSSION

Peripheral pronociceptive changes in the bowel seem more important than psychological factors in determining pain severity within a tightly phenotyped cohort of patients with IBS-D. No individual mediator was identified as the cause of this pronociceptive change, suggesting that nerve targeting therapeutic approaches may be more successful than mediator-driven approaches for the treatment of pain in IBS-D.

[Low diagnostic accuracy of rigid sigmoidoscopy in the investigation of rectal cancer]

We performed a retrospective observational study to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of rigid sigmoidoscopy (RS) in patients with rectal cancer (n=279). Fifty-six percent of the patients had performed an RS within three months before diagnosis and mostly by a primary care provider (93%). In 21% of the patients the physician determined that the examination was normal, in 50% a rectal tumor was suspected and in 29% of cases an unspecific pathology (e.g. luminal blood, mucosal abnormalities) was reported. A normal finding on RS was associated with a longer time between the first appointment and subsequent diagnosis (multivariate hazard ratio (HR) 0.50; 95th percentile CI 0.35-0.71) whereas a history of rectal bleeding (multivariate HR 1.49; 95th percentile CI 1.01-2.20) and adherence to new national guidelines (multivariate HR 1.46; 95th percentile CI 1.08-1.99) was associated with a shorter time to diagnosis. We conclude that RS only had modest diagnostic accuracy in the diagnosis of rectal cancer, at least in this mainly primary care-based setting.

Screening colonoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy for reduction of colorectal cancer incidence: A case-control study

BACKGROUND

Flexible sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy are both recommended colorectal cancer screening options, but their relative effectiveness needs clarification. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of colonoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy for reduction of colorectal cancer incidence.

METHODS

We conducted a case-control study within the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database. Cases were subjects age 70-85 years in the SEER-Medicare database diagnosed with CRC during 2004-2013. Up to 3 controls were matched to each case by birth year, sex, race, and SEER region. Receipt of screening colonoscopy or flexible sigmoidoscopy was ascertained from Medicare claims. Conditional logistic regression models were developed to estimate the odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for a history of screening in cases vs. controls. We conducted secondary analyses by sex, race, endoscopist characteristics, and with varying timing and duration of the look-back period.

RESULTS

Receipt of screening colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy was associated with a 59% (OR 0.41, 95%CI 0.39, 0.43) and 22% reduction (OR 0.78, 95%CI 0.67, 0.92) in colorectal cancer incidence, respectively. Colonoscopy was associated with greater reduction in the distal colorectal cancer incidence (OR 0.22, 95%CI 0.20, 0.24) than proximal colorectal cancer incidence (OR 0.62, 95%CI 0.59, 0.66). Sigmoidoscopy was associated with a 52% reduction in distal colorectal cancer incidence (OR 0.48, 95%CI 0.37, 0.63), but with no reduction in proximal colorectal cancer incidence. These associations were stronger in men than in women. No differences by race or endoscopist characteristics were observed.

CONCLUSION

Both screening colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy were associated with reductions in overall colorectal cancer incidence, with a greater magnitude of reduction observed with colonoscopy.

Effect of once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy screening on the outcomes of subsequent faecal occult blood test screening

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the outcomes of biennial guaiac faecal occult blood test (gFOBT) screening after once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening.

METHODS

Between 1994 and 1999, as part of the UK FS Screening Trial (UKFSST), adults aged 55-64 were randomly allocated to an intervention group (offered FS screening) or a control group (not contacted). From 2006, a subset of UKFSST participants (20,895/44,041 intervention group; 41,497/87,149 control group) were invited to biennial gFOBT screening by the English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme. We analysed gFOBT uptake, test positivity, yield of colorectal cancer (CRC), and positive predictive value (PPV) for CRC, advanced adenomas (AAs), and advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACN: AA/CRC).

RESULTS

Uptake of gFOBT at first invitation was 1.9% lower (65.7% vs. 67.6%, p < 0.01) among intervention versus control group participants. Positivity was 0.4% lower (2.0% vs. 2.4%, p < 0.01) and CRC yield was 0.08% lower (0.19% vs. 0.27%, p = 0.14). PPVs were also lower in the intervention versus control group, at 10.3% vs. 12.3% ( p = 0.44) for CRC, 22.7% vs. 31.4% ( p < 0.01) for AA, and 33.0% vs. 43.7% ( p < 0.01) for ACN. Among those who refused FS ( n = 5532), gFOBT uptake at first invitation was 47.7%, CRC yield was 0.25%, and PPV for ACN was 46.2%. Among FS attenders ( n = 15,363), uptake was 72.2%, CRC yield was 0.18%, and PPV for ACN was 27.9%.

CONCLUSIONS

Uptake, positivity and PPV of gFOBT screening were reduced following prior offer of FS screening. However, a quarter of FS screened participants receiving a diagnostic examination after positive gFOBT were diagnosed with ACN.

Crohn’s-like acute severe colitis associated with Hermansky-Pudlak syndrome: A case report

BACKGROUND

Hermansky-Pudlak syndrome (HPS) is a rare autosomal recessive disorder characterized by oculocutaneous albinism, platelet storage pool deficiency and systemic complications associated with ceroid deposition in the reticuloendothelial system. HPS types 1 and 4 are associated with Crohn’s disease (CD)-like gastrointestinal disorders, such as granulomatous enterocolitis or perianal disease. Cases of colitis can be particularly severe and, before the use of anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα) therapy had become common, were reported as showing poor responsiveness to medical treatment.

CASE SUMMARY

We present the case of a 51-year-old albino woman who presented with acute severe colitis that led to the diagnosis of HPS. Histologic findings of biopsy samples showed chronic inflammation with deep ulcerations, and granulomas without caseous necrosis. Molecular genetic analysis confirmed HPS type 1, with a homozygous 27 base-pair deletion in exon 20 of the HPS1 gene. Once the patient’s bleeding diathesis was corrected by platelet transfusion, the granulomatous colitis responded dramatically to a medical treatment regimen that included corticosteroids, azathioprine and infliximab; this regimen is similar to that used in CD treatment. Although it remains unclear if the granulomatous enterocolitis in HPS is due to ceroid deposition or reflects the co-existence of CD and HPS, the fact that this case of HPS-related granulomatous colitis responded to the same therapeutic approach used in CD suggests that this type of colitis may result from HPS patients’ genetic susceptibility to CD.

CONCLUSION

We report a case of severe colitis that led to the diagnosis of HPS, which was responsive to azathioprine and infliximab.

Colorectal Cancer Screening: Role of Family Physicians

The purpose of this study was to look at the differences in colorectal cancer screening awareness between two rural communities in Texas. In Clifton, patients have access to colonoscopies in their local hospital, while in Haskell, patients have to travel to a tertiary center. A 24-question survey pertaining to colon cancer from the Behavior Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) was given to patients at primary care clinics in Clifton and Haskell. To take the survey, participants had to have been patients for at least 1 year in either Clifton or Haskell clinic and be at least age 50 years or older. A total of 168 surveys were collected, 92 at Clifton and 76 at Haskell. A higher odds ratio (OR=3.61; CI = [1.11, 11.69]) was seen in Clifton compared with Haskell for patient colon cancer screening awareness. Also, a higher odds ratio (OR=2.50; CI = [1.13, 5.54]) was found of knowing at what age a person should be screened for colon cancer in Clifton compared with Haskell. A higher odds ratio (OR=3.61; CI = [1.42, 9.20]) was seen in Clifton compared with Haskell for patients ever having a colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy. This study supports the idea that providing colorectal cancer screening and screening procedures locally in the rural community by family medicine physicians helps to contribute to an improved awareness of colorectal cancer screening guidelines as opposed to communities that do not offer screening locally.

flexible sigmoidoscopy for suspected colorectal cancer based on presenting symptoms and signs: a multicentre cohort study

BACKGROUND

Patients with suspected colorectal cancer (CRC) usually undergo colonoscopy. Flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) may be preferred if proximal cancer risk is low. We investigated which patients could undergo FS alone.

METHODS

Cohort study of 7375 patients (≥55 years) referred with suspected CRC to 21 English hospitals (2004-2007), followed using hospital records and cancer registries. We calculated yields and number of needed whole-colon examinations (NNE) to diagnose one cancer by symptoms/signs and subsite. We considered narrow (haemoglobin <11 g/dL men; <10 g/dL women) and broad (<13 g/dL men; <12 g/dL women) anaemia definitions and iron-deficiency anaemia (IDA).

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty-seven proximal and 429 distal CRCs were diagnosed. A broad anaemia definition identified 80% of proximal cancers; a narrow definition with IDA identified 39%. In patients with broad definition anaemia and/or abdominal mass, proximal cancer yield and NNE were 4.8% (97/2022) and 21. In patients without broad definition anaemia and/or abdominal mass, with rectal bleeding or increased stool frequency (41% of cohort), proximal cancer yield and NNE were 0.4% (13/3031) and 234.

CONCLUSION

Most proximal cancers are accompanied by broad definition anaemia. In patients without broad definition anaemia and/or abdominal mass, with rectal bleeding or increased stool frequency, proximal cancer is rare and FS should suffice.

Use of Two Self-referral Reminders and a Theory-Based Leaflet to Increase the Uptake of Flexible Sigmoidoscopy in the English Bowel Scope Screening Program: Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial in London

Background

We previously initiated a randomized controlled trial to test the effectiveness of two self-referral reminders and a theory-based leaflet (sent 12 and 24 months after the initial invitation) to increase participation within the English Bowel Scope Screening program.

Purpose

This study reports the results following the second reminder.

Methods

Men and women included in the initial sample (n = 1,383) were re-assessed for eligibility 24 months after their invitation (12 months after the first reminder) and excluded if they had attended screening, moved away, or died. Eligible adults received the same treatment they were allocated 12 months previous, that is, no reminder ("control"), or a self-referral reminder with either the standard information booklet ("Reminder and Standard Information Booklet") or theory-based leaflet designed using the Behavior Change Wheel ("Reminder and Theory-Based Leaflet"). The primary outcome was the proportion screened within each group 12 weeks after the second reminder.

Results

In total, 1,218 (88.1%) individuals were eligible. Additional uptake following the second reminder was 0.4% (2/460), 4.8% (19/399), and 7.9% (29/366) in the control, Reminder and Standard Information Booklet, and Reminder and Theory-Based Leaflet groups, respectively. When combined with the first reminder, the overall uptake for each group was 0.7% (3/461), 14.5% (67/461), and 21.5% (99/461). Overall uptake was significantly higher in the Reminder and Standard Information Booklet and Reminder and Theory-Based Leaflet groups than in the control (odds ratio [OR] = 26.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 8.1-84.0, p < .001 and OR = 46.9, 95% CI = 14.7-149.9, p < .001, respectively), and significantly higher in the Reminder and Theory-Based Leaflet group than in the Reminder and Standard Information Booklet group (OR = 1.8, 95% CI = 1.3-2.6, p < .001).

Conclusion

A second reminder increased uptake among former nonparticipants. The added value of the theory-based leaflet highlights a potential benefit to reviewing the current information booklet.

Trials Registry Number

ISRCTN44293755.

Number of Adenomas Removed and Colorectal Cancers Prevented in Randomized Trials of Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) with sigmoidoscopy reduces CRC incidence by detecting and removing adenomas. The number needed to screen is a measure of screening efficiency, but is not directly associated with adenoma removal. We propose the following 2 new metrics for quantifying the relationship between adenoma removal and CRC prevented: number of adenomas needed to remove (NNR) and adenoma dwell time avoided (DTA).

METHODS

We collected data from 4 randomized trials of sigmoidoscopy screening (1 in the United States and 3 in Europe) to assess NNR and DTA. For each trial, NNR was computed as the number of adenomas removed from subjects in the intervention group, divided by the number of CRCs prevented. DTA was computed similarly but taking into account the timing of adenoma removal. Combined results across trials were assessed using standard meta-analytic techniques.

RESULTS

The estimated NNR for the PLCO (Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian) trial was 74 (95% confidence interval [CI], 56-110), for the NORCCAP (Norwegian Colorectal Cancer Prevention) trial was 71 (95% CI, 44-174), for the SCORE (Screening for Colon Rectum) trial was 27 (95% CI, 14-135), and for the UKFSST (UK Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening Trial) was 36 (95% CI, 28-52). The combined estimate (meta-analysis) of NNR was 52 (95% CI, 36-93) assuming heterogeneity (P for heterogeneity = .014). DTA estimates among trials ranged from 278 to 730 years, with a combined estimate of 500 (95% CI, 344-833) years assuming heterogeneity (P for heterogeneity = .035), or 2 CRC cases prevented per 1000 adenoma dwell years avoided. The combined estimates of NNR and DTA restricted to advanced adenomas were 13 (95% CI, 9-22) and 122 (95% CI, 90-190) years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We collected data from 4 randomized trials of sigmoidoscopy screening for CRC to develop metrics of endoscopic efficiency, NNR and DTA, which are directly linked to adenoma detection and removal. They can be used to compare screening among endoscopic modalities and to more precisely measure adenoma to carcinoma transition rates.

[Implementation of colorectal cancer screening in Sweden]

Convincing data demonstrate that screening reduces mortality in colorectal cancer. International organizations and national authorities recommend implementation of colorectal cancer screening programs. There are several different primary methods for screening, including tests of blood in feces, sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy, all with their inherent advantages and disadvantages. The majority of programs utilizes fecal occult blood test as primary screening method followed by colonoscopy. Colonoscopy as a primary screening method has the advantage of directly removing precancerous lesions and ongoing studies evaluates the role of colonoscopy as a primary screening method for colorectal cancer. Challenges for implementation of screening in Sweden include limited access to colonoscopy resources and problems to reassure quality control. This article summarizes current evidence for colorectal cancer screening, as well as methods and requirements for implementation.

Association of Colonoscopy Adenoma Findings With Long-term Colorectal Cancer Incidence

IMPORTANCE

Individuals with adenomatous polyps are advised to undergo repeated colonoscopy surveillance to prevent subsequent colorectal cancer (CRC), but the relationship between adenomas at colonoscopy and long-term CRC incidence is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To compare long-term CRC incidence by colonoscopy adenoma findings.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Multicenter, prospective cohort study of participants in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer randomized clinical trial of flexible sigmoidoscopy (FSG) beginning in 1993 with follow-up for CRC incidence to 2013 across the United States. Participants included 154 900 men and women aged 55 to 74 years enrolled in PLCO of whom 15 935 underwent colonoscopy following their first positive FSG screening result. The final day of follow-up was December 31, 2013.

EXPOSURES

Enrolled participants had been randomized to FSG or usual care. Participants who underwent FSG and had abnormal findings were referred for follow-up. Subsequent colonoscopy findings were categorized as advanced adenoma (≥1 cm, high-grade dysplasia, or tubulovillous or villous histology), nonadvanced adenoma (<1 cm without advanced histology), or no adenoma.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was CRC incidence within 15 years of the baseline colonoscopy. The secondary outcome was CRC mortality.

RESULTS

There were 15 935 participants who underwent colonoscopy (men, 59.7%; white, 90.7%; median age, 64 y [IQR, 61-68]). On initial colonoscopy, 2882 participants (18.1%) had an advanced adenoma, 5068 participants (31.8%) had a nonadvanced adenoma, and 7985 participants (50.1%) had no adenoma; median follow-up for CRC incidence was 12.9 years. CRC incidence rates per 10 000 person-years of observation were 20.0 (95% CI, 15.3-24.7; n = 70) for advanced adenoma, 9.1 (95% CI, 6.7-11.5; n = 55) for nonadvanced adenoma, and 7.5 (95% CI, 5.8-9.7; n = 71) for no adenoma. Participants with advanced adenoma were significantly more likely to develop CRC compared with participants with no adenoma (rate ratio [RR], 2.7 [95% CI, 1.9-3.7]; P < .001). There was no significant difference in CRC risk between participants with nonadvanced adenoma compared with no adenoma (RR, 1.2 [95% CI, 0.8-1.7]; P = .30). Compared with participants with no adenoma, those with advanced adenoma were at significantly increased risk of CRC death (RR, 2.6 [95% CI, 1.2-5.7], P = .01), but mortality risk in participants with nonadvanced adenoma was not significantly different (RR, 1.2 [95% CI, 0.5-2.7], P = .68).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Over a median of 13 years of follow-up, participants with an advanced adenoma at diagnostic colonoscopy prompted by a positive flexible sigmoidoscopy result were at significantly increased risk of developing colorectal cancer compared with those with no adenoma. Identification of nonadvanced adenoma may not be associated with increased colorectal cancer risk.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00002540.