Search

Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence at ages <50 years is increasing worldwide. Screening initiation was lowered to 45 years in the United States. The cost-effectiveness of initiating CRC screening at 45 years in Israel was assessed with the aim of informing national policy and addressing internationally relevant questions., Methods: A validated CRC screening model was calibrated to Israeli data and examined annual fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) or colonoscopy every 10 years from 45 to 74 years (FIT45-74 or Colo45-74) versus from 50 to 74 years (FIT50-74 or Colo50-74). The addition of a fourth colonoscopy at 75 years was explored, subanalyses were performed by sex/ethnicity, and resource demands were estimated., Results: FIT50-74 and Colo50-74 reduced CRC incidence by 57% and 70% and mortality by 70% and 77%, respectively, versus no screening, with greater absolute impact in Jews/Other versus Arabs but comparable relative impact. FIT45-74 further reduced CRC incidence and mortality by an absolute 3% and 2%, respectively. With Colo45-74 versus Colo50-74, CRC cases and deaths increased slightly as three colonoscopies per lifetime shifted to 5 years earlier but mean quality-adjusted life-years gained (QALYGs) per person increased. FIT45-74 and Colo45-74 cost 23,800-53,900 new Israeli shekels (NIS)/QALYG and 110,600-162,700 NIS/QALYG, with the lowest and highest values among Jewish/Other men and Arab women, respectively. A fourth lifetime colonoscopy cost 48,700 NIS/QALYG. Lowering FIT initiation to 45 years with modest participation required 19,300 additional colonoscopies in the first 3 years., Conclusions: Beginning CRC screening at 45 years in Israel is projected to yield modest clinical benefits at acceptable costs per QALYG. Despite different estimates by sex/ethnicity, a uniform national policy is favored. These findings can inform Israeli guidelines and serve as a case study internationally., (© 2024 American Cancer Society.)

Background: Little is known about the psychological outcomes of germline multigene panel testing, particularly among diverse patients and those with moderate-risk pathogenic variants (PVs)., Methods: Study participants (N = 1264) were counseled and tested with a 25- or 28-gene panel and completed a 3-month postresult survey including the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA)., Results: The mean age was 52 years, 80% were female, and 70% had cancer; 45% were non-Hispanic White, 37% were Hispanic, 10% were Asian, 3% were Black, and 5% had another race/ethnicity. Approximately 28% had a high school education or less, and 23% were non-English-speaking. The genetic test results were as follows: 7% had a high-risk PV, 6% had a moderate-risk PV, 35% had a variant of uncertain significance (VUS), and 52% were negative. Most participants (92%) had a total MICRA score ≤ 38, which corresponded to a mean response of "never," "rarely," or only "sometimes" reacting negatively to results. A multivariate analysis found that mean total MICRA scores were significantly higher (more uncertainty/distress) among high- and moderate-risk PV carriers (29.7 and 24.8, respectively) than those with a VUS or negative results (17.4 and 16.1, respectively). Having cancer or less education was associated with a significantly higher total MICRA score; race/ethnicity was not associated with the total MICRA score. High- and moderate-risk PV carriers did not differ significantly from one another in the total MICRA score, uncertainty, distress, or positive experiences., Conclusions: In a diverse population undergoing genetic counseling and multigene panel testing for hereditary cancer risk, the psychological response corresponded to test results and showed low distress and uncertainty. Further studies are needed to assess patient understanding and subsequent cancer screening among patients from diverse backgrounds., Lay Summary: Multigene panel tests for hereditary cancer have become widespread despite concerns about adverse psychological reactions among carriers of moderate-risk pathogenic variants (mutations) and among carriers of variants of uncertain significance. This large study of an ethnically and economically diverse cohort of patients undergoing panel testing found that 92% "never," "rarely," or only "sometimes" reacted negatively to results. Somewhat higher uncertainty and distress were identified among carriers of high- and moderate-risk pathogenic variants, and lower levels were identified among those with a variant of uncertain significance or a negative result. Although the psychological response corresponded to risk, reactions to testing were favorable, regardless of results., (© 2020 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Cancer Society.)

Persons with a family history (FH) of colorectal cancer (CRC) or adenomas that are not due to known hereditary syndromes have an increased risk for CRC. An understanding of these risks, screening recommendations, and screening behaviors can inform strategies for reducing the CRC burden in these families. A comprehensive review of the literature published within the past 10 years has been performed to assess what is known about cancer risk, screening guidelines, adherence and barriers to screening, and effective interventions in persons with an FH of CRC and to identify FH tools used to identify these individuals and inform care. Existing data show that having 1 affected first-degree relative (FDR) increases the CRC risk 2-fold, and the risk increases with multiple affected FDRs and a younger age at diagnosis. There is variability in screening recommendations across consensus guidelines. Screening adherence is <50% and is lower in persons under the age of 50 years. A provider's recommendation, multiple affected relatives, and family encouragement facilitate screening; insufficient collection of FH, low knowledge of guidelines, and poor family communication are important barriers. Effective interventions incorporate strategies for overcoming barriers, but these have not been broadly tested in clinical settings. Four strategies for reducing CRC in persons with familial risk are suggested: 1) improving the collection and utilization of the FH of cancer, 2) establishing a consensus for screening guidelines by FH, 3) enhancing provider-patient knowledge of guidelines and communication about CRC risk, and 4) encouraging survivors to promote screening within their families and partnering with existing screening programs to expand their reach to high-risk groups. Cancer 2016. © 2016 American Cancer Society. Cancer 2016;122:2633-2645. © 2016 American Cancer Society., (© 2016 American Cancer Society.)

Background: Tailoring screening to colorectal cancer (CRC) risk could improve screening effectiveness. Most CRCs arise from advanced neoplasia (AN) that dwells for years. To date, no available colorectal neoplasia risk score has been validated externally in a diverse population. The authors explored whether the National Cancer Institute (NCI) CRC risk-assessment tool, which was developed to predict future CRC risk, could predict current AN prevalence in a diverse population, thereby allowing its use in risk stratification for screening., Methods: This was a prospective examination of the relation between predicted 10-year CRC risk and the prevalence of AN, defined as advanced or multiple (≥3 adenomatous, ≥5 serrated) adenomatous or sessile serrated polyps, in individuals undergoing screening colonoscopy., Results: Among 509 screenees (50% women; median age, 58 years; 61% white, 5% black, 10% Hispanic, and 24% Asian), 58 (11%) had AN. The prevalence of AN increased progressively from 6% in the lowest risk-score quintile to 17% in the highest risk-score quintile (P = .002). Risk-score distributions in individuals with versus without AN differed significantly (median, 1.38 [0.90-1.87] vs 1.02 [0.62-1.57], respectively; P = .003), with substantial overlap. The discriminatory accuracy of the tool was modest, with areas under the curve of 0.61 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-0.69) overall, 0.59 (95% CI, 0.49-0.70) for women, and 0.63 (95% CI, 0.53-0.73) for men. The results did not change substantively when the analysis was restricted to adenomatous lesions or to screening procedures without any additional incidental indication., Conclusions: The NCI CRC risk-assessment tool displays modest discriminatory accuracy in predicting AN at screening colonoscopy in a diverse population. This tool may aid shared decision-making in clinical practice. Cancer 2016. © 2016 American Cancer Society. Cancer 2016;122:2663-2670. © 2016 American Cancer Society., (© 2016 American Cancer Society.)

Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is underused by minority populations, and patient navigation increases adherence with screening colonoscopy. In this study, the authors estimated the cost-effectiveness of navigation for screening colonoscopy from the perspective of a payer seeking to improve population health., Methods: A validated model of CRC screening was informed with inputs from navigation studies in New York City (population: 43% African American, 49% Hispanic, 4% white, 4% other; base-case screening: 40% without navigation, 65% with navigation; navigation costs: $29 per colonoscopy completer, $21 per noncompleter, $3 per non-navigated individual). Two analyses compared: 1) navigation versus no navigation for 1-time screening colonoscopy in unscreened individuals aged ≥ 50 years; and 2) programs of colonoscopy with versus without navigation versus fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) or fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) for individuals ages 50 to 80 years., Results: In the base case: 1) 1-time navigation gained quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and decreased costs; 2) longitudinal navigation cost $9800 per QALY gained versus no navigation, and, assuming comparable uptake rates, it cost $118,700 per QALY gained versus FOBT but was less effective and more costly than FIT. The results were most dependent on screening participation rates and navigation costs: 1) assuming a 5% increase in screening uptake with navigation, and a navigation cost of $150 per completer, 1-time navigation cost $26,400 per QALY gained; and 2) longitudinal navigation with 75% colonoscopy uptake cost <$25,000 per QALY gained versus FIT when FIT uptake was <50%. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses did not alter the conclusions., Conclusions: Navigation for screening colonoscopy appears to be cost-effective, and 1-time navigation may be cost-saving. In emerging health care models that reward outcomes, payers should consider covering the costs of navigation for screening colonoscopy., (© 2014 American Cancer Society.)

Background: Socioeconomic status (SES) plays an important role in colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality, although the independent and joint effects with nativity and neighborhood factors have yet to be evaluated., Methods: With nearly one-third of all US Hispanics residing in California, the authors obtained information from the California Cancer Registry to examine the associations between neighborhood SES and mortality in all 33,146 Hispanic individuals diagnosed with CRC from 1988 through 2010, with a particular focus on associations among US-born and foreign-born Hispanics. Cox proportional hazards models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for overall and CRC-specific mortality., Results: Hispanics residing in lower SES neighborhoods demonstrated a higher rate of overall and CRC-specific mortality than those residing in high SES neighborhoods (SES quintile 1[low] vs quintile 5 [high]: HR, 1.15 [95% CI, 1.05-1.26] and HR, 1.16 [95% CI, 1.03-1.30], respectively). Nativity modified the associations between SES and mortality (P for interaction, .02 for overall and P for interaction, .01 for CRC-specific mortality) such that the SES associations were observed only among US-born (P for trend < .01 for overall and CRC-specific mortality) but not among foreign-born Hispanics., Conclusions: Neighborhood SES demonstrates significant differential effects on overall and CRC-specific mortality between US-born and foreign-born Hispanics. Future efforts should investigate the underlying contextual and individual-level factors that could account for these differential associations by nativity., (© 2014 American Cancer Society.)

Background: Patient navigation (PN) is being used increasingly to help patients complete screening colonoscopy (SC) to prevent colorectal cancer. At their large, urban academic medical center with an open-access endoscopy system, the authors previously demonstrated that PN programs produced a colonoscopy completion rate of 78.5% in a cohort of 503 patients (predominantly African Americans and Latinos with public health insurance). Very little is known about the direct costs of implementing PN programs. The objective of the current study was to perform a detailed cost analysis of PN programs at the authors' institution from an institutional perspective., Methods: In 2 randomized controlled trials, average-risk patients who were referred for SC by primary care providers were recruited for PN between May 2008 and May 2010. Patients were randomized to 1 of 4 PN groups. The cost of PN and net income to the institution were determined in a cost analysis., Results: Among 395 patients who completed colonoscopy, 53.4% underwent SC alone, 30.1% underwent colonoscopy with biopsy, and 16.5% underwent snare polypectomy. Accounting for the average contribution margins of each procedure type, the total revenue was $95,266.00. The total cost of PN was $14,027.30. Net income was $81,238.70. In a model sample of 1000 patients, net incomes for the institutional completion rate (approximately 80%), the historic PN program (approximately 65%), and the national average (approximately 50%) were compared. The current PN program generated additional net incomes of $35,035.50 and $44,956.00, respectively., Conclusions: PN among minority patients with mostly public health insurance generated additional income to the institution, mainly because of increased colonoscopy completion rates., (Copyright © 2012 American Cancer Society.)

Background: Current guidelines recommend offering genetic testing for Lynch syndrome to individuals whose tumors suggest this condition and to relatives of affected individuals. Little is known, however, regarding how patients view the prospect of such testing. In addition, data on preferences (utilities) for the potential outcomes of testing decisions for use in cost-effectiveness analyses are lacking., Methods: Time tradeoff utilities were elicited for 10 potential outcomes of Lynch syndrome testing decisions and 3 associated cancers from 70 participants, representing a range of knowledge about and experiences with Lynch syndrome., Results: Highest mean utilities were assigned to scenarios in which only the assessor's sibling had Lynch-associated colorectal cancer (ranging from 0.669 ± 0.231 to 0.760 ± 0.220). Utilities assigned to scenarios in which the assessor had Lynch-associated colorectal cancer ranged from 0.605 ± 0.252 to 0.682 ± 0.246, whereas the lowest mean utilities were assigned to 2 of the general cancer states (0.601 ± 0.238 and 0.593 ± 0.272 for colorectal and ovarian cancer respectively). Only 43% of the sample assigned higher values to undergoing Lynch testing and receiving negative results versus forgoing Lynch testing, whereas 50% assigned higher values to undergoing rather than forgoing surgery to prevent a subsequent cancer., Conclusions: Genetic testing for Lynch syndrome, regardless of results, can have profound effects on quality of life; the utilities we collected can be used to incorporate these effects into cost-effectiveness analyses. Importantly, preferences for the potential outcomes of testing vary substantially, calling into question the extent to which patients would avail themselves of such testing if it were offered to them., (Copyright © 2012 American Cancer Society.)

Background: Understanding racial/ethnic disparities in cancer screening by family history risk could identify critical opportunities for patient and provider interventions tailored to specific racial/ethnic groups. The authors evaluated whether breast cancer (BC) and colorectal cancer (CRC) disparities varied by family history risk using a large, multiethnic population-based survey., Methods: By using the 2005 California Health Interview Survey, BC and CRC screening were evaluated separately with weighted multivariate regression analyses, and stratified by family history risk. Screening was defined for BC as mammogram within the past 2 years for women aged 40 to 64 years; for CRC, screening was defined as annual fecal occult blood test, sigmoidoscopy within the past 5 years, or colonoscopy within the past 10 years for adults aged 50 to 64 years., Results: The authors found no significant BC screening disparities by race/ethnicity or income in the family history risk groups. Racial/ethnic disparities were more evident in CRC screening, and the Latino-white gap widened among individuals with family history risk. Among adults with a family history for CRC, the magnitude of the Latino-white difference in CRC screening (odds ratio [OR], 0.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.11-0.60) was more substantial than that for individuals with no family history (OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.59-0.92)., Conclusions: Knowledge of their family history widened the Latino-white gap in CRC screening among adults. More aggressive interventions that enhance the communication between Latinos and their physicians about family history and cancer risk could reduce the substantial Latino-white screening disparity in Latinos most susceptible to CRC., (Copyright © 2011 American Cancer Society.)