Search

Lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose CT (LDCT) imaging was recommended in 2013, making approximately 8 million Americans eligible for LCS. The demographic characteristics and outcomes of individuals screened in the United States have not been reported at the population level. What are the outcomes among people screened and entered in the American College of Radiology's Lung Cancer Screening Registry compared with those of trial participants? This was a cohort study of individuals undergoing baseline LDCT imaging for LCS between 2015 and 2019. Predictors of adherence to annual screening were computed. LDCT scan interpretations by Lung Imaging Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) score, cancer detection rates (CDRs), and stage at diagnosis were compared with National Lung Cancer Screening Trial data. Adherence was 22.3%, and predictors of poor adherence included current smoking status and Hispanic or Black race. On baseline screening, 83% of patients showed negative results and 17% showed positive screening results. The overall CDR was 0.56%. The percentage of people with cancer detected at baseline was higher in the positive Lung-RADS categories at 0.4% for Lung-RADS category 3, 2.6% for Lung-RADS category 4A, 11.1% for Lung-RADS category 4B, and 19.9% for Lung-RADS category 4X. The cancer stage distribution was similar to that observed in the National Lung Cancer Screening Trial, with 53.5% of patients receiving a diagnosis of stage I cancer and 14.3% with stage IV cancer. Underreporting into the registry may have occurred. This study revealed both the positive aspects of CT scan screening for lung cancer and the challenges that remain. Findings on CT imaging were correlated accurately with lung cancer detection using the Lung-RADS system. A significant stage shift toward early-stage lung cancer was present. Adherence to LCS was poor and likely contributes to the lower than expected cancer detection rate, all of which will impact the outcomes of patients undergoing screening for lung cancer. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There are approximately 25.6 million individuals with limited English proficiency (LEP) in the USA, and this number is increasing. Objective: Investigate associations between LEP and access to care in adults. Design: Cross-sectional nationally representative survey. Participants: Adults with (n = 18,908) and without (n = 98,060) LEP aged ≥ 18 years identified from the 2014–2018 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey Main Measures: Associations between LEP and access to healthcare and preventive services were evaluated with multivariable logistic regression models, stratified by age group (18–64 and ≥ 65 years). The official government definition of LEP (answers "not at all/not well/well" to the question "How well do you speak English?") was used. Access to care included having a usual source of care (and if so, distance from usual source of care, difficulty contacting usual source of care, and provision of extended hours), visiting a medical provider in the past 12 months, having to forego or delay care, and having trouble paying for medical bills. Preventive services included blood pressure and cholesterol check, flu vaccination, and cancer screening. Key Results: Adults aged 18–64 years with LEP were significantly more likely to lack a usual source of care (adjusted odds ratios [aOR] = 2.48; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.27–2.70), not have visited a medical provider (aOR = 2.02; CI = 1.89–2.16), and to be overdue for receipt of preventive services, including blood pressure check (aOR = 2.00; CI = 1.79–2.23), cholesterol check (aOR = 1.22; CI = 1.03–1.44), and colorectal cancer screening (aOR = 1.58; CI = 1.37–1.83) than adults without LEP. Results were similar among adults aged ≥ 65 years. Conclusions: Adults with LEP had consistently worse access to care than adults without LEP. System-level interventions, such as expanding access to health insurance coverage, providing language services, improving provider training in cultural competence, and increasing diversity in the medical workforce may minimize barriers and improve equity in access to care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) was recommended by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) in 2013, making approximately 8 million Americans eligible for screening. The demographic characteristics and adherence of persons screened in the United States have not been reported at the population level.Objective: To define sociodemographic characteristics and adherence among persons screened and entered into the American College of Radiology's Lung Cancer Screening Registry (LCSR).Design: Cohort study.Setting: United States, 2015 to 2019.Participants: Persons receiving a baseline LDCT for LCS from 3625 facilities reporting to the LCSR.Measurements: Age, sex, and smoking status distributions (percentages) were computed among persons who were screened and among respondents in the 2015 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) who were eligible for screening. The prevalence between the LCSR and the NHIS was compared with prevalence ratios (PRs) and 95% CIs. Adherence to annual screening was defined as having a follow-up test within 11 to 15 months of an initial LDCT.Results: Among 1 159 092 persons who were screened, 90.8% (n = 1 052 591) met the USPSTF eligibility criteria. Compared with adults from the NHIS who met the criteria (n = 1257), screening recipients in the LCSR were older (34.7% vs. 44.8% were aged 65 to 74 years; PR, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.20 to 1.39]), more likely to be female (41.8% vs. 48.1%; PR, 1.15 [CI, 1.08 to 1.23]), and more likely to currently smoke (52.3% vs. 61.4%; PR, 1.17 [CI, 1.11 to 1.23]). Only 22.3% had a repeated annual LDCT. If follow-up was extended to 24 months and more than 24 months, 34.3% and 40.3% were adherent, respectively.Limitations: Underreporting of LCS and missing data may skew demographic characteristics of persons reported to be screened. Underreporting of adherence may result in underestimates of follow-up.Conclusion: Approximately 91% of persons who had LCS met USPSTF eligibility criteria. In addition to continuing to target all eligible adults, men, those who formerly smoked, and younger eligible patients may be less likely to be screened. Adherence to annual follow-up screening was poor, potentially limiting screening effectiveness.Primary Funding Source: None. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: In the United States, colorectal cancer incidence has increased in adults under age 55. Although debate remains about whether this rise is a result of increased detection because of more colonoscopy utilization, population-based trends in colonoscopy among this age group are unknown. We examined changes in colonoscopy rates, as well as colorectal cancer incidence, among adults aged 40–54, using nationally representative data. Methods: Recent (past year) colonoscopy rates were computed among 53,175 respondents aged 40–54 in National Health Interview Survey data from 2000 through 2015 by five-year age group. Colorectal cancer incidence rates and incidence rate ratios were estimated from 18 population-based Surveillance Epidemiology and End Result registries during the same period. Results: Among respondents aged 40–44, past-year colonoscopy rates were stable during 2000–2015, and ranged from 2.3% to 3.5% (p -value for trend = 0.771). In contrast, colonoscopy rates increased from 2.5% in 2000 to 5.2% in 2015 among ages 45–49, and from 5.0% to 14.1% in ages 50–54 (test for trend p -values < 0.001). During 2000–2015, colorectal cancer incidence rates increased by 28% in people aged 40–44 (incidence rate ratio = 1.28, 95% CI 1.20, 2.37), 15% in those aged 45–49 (incidence rate ratio = 1.15, 95%CI 1.10, 1.21), and 17% in those aged 50–54 (incidence rate ratio = 1.17, 95%CI 1.13, 1.21), respectively. Conclusion: Increases in colonoscopy rates were confined to ages 45–54, whereas colorectal cancer incidence rates rose in those aged 40–44, 45–49, and 50–54. Colonoscopy trends do not fully align with colorectal cancer incidence patterns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the United States, colorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth most common cancer diagnosed among adults and the second leading cause of death from cancer. For this guideline update, the American Cancer Society (ACS) used an existing systematic evidence review of the CRC screening literature and microsimulation modeling analyses, including a new evaluation of the age to begin screening by race and sex and additional modeling that incorporates changes in US CRC incidence. Screening with any one of multiple options is associated with a significant reduction in CRC incidence through the detection and removal of adenomatous polyps and other precancerous lesions and with a reduction in mortality through incidence reduction and early detection of CRC. Results from modeling analyses identified efficient and model-recommendable strategies that started screening at age 45 years. The ACS Guideline Development Group applied the Grades of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria in developing and rating the recommendations. The ACS recommends that adults aged 45 years and older with an average risk of CRC undergo regular screening with either a high-sensitivity stool-based test or a structural (visual) examination, depending on patient preference and test availability. As a part of the screening process, all positive results on noncolonoscopy screening tests should be followed up with timely colonoscopy. The recommendation to begin screening at age 45 years is a qualified recommendation. The recommendation for regular screening in adults aged 50 years and older is a strong recommendation. The ACS recommends (qualified recommendations) that: 1) average-risk adults in good health with a life expectancy of more than 10 years continue CRC screening through the age of 75 years; 2) clinicians individualize CRC screening decisions for individuals aged 76 through 85 years based on patient preferences, life expectancy, health status, and prior screening history; and 3) clinicians discourage individuals older than 85 years from continuing CRC screening. The options for CRC screening are: fecal immunochemical test annually; high-sensitivity, guaiac-based fecal occult blood test annually; multitarget stool DNA test every 3 years; colonoscopy every 10 years; computed tomography colonography every 5 years; and flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5 years. CA Cancer J Clin 2018;68:250-281. © 2018 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Previous studies report infrequent use of shared decision making for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing. It is unknown whether this pattern has changed recently considering increased emphasis on shared decision making in prostate cancer screening recommendations. Thus, the objective of this study is to examine recent changes in shared decision making.Methods: We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study among men aged 50 years and older in the United States using 2010 and 2015 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) data (n = 9,598). Changes in receipt of shared decision making were expressed as adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Analyses were stratified on PSA testing (recent [in the past year] or no testing). Elements of shared decision making assessed included the patient being informed about the advantages only, advantages and disadvantages, and full shared decision making (advantages, disadvantages, and uncertainties).Results: Among men with recent PSA testing, 58.5% and 62.6% reported having received ≥1 element of shared decision making in 2010 and 2015, respectively (P = .054, aPR = 1.04; 95% CI, 0.98-1.11). Between 2010 and 2015, being told only about the advantages of PSA testing significantly declined (aPR = 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71-0.96) and full shared decision making prevalence significantly increased (aPR = 1.51; 95% CI, 1.28-1.79) in recently tested men. Among men without prior PSA testing, 10% reported ≥1 element of shared decision making, which did not change with time.Conclusion: Between 2010 and 2015, there was no increase in shared decision making among men with recent PSA testing though there was a shift away from only being told about the advantages of PSA testing towards full shared decision making. Many men receiving PSA testing did not receive shared decision making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Recent studies report racial disparities among individuals in organized colorectal cancer (CRC) programs; however, there is a paucity of information on CRC screening utilization by race/ethnicity among newly age-eligible adults in such programs.Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study among Kaiser Permanente Northern California enrollees who turned age 50 years between 2007 and 2012 (N=138,799) and were served by a systemwide outreach and facilitated in-reach screening program based primarily on mailed fecal immunochemical tests to screening-eligible people. Kaplan-Meier and Cox model analyses were used to estimate differences in receipt of CRC screening in 2015-2016.Results: Cumulative probabilities of CRC screening within 1 and 2 years of subjects' 50th birthday were 51% and 73%, respectively. Relative to non-Hispanic whites, the likelihood of completing any CRC screening was similar in blacks (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% CI=0.96, 1.00); 5% lower in Hispanics (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI=0.93, 0.96); and 13% higher in Asians (hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% CI=1.11, 1.15) in adjusted analyses. Fecal immunochemical testing was the most common screening modality, representing 86% of all screening initiations. Blacks and Hispanics had lower receipt of fecal immunochemical testing in adjusted analyses.Conclusions: CRC screening uptake was high among newly screening-eligible adults in an organized CRC screening program, but Hispanics were less likely to initiate screening near age 50 years than non-Hispanic whites, suggesting that cultural and other individual-level barriers not addressed within the program likely contribute. Future studies examining the influences of culturally appropriate and targeted efforts for screening initiation are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Answer questions and earn CME/CNE Each year, the American Cancer Society publishes a summary of its guidelines for early cancer detection, data and trends in cancer screening rates, and select issues related to cancer screening. In this issue of the journal, the authors summarize current American Cancer Society cancer screening guidelines, describe an update of their guideline for using human papillomavirus vaccination for cancer prevention, describe updates in US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations for breast and colorectal cancer screening, discuss interim findings from the UK Collaborative Trial on Ovarian Cancer Screening, and provide the latest data on utilization of cancer screening from the National Health Interview Survey. CA Cancer J Clin 2017;67:100-121. © 2017 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A recent study estimates that 277,000 colorectal cancer (CRC) cases and 203,000 CRC deaths will be averted between 2013 and 2030 if the National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable goal of increasing CRC screening prevalence to 80% by 2018 is reached. However, the number of individuals who need to be screened (NNS) to achieve this goal is unknown. In this communication, the authors estimate the NNS to achieve 80% by 2018 nationwide and by state.Methods: The authors estimated the NNS by subtracting adults aged 50 to 75 years who would need to be screened to achieve an 80% CRC screening prevalence from the number who are currently guideline-compliant from population estimates for this age group. The 2013 National Health Interview Survey and the 2012 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System were used to estimate CRC screening prevalence and data from the US Census Bureau were used to estimate population projections. The NNS were age-standardized and sex-standardized.Results: Nationwide, 24.39 million individuals (95% confidence interval, 24.37-24.41 million) aged 50 to 75 years will need to be screened to achieve 80% by 2018. By state, the NNS ranged from 45,400 in Vermont to 2.72 million in California. The majority of individuals who need to be screened are aged 50 to 64 years and the largest subgroup is privately insured.Conclusions: The authors estimated that at least 24.4 million additional individuals in the United States will need to be screened to achieve the National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable goal of increasing CRC screening prevalence to 80% by 2018. To reach this goal, improving facilitators of CRC screening, including physician recommendation and patient awareness, is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Prostate cancer incidence in men 75 years and older substantially decreased following the 2008 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation against prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening for this age group. It is unknown whether incidence has changed since the USPSTF recommendation against screening for all men in May 2012.Objective: To examine recent changes in stage-specific prostate cancer incidence and PSA screening rates following the 2008 and 2012 USPSTF recommendations.Design and Settings: Ecologic study of age-standardized prostate cancer incidence (newly diagnosed cases/100,000 men aged ≥50 years) by stage from 2005 through 2012 using data from 18 population-based Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registries and PSA screening rate in the past year among men 50 years and older without a history of prostate cancer who responded to the 2005 (n = 4580), 2008 (n = 3476), 2010 (n = 4157), and 2013 (n = 6172) National Health Interview Survey (NHIS).Exposures: The USPSTF recommendations to omit PSA-based screening for average-risk men.Main Outcomes and Measures: Prostate cancer incidence and incidence ratios (IRs) comparing consecutive years from 2005 through 2012 by age (≥50, 50-74, and ≥75 years) and SEER summary stage categorized as local/regional or distant and PSA screening rate and rate ratios (SRRs) comparing successive survey years by age.Results: Prostate cancer incidence per 100,000 in men 50 years and older (N = 446,009 in SEER areas) was 534.9 in 2005, 540.8 in 2008, 505.0 in 2010, and 416.2 in 2012; rates began decreasing in 2008 and the largest decrease occurred between 2011 and 2012, from 498.3 (99% CI, 492.8-503.9) to 416.2 (99% CI, 411.2-421.2). The number of men 50 years and older diagnosed with prostate cancer nationwide declined by 33,519, from 213,562 men in 2011 to 180,043 men in 2012. Declines in incidence since 2008 were confined to local/regional-stage disease and were similar across age and race/ethnicity groups. The percentage of men 50 years and older reporting PSA screening in the past 12 months was 36.9% in 2005, 40.6% in 2008, 37.8% in 2010, and 30.8% in 2013. In relative terms, screening rates increased by 10% (SRR, 1.10; 99% CI, 1.01-1.21) between 2005 and 2008 and then decreased by 18% (SRR, 0.82; 99% CI, 0.75-0.89) between 2010 and 2013. Similar screening patterns were found in age subgroups 50 to 74 years and 75 years and older.Conclusions and Relevance: Both the incidence of early-stage prostate cancer and rates of PSA screening have declined and coincide with 2012 USPSTF recommendation to omit PSA screening from routine primary care for men. Longer follow-up is needed to see whether these decreases are associated with trends in mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND The aim of the cost-sharing provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) was to reduce financial barriers for preventive services, including screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) and breast cancer (BC) among privately and Medicare-insured individuals. Whether the provision has affected CRC and BC screening prevalence is unknown. The current study investigated whether CRC and BC screening prevalence among privately and Medicare-insured adults by socioeconomic status (SES) changed before and after the ACA. METHODS Data obtained from the National Health Interview Survey pertaining to privately and Medicare-insured adults from 2008 (before the ACA) and 2013 (after the ACA) were used. There were 15,786 adults aged 50 to 75 years in the CRC screening analysis and 14,530 women aged ≥40 years in the BC screening analysis. Changes in guideline-recommended screening between 2008 and 2013 by SES were expressed as the prevalence difference (PD) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) adjusted for demographics, insurance, income, education, body mass index, and having a usual provider. RESULTS Overall, CRC screening prevalence increased from 57.3% to 61.2% between 2008 and 2013 ( P<.001). Adjusted CRC screening prevalence during the corresponding period increased in low-income (PD, 5.9; 95% CI, 1.8 to 10.2), least-educated (PD, 7.2; 95% CI, 0.9 to 13.5), and Medicare-insured (PD, 6.2; 95% CI, 1.7 to 10.7) individuals, but not in high-income, most-educated, and privately insured respondents. BC screening remained unchanged overall (70.5% in 2008 vs 70.2% in 2013) and in the low SES groups. CONCLUSIONS Increases in CRC screening prevalence between 2008 and 2013 were confined to respondents with low SES. These findings may in part reflect the ACA's removal of financial barriers. Cancer 2015;121:3272-3280. © 2015 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Despite substantial declines in cervical cancer mortality because of widespread screening, socioeconomic status (SES) disparities persist. The authors examined trends in cervical cancer mortality rates and the risk of late-stage diagnoses by SES. METHODS: Using data from the National Vital Statistics System, trends in age-standardized mortality rates among women ages 25 to 64 years (1993-2007) by education level (≤12 years, 13-15 years, and ≥16 years) and race/ethnicity for non-Hispanic white (NHW) women and non-Hispanic black (NHB) women in 26 states were assessed using log-linear regression. Rate ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to assess disparities between those with ≤12 years versus ≥16 years of education during 1993 to 1995 and 2005 to 2007. Avertable deaths were calculated by applying mortality rates from the most educated women to others in 48 states. Trends in the risk of late-stage diagnosis by race/ethnicity and insurance status were evaluated in the National Cancer Data Base. RESULTS: Declines in mortality were steepest for those with the highest education levels (3.2% per year among NHW women and 6.8% per year among NHB women). Consequently, the education disparity widened between the periods 1993 to 1995 and 2005 to 2007 from 3.1 (95% CI, 2.4-3.9) to 4.4 (95% CI, 3.5-5.6) for NHW women and from 3.8 (95% CI, 2.0-7.0) to 5.6 (95% CI, 3.1-10.0) for NHB women. The risk of late-stage diagnosis increased for uninsured versus privately insured women over time. During 2007, 74% of cervical cancer deaths in the United States may have been averted by eliminating SES disparities. CONCLUSIONS: SES disparities in cervical cancer mortality and the risk of late-stage diagnosis increased over time. Most deaths in 2007 may have been averted by eliminating SES disparities. Cancer 2012. © 2012 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: In 2009, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) no longer recommended routine mammography for women aged 40-49 and ≥75 years (younger and older women, respectively). Whether mammography usage and physician recommendation among younger and older women changed in response to these recommendations is unclear.Methods: Cross-sectional data from women aged ≥40 years in the 2008 and 2013 National Health Interview Surveys were used (n=4,942 younger and 3,047 older women) and were analyzed in 2015. Changes between 2008 and 2013 in self-reports about having undergone mammography in the past 2 years and physician recommendation for mammography were expressed as adjusted prevalence difference (PD) and 95% CI.Results: Overall, adjusted prevalence of mammography among younger women was similar in 2008 (62.2%) and 2013 (58.5%) (p=0.05), but significantly declined in high-income (PD=-6.1%, 95% CI=-11.2, -1.0); non-Hispanic white (PD=-5.5%, 95% CI=-10.2, -0.8); and privately insured (PD=-5.7%, 95% CI=-9.8, -1.6) younger women. For older women, there was no change in adjusted mammography prevalence overall (2008, 56.2%; 2013, 54.2%; p=0.473) or by SES. Physician mammography recommendation declined in younger (PD=-5.0%, 95% CI=-8.7, -1.3) and older (PD=-5.8%, 95% CI=-10.5, -1.1) women.Conclusions: Four years after publication of USPSTF mammography recommendations, mammography prevalence for younger and older women did not significantly decrease except for higher-SES younger women. The significant decrease in physician recommendation of mammography in younger and older women may reflect a change in practice patterns by some physicians in response to USPSTF recommendations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite important controversy in its efficacy, prostate cancer (PCa) screening has become widespread. Important socioeconomic screening disparities have been reported. However, trends in PCa screening and social disparities have not been investigated in Switzerland, a high risk country for PCa. We used data from five waves (from 1992-2012) of the population-based Swiss Health Interview Survey to evaluate trends in PCa screening and its association with socioeconomic indicators.Methods: We used multivariable Poisson regression to estimate prevalence ratios (PR) and 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) adjusting for demographics, health status, and use of healthcare.Results: The study included 12,034 men aged ≥50 years (mean age: 63.9). Between 1992 and 2012, ever use of PCa screening increased from 55.3% to 70.0% and its use within the last two years from 32.6% to 42.4% (p-value <0.05). Income, education, and occupational class were independently associated with PCa screening. PCa screening within the last two years was greater in men with the highest (>$6,000/month) vs. lowest income (≤$2,000) (46.5% vs. 38.7% in 2012, PR for overall period =1.29, 95%CI: 1.13-1.48). These socioeconomic disparities did not significantly change over time.Conclusions: This study shows that about half of Swiss men had performed at least one PCa screening. Men belonging to high socioeconomic status are clearly more frequently screened than those less favored. Given the uncertainty of the usefulness of PCa screening, men, including those with high socioeconomic status, should be clearly informed about benefits and harms of PCa screening, in particular, the adverse effect of over-diagnosis and of associated over-treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Regular colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is recommended for reducing CRC incidence and mortality. This paper provides an updated analysis of CRC screening in the United States (US) and examines CRC screening by several features of health insurance coverage. Recommendation-consistent CRC screening was calculated for adults aged 50-75 in 2008, 2010, 2013 and 2015 using data from the National Health Interview Survey. CRC screening prevalence in 2015 was described overall and by sociodemographic subgroups. CRC screening by health insurance coverage was further examined using multivariable logistic regression, stratified by age (50-64 years and 65-75 years) and adjusted for age, race/ethnicity, sex, education, income, time in US, and comorbid conditions. Recommendation-consistent screening increased from 51.6% in 2008 to 58.3% in 2010 (p < 0.001). Use plateaued from 2010 to 2013 but increased to 61.3% in 2015 (p < 0.001). In 2015, adults aged 50-64 years with traditional employer-sponsored private insurance were more likely to be screened (62.2%) than those with traditional private direct purchase plans (50.9%) and the uninsured (24.8%) (p < 0.01, respectively). After multivariable adjustment, differences between traditional employer-sponsored private insurance and the uninsured remained statistically significant. Adults aged 65-75 with Medicare and private insurance were more likely to be screened (76.3%) than those with Medicare, no supplemental insurance (68.8%) or Medicare and Medicaid (65.2%) (p < 0.001). After multivariable adjustment, the differences between Medicare and private insurance and Medicare no supplemental insurance remained statistically significant. CRC screening rates have increased over time, but certain segments of the population, especially the uninsured, continue to screen below recommended levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]