Search

INTRODUCTION: At-home colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is an effective way to reduce CRC mortality, but screening rates in medically underserved groups are low. To plan the implementation of a pragmatic randomized trial comparing two population-based outreach approaches, we conducted qualitative research on current processes and barriers to at-home CRC screening in 10 community health centers (CHCs) that serve medically underserved groups, four each in Massachusetts and California, and two tribal facilities in South Dakota. METHODS: We conducted 53 semi-structured interviews with clinical and administrative staff at the participating CHCs. Participants were asked about CRC screening processes, categorized into eight domains: patient identification, outreach, risk assessment, fecal immunochemical test (FIT) workflows, FIT-DNA (i.e., Cologuard) workflows, referral for a follow-up colonoscopy, patient navigation, and educational materials. Transcripts were analyzed using a Rapid Qualitative Analysis approach. A matrix was used to organize and summarize the data into four sub-themes: current process, barriers, facilitators, and solutions to adapt materials for the intervention. RESULTS: Each sites process for stool-based CRC screening varied slightly. Interviewees identified the importance of offering educational materials in English and Spanish, using text messages to remind patients to return kits, adapting materials to address health literacy needs so patients can access instructions in writing, pictures, or video, creating mailed workflows integrated with a tracking system, and offering patient navigation to colonoscopy for patients with an abnormal result. CONCLUSION: Proposed solutions across the three regions will inform a multilevel intervention in a pragmatic trial to increase CRC screening uptake in CHCs.

Introduction/objectivesColonoscopy completion rates after an abnormal fecal immunochemical test (FIT) are suboptimal, resulting in missed opportunities for early detection and prevention of colorectal cancer. Patient navigation and structured follow-up may improve colonoscopy completion, but implementation of these strategies is not widespread.MethodsWe conducted a quality improvement study using a Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) Model to increase colonoscopy completion after abnormal FIT in a large federally qualified health center serving a diverse and low-income population. Intervention components included patient navigation, and a checklist to promote completion of key steps required for abnormal FIT follow-up. Primary outcome was proportion of patients achieving colonoscopy completion within 6 months of abnormal FIT, assessed at baseline for 156 patients pre-intervention, and compared to 208 patients during the intervention period from April 2017 to December 2019. Drop offs at each step in the follow-up process were assessed.ResultsColonoscopy completion improved from 21% among 156 patients with abnormal FIT pre-intervention, to 38% among 208 patients with abnormal FIT during the intervention (P

Background: Colorectal cancer is the second most common cause of cancer mortality in Australia (1). The National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) aims to reduce mortality through early detection with a biennial faecal occult blood test for Australians aged 50–74 years (2). Modelling predicted COVID‐19 would reduce participation and delay colonoscopies despite the NBCSP continuing during the pandemic (3). This study analyses the realized impact of COVID‐19 related disruptions on the NBCSP and the effect on mortality. Methods: NBCSP participation, time to colonoscopy and annualized mortality were compared before and during COVID‐19. The effect on mortality was determined using a validated microsimulation model (4, 5). Results: From 1 January 2018 to 31 December 2019, 2 497 317 people participated in the NBCSP and 168 390 received a colonoscopy, compared to 2 490 265 and 162 573 from 1 January 2020 to 31 December 2021. Relative participation decreased 6 % and the proportion of colonoscopies performed within the recommended 120 days increased 14.5%. A disproportionally greater impact was observed outside major cities and in lower socioeconomic areas. An estimated 98–111 additional colorectal cancer deaths resulted from 3 % fewer colonoscopies performed during the pandemic. Conclusion: This study presents the most comprehensive analysis of the realized impact of COVID‐19 on the NBCSP. Catch‐up screening would be best targeted at Australians from rural and lower socioeconomic areas where participation remains low. Streamlined referral pathways and additional colonoscopy provisioning is required as less than two thirds of screen positive patients receive a colonoscopy within the recommended 120 days. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

IntroductionLimited data exists on the effectiveness of organized outreach campaigns on CRC screening completion for patients who are newly eligible for such screening.MethodsWe conducted an analysis of an existing clinical trial dataset of a publicly funded safety-net health system serving low-income populations.ResultsA total of 619 patients aged 50-51 received the outreach intervention and 3108 patients aged greater than 51 years old who had no prior history of FIT testing similarly received the outreach intervention. Patients newly eligible for FIT were more likely to complete a FIT test compared with older patients who had yet to complete a FIT test (58.3% vs 40.5%, p

IntroductionOrganized outreach to increase CRC screening using mailed FIT tests has been shown to be effective, but durable changes to screening behavior after cessation of screening is not known.MethodsIn this study, after cessation of funding for an organized cancer screening outreach program, we evaluated whether adherence to screening remained elevated. Patients aged 50-75 years eligible for CRC screening from eight safety net clinics were randomly assigned to outreach intervention vs usual care alone in 2016 to 2018; the primary outcome analyzed was the difference in the cumulative proportion of completed FIT screening between study assignments 1 year after study cessation.ResultsDespite higher rates of FIT screening for patients who were randomly assigned to the outreach intervention, FIT completion was not significantly different between the group that received the outreach services versus the usual care group (28.3% vs 29.8%, p = 0.158).ConclusionOutreach campaigns and their activities must be sustained to maintain improved rates of screening participation.

A 13-year-old boy presented with an 8-year history of repeated episodes of anemia. Laboratory investigations confirmed iron deficiency anemia due to occult blood loss from the gastrointestinal tract. Despite undergoing esophagogastroduodenoscopy, colonoscopy, and push enteroscopy, no abnormalities were detected. Subsequent computed tomography enterography also yielded normal results. However, a capsule endoscopy revealed multiple superficial ulcers in the jejunum and proximal ileum. Initially, the patient was treated for Crohn’s disease using various therapeutic approaches, all of which were unsuccessful. Further investigation led to a positive diagnosis for a rare condition known as chronic enteropathy associated with SLCO2A1 mutation (CEAS), marking the first reported case in India.

BackgroundThe fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is the primary modality used by the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services (LADHS) for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in average-risk patients. Some patients referred for FIT-positive diagnostic colonoscopy have neither adenomas nor more advanced pathology. We aimed to identify predictors of false-positive FIT (FP-FIT) results in our largely disenfranchised, low socioeconomic status population.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective study of 596 patients who underwent diagnostic colonoscopy following a positive screening FIT. Colonoscopies showing adenomas (or more advanced pathology) were considered positive. We employed multiple logistic and linear regression as well as machine learning models (MLMs) to identify clinical predictors of FP-FIT (primary outcome) and the presence of advanced adenomas (secondary outcome).ResultsOverall, 268 patients (45.0%) had a FP-FIT. Female sex and hemorrhoids (odds ratios [ORs] 1.59 and 1.89, respectively) were associated with increased odds of FP-FIT and fewer advanced adenomas (β = - 0.658 and  - 0.516, respectively). Conversely, increasing age and BMI (ORs 0.94 and 0.96, respectively) were associated with decreased odds of FP-FIT and a greater number of advanced adenomas (β = 0.073 and 0.041, respectively). MLMs predicted FP-FIT with high specificity (93.8%) and presence of advanced adenoma with high sensitivity (94.4%).ConclusionIncreasing age and BMI are associated with lower odds of FP-FIT and greater number of advanced adenomas, while female sex and hemorrhoids are associated with higher odds of FP-FIT and fewer advanced adenomas. The presence of the aforementioned predictors may inform the decision to proceed with diagnostic colonoscopy in FIT-positive patients.

Background & aimsReports of mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach effectiveness over time are minimal. We aimed to better evaluate a mailed FIT program with longitudinal metrics.MethodsA total of 10,771 patients aged 50 to 75 years not up-to-date with colorectal cancer screening were randomized to intervention or usual care. The intervention arm received an advanced notification call and informational postcard prior to a mailed FIT. Usual care was at the discretion of the primary care provider. Patients were followed for up to 2.5 years. The primary outcome was the difference in cumulative proportion of completed FIT screening between arms. Screening was further examined with the proportion of time up-to-date, consistency of adherence, and frequency of abnormal FIT.ResultsThe cumulative proportion of FIT completion was higher in the outreach intervention (73.2% vs 55.1%; P < .001). The proportion of time covered by screening was higher in the intervention group (46.8% vs 27.3%; Δ19.6%; 95% confidence interval, 18.2%-20.9%). Patients assigned to FIT outreach were more likely to consistently complete FITs (2 completed of 2 offered) (50.1% vs 21.8%; P < .001). However, for patients who did not complete the FIT during the first cycle, only 17.1% completed a FIT during the second outreach cycle. The number and overall proportion of abnormal FIT was significantly higher in the outreach intervention (6.9% Outreach vs 4.1% Usual Care; P < .01).ConclusionsOrganized mailed FIT outreach significantly increased colorectal cancer screening over multiple years in this safety-net health system. Although mailing was overall effective, the effect was modest in patients who did not complete FIT in first cycle of intervention. (ClincialTrials.gov, NCT02613260).

ObjectiveDespite some progress in recent years, colorectal cancer (CRC) screening adherence in the United States is still suboptimal, particularly among disadvantaged groups. In this study, we assessed the association between socioeconomic status (SES) and self-reported screening non-adherence (SNA) in a sample of racial/ethnic minorities living in San Francisco, California.Design/methodsA total of 376 participants of the San Francisco version of the Health Information National Trends Survey (SF-HINTS) with ages 50-75 years were included in this cross-sectional study. SNA was defined as not reporting blood stool test within the past year and not reporting sigmoidoscopy/colonoscopy within the past 10 years. Poisson regression models with robust variance estimators were used to evaluate the relation of SES with SNA, adjusting for measured confounders. Results are reported as prevalence ratios (PR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).ResultsOverall SNA was 40%. In multivariable models including all respondents, retired participants had significantly lower SNA prevalence than employed participants (PR = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.26 0.83). In stratified analyses by race/ethnicity, Black respondents with less than high school (PR = 1.93, 95% CI = 1.09, 3.43) and those with high school or equivalent (PR = 1.88, 95% CI = 1.16, 3.04) had significantly higher SNA prevalence than those with at least some college. Among non-Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islanders, those disabled had significantly higher prevalence of SNA as compared to employed people (PR = 4.26, 95% CI = 2.11, 8.60). None of the SES indicators were significantly associated to SNA among Hispanics.ConclusionsParticipants with lower SES characteristics were less likely to adhere to CRC screening guidelines and being retired was a predictor of compliance. There was evidence of heterogeneity in associations between SES and CRC screening by race/ethnicity. Life circumstances of retired people could provide insights for designing interventions aimed to improve CRC screening uptake in these priority groups. Future efforts should consider mechanisms underlying differences by race/ethnicity.

Opinion statementColorectal cancer (CRC) imposes significant morbidity and mortality, yet it is also largely preventable with evidence-based screening strategies. In May 2021, the US Preventive Services Task Force updated guidance, recommending screening begin at age 45 for average-risk individuals to reduce CRC incidence and mortality in the United States (US). The Task Force recommends screening with one of several screening strategies: high-sensitivity guaiac fecal occult blood test (HSgFOBT), fecal immunochemical test (FIT), multi-target stool DNA (mt-sDNA) test, computed tomographic (CT) colonography (virtual colonoscopy), flexible sigmoidoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy with FIT, or traditional colonoscopy. In addition to these recommended options, there are several emerging and novel CRC screening modalities that are not yet approved for first-line screening in average-risk individuals. These include blood-based screening or "liquid biopsy," colon capsule endoscopy, urinary metabolomics, and stool-based microbiome testing for the detection of colorectal polyps and/or CRC. In order to maximize CRC screening uptake in the US, patients and providers should engage in informed decision-making about the benefits and limitations of recommended screening options to determine the most appropriate screening test. Factors to consider include the invasiveness of the test, test performance, screening interval, accessibility, and cost. In addition, health systems should have a programmatic approach to CRC screening, which may include evidence-based strategies such as patient education, provider education, mailed screening outreach, and/or patient navigation, to maximize screening participation.

IntroductionThe Veterans Health Administration introduced a clinical reminder system in 2018 to help address process gaps in colorectal cancer screening, including the diagnostic evaluation of positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) results. We conducted a qualitative study to explore the differences between facilities who performed in the top vs bottom decile for follow-up colonoscopy.MethodsSeventeen semistructured interviews with gastroenterology (GI) providers and staff were conducted at 9 high-performing and 8 low-performing sites.ResultsWe identified 2 domains, current practices and perceived barriers, and most findings were described by both high- and low-performing sites. Findings exclusive to 1 group mainly pertained to current practices, especially arranging colonoscopy for FIT-positive patients. We observed only 1 difference in the perceived barriers domain, which pertained to primary care providers.DiscussionThese results suggest that what primarily distinguishes high- and low-performing sites is not a difference in barriers but rather in the GI clinical care process. Developing and disseminating patient education materials about the importance of diagnostic colonoscopy, eliminating in-person precolonoscopy visits when clinically appropriate, and involving GI in missed colonoscopy appointments and outside referrals should all be considered to increase follow-up colonoscopy rates. Our study illustrates the challenges of performing a timely colonoscopy after a positive FIT result and provides insights on improving the clinical care process for patients who are at substantially increased risk for colorectal cancer.

Abstract Background The COVID-19 pandemic has affected all aspects of the healthcare system, including prevention, treatment, rehabilitation of diseases and health education; access to essential therapies; allocation of finance & facilities to health issues, and governance of diseases, including COVID-19 and other diseases. Consequently, the burden of COVID-19 was not only attributable to the multiorgan involvement and detailed presentation of the disease but also to the inadequate management of other diseases resulting from the exclusive allocation of resources and medical personnel to the pandemic crisis. Over the mentioned period, one observed deficiency was the lack of public and official favor for conventional screening protocols. To this end, this study aims to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on colorectal cancer (CRC) screening protocols at Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences in Tehran, Iran, in an effort to identify individuals at risk for CRC and provide them with intensive screening and therapy. Methods This is an observational study comparing the number of candidates for CRC screening referred to primary, secondary, and tertiary health-care centers under supervision of Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences (SBMU), Tehran, Iran in a 2-year interval before and after COVID-19 pandemics. Patients with intermediate- and high-risk criteria for colorectal cancer were included in the study and were screened by fecal immunochemical test. Patients with positive or indeterminate fecal test results were further evaluated with colonoscopy in research institute for gastroenterology and liver diseases where is a tertiary referral center for CRC screening. Finally, the decrease percentage of screening tests and endoscopic findings during the pandemic period compared to pre-pandemic period was calculated and interpreted. Results A significant decrease in the number of performed fecal immunochemical tests (FITs), referred positive FITs, and referred patients with positive alarm signs to the Research Institute of Gastroenterology and Liver Diseases (RIGLD) center inevitably led to a considerable decrease in the number of endoscopic findings, including high-risk adenomas, sessile serrated polyps, and even early-stage colorectal cancers (CRCs). Conclusion The disruption of screening protocols caused by the COVID-19 pandemic appears to increase the number of patients with high-grade and end-stage CRCs referred in the near future.

ObjectiveDigital health care offers an opportunity to scale and personalize cancer screening programs, such as mailed outreach for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. However, studies that describe the patient selection strategy and process for CRC screening are limited. Our objective was to evaluate implementation strategies for selecting patients for CRC screening programs in large health care systems.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of 30 studies along with key informant surveys and interviews to describe programmatic implementation strategies for selecting patients for CRC screening. PubMed and Embase were searched since inception through December 2018, and hand searches were performed of the retrieved reference lists but none were incorporated (n = 0). No language exclusions were applied.ResultsCommon criteria for outreach exclusion included: being up-to-date with routine CRC screening (n = 22), comorbidities (n = 20), and personal history (n = 22) or family history of cancer (n = 9). Key informant surveys and interviews were performed (n = 28) to understand data sources and practices for patient outreach selection, and found that 13 studies leveraged electronic medical care records, 10 studies leveraged a population registry (national, municipal, community, health), 4 studies required patient opt-in, and 1 study required primary care provider referral. Broad ranges in fecal immunochemical test completion were observed in community clinic (n = 8, 31.0-59.6%), integrated health system (n = 5, 21.2-82.7%), and national regional CRC screening programs (n = 17, 23.0-64.7%). Six studies used technical codes, and four studies required patient self-reporting from a questionnaire to participate.ConclusionThis systematic review provides health systems with the diverse outreach practices and technical tools to support efforts to automate patient selection for CRC screening outreach.

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.

The 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has dramatically impacted numerous health and economic fronts. Because of the stay-at-home mandate and practice of physical distancing, nearly all preventive care measures have been halted, including colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. The health consequences of this temporary suspension are of great concern, particularly for underserved populations, who experience substantial CRC-related disparities. In this commentary, we describe challenges and opportunities to deliver COVID-19-adapted CRC screening to medically underserved populations receiving care in community health centers (CHC). This perspective is based on key informant interviews with CHC medical directors, teleconference discussions, and strategic planning assessments. To address the unprecedented challenges created by the COVID-19 pandemic, we identify 2 broad calls to action: invest in CHCs now and support equitable and adaptable telehealth solutions now and in the future. We also recommend 4 CRC-specific calls to action: establish COVID-19-adapted best practices to implement mailed fecal immunochemical test programs, implement grassroots advocacy to identify community gastroenterologists who commit to performing colonoscopies for CHC patients, assess cancer prevention priorities among individuals in underserved communities, and assess regional CRC screening and follow-up barriers and solutions. The COVID-19 pandemic may further exacerbate existing CRC screening disparities in underserved individuals. This will likely lead to delayed diagnosis, a shift to later-stage disease, and increased CRC deaths. To prevent this from happening, we call for timely action and a commitment to address the current extraordinary CRC screening challenges for vulnerable populations.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected all aspects of the healthcare system, including prevention, treatment, rehabilitation of diseases and health education; access to essential therapies; allocation of finance & facilities to health issues, and governance of diseases, including COVID-19 and other diseases. Consequently, the burden of COVID-19 was not only attributable to the multiorgan involvement and detailed presentation of the disease but also to the inadequate management of other diseases resulting from the exclusive allocation of resources and medical personnel to the pandemic crisis. Over the mentioned period, one observed deficiency was the lack of public and official favor for conventional screening protocols. To this end, this study aims to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on colorectal cancer (CRC) screening protocols at Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences in Tehran, Iran, in an effort to identify individuals at risk for CRC and provide them with intensive screening and therapy. Methods: This is an observational study comparing the number of candidates for CRC screening referred to primary, secondary, and tertiary health-care centers under supervision of Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences (SBMU), Tehran, Iran in a 2-year interval before and after COVID-19 pandemics. Patients with intermediate- and high-risk criteria for colorectal cancer were included in the study and were screened by fecal immunochemical test. Patients with positive or indeterminate fecal test results were further evaluated with colonoscopy in research institute for gastroenterology and liver diseases where is a tertiary referral center for CRC screening. Finally, the decrease percentage of screening tests and endoscopic findings during the pandemic period compared to pre-pandemic period was calculated and interpreted. Results: A significant decrease in the number of performed fecal immunochemical tests (FITs), referred positive FITs, and referred patients with positive alarm signs to the Research Institute of Gastroenterology and Liver Diseases (RIGLD) center inevitably led to a considerable decrease in the number of endoscopic findings, including high-risk adenomas, sessile serrated polyps, and even early-stage colorectal cancers (CRCs). Conclusion: The disruption of screening protocols caused by the COVID-19 pandemic appears to increase the number of patients with high-grade and end-stage CRCs referred in the near future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose This study aimed to evaluate the participation and follow-up test compliance rates and key performance indicators of the National Cancer Screening Program (NCSP) for colorectal cancer (CRC) from 2004 to 2017. Materials and Methods The overall outcomes of the NCSP for CRC were analyzed using the NCSP data collected from 2004 to 2017 and the Korean Central Cancer Registry for CRC from 2005 to 2017. We cross-sectionally analyzed the participation and follow-up test compliance rates and performance indicators for each year. The trend of participation rates as an annual percentage change was assessed, and other statistical analyses were performed. Results The screening participation rates increased from 7.3% in 2004 to 30.5% in 2017. Additionally, the screening rates were higher among individuals aged 60-69 years and National Health Insurance Service beneficiaries of low-income status. However, the adherence to the follow-up test decreased from 63% in 2004 to 32% in 2017. The follow-up tests using the double-contrast barium enema method decreased from 42.2% in 2004 to 0.3% in 2017. However, follow-up tests by colonoscopy increased from 21.0% in 2004 to 31.8% in 2017. Furthermore, the positivity, false-positive, and interval CRC rates decreased, whereas the specificity increased from 2004 to 2016, indicating improved performance of CRC. Conclusion The participation rates and performance of the NCSP for CRC have steadily improved, whereas adherence to follow-up tests has decreased. Additionally, there is a rapid growth in colonoscopy volume as a follow-up test. Continued efforts are required to improve the follow-up rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study was to first characterize the prevalence of recall, recognition, and knowledge of colon cancer screening tests and guidelines (collectively, "awareness") among non-Hispanic black (NHB) and NH white (NHW) urban colon cancer patients. Second, we sought to examine whether awareness was associated with mode of cancer detection. Low awareness regarding colon cancer screening tests and guidelines may explain low screening rates and high prevalence of symptomatic detection. We examined recall, recognition, and knowledge of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tests and guidelines and their associations with mode of cancer detection (symptomatic versus screen-detected) in 374 newly diagnosed NHB and NHW patients aged 45-79. Patients were asked to name or describe any test to screen for colon cancer (recall); next, they were given descriptions of stool testing and colonoscopy and asked if they recognized each test (recognition). Lastly, patients were asked if they knew the screening guidelines (knowledge). Overall, awareness of CRC screening guidelines was low; just 20% and 13% of patients knew colonoscopy and fecal test guidelines, respectively. Awareness of CRC screening tests and guidelines was especially low among NHB males, socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals, and those diagnosed at public healthcare facilities. Inability to name or recall a single test was associated with reduced screen-detected cancer compared with recall of at least one test (36% vs. 22%, p = 0.01). Low awareness of CRC screening tests is a risk factor for symptomatic detection of colon cancer.

ImportanceColorectal 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.ObjectiveTo 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.PopulationAsymptomatic 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 assessmentThe 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.RecommendationThe 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).

Background and aimsThe optimal time interval for diagnostic colonoscopy completion after an abnormal stool-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening test is uncertain. We examined the association between time to colonoscopy and CRC outcomes among individuals who underwent diagnostic colonoscopy after abnormal stool-based screening.MethodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study of veterans age 50 to 75 years with an abnormal fecal occult blood test (FOBT) or fecal immunochemical test (FIT) between 1999 and 2010. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards to generate CRC-specific incidence and mortality hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for 3-month colonoscopy intervals, with 1 to 3 months as the reference group. Association of time to colonoscopy with late-stage CRC diagnosis was also examined.ResultsOur cohort included 204,733 patients. Mean age was 61 years (SD 6.9). Compared with patients who received a colonoscopy at 1 to 3 months, there was an increased CRC risk for patients who received a colonoscopy at 13 to 15 months (HR 1.13; 95% CI 1.00-1.27), 16 to 18 months (HR 1.25; 95% CI 1.10-1.43), 19 to 21 months (HR 1.28; 95% CI: 1.11-1.48), and 22 to 24 months (HR 1.26; 95% CI 1.07-1.47). Compared with patients who received a colonoscopy at 1 to 3 months, mortality risk was higher in groups who received a colonoscopy at 19 to 21 months (HR 1.52; 95% CI 1.51-1.99) and 22 to 24 months (HR 1.39; 95% CI 1.03-1.88). Odds for late-stage CRC increased at 16 months.ConclusionsIncreased time to colonoscopy is associated with higher risk of CRC incidence, death, and late-stage CRC after abnormal FIT/FOBT. Interventions to improve CRC outcomes should emphasize diagnostic follow-up within 1 year of an abnormal FIT/FOBT result.

ImportanceColorectal 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.ObjectiveTo 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.PopulationAsymptomatic 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 assessmentThe 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.RecommendationThe 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).

BACKGROUND: How clinical teams function varies across sites and may affect follow-up of abnormal fecal immunochemical test (FIT) results. AIMS: This study aimed to identify the characteristics of clinical practices associated with higher diagnostic colonoscopy completion after an abnormal FIT result in a multi-site integrated safety-net system. METHODS: We distributed survey questionnaires about tracking and follow-up of abnormal FIT results to primary care team members across 11 safety-net clinics from January 2017 to April 2017. Surveys were distributed at all-staff clinic meetings and electronic surveys sent to those not in attendance. Participants received up to three reminders to complete the survey. RESULTS: Of the 501 primary care team members identified, 343 (68.5%) completed the survey. In the four highest-performing clinics, nurse managers identified at least two team members who were responsible for communicating abnormal FIT results to patients. Additionally, team members used a clinic-based registry to track patients with abnormal FIT results until colonoscopy completion. Compared to higher-performing clinics, lower-performing clinics more frequently cited competing health issues (56% vs. 40%, p = 0.03) and lack of patient priority (59% vs. 37%, p

ObjectiveColorectal cancer screening programs frequently report problems ensuring adequate follow-up of positive fecal immunochemical tests (FITs). We investigated strategies implemented by ongoing screening programs to improve follow-up for FIT-positive participants, and explored associations between interventions and reported rates of follow-up.MethodsWe submitted an electronic survey to 58 colorectal cancer screening programs or affiliated researchers. Primary outcomes were the proportion of program participants with a positive FIT completing diagnostic colonoscopy, and patient, provider, and system-level interventions used to improve follow-up. We compare mean colonoscopy completion at six months in programs with and without interventions.ResultsThirty-five programs completed the survey (60% response). The mean proportion of participants with a positive FIT who completed colonoscopy was 79% (standard deviation 16%). Programs used a mean of five interventions to improve follow-up. Programs using patient navigators had an 11% higher rate of colonoscopy completion at six months (p = 0.05). Programs sending reminders to primary care providers when no colonoscopy has been completed had a 12% higher rate of colonoscopy completion (p = 0.03). Other interventions were not associated with significant differences.ConclusionsAlmost all programs employ multiple interventions to ensure timely follow-up of positive FIT. The use of patient navigators and provider reminders is associated with higher rates of colonoscopy completion.

Abstract Background Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening reduces all-cause and CRC-related mortality. New research demonstrates that the faecal haemoglobin concentration (f-Hb) may indicate the presence of other serious diseases not related to CRC. We investigated the association between f-Hb, measured by a faecal immunochemical test (FIT), and both all-cause mortality and cause of death in a population-wide cohort of screening participants. Methods Between 2014 and 2018, 1,262,165 participants submitted a FIT for the Danish CRC screening programme. We followed these participants, using the Danish CRC Screening Database and several other national registers on health and population, until December 31, 2018. We stratified participants by f-Hb and compared them using a Cox proportional hazards regression on all-cause mortality and cause of death reported as adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs). We adjusted for several covariates, including comorbidity, socioeconomic factors, demography and prescription medication. Results We observed 21,847 deaths in the study period. Our multivariate analyses indicated an association relationship between increasing f-Hb and the risk of dying in the study period. This risk increased steadily from aHR 1.38 (95% CI: 1.32, 1.44) in those with a f-Hb of 7.1–11.9 μg Hb/g faeces to 2.20 (95% CI: 2.10, 2.30) in those with a f-Hb ≥60.0 μg Hb/g faeces, when compared to those with a f-Hb ≤7.0 μg Hb/g faeces. The pattern remained when excluding CRC from the analysis. Similar patterns were observed between incrementally increasing f-Hb and the risk of dying from respiratory disease, cardiovascular disease and cancers other than CRC. Furthermore, we observed an increased risk of dying from CRC with increasing f-Hb. Conclusions Our findings support the hypothesis that f-Hb may indicate an elevated risk of having chronic conditions if causes for the bleeding have not been identified. The mechanisms still need to be established, but f-Hb may be a potential biomarker for several non-CRC diseases.

BackgroundThe fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is the second most commonly used colorectal cancer (CRC) screening modality in the United States; yet, follow-up of abnormal FIT results with diagnostic colonoscopy is underutilized. Our objective was to determine patient-reported barriers to diagnostic colonoscopy following abnormal FIT in an academic healthcare setting.MethodsWe included patients age 50-75 with an abnormal FIT result between 1/1/2015 and 10/31/2017 and no documented follow-up diagnostic colonoscopy. We abstracted demographic data from the electronic health record (EHR). Study personnel conducted telephone surveys with patients to confirm colonoscopy completion and elicit data on notification of FIT results and barriers to colonoscopy. We also provided brief verbal education about diagnostic colonoscopy. We calculated frequencies of demographic data and survey responses and compared survey responses by interest in colonoscopy after education.ResultsWe surveyed 67 patients. Fifty-one were aware of the abnormal FIT result, and a majority learned of the abnormal FIT result by direct communication with providers (19, 37.3%) or EHR messaging (11, 21.6%). Overall, fifty-three patients (79.1%) confirmed lack of colonoscopy, citing provider-related (19, 35.8%), patient-related (16, 30.2%), system-related (1, 1.9%), or multifactorial (17, 32.1%) reasons. Lack of knowledge of FIT result (14, 26.4%) was most common. After brief education, 20 (37.7%) patients requested colonoscopy.ConclusionPatients with an abnormal FIT reported various multi-level barriers to diagnostic colonoscopy after abnormal FIT, including knowledge of FIT results. When provided with brief education, participants expressed interest in diagnostic colonoscopy. Future efforts will evaluate interventions to improve colonoscopy follow-up.

BackgroundExisting diagnostic methods for the parasitic gastrointestinal nematode, Haemonchus contortus, are time consuming and require specialised expertise, limiting their utility in the field. A practical, on-farm diagnostic tool could facilitate timely treatment decisions, thereby preventing losses in production and flock welfare. We previously demonstrated the ability of visible-near-infrared (Vis-NIR) spectroscopy to detect and quantify blood in sheep faeces with high accuracy. Here we report our investigation of whether variation in sheep type and environment affect the prediction accuracy of Vis-NIR spectroscopy in quantifying blood in faeces.MethodsVisible-NIR spectra were obtained from worm-free sheep faeces collected from different environments and sheep types in South Australia (SA) and New South Wales, Australia and spiked with various sheep blood concentrations. Spectra were analysed using principal component analysis (PCA), and calibration models were built around the haemoglobin (Hb) wavelength region (387-609 nm) using partial least squares regression. Models were used to predict Hb concentrations in spiked faeces from SA and naturally infected sheep faeces from Queensland (QLD). Samples from QLD were quantified using Hemastix® test strip and FAMACHA© diagnostic test scores.ResultsPrincipal component analysis showed that location, class of sheep and pooled versus individual samples were factors affecting the Hb predictions. The models successfully differentiated 'healthy' SA samples from those requiring anthelmintic treatment with moderate to good prediction accuracy (sensitivity 57-94%, specificity 44-79%). The models were not predictive for blood in the naturally infected QLD samples, which may be due in part to variability of faecal background and blood chemistry between samples, or the difference in validation methods used for blood quantification. PCA of the QLD samples, however, identified a difference between samples containing high and low quantities of blood.ConclusionThis study demonstrates the potential of Vis-NIR spectroscopy for estimating blood concentration in faeces from various types of sheep and environmental backgrounds. However, the calibration models developed here did not capture sufficient environmental variation to accurately predict Hb in faeces collected from environments different to those used in the calibration model. Consequently, it will be necessary to establish models that incorporate samples that are more representative of areas where H. contortus is endemic.

BackgroundPhone calls as part of multimodal fecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach are effective but resource-intensive. Previous studies of advanced notification calls before FIT mailing have not differentiated patients' prior screening status.ObjectiveTo determine the effectiveness of a phone call preceding mailing of a FIT kit on test completion rate for patients who have completed a prior FIT.DesignRandomized controlled trial nested within a larger study. All patients were assigned to receive organized mailed FIT outreach in the larger study.ParticipantsPatients in a safety-net health setting ages 50-75 years old with a previously negative FIT.InterventionsPatients were assigned to either receive an advanced notification phone call or no phone call preceding a mailed FIT kit. Both groups received an informational postcard prior to the mailed FIT.Main measuresThe primary outcome was FIT completion rate at 1 year. The secondary outcomes were FIT completion rates at 60, 90, and 180 days, rates stratified by demographic subgroups, and rates according to outcome of the phone call.Key resultsA total of 1645 patients were assigned to advanced notification calls and 1595 were assigned to no call preceding the FIT mailing. Although FIT completion rate was higher at day 60 (55.5% vs. 50.8%, p < 0.01), an advanced notification call did not significantly improve FIT completion at 1 year (70.9% vs. 69.9%, p = 0.52). Of the patients assigned to receive an advanced notification call, 90.5% were spoken with or left a voicemail; patients who were spoken with were more likely to complete a FIT at 1 year compared with patients who were only left a voicemail or could not be left a voicemail (79.9% vs. 69.2% vs. 49.6%, p < 0.01).ConclusionsAdvanced notification phone calls prior to FIT mailing did not improve rates at 1 year for patients with a previously negative FIT.

• Hb concentration decreases in FIT specimens with storage, which may lead to false negatives. • FIT specimens with initial results near the clinical cut-off are more susceptible to false negatives. • Specimen storage temperature impacts the stability of FIT specimens. • Laboratories should validate FIT specimen storage conditions to help prevent false negatives. Fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) are used to screen for colorectal cancer by detecting blood present in stool. Patients collect FIT specimens at home in a sampling kit and return them to the lab for testing. At our institution, patients are instructed to return their specimens to the laboratory within seven days from collection, which is shorter than the manufacturer stated room temperature (RT) stability of 15 days. The objective of this study was to assess and verify the stability of FIT specimens at RT and to determine if refrigerated storage improves stability. A series of experiments were performed with the OC-Sensor DIANA iFOB Test system between 2017 and 2019, using a positive clinical cut-off of 75 ng/mL (15 µg/g) hemoglobin (Hb). Specimens were collected and categorized based on their initially measured Hb concentration and had repeated measurements for up to 21 days following collection. FIT specimens were stored either at RT or refrigerated. Our results show that FIT specimens have reduced concentrations of Hb compared to baseline when stored at RT; refrigeration improved FIT specimen stability but did not completely prevent the reduction in Hb concentration. Additionally, specimens marginally above the cut-off (initial concentrations between 75 and 100 ng/mL (15–20 µg/g)) that were stored at RT showed 100% positivity on the day of collection (n=33), 63% on Day 3 (n=19), 46% on Days 4/5 (n=26), and 38% on Days 6/7 (n=26). Finally, specimens with Hb values near the clinical cut-off appear to be particularly susceptible to false negatives as a result of the reduction in Hb over time. Therefore, laboratories should verify the specifics of their FIT tests before offering it to patients to reduce false negatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundIn middle-income countries, the burden of colorectal cancer (CRC) is increasing in parallel with resources for diagnosis and treatment. There is a potential benefit of CRC screening programs in Mexico.ObjectiveSince there are no organized screening programs in the country, we explored the willingness of individuals to complete a faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) based CRC screening program and its potential benefit in Mexico.MethodsWe conducted a CRC screening program pilot in Veracruz, Mexico, during 2015-16 using FIT. Individuals with FIT results >100 ng of haemoglobin/ml buffer were referred for diagnostic colonoscopy.ResultsOf 473 FIT kits distributed to adults aged 50-75, 85.8% (406) were completed by participants and analysed in the laboratory. Of these, 5.9% (24/406) of test results showed >100 ng haemoglobin/ml. Twenty-one participants completed colonoscopy. The positive predictive value of FIT >100 ng haemoglobin/ml for premalignant lesions was 33%.ConclusionThese results provide preliminary evidence of the willingness of individuals to complete FIT-based CRC screening program in Mexico. However, further evaluation of health systems resources will be needed prior to large-scale implementation of CRC screening programs.

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

Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains one of the most common and deadly malignancies despite advancements in screening, diagnostic capabilities, and treatment. The ability to detect and remove precancerous and cancerous lesions via screening has altered the epidemiology of the disease, decreasing incidence, mortality, and late-stage disease presentation. The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is a screening test that aims to detect human hemoglobin in the stool. FIT is the most common CRC screening modality worldwide and second most common in the United States. Its use in screening programs has been shown to increase screening uptake and improve CRC outcomes. However, FIT-based screening programs vary widely in quality and effectiveness. In health systems with high-quality FIT screening programs, only superior FIT formats are used, providers order FIT appropriately, annual patient participation is high, and diagnostic follow-up after an abnormal result is achieved in a timely manner. Proper utilization of FIT involves multiple steps beyond provider recommendation of the test. In this commentary, we aim to highlight ongoing challenges in FIT screening and suggest interventions to maximize FIT effectiveness. Through active engagement of patients and providers, health systems can use FIT to help optimize CRC screening rates and improve CRC outcomes.

Background & aimsNoninvasive tests used in colorectal cancer screening, such as the fecal immunochemical test (FIT), are more acceptable but detect neoplasias with lower levels of sensitivity than colonoscopy. We investigated whether lowering the cut-off concentration of hemoglobin for designation as an abnormal FIT result increased the detection of advanced neoplasia in a mailed outreach program.MethodsWe performed a prospective study of 17,017 uninsured patients, age 50 to 64 years, who were not current with screening and enrolled in a safety-net system in Texas. We reduced the cut-off value for an abnormal FIT result from 20 or more to 10 or more μg hemoglobin/g feces a priori. All patients with abnormal FIT results were offered no-cost diagnostic colonoscopy. We compared proportions of patients with abnormal FIT results and neoplasia yield for standard vs lower cut-off values, as well as absolute hemoglobin concentration distribution among 5838 persons who completed the FIT. Our primary aim was to determine the effects of implementing a lower hemoglobin concentration cut-off value on colonoscopy demand and yield, specifically colorectal cancer (CRC) and advanced neoplasia detection, compared with the standard, higher, hemoglobin concentration cut-off value.ResultsThe proportions of patients with abnormal FIT results were 12.3% at the 10 or more μg hemoglobin/g feces and 6.6% at the standard 20 or more μg hemoglobin/g feces cut-off value (P = .0013). Detection rates for the lower vs the standard threshold were 10.2% vs 12.7% for advanced neoplasia (P = .12) and 0.9% vs 1.2% for CRC (P = .718). The positive predictive values were 18.9% for the lower threshold vs 24.4% for the standard threshold for advanced neoplasia (P = .053), and 1.7% vs 2.4% for CRC (P = .659). The number needed to screen to detect 1 case with advanced neoplasia was 45 at the lower threshold compared with 58 at the standard threshold; the number needed to scope to detect 1 case with advanced neoplasia increased from 4 to 5. Most patients with CRC (72.7%) or advanced adenoma (67.3%) had hemoglobin concentrations of 20 or more μg/g feces. In the group with 10 to 19 μg hemoglobin/g feces, there were 3 patients with CRC (3 of 11; 27.3%) and 36 with advanced adenoma (36 of 110; 32.7%) who would not have been detected at the standard positive threshold (advanced neoplasia Pcomparison < .001). The proportion of patients found to have no neoplasia after an abnormal FIT result (false positives) was not significantly higher with the lower cut-off value (44.4%) than the standard cut-off value (39.1%) (P = .1103).ConclusionsIn a prospective study of 17,017 uninsured patients, we found that reducing the abnormal FIT result cut-off value (to ≥10 μg hemoglobin/g feces) might increase detection of advanced neoplasia, but doubled the proportion of patients requiring a diagnostic colonoscopy. If colonoscopy capacity permits, health systems that use quantitative FITs should consider lowering the abnormal cut-off value to optimize CRC detection and prevention. (ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT01946282.).

Screening with fecal occult blood tests (FOBT) reduces colorectal cancer mortality. Failure to complete repeat tests may compromise screening effectiveness. We conducted a systematic review of repeat FOBT across diverse health care settings. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for studies published from 1997 to 2017 and reported repeat FOBT over ≥2 screening rounds. Studies (n = 27 reported in 35 articles) measured repeat FOBT as (i) proportion of Round 1 participants completing repeat FOBT in Round 2; (ii) proportion completing two, consecutive FOBT; or (iii) proportion completing ≥3 rounds. Among those who completed FOBT in Round 1, 24.6% to 89.6% completed repeat FOBT in Round 2 [median: 82.0%; interquartile range (IQR): 73.7%-84.6%]. The proportion completing FOBT in two rounds ranged from 16.4% to 80.0% (median: 46.6%; IQR: 40.5%-50.0%), and in studies examining ≥3 rounds, repeat FOBT ranged from 0.8% to 64.1% (median: 39.2%; IQR: 19.7%-49.4%). Repeat FOBT appeared higher in mailed outreach (69.1%-89.6%) compared with opportunistic screening (24.6%-48.6%). Few studies examined correlates of repeat FOBT. In summary, we observed a wide prevalence of repeat FOBT, and prevalence generally declined in successive screening rounds. Interventions that increase and maintain participation in FOBT are needed to optimize effectiveness of this screening strategy.

AbstractBackground Evidence is increasing for the use of faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for occult blood as diagnostic tools when colorectal cancer can be suspected. FITs have been used for this purpose in Swedish primary care since around 2005 despite absence of supporting guidelines. To our knowledge, the extent of this use has not been studied.Objective To investigate the use of FITs as diagnostic tools, and if the use was related to patient age, sex and travel time from primary care to diagnostic facilities in secondary care.Design Population-based retrospective study using data from electronic health records.Setting and subjects Patients ≥18 years that provided FITs in primary care in five Swedish health care regions during 2015. Driving times from their primary care centres to secondary care were calculated.Main outcome measures The proportion of patients that provided FITs was calculated for each region, different age intervals and grouped driving times.Results 18,913 patients provided FITs. The proportion of listed patients in the five regions that provided FITs increased with age: 0.86–1.2% for ages

Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening reduces all-cause and CRC-related mortality. New research demonstrates that the faecal haemoglobin concentration (f-Hb) may indicate the presence of other serious diseases not related to CRC. We investigated the association between f-Hb, measured by a faecal immunochemical test (FIT), and both all-cause mortality and cause of death in a population-wide cohort of screening participants. Methods: Between 2014 and 2018, 1,262,165 participants submitted a FIT for the Danish CRC screening programme. We followed these participants, using the Danish CRC Screening Database and several other national registers on health and population, until December 31, 2018. We stratified participants by f-Hb and compared them using a Cox proportional hazards regression on all-cause mortality and cause of death reported as adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs). We adjusted for several covariates, including comorbidity, socioeconomic factors, demography and prescription medication. Results: We observed 21,847 deaths in the study period. Our multivariate analyses indicated an association relationship between increasing f-Hb and the risk of dying in the study period. This risk increased steadily from aHR 1.38 (95% CI: 1.32, 1.44) in those with a f-Hb of 7.1–11.9 μg Hb/g faeces to 2.20 (95% CI: 2.10, 2.30) in those with a f-Hb ≥60.0 μg Hb/g faeces, when compared to those with a f-Hb ≤7.0 μg Hb/g faeces. The pattern remained when excluding CRC from the analysis. Similar patterns were observed between incrementally increasing f-Hb and the risk of dying from respiratory disease, cardiovascular disease and cancers other than CRC. Furthermore, we observed an increased risk of dying from CRC with increasing f-Hb. Conclusions: Our findings support the hypothesis that f-Hb may indicate an elevated risk of having chronic conditions if causes for the bleeding have not been identified. The mechanisms still need to be established, but f-Hb may be a potential biomarker for several non-CRC diseases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundFor colorectal cancer (CRC) screening to improve survival, patients with an abnormal fecal immunochemical test (FIT) must follow-up with a diagnostic colonoscopy. Adherence to follow-up is low and patient-level barriers for suboptimal adherence have yet to be explored.ObjectiveTo characterize barriers for non-completion of diagnostic colonoscopy after an abnormal FIT reported by under- and uninsured patients receiving care in a safety-net health system.DesignA longitudinal, cohort study of CRC screening outreach to 8565 patients using mailed FIT kits. Patients with abnormal FIT results received telephonic navigation to arrange for a no-cost diagnostic colonoscopy.PatientsAdults aged 50-64 years receiving care at a North Texas safety-net health system.ApproachDescriptive analyses characterized the patient sample and reasons for lack of follow-up after abnormal FIT over the 3-year outreach program. Thematic qualitative analyses characterized reasons for lack of follow-up with a colonoscopy after the abnormal FIT.Key resultsOf 689 patients with an abnormal FIT, 45% (n = 314) did not complete a follow-up colonoscopy. Among the 314 non-completers, 184 patients reported reasons for not completing a follow-up colonoscopy included health insurance-related challenges (38%), comorbid conditions (37%), social barriers such as transportation difficulties and lack of social support (29%), concerns about FIT/colonoscopy process (12%), competing life priorities (12%), adverse effects of bowel preparation (3%), and poor health literacy (3%). Among the 314 non-completers, 131 patients did not report a barrier, as 51% reported that that had completed a previous colonoscopy in the past 10 years, 10% refused with no reason, and 10% were never reached by phone.ConclusionsFuture studies aimed at improving FIT screening and subsequent colonoscopy rates need to address the unique needs of patients for effective and sustainable screening programs.Trial registrationNCT01946282.

This study examined factors related to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening uptake among Thais in the United States. A total of 121 Thais between 50 and 75 years of age, who were married and living in southern California participated in the survey (mean age = 61 years). Out of all the participants, only 21% of the participants had fecal occult blood tests, 21% had sigmoidoscopy, and 45% had colonoscopy that were within the recommended period. Overall, 55% of participants met CRC screening adherence criteria. Participants who had had regular checkups in the previous 2 years without having any symptoms were 16 times more likely to have obtained CRC screening than their counterparts (OR 16.01, CI 3.75-68.75) in the multivariable logistic regression model. Other significant predictors of screening adherence included older age (OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.00-1.17), having lived in the U.S. 15 years or longer (OR 6.65, 95% CI 1.55-28.59), having had at least some college education (OR 3.74, 95% CI 1.23-11.37), and higher levels of perceived self-efficacy (OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.01-3.50) to obtain CRC screening. Targeted interventions for Thais who are less likely receive CRC screening could be effective in improving CRC screening. Interventions to improve the populations' awareness of the importance of preventive measures when they are not sick could be also effective.

OBJECTIVES:The effectiveness of fecal immunochemical test (FIT) screening for colorectal cancer depends on timely colonoscopy follow-up of positive tests, although limited data exist regarding effective system-level strategies for improving follow-up rates. METHODS:Using a mixed-methods design (qualitative and quantitative), we first identified system-level strategies that were implemented for improving timely follow-up after a positive FIT test in a large community-based setting between 2006 and 2016. We then evaluated changes in time to colonoscopy among FIT-positive patients across 3 periods during the study interval, controlling for screening participant age, sex, race/ethnicity, comorbidity, FIT date, and previous screening history. RESULTS:Implemented strategies over the study period included setting a goal of colonoscopy follow-up within 30 days of a positive FIT, tracking FIT-positive patients, early telephone contact to directly schedule follow-up colonoscopies, assigning the responsibility for follow-up tracking and scheduling to gastroenterology departments (vs primary care), and increasing colonoscopy capacity. Among 160,051 patients who had a positive FIT between 2006 and 2016, 126,420 (79%) had a follow-up colonoscopy within 180 days, including 67% in 2006-2008, 79% in 2009-2012, and 83% in 2013-2016 (P < 0.001). Follow-up within 180 days in 2016 varied moderately across service areas, between 72% (95% CI 70-75) and 88% (95% CI 86-91), but there were no obvious differences in the pattern of strategies implemented in higher- vs lower-performing service areas. CONCLUSIONS:The implementation of system-level strategies coincided with substantial improvements in timely colonoscopy follow-up after a positive FIT. Intervention studies are needed to identify the most effective strategies for promoting timely follow-up.

Despite clear evidence that colorectal cancer (CRC) screening reduces mortality, screening, including fecal immunochemical tests (FIT), is underutilized. We conducted a systematic review to determine the evidence of efficacy of interventions to improve FIT completion that could be scaled and utilized in population health management. We systematically searched publication databases for studies evaluating provider- or system-level interventions to improve CRC screening by FIT between 1 January 1996 and 13 December 2017 without language restrictions. Twenty articles describing 25 studies were included, 23 were randomized controlled trials with 1 quasi-experimental and 1 observational study. Ten studies discussed mailed FIT outreach, 4 pre-FIT patient reminders, 3 tailored patient messages, 2 post-FIT reminders, 2 paired FIT with influenza vaccinations, 2 provider alerts and 1 study each described the use of high-quality small media and patient financial incentives. Mailed FIT outreach was consistently effective with median improvement in CRC screening of 21.5% (interquartile range (IQR) 13.6%-29.0%). FIT paired with vaccinations led to a median 15.9% (IQR 15.6%-16.3%) improvement, while pre-FIT and post-FIT reminders demonstrated modest efficacy with median 4.1% (IQR 3.6%-6.7%) and 3.1% (IQR 2.9%-3.3%) improvement in CRC screening, respectively. More than half the studies were at high or unclear risk of bias; heterogeneous study designs and characteristics precluded meta-analysis. FIT-based CRC screening programs utilizing multilevel interventions (e.g. mailed FIT outreach, FIT paired with other preventative services, and provider alerts) have the potential to significantly increase screening participation. However, such programs must also follow-up patients with abnormal FIT results.

Chinese Americans have low colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates. It is unclear whether physicians should offer all CRC screening modalities (fecal occult blood test [FOBT], sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy) to Chinese Americans to increase screening. Seven hundred and twenty-five Chinese Americans were asked in a survey if their physician had ever recommended CRC screening and to self-report receipt and type of CRC screening. Participants whose physician had recommended all CRC screening modalities were significantly more likely to report ever having screening (adjusted odds ratio 4.29, 95% CI 1.26-14.68) and being up-to-date (4.06, 95% CI 2.13-7.74) than those who reported that their physician only recommended FOBT. Participants who received a recommendation of only one type of screening did not report a significant difference in ever having or being up-to-date for screening. A potential strategy to increase CRC screening among Chinese Americans is for clinicians to recommend all available CRC screening modalities to each patient.

Evidence is increasing for the use of faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for occult blood as diagnostic tools when colorectal cancer can be suspected. FITs have been used for this purpose in Swedish primary care since around 2005 despite absence of supporting guidelines. To our knowledge, the extent of this use has not been studied. To investigate the use of FITs as diagnostic tools, and if the use was related to patient age, sex and travel time from primary care to diagnostic facilities in secondary care. Population-based retrospective study using data from electronic health records. Patients ≥18 years that provided FITs in primary care in five Swedish health care regions during 2015. Driving times from their primary care centres to secondary care were calculated. The proportion of patients that provided FITs was calculated for each region, different age intervals and grouped driving times. 18,913 patients provided FITs. The proportion of listed patients in the five regions that provided FITs increased with age: 0.86–1.2% for ages <65 years, 3.6–4.1% for ages 65–79 years and 3.8–6.1% for ages ≥80 years. Differences between the regions were small. There was no overall correlation between the proportion of patients that provided FITs and driving time to secondary care. FITs were used extensively in Swedish primary care with a higher use in older age groups. There was no tendency towards a higher use of FITs at primary care centres with longer driving times to secondary care. Evidence is increasing for the use of faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) as diagnostic tools when colorectal cancer can be suspected. We investigated the use of FITs in Sweden. FITs were used extensively in primary care especially in older age groups. There were small differences in the use of FITs between five studied health care regions. There was no tendency towards a higher use of FITs at primary care centres with longer driving times to diagnostic facilities in secondary care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aim: Colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical test (FIT) are commonly used screening methods for the detection of colorectal cancer (CRC), but their effects on survival have not been compared. We compared survival outcomes in patients with CRC according to the exposure history to colonoscopy or FIT before diagnosis of CRC. Methods: We performed a nationwide population‐based retrospective cohort study using Korean national‐insurance claims data. In total, 24 875 patients with CRC diagnosed in 2012 were included. The patients were divided into three groups in terms of examinations performed during the 10 years prior to CRC diagnosis: the colonoscopy group, the FIT group, and the never‐screened group. Survival outcomes were compared among the three groups. The colonoscopy group and FIT group were matched using propensity score‐matching method. Results: The cohort consisted of 9619 patients in the colonoscopy group, 6936 patients in the FIT group, and 8320 patients in the never‐screened group. The 5‐year overall survival rates were 74.1% in the colonoscopy group, 65.9% in the FIT group, and 59.6% in the never‐screened group (P < 0.001). The adjusted hazard ratios for death were 0.56 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53–0.59) in the colonoscopy group and 0.78 (95% CI, 0.74–0.82) in the FIT group compared with the never‐screened group. In the matched cohort, the adjusted hazard ratios for death was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.72–0.81) in the colonoscopy group compared with the FIT group. Conclusion: Colonoscopy is a more effective method for reducing mortality in patients with CRC compared with FIT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Colorectal cancer, the second leading cause of mortality in the USA, can be prevented with colorectal cancer screening. However, many people who should receive the screening do not get screened. To learn more, this study estimated the prevalence of up-to-date colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and examined the relationship between CRC knowledge and screening compliance among Asian Americans living in the Baltimore-Washington Metropolitan area. The study included a cross-sectional sample of 274 Chinese, Korean, and Vietnamese Americans aged 50-75 years old. Participants completed a questionnaire regarding CRC knowledge in either their preferred native language or in English, and data were collected in person. The percentage of total participants with up-to-date overall CRC screening was 52.9%. Up-to-date fecal occult blood test (FOBT) screening was 15.0% and colonoscopy was 50.7%. The average CRC knowledge score was 6.10 out of 9 (SD = 2.91). Those with high education, high English proficiency, married, health insurance, and good physical health ratings had higher CRC knowledge. In multivariate analysis, CRC knowledge was significantly correlated with increasing up-to-date colonoscopy (aOR = 2.74, 1.13-6.64). Having health insurance (aOR = 4.40, 2.33-8.32) was another predictor of up-to-date colonoscopy. These findings suggest that CRC knowledge is a strong predictor of CRC screening behavior in Asian American populations. Lack of CRC screening knowledge still remains an important barrier to screening, and increased public awareness is necessary to achieve greater screening compliance.

Objectives: There are patients who do not undergo colonoscopy even if the fecal immunochemistry test (FIT) results are positive and even with repeated positive test results the following year. We aimed to investigate colorectal cancer (CRC) risk in examinees with positive FIT results in our annual screening program. Methods: We analyzed patients who underwent initial colonoscopy from April 2010 to March 2017 because of positive FIT results using an endoscopy database in our hospital. We investigated the difference in the risk of advanced colorectal neoplasia as a surrogate marker of CRC between those who had an initial positive test and those who had repeated positive tests. Results: A total of 748 patients were included in this analysis. The advanced neoplasia detection rates were 7.6% (50/656) and 18.5% (17/92) for the initial and repeated positive test groups, respectively. Subgroup analysis of those with repeated positive tests revealed that the detection rates in examinees with positive tests 1-2 and >2 years ago were 16.7% (6/36) and 19.6% (11/56), respectively. The odds ratios for advanced neoplasia detection in patients with positive tests 1-2 and >2 years ago compared with those in the initial positive test group were 2.72 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-7.10) and 3.09 (95% CI, 1.47-6.48), respectively. Conclusions: The risk of CRC appears more than doubled in patients with a repeated positive FIT result. Prompt colonoscopy is recommended for FIT-positive cases.

Background Positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) results have been recently suggested as a risk factor for systemic inflammation. Diabetes induces inflammation in the gastrointestinal tract via several ways. We investigated the association between FIT results and the incidence of diabetes. Methods A total of 7,946,393 individuals aged ≥50 years from the National Cancer Screening Program database who underwent FIT for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening from 2009 to 2012 were enrolled. The primary outcome was newly diagnosed diabetes based on the International Classification of Disease 10th revision codes and administration of anti-diabetic medication during the follow-up period. Results During a mean follow-up of 6.5 years, the incidence rates of diabetes were 11.97, 13.60, 14.53, and 16.82 per 1,000 personyears in the FIT negative, one-positive, two-positive, and three-positive groups, respectively. The hazard ratios (HRs) for the incidence of diabetes were 1.14 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12 to 1.16; HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.16 to 1.27; and HR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.28 to 1.55) in the one-positive, two-positive, and three-positive FIT groups compared with the FIT negative group, respectively. The effect was consistent in individuals with normal fasting blood glucose (adjusted HR 1.55 vs. 1.14, P for interaction

BackgroundLong-term adherence to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is particularly important for fecal testing. Some U.S. studies report that only 25% of individuals repeat fecal testing annually. The purpose of this qualitative study was to identify barriers and facilitators reported by patients with suboptimal screening adherence to refine interventions for starting ongoing adherence to CRC screening. We also explored whether participants, particularly never screeners, would be willing to do a CRC screening blood test.MethodsForty-one patients who previously enrolled in the Systems of Support to Increase CRC Screening (SOS) trial were interviewed 4-5 years later. Participants were purposively selected to include men and women with diverse race/ethnicities who had either been inconsistent screeners or had never screened during the first three years of SOS despite receiving at least two rounds of mailed fecal tests. Two interviewers conducted 30-min telephone interviews using a semi-structured interview guide. An iterative thematic analysis approach was used.ResultsThemes related to screening barriers were more pervasive among never screeners including: (1) Avoidance (inattention, procrastination) (2) Concerns about handling stool; (3) Health concerns; (4) Fear of a cancer diagnosis or positive test results. Themes related to screening facilitators were more often mentioned by participants who screened at least once including: (1) Use of a simpler 1-sample fecal test; (2) Convenience of mailings and doing the test at home; (3) Salience of prevention, especially as one got older; and (4) Influence of recommendations from providers, family and friends. Participants had diverse preferences for the number (3 on average) and types (phone, mail, text) of screening reminders. Some participants did not prefer e-mail links to the patient shared electronic health record because of difficulties remembering their password. It was acceptable for a nurse or medical assistant not from their clinic to call them as long as that person was knowledgeable about their records and could communicate with their physician. Participants, especially never screeners, were generally very enthusiastic about the potential option of a CRC screening blood test.ConclusionFuture CRC screening programs should be designed to minimize these barriers and maximize facilitators to improve long-term screening adherence.Trial registrationPrimary Funding Agency: The National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health (R01CA121125). Registered at clinicaltrials.gov NCT00697047 .

Background: Screening with fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) reduces colorectal cancer mortality; however, screening remains low in underserved populations. Mailed outreach, including an invitation letter, FIT, and test instructions, is an evidence-based strategy to improve screening.Aims: To examine screening completion and yield in a mailed outreach program in a safety-net healthcare system.Methods: We identified and mailed outreach invitations to patients due for screening in a large safety-net system between September 1, 2018, and August 31, 2019. We examined: (1) screening completion, the proportion of patients completing FIT or screening colonoscopy within 6 months of the mailed invitation; and (2) timely diagnostic colonoscopy, the proportion of patients completing colonoscopy within 6 months of positive FIT.Results: We mailed 14,879 invitations to 13,190 patients. Nearly half (n = 6098, 46.2%) of patients completed screening: 4,896 (80.3%) completed FIT through mailed outreach; 1,114 (18.3%) FIT through usual care; and 88 (1.4%) screening colonoscopy through usual care. Of patients with a positive FIT (n = 289), 50.5% completed diagnostic colonoscopy within 6 months, 10.7% within 6-12 months, and 4.8% after 12 months. A total of 8 cancers and 83 advanced adenomas were detected in the 191 patients completing diagnostic colonoscopy.Conclusion: After implementing and scaling up mailed outreach in a safety-net system, about half of patients completed screening, and the majority did so through mailed outreach. However, many patients failed to complete diagnostic colonoscopy after positive FIT. Results highlight the importance of adapting mailed outreach programs to local contexts and constraints of healthcare systems, in order to support efforts to improve CRC screening in underserved populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purposes of this study were to determine if (1) certain demographic characteristics (potential predictors) of participants, and (2) clock-drawing test results (as a screening test for cognitive impairment) were associated with fecal immunochemical test (FIT) sample collection errors.Methods: Patients scheduled for an upcoming colonoscopy were asked to collect stool samples using 5 different FITs. Patients completed a questionnaire that included the clock-drawing test. Errors included mistakes or omissions in recording the stool collection date and errors in stool collection. Each clock drawing was scored by 2 reviewers using 2 established methods.Results: Of the 1,448 participants with a clock drawing, 63% were female with a mean age of 63 years. In this population there were 83% White, 6% Black, and 24% Hispanic persons. Cognitive impairment was found in 292 patients by the Mendes-Santos method. Kappa coefficient for the 2 clock-drawing scores was 0.79 (P <.001). The multivariable generalized linear mixed model for FIT collection errors indicated being female (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.64; 95% CI, 1.09-2.48), having an 8th grade or less education (AOR, 3.40; 95% CI, 1.87-6.18), and having an abnormal Mendes-Santos method clock score (AOR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.08-2.54) were associated with significantly more errors.Conclusion: Among the participants who do not have dementia, FIT collection errors were made not only by those who had abnormal clock drawing, but also, by those with normal clock drawings. Subjects being female, having 8th grade education or less, and having an abnormal clock drawing scored by Mendes-Santos's method were associated with FIT collection errors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate the significance of combined detection of Septin9 and syndecan-2 (SDC2) methylation markers and serum tumor markers for the early diagnosis of colorectal cancer., Methods: A total of 116 patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer between December 2022 and February 2024 were designated as the colorectal cancer group. Additionally, 31 patients with colorectal adenoma were assigned to the adenoma group, while 44 individuals undergoing routine physical examinations were included in the control group. Concentrations of Septin9, SDC2, fecal occult blood (FOB), and four tumor markers-carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), carbohydrate antigen 199 (CA199), carbohydrate antigen 125 (CA125), and carbohydrate antigen 724 (CA724)-were measured. Diagnostic performance was assessed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for Septin9, SDC2, the four tumor markers, FOB, the combination of Septin9 and SDC2, and the combined use of all seven indicators (CEA, CA19-9, CA125, CA72-4, FOB, Septin9, and SDC2)., Results: The colorectal cancer group exhibited the highest positive rates for Septin9, SDC2, the four tumor markers, the combined detection of Septin9 and SDC2, and the combined detection of all seven indicators, compared to both the adenoma and control groups (P < 0.05). The adenoma group also showed higher positive rates than the control group (P < 0.05). For patients with stage I-III colorectal cancer, the positive rates for the combined detection of Septin9 and SDC2 were 81.3%, 78.9%, and 90.2%, respectively, surpassing those for the combined detection of the four tumor markers (43.8%, 55.3%, and 61.0%). Additionally, the positive rates for the two-gene combination in stage III colorectal cancer were higher than those for FOB (P < 0.05). The sensitivity and area under the curve (AUC) for SDC2 were 73.3% and 0.855, respectively, exceeding the sensitivity and AUC for the combined four tumor markers, which were 60.3% and 0.734 (P < 0.05). The combined detection of the two methylated genes demonstrated a sensitivity of 86.2% and an AUC of 0.908, outperforming both FOB and the combined detection of the four tumor markers (P < 0.05)., Conclusion: The detection of SDC2 exhibits high sensitivity for colorectal cancer, and when combined with Septin9, it significantly enhances the diagnostic accuracy for early-stage colorectal cancer, offering substantial clinical value., (© 2024. The Author(s).)