Average Risk For Colorectal Cancer Research Articles

An updated counseling framework for moderate-penetrance colorectal cancer susceptibility genes

With the recent guideline change for individuals at average risk for colorectal cancer (CRC) to initiate colonoscopy at the age of 45 years, there is a need to provide an updated counseling framework for individuals with variants in moderate-penetrance CRC susceptibility genes. Population age-specific incidence rates for CRC were obtained from the 2014-2018 US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program cancer statistics. Average-risk multipliers derived from a systematic meta-analysis were used to calculate the 5-year and cumulative lifetime risks for specific genetic variants associated with a moderate risk for CRC: NM_007194.4(CHEK2):c.1100del (p.Thr367fs), NM_007194.4(CHEK2):c.470T>C (p.Ile157Thr), NM_000038.6(APC):c.3920T>A (p.Ile1307Lys) and monoallelic MUTYH. When an individual at average risk would initiate colonoscopy at age 45 years, a CRC risk of 0.39% is reached. For CHEK2 1100delC, CHEK2 I157T, and APC I1307K heterozygotes, this same level of risk is reached (or nearly reached) by age 40 to 45 years. For individuals with a monoallelic MUTYH variant, the CRC risk is 0.46% by age 45 to 49 years, similar to individuals at average risk. These updated calculations support recommendations to initiate earlier colonoscopy surveillance for CHEK2 and APC I1307K germline variant heterozygotes. However, earlier surveillance is not indicated for individuals with monoallelic MUTYH germline variants in the absence of family history.

Incident colorectal cancer screening and associated healthcare resource utilization and Medicare cost among Medicare beneficiaries aged 66–75 years in 2016–2018

BackgroundWhile prevalence of up-to-date screening status is the usual reported statistic, annual screening incidence may better reflect current clinical practices and is more actionable. Our main purpose was to examine incident colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates in Medicare beneficiaries and to explore characteristics associated with CRC screening.MethodsUsing 20% Medicare random sample data, the study population included 2016–2018 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries covered by Parts A and B aged 66–75 years at average CRC risk. For each study year, we excluded individuals who had a Medicare claim for a colonoscopy within 9 years, flexible sigmoidoscopy within 4 years, and multitarget stool DNA test (mt-sDNA) within 2 years prior; therefore, any observed screening during study year was considered an “incident screening”. Incident screening rates were calculated as number of incident screenings per 1000 Medicare beneficiaries. Overall rates were normalized to 2018 Medicare population distributions of age, sex, and race.ResultsEach year, > 1.4 million individuals met the inclusion/exclusion criteria from > 6.5 million Medicare beneficiaries. The overall adjusted incident CRC screening rate per 1000 Medicare beneficiaries increased from 85.2 in 2016 to 94.3 in 2018. Incident screening rates decreased 11.4% (22.9 to 20.3) for colonoscopy and 2.4% (58.3 to 56.9) for fecal immunochemical test/guaiac-based fecal occult blood test; they increased 201.5% (6.5 to 19.6) for mt-sDNA. The 2018 unadjusted rate was 76.0 for men and 110.4 for women. By race/ethnicity, the highest 2018 rate was for Asian individuals and the lowest rate was for Black individuals (113.4 and 72.8, respectively).ConclusionsThe 2016–2018 observed incident CRC screening rate in average-risk Medicare beneficiaries, while increasing, was still low. Our findings suggest more work is needed to improve CRC screening overall and, especially, among male and Black Medicare beneficiaries.

S2078 Multicentric, Synchronous Colon Cancer in the Rectum, Sigmoid and Cecum in an Elderly Female

Introduction: Multicentric tumors are more common in genetically-linked cancers. In most instances, tumor occurrence in a different location is due to recurrence of the malignancy. Our case illustrates a rare endoscopic finding of 3 distinct and synchronous adenocarcinomas of the rectum, sigmoid colon, and cecum in an otherwise healthy elderly female at an average risk for colorectal cancer. Case Description/Methods: An 81-year-old female with no medical history presented to the hospital with constipation and diffuse intermittent abdominal pain for 4 months. She had been self-medicating at home with over-the-counter laxatives but recently reported that she was not experiencing relief. She denied any prior endoscopy or family history of colorectal cancer. On admission, her vital signs were normal and her physical exam was significant for diffuse abdominal tenderness to palpation. Digital rectal examination revealed a non-tender, hard mass in the left lateral wall of the rectum. Her complete blood count and comprehensive metabolic panels were normal. Iron studies were also unremarkable. A computed tomography (CT) scan of the abdomen and pelvis showed thickening in the sigmoid colon and the rectum with scattered subcentimeter lymph nodes. On colonoscopy, she was found to have 3 partially-obstructing, malignant-appearing lesions located in the rectum, proximal sigmoid, and cecum. Biopsies of all 3 sites revealed adenocarcinoma. Immunohistochemistry for DNA mismatch repair proteins (MMR) showed intact MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PMS2 genes. She underwent a laparoscopic total colectomy with end ileostomy, with pathological staging revealing pT3 N0 for the sigmoid tumor and pT4a N2b for the cecal tumor. She was planned for neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy in anticipation for future robotic proctectomy for treatment of the rectal tumor (Figure 1). Discussion: Synchronous colorectal cancers pose a distinct challenge in terms of management and treatment. The extent of surgical resection and the use of chemoradiation depends on the location, number of lesions, and lymph node involvement. Our patient was an interesting case as she presented later in life and her only symptom was constipation. She was an average risk patient, had otherwise normal labs, and HNPCC/lynch syndrome-related cancers were excluded on the basis of normal immunohistochemistry testing.Figure 1.: Partially-obstructing malignant lesions in the (A) rectum, (B) proximal sigmoid, and (C) cecum.

S343 The Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Average-Risk Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Quality Assurance Evaluation to Assess Policy Success at the Facility Level

S343 The Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Average-Risk Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Quality Assurance Evaluation to Assess Policy Success at the Facility Level

S2220 A Solitary Extramedullary Plasmacytoma Found in the Sigmoid Colon

Introduction: Plasmacytomas are rare tumors made of a single line of plasma cells that can appear anywhere in the body, but the majority arise in the bone marrow. Extramedullary plasmacytomas (EMPs) represent less than 5% of cases, and only 5% of EMPs occur in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. GI EMPs occur most commonly in the small intestine, followed by the stomach; colonic EMPs are rare. We present a case of a solitary extramedullary plasmacytoma found in the sigmoid colon on routine colonoscopy. Case Description/Methods: A 75-year-old female with a history of hypertension and diabetes presented for evaluation of sour taste in her mouth and epigastric pain, and also for average-risk colorectal cancer screening. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy showed Los Angeles Classification grade A esophagitis and patchy gastric erythema with Helicobacter pylori infection confirmed from random gastric biopsies. Colonoscopy showed an erythematous nodule in the sigmoid colon, and polypectomy was performed (Figure). Pathology showed plasma cell population with immunostaining that was overwhelmingly positive for IgG and kappa consistent with extraosseous plasmacytoma. A repeat colonoscopy was performed in 4 months which confirmed complete removal of the plasmacytoma. The patient was referred to a hematologist with evaluation pending. Discussion: Colonic EMPs are rare. Patients can either be asymptomatic or present with abdominal pain, melena, and hematochezia. Once confirmed on pathology, patients should undergo extensive work-up including a complete blood count, comprehensive metabolic panel, and positron emission tomography to assess for more extensive involvement. Radiation therapy is warranted if complete surgical resection is not achieved, and these patients must be monitored closely for signs and symptoms of multiple myeloma. It is crucial for gastroenterologists to understand the significance of this rare finding to facilitate a comprehensive evaluation.Figure 1.: An erythematous nodule in the sigmoid colon.

Single CT Appointment for Double Lung and Colorectal Cancer Screening: Is the Time Ripe?

Annual screening of lung cancer (LC) with chest low-dose computed tomography (CT) and screening of colorectal cancer (CRC) with CT colonography every 5 years are recommended by the United States Prevention Service Task Force. We review epidemiological and pathological data on LC and CRC, and the features of screening chest low-dose CT and CT colonography comprising execution, reading, radiation exposure and harm, and the cost effectiveness of the two CT screening interventions. The possibility of combining chest low-dose CT and CT colonography examinations for double LC and CRC screening in a single CT appointment is then addressed. We demonstrate how this approach appears feasible and is already reasonable as an opportunistic screening intervention in 50–75-year-old subjects with smoking history and average CRC risk. In addition to the crucial role Computer Assisted Diagnosis systems play in decreasing the test reading times and the need to educate radiologists in screening chest LDCT and CT colonography, in view of a single CT appointment for double screening, the following uncertainties need to be solved: (1) the schedule of the screening CT; (2) the effectiveness of iterative reconstruction and deep learning algorithms affording an ultra-low-dose CT acquisition technique and (3) management of incidental findings. Resolving these issues will imply new cost-effectiveness analyses for LC screening with chest low dose CT and for CRC screening with CT colonography and, especially, for the double LC and CRC screening with a single-appointment CT.

Predictors of colorectal cancer screening intention based on the integrated theory of planned behavior among the average-risk individuals

BackgroundThis study aimed to determine the predictors of colorectal cancer screening intention based on the integrated theory of planned behavior among average -risk individuals in Urmia. Identifying these predictors will help design and implement various interventions, including educational interventions, according to the needs of this group, thereby taking a step towards improving the colorectal cancer screening index.MethodsThe present cross-sectional study was performed on 410 individuals at average risk of colorectal cancer referring to the comprehensive health services centers of Urmia in Iran. The data collection tool was a researcher-made questionnaire consisting of two parts. The first part captured the demographic information and medical history of the participants. The second part involved questions designed based on constructs of motivational phase of health action process approach, and theory of planned behavior, as well as behavioral intent to perform colorectal cancer screening. Data analysis was performed using SPSS software.ResultsOutcome expectancies, risk perception, action self-efficacy, and normative beliefs, respectively had the largest impact and were significant and positive predictors of colorectal cancer screening intention. The study’s conceptual framework explained about 36% of the variance of behavioral intention among the average-risk individuals in Urmia.ConclusionsConstructs of motivational phase of health action process approach, and theory of planned behavior are valuable and appropriate to identify the factors affecting the intention to undergo colorectal cancer screening as well as to design and implement educational interventions in this field. The four constructs of outcome expectancies, risk perception, action self-efficacy, and normative beliefs are suggested to be integrated into all educational interventions designed and implemented to improve the colorectal cancer screening index.

Patient Preferences for Colorectal Cancer Screening Tests in Light of Lowering the Screening Age to 45 Years

In 2021, the US Preventive Services Task Force lowered the colorectal cancer (CRC) screening age to 45 years. We used conjoint analysis, a method that assesses complex decision making, to update our understanding on people's CRC screening test preferences in the context of new guidelines. We conducted a conjoint analysis survey among unscreened individuals ≥40 years at average risk for CRC to determine the relative importance of screening test attributes in their decision making (eg, modality, effectiveness at reducing CRC risk, bowel prep). We also performed simulations to estimate the proportion of people who would prefer each US Multi-Society Task Force (MSTF) on CRC-recommended test. The analyses were stratified among those aged 40-49 years (newly or soon-to-be eligible for screening) and ≥50 years (have been eligible). Overall, 1000 participants completed the conjoint analysis (40-49 years, n= 456; ≥50 years, n= 544). When considering all 5 US MSTF-recommended tests, there were differences in test preferences between age groups (P= .019), and the most preferred test was a fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-fecal DNA every 3 years: 40-49 years, 34.6%; ≥50 years, 37.3%. When considering only the US MSTF tier 1 tests, most 40- to 49- (68.9%) and ≥50-year-olds (77.4%; P= .004) preferred an annual FIT over a colonoscopy every 10 years. Our findings suggest that more than one-third of people may want to do a FIT-fecal DNA every 3 years for their CRC screening. When only considering US MSTF tier 1 tests, three-fourths of people may prefer an annual FIT over colonoscopy. Further research examining CRC screening test preferences among broader populations is warranted to inform and enhance screening programs.

Screening colonoscopy similarly prevented distal and proximal colorectal cancer: a prospective study among 55–69-year-olds

ObjectivesWe aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of screening colonoscopy in reducing incidence of distal vs. proximal colorectal cancer (CRC) in persons aged 55–69 years. Study Design and SettingUsing observational data from a German claims database (German Pharmacoepidemiological Research Database), we emulated a target trial with two arms: Colonoscopy screening vs. no-screening at baseline. Adjusted cumulative incidence of total, distal, and proximal CRC over 11 years of follow-up was estimated in 55–69-year-olds at an average CRC risk and without colonoscopy, polypectomy, or fecal occult blood test before baseline. ResultsOverall, 307,158 persons were included (screening arm: 198,389 and control arm: 117,399). The adjusted 11-year risk of any CRC was 1.62% in the screening group and 2.38% in the no-screening group resulting in a relative risk of 0.68 (95% CI: 0.63–0.73). The relative risk was 0.67 for distal CRC (95% CI: 0.62–0.73) and 0.70 (95% CI: 0.63–0.79) for proximal CRC. The cumulative incidence curves of the groups crossed after 6.7 (distal CRC) and 5.0 years (proximal CRC). ConclusionOur results suggest that colonoscopy is effective in preventing distal and proximal CRC. Unlike previous studies not using a target trial approach, we found no relevant difference in the effectiveness by location.

Modeling analysis of COVID 19-related delays in colorectal cancer screening on simulated clinical outcomes.

e13631 Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening disruptions have been observed with the COVID-19 pandemic, putting patients at risk for more advanced-stage disease at the time of diagnosis. We estimated the impact of increased use of stool-based tests for screening during the COVID-19 pandemic on near-term clinical outcomes in a simulated United States (US) population. Methods: A previously developed budget impact model was adapted to assess the impact of increasing use of multi-target stool DNA [mt-sDNA] or fecal immunochemical [FIT] tests to offset the COVID-19 related disruption in colonoscopy screening. Adults, ages 50 – 75 years, at average risk for CRC were included over a 3-year time horizon (2020 – 2023) to explore the impact of increased screening for CRC using mt-sDNA or FIT, from the perspective of a US payer. Compared to the base case (S0; 85% colonoscopy and 15% non-invasive tests), the estimated number of missed CRCs and advanced adenomas (AAs) were determined for four COVID-19-affected screening scenarios: S1, 9 months of CRC screening at 50% capacity, followed by 21 months at 75% capacity; S2, S1 followed by increasing stool-based testing by an average of 10% over 3-years; S3, 18 months of CRC screening at 50% capacity, followed by 12 months of 75% capacity; and S4, S3 followed by increasing stool-based testing by an average of 13% over 3-years. Results: Increasing the proportional use of mt-sDNA, the detection of AAs improved by 6.0% (Scenario 2 versus 1) to 8.4% (Scenario 4 versus 3) and the number of missed CRCs decreased by 15.1% to 17.3% respectively. Increasing FIT utilization improved the detection of AAs by 3.3% (Scenario 2 versus 1) to 4.6% (Scenario 4 versus 3) and the number of missed CRCs decreased by 12.9% (Scenario 2 versus 1) to 14.9% (Scenario 4 versus 3). Across all scenarios, the number of AAs detected was higher for mt-sDNA than for FIT, and the number of missed CRCs was lower for mt-sDNA than for FIT. Conclusions: Using home-based stool tests for average-risk CRC screening can mitigate the consequences of reduced colonoscopy screening resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. Use of mt-sDNA led to fewer missed CRCs and more AAs detected, compared to FIT.

LBA SO-23 Real-world evaluation of clinical utility of ColonAiQ, a blood-based assay for colorectal cancer (CRC) early detection

CRC is the third most common diagnosed cancer in recent years, and the second leading cause of cancer death globally, and it's also the second most common cancer and the fifth leading cause of cancer death in China. We have developed a multi-locus blood-based assay, ColonAiQ, targeting circulating tumor DNA methylation. It has demonstrated the ability of non-invasive early detection for CRC and advanced adenoma (AA). The prospective evaluation of ColonAiQ (PreC) study is an ongoing real-world cohort study organized in Yangzhou, China, which aims to evaluate whether the ColonAiQ test can improve patient compliance and detect CRC and AA in asymptomatic population. From Jan. to Dec. of 2021, 39,880 participants at average-risk of CRC, aging from 40 to 80, were voluntarily enrolled in PreC study. ColonAiQ tests were conducted for all participants and a follow-up colonoscopy was recommended for the test-positive individual. We are collecting and analyzing the real-world data to assess clinical utility of ColonAiQ assay. Among 39,880 participants, 2,823 participants (7.08%) tested positive via the ColonAiQ test. Collectively, 53.84% (1,520) of positive ones were willing to undergo a screening colonoscopy followed with pathological confirmation. Overall, there are 811 (53.36%) participants confirmed with colonoscopy findings, including 26 (3.21%) CRC, 208 (25.65%) AA, 431(53.14%) non-advanced adenoma, 74 (9.12%) polyps, and 72 (8.88%) non-neoplastic GI disorders. The predictive value (PPV) is 1.71% for CRC and 42.04% for adenoma (13.68% for AA). From real-world data, the patient compliance of colonoscopy in PreC study participants is significantly increased from 17.25% to 53.84%. ColonAiQ test has detected 665 asymptomatic patients with neoplasm who need endoscopic resection or surgery excision. PreC study supports ColonAiQ as a robust noninvasive option for CRC/AA screening to efficiently stratify individuals with a higher risk in more cost-effective manner.

Age-Stratified Prevalence and Predictors of Neoplasia Among U.S. Adults Undergoing Screening Colonoscopy in a National Endoscopy Registry

Background & AimsSeveral U.S. organizations now recommend starting average-risk colorectal cancer screening at age 45 years, but the prevalence of colonic neoplasia in individuals younger than 50 years has not been well characterized. We used a national endoscopic registry to calculate age-stratified prevalence and predictors of colorectal neoplasia. MethodsOutpatient screening colonoscopies performed during 2010–2020 in the GI Quality Improvement Consortium registry were analyzed. We measured the prevalence of advanced neoplasia and adenomas by age, sex, and race/ethnicity, as well as the prevalence ratio of neoplasia compared with the reference group of 50- to 54-year-olds. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify predictors of neoplasia. ResultsWe identified 3,928,727 screening colonoscopies, of which 129,736 (3.3%) were performed on average-risk individuals younger than 50 years. The prevalence of advanced neoplasia was 6.2% for 50- to 54-year-olds and 5.0% (prevalence ratio, 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.78–0.83) for average-risk 45- to 49-year-olds. Men had higher prevalence of neoplasia than women for all age groups. White individuals had higher prevalence of advanced neoplasia than persons of other racial/ethnic groups in most age groups, which was partially driven by serrated lesions. On multivariable regression, White individuals had higher odds of advanced neoplasia than Black, Hispanic, and Asian individuals in both younger and older age groups. ConclusionsIn a large U.S. endoscopy registry, the prevalence of advanced neoplasia in 45- to 49-year-olds was substantial and supports beginning screening at age 45 years. White individuals had higher risk of advanced neoplasia than Black, Hispanic, and Asian individuals across the age spectrum. These findings may inform adenoma detection benchmarks and risk-based screening strategies.

Increasing Fecal Immunochemical Test Return Rates by Implementing Effective "Reminder to Complete Kit" Communication With Participants: A Quality Improvement Study.

BackgroundThe incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) in the United States is increasing. It remains the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States for men and women combined, mainly due to underutilization of screening methods. The American Cancer Society now 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 structural (visual) examination, depending on patient preference and test availability. The primary objective of this quality improvement project was to determine if reminder methods, such as telephone or letter reminders, increased the return rate of fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) for CRC screening.MethodologyAt public outreach events and daily clinics in the West Texas Panhandle area, participants in the GET FIT program were provided with FIT kits after completing the education on CRC. Participants who fit the inclusion criteria and had received a FIT kit from the program were included. They were instructed on how to perform the test and mail it back. Participants who did not return the completed kits within two weeks were reminded either through (1) a reminder letter, (2) telephone, or (3) a combination of letter reminder and telephone call every two weeks (±three days) for 60 days or five attempts to contact. We de-identified and analyzed the FIT kit return data from April-September 2019 before analyzing these reminder methods. We then calculated the change in return rates from October 2019 to March 2020. Our goal was to increase the FIT return rates by 25% compared to the baseline return rate.ResultsThe pre-intervention return rate of kits for April-September 2019 was 61.52%, and the post-intervention return rate for October 2019-March 2020 was 71.85%. This rate was equal to an approximately 16.79% increase in return rates that was statistically significant (p < 0.01). There was a significant difference in the method of reminder between the two groups, but no significant differences in gender and race/ethnicity between the two groups. There was a significant difference in return rates between race/ethnicities in the October-March cohort with black and Hispanic participants having the highest return rates of 82.3% and 77.25%, respectively.ConclusionsFIT remains one of the primary options for CRC screening. Due to its lower cost and noninvasiveness, FIT was offered to patients at average risk. We demonstrated an increase in return rates, although we did not meet our target return rate goal for this project. This study was limited due to a gradual increase in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases and a subsequent shift and conversation of ongoing research into COVID-19.

Adenoma and Sessile Serrated Lesion Detection Rates at Screening Colonoscopy for Ages 45–49 Years vs Older Ages Since the Introduction of New Colorectal Cancer Screening Guidelines

All major U.S. guidelines now endorse average-risk colorectal cancer (CRC) screening at 45-49 years of age. Concerns exist that endoscopic capacity may be strained, that low-risk persons may self-select for screening, and that calculations of the adenoma detection rate may be diluted. We analyzed age-specific screening colonoscopy volumes and lesion detection rates before vs after the endorsement of CRC screening at 45-49 years of age. We compared colonoscopy volumes and lesion detection rates in our healthcare system during period 1 (October 2017 to December 2018), before the first change in guidelines, vs period 2 (January 2019 to August 2021), the era of new guidelines. The proportion of first-time screening colonoscopies performed in 45- to 49-year-olds increased from 3.5% to 11.6% (relative risk, 3.36; 95% CI, 2.45-4.61). The period 2 detection rates for adenoma, advanced adenoma, sessile serrated lesion, advanced sessile serrated lesion, adenomas per colonoscopy, and lesions per colonoscopy were very similar for 45- to 49-year-olds (34.3%, 6.3%, 8.6%, 2.9%, 0.58, and 0.69, respectively) and 50- to 54-year-olds (38.2%, 5.8%, 9.4%, 3.0%, 0.63, and 0.76, respectively) at first-time screening, and for 60- to 64-year-olds at rescreening (33.4%, 6.1%, 7.2%, 2.3%, 0.61, and 0.70, respectively). All detection rates, adenomas per colonoscopy, and lesions per colonoscopy increased from period 1 to period 2 (eg, overall adenoma detection rate 35.1% vs 42.6%; P < .0001), without any decreases among 45- to 49-year-olds. In our healthcare system, a lower CRC screening initiation age has modestly affected colonoscopy volume by age without compromising screening yield. Lesion detection rates, including for advanced adenomas, in average-risk 45- to 49-year-olds approximate those in 50- to 54-year-olds at first-time screening and 60- to 64-year-olds at rescreening. National monitoring is needed to assess fully the impact of lowering the CRC screening initiation age.

Sociodemographic correlates of colorectal cancer screening completion among women adherent to mammography screening guidelines by place of birth

IntroductionColorectal cancer screening rates in the U.S. still fall short of national goals, while screening rates for other cancer sites, such as breast, remain high. Understanding characteristics associated with colorectal cancer screening among different groups of women adherent to breast cancer screening guidelines can shed light on the facilitators of colorectal cancer screening among those already engaged in cancer prevention behaviors. The purpose of this study was to explore which demographic characteristics, healthcare access factors, and cancer-related beliefs were associated with colorectal cancer screening completion among U.S. and foreign-born women adherent to mammography screening recommendations.MethodsAnalyses of the 2015 National Health Interview Survey were conducted in 2019. A sample of 1206 women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram in the past 2 years and were of average risk for colorectal cancer was examined. Logistic regression was used to determine demographic, health service, and health belief characteristics associated with colorectal cancer screening completion.ResultsFifty-five percent of the sample were adherent to colorectal cancer screening recommendations. Women over the age of 65 (AOR = 1.76, 95% CI 1.06–2.91), with any type of health insurance, and who were bilingual (AOR = 3.84, 95% CI 1.83–8.09) were more likely to complete screening, while foreign-born women (AOR = 0.53, 95% CI 0.34–0.83) were less likely. Cancer-related beliefs did not influence adherence. Stratified analyses by nativity revealed additional associations.ConclusionsDemographic and health service factors interact to influence colorectal cancer screening among women completing breast cancer screening. Colorectal cancer screening interventions targeting specific underserved groups and financing reforms may enhance women’s colorectal cancer screening rates.

Cost-effectiveness of artificial intelligence for screening colonoscopy: a modelling study

Artificial intelligence (AI) tools increase detection of precancerous polyps during colonoscopy and might contribute to long-term colorectal cancer prevention. The aim of the study was to investigate the incremental effect of the implementation of AI detection tools in screening colonoscopy on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, and the cost-effectiveness of such tools. We conducted Markov model microsimulation of using colonoscopy with and without AI for colorectal cancer screening for individuals at average risk (no personal or family history of colorectal cancer, adenomas, inflammatory bowel disease, or hereditary colorectal cancer syndrome). We ran the microsimulation in a hypothetical cohort of 100 000 individuals in the USA aged 50-100 years. The primary analysis investigated screening colonoscopy with versus without AI every 10 years starting at age 50 years and finishing at age 80 years, with follow-up until age 100 years, assuming 60% screening population uptake. In secondary analyses, we modelled once-in-life screening colonoscopy at age 65 years in adults aged 50-79 years at average risk for colorectal cancer. Post-polypectomy surveillance followed the simplified current guideline. Costs of AI tools and cost for downstream treatment of screening detected disease were estimated with 3% annual discount rates. The main outcome measures included the incremental effect of AI-assisted colonoscopy versus standard (no-AI) colonoscopy on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, and cost-effectiveness of screening projected for the average risk screening US population. In the primary analyses, compared with no screening, the relative reduction of colorectal cancer incidence with screening colonoscopy without AI tools was 44·2% and with screening colonoscopy with AI tools was 48·9% (4·8% incremental gain). Compared with no screening, the relative reduction in colorectal cancer mortality with screening colonoscopy with no AI was 48·7% and with screening colonoscopy with AI was 52·3% (3·6% incremental gain). AI detection tools decreased the discounted costs per screened individual from $3400 to $3343 (a saving of $57 per individual). Results were similar in the secondary analyses modelling once-in-life colonoscopy. At the US population level, the implementation of AI detection during screening colonoscopy resulted in yearly additional prevention of 7194 colorectal cancer cases and 2089 related deaths, and a yearly saving of US$290 million. Our findings suggest that implementation of AI detection tools in screening colonoscopy is a cost-saving strategy to further prevent colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. European Commission and Japan Society of Promotion of Science.

Cancer Prevention in a Postpandemic World: A One-Stop-Shop Approach

Cancer Prevention in a Postpandemic World: A One-Stop-Shop Approach

Colorectal cancer screening preferences among physicians and individuals at average risk: A discrete choice experiment.

BackgroundGuidelines include several options for average‐risk colorectal cancer (CRC) screening that vary in aspects such as invasiveness, recommended frequency, and precision. Thus, patient and provider preferences can help identify an appropriate screening strategy. This study elicited CRC screening preferences of physicians and individuals at average risk for CRC (IAR).MethodsIAR aged 45–75 years and licensed physicians (primary care or gastroenterology) completed an online discrete choice experiment (DCE). Participants were recruited from representative access panels in the US. Within the DCE, participants traded off preferences between screening type, screening frequency, true‐positive, true‐negative, and adenoma true positive (physicians only). A mixed logit model was used to obtain predicted choice probabilities for colonoscopy, multi‐target stool DNA (mt‐sDNA), fecal immunochemical test (FIT), and methylated septin 9 (mSEPT9) blood test.ResultsPreferences of IAR and physicians were affected by screening precision and screening type. IAR also valued more regular screening. Physicians preferred colonoscopy (96.8%) over mt‐sDNA (2.8%; p < 0.001), FIT (0.3%; p < 0.001) and mSEPT9 blood test (0.1%; p < 0.01). IAR preferred mt‐sDNA (38.8%) over colonoscopy (32.5%; p < 0.001), FIT (19.2%; p < 0.001), and mSEPT9 blood test (9.4%; p < 0.001). IAR naïve to screening preferred non‐invasive screening (p < 0.001), while the opposite was found for those who previously underwent colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy.ConclusionsWhile physicians overwhelmingly preferred colonoscopy, preferences of IAR were heterogenous, with mt‐sDNA being most frequently preferred on average. Offering choices in addition to colonoscopy could improve CRC screening uptake among IAR.This study used a discrete choice experiment in the US to elicit preferences of physicians and individuals at average risk for colorectal cancer screening modalities and their characteristics.

A multilevel, low literacy dual language intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening in community clinics in Florida: A randomized controlled trial

One of the largest disparities in cancer mortality in the United States occurs with colorectal cancer (CRC). The objectives of this multilevel two-arm intervention trial were to compare the efficacy of two interventions to promote CRC screening (CRCS) with fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and examine sociodemographic and psychosocial predictors of FIT screening. Individuals ages 50–75 (n = 326) who were not up-to-date with CRCS, could understand English or Spanish, and were at average CRC risk were recruited from two federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) in Florida. Prior to intervention, CRCS rates in the FQHCs were 27.1% and 32.9%, respectively. Study enrollment occurred April 2018–November 2019. System-level intervention components included leveraging electronic medical record (EMR) systems and delivering patient reminders. Participants were randomized to C-CARES (education+FIT) or C-CARES Plus (C-CARES+personalized coaching [for those not completing FIT within 90 days]). Primary outcome was completed FIT returned <1 year. Primary outcome analyses were performed using logistic regression. 225 participants completed FIT (69.0% [95% CI: 64.0–74.0%]), with no significant difference in FIT uptake by intervention arm (67.3% C-CARES Plus vs. 70.8% C-CARES; p = .49). FIT uptake was significantly higher among patients who received intervention materials in Spanish (77.2%) compared to those who received materials in English (63.2%, p < .01). The personalized coaching in the C-CARES Plus arm did not appear to provide added benefit beyond the C-CARES intervention. Multilevel approaches that include EMR prompts, reminders, FIT access, and provision of low-literacy, language-concordant education can support efforts to improved community clinics' CRCS rates. Future efforts should focus on repeat FIT screening.Trial registration: The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03906110).

Osteoporosis Is Associated with an Increased Risk of Colorectal Adenoma and High-Risk Adenoma: A Retrospective, Multicenter, Cross-Sectional, Case-Control Study.

Background/AimsThe protective effects of vitamin D and calcium on colorectal neoplasms are known. Bone mineral density (BMD) may be a reliable biomarker that reflects the long-term anticancer effect of vitamin D and calcium. This study aimed to evaluate the association between BMD and colorectal adenomas including high-risk adenoma.MethodsA multicenter, cross-sectional, case-control study was conducted among participants with average risk of colorectal cancer who underwent BMD and screening colonoscopy between 2015 and 2019. The main outcome was the detection of colorectal neoplasms. The variable under consideration was low BMD (osteopenia/osteoporosis). The logistic regression model included baseline demographics, components of metabolic syndrome, fatty liver disease status, and aspirin and multivitamin use.ResultsA total of 2,109 subjects were enrolled. The mean age was 52.1±10.8 years and 42.6% were male. The adenoma detection rate was 43%. Colorectal adenoma and high-risk adenoma were both more prevalent in subjects with low BMD than those with normal BMD (48.2% vs 38.8% and 12.1% vs 9.1%). In the univariate analysis, old age, male sex, smoking, metabolic components, fatty liver, and osteoporosis were significantly associated with the risk of adenoma and high-risk adenoma. In the multivariate analysis, osteoporosis was independently associated with risk of colorectal adenoma (odds ratio [OR], 1.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11 to 2.46; p=0.014) and high-risk adenoma (OR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.14 to 3.29; p=0.014).ConclusionsOsteoporosis is an independent risk factor of colorectal adenoma and high-risk adenoma.