Benefits Of Colorectal Cancer Screening Research Articles

Knowledge and barriers to screening for colorectal cancer among individuals aged 40 years or older visiting primary healthcare clinics in Al-Khobar, Eastern Province.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) ranks third as the most common cancer in the world and the 4th most common cause of deaths from cancer. In Saudi Arabia, CRC is the most common cancer in males and the third most common in females. Early screening reduces the risk of CRC and death. However, there is a lack of awareness of CRC screening in Saudi Arabia. The objective of this study was to determine the knowledge, practices, and barriers to CRC screening using the Health Belief Model (HBM). This study enrolled Saudis aged 40 years or older visiting PHCCs in Al-Khobar. Data were collected using a self-administered questionnaire or a direct interview of the selected participants. Information sought included sociodemographics, past CRC screening, CRC knowledge, and HBM items. Data analysis was done using SPSS; the Chi-squared test and ANOVA were used to determine statistical significance. A total of 206 of the individuals approached completed the questionnaire. The average age was 51.1 years, and 51% were males. Only 10% reported that a physician had provided information on CRC prevention or discussed/recommended screening for CRC, and 10% had undergone screening for CRC. Seventy-five percent of respondents had heard of CRC, and 74% said that CRC was preventable. Regarding the HBM, no significant difference in the mean scores for perceived susceptibility, perceived severity, self-efficacy, and benefits of CRC screening was found by age groups. The mean score for perceived severity was higher for females than males. About 60% of participants were extremely likely to have a screening test for CRC done on the day if recommended by the doctor. The knowledge and awareness of CRC screening of the targeted sample is inadequate. Individuals with higher perceived susceptibility, severity of CRC, and perceived benefit of the screening tests were more willing to undergo the test. The highest perceived barrier was having no symptoms, and the lowest was "getting a stool test is too much of a hassle." These findings underline the importance of having a national screening program and campaigns to deal with the concerns of people and raise awareness of CRC.

Benefit-Harm Analysis for Informed Decision Making on Participating in Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Modeling Study

ObjectivesTo facilitate informed decision making on participating in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, we assessed the benefit-harm balance of CRC screening for a wide range of subgroups over different time horizons. MethodsThe study combined incidence proportions of benefits and harms of (not) participating in CRC screening estimated by the Adenoma and Serrated pathway to CAncer microsimulation model, a preference eliciting survey, and benefit-harm balance modeling combining all outcomes to determine the net health benefit of CRC screening over 10, 20, and 30 years. Probability of net health benefit was estimated for 210 different subgroups based on age, sex, previous participation in CRC screening, and lifestyle. ResultsCRC screening was net beneficial in 183 of 210 subgroups over 30 years (median probability [MP] of 0.79, interquartile range [IQR] of 0.69-0.85) across subgroups. Net health benefit was greater for men (MP 0.82; IQR 0.69-0.89) than women (MP 0.76; IQR 0.67-0.83) and for those without history of participation in previous screenings (MP 0.84; IQR 0.80-0.89) compared with those with (MP 0.69; IQR 0.59-0.75). Net health benefit decreased with increasing age, from MP of 0.84 (IQR 0.80-0.86) at age 55 to 0.61 (IQR 0.56-0.71) at age 75. Shorter time horizons led to lower benefit, with MP of 0.70 (IQR 0.62-0.80) over 20 years and 0.54 (IQR 0.48-0.67) over 10 years. ConclusionsOur benefit-harm analysis provides information about net health benefit of screening participation, based on important characteristics and preferences of individuals, which could assist screening invitees in making informed decisions on screening participation.

Screening for Colorectal Cancer in Individuals Younger Than 50 Years

What Is the Issue?
 
 Incidence of colorectal cancer in individuals younger than 50 years in Canada is rising, despite existing recommendations in Canada advising that colorectal cancer screening be initiated at 50 years.
 In response to the also increasing incidence of colorectal cancer observed in other jurisdictions, screening for colorectal cancer in individuals of average risk younger than 50 years has been recommended.
 These factors have prompted reconsideration of current Canadian guidelines regarding the age at which colorectal cancer screening should be initiated.
 
 What Did We Do?
 
 To inform considerations about the age at which colorectal cancer screening should best be initiated, CADTH identified and summarized studies comparing colorectal cancer screening in individuals of average risk younger than 50 years with either no screening or screening in individuals of average risk aged 50 years and older.
 An information specialist conducted a search of peer-reviewed and grey literature sources. Recommendations from evidence-based guidelines for screening individuals of average risk younger than 50 years were also sought and summarized.
 
 What Did We Find?
 
 Data from 1 retrospective cohort study in the US conducted in a large sample across 13 years suggested there is higher incidence of colorectal cancer among individuals between the ages of 45 and 49 years who underwent screening colonoscopy than in those between the ages of 50 and 54 years.
 Data from a retrospective cohort study conducted in Greece with a limited sample size across 1 year of observation demonstrated no difference in the cumulative incidence of colorectal cancer in individuals of average risk younger than 50 years or 50 years and older.
 Estimates from 4 modelling studies (1 of which was Canadian) that investigated screening in individuals younger than 50 years indicate that life-years may be gained, colorectal cancer cases and deaths may be reduced, but that numbers of lifetime colonoscopies and complications from screening would likely increase.
 One economic evaluation conducted in Portugal concluded that there is no cost-utility for colorectal cancer screening in individuals of average risk younger than 50 years at a willingness-to-pay threshold of €39,760, given current estimates of incidence in this age cohort.
 Seven evidence-based guidelines identified recommend that colorectal cancer screening be initiated in individuals of average risk at age 45 years, whereas 1 guideline recommends against screening in individuals of average risk beginning at 45 years and 1 guideline recommends against screening beginning at age 40 years. Most evidence-based guidelines highlight the lack of empirical evidence describing clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness as limitations when developing recommendations.
 
 What Does It Mean?
 
 Empirical data describing the effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening in individuals of average risk younger than 50 years remain limited, although a preponderance of evidence-based guidelines identified by this review recommend in favour of doing so.
 Modelled data estimate that colorectal cancer screening in individuals younger than 50 years may produce benefits, although these estimates are vulnerable to model inputs and assumptions (perfect adherence to screening protocols, for instance), and may not adequately account for the potential harms of screening.
 Additional opportunities for maximizing the benefits of colorectal cancer screening may include targeting increased uptake among disadvantaged and high-risk groups, including those 50 years and older.
 Broader considerations that address societal benefit and costs — including health equity and implementation — are essential to inform decision-making concerning colorectal cancer screening in individuals of average risk younger than 50 years.

Current Quality of Videos on Colorectal Cancer Screening for General Public.

One-third of American adults encompassed by current colorectal cancer screening guidelines fail to obtain recommended screening evaluations. Educational videos are a valuable medium through which to educate and encourage recommended health behaviors in patients. A cross-sectional study reviewing the quality of patient education videos addressing colorectal cancer screening. Video quality was assessed in 3 domains: accountability, content, and production. Forty-four videos met inclusion criteria. Out of 33 possible points, videos scored a median of 15.0 (interquartile range 12.9-16.6). Videos scored 1.0 (interquartile range .8-1.0) out of 4.0 for accountability, 6.0 (interquartile range 4.4-8.0) out of 20 for content, and 8.0 (interquartile range 7.4-8.0) out of 9.0 for production. Colonoscopy was the most frequently discussed method of screening (38, 86%). While 13 (34%) videos discussed the risk of colorectal cancer in the general population and 15 (32%) discussed the risk in those with a family history, few videos addressed those with other risk factors. Most (31, 70%) videos discussed the medical consequences of not receiving screening, but only 1 (2%) video discussed the social consequences. Similarly, medical benefits were discussed in 34 (77%) videos while other benefits were not discussed by any video. Only one-fifth of the videos address three or more barriers to screening. Videos on colorectal cancer screening have excellent production quality but need improvement in the domains of accountability and content. The videos included in this analysis did not adequately address the concerns of viewers nor the benefits of colorectal cancer screening.

Colorectal cancer screening status and its association with health belief model variables in a rural population

Abstract Background: Rural populations exhibit low colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates, which may be a consequence of social determinants of health but may also result from individual health beliefs. This study aimed to explore the association between key health belief model (HBM) variables and CRC screening status in a rural Midwest population. Methods: One hundred thirty six people participated in this cross-sectional study. A survey instrument was developed to capture demographic information and measure the following HBM variables: perceived barriers, perceived benefits, self-efficacy beliefs associated with CRC screening, and knowledge associated with CRC. Results: The response rate for the study was 17.6%. The most endorsed (28.5%) barrier to CRC screening was fear of something going wrong. The most endorsed (86.5%) benefit of CRC screening was confidence that privacy and confidentiality would be protected. There were significant differences (P < .01) in means for perception of barriers, benefits, and self-efficacy according to CRC screening status. In a model which included perception of barriers, benefits, and self-efficacy, only perceived barriers made a unique, significant (P < .05) contribution (OR = 0.823 [0.706–0.958]) in predicting CRC screening status. Conclusions: Key HBM variables, perception of barriers, benefits, and self-efficacy seem to be important factors associated with CRC screening in rural populations and may be appropriate targets for interventions to increase CRC screening.

Effect of colorectal cancer screening on 1-year mortality and medical costs: Real-world evidence from the largest commercial medical claims database in the US.

10579 Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States with increasing trends in both mortality and incidence in individuals under age 50. Whether CRC screening reduces mortality recently becomes controversial in some observational studies due to a lack of data and a possibility of screenings confounded with social determinants of health (SDoH) and patient characteristics that were not properly addressed. Methods: We used the Optum’s de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart Database that provides information of healthcare plan, major SDoH, the CRC diagnosis, treatments, medical service and prescription charges, and survival data since 2007 for over 75 million patients to re-examine benefits of CRC screenings. Our CRC study cohort (N=99,704) included persons first diagnosed with CRC between 2010 – 2020, with 3-year pre-diagnosis continuing insurance coverage to identify pre-diagnosis screening, and 1-year follow-up to identify death and associated costs. Primary outcomes are 1-year mortality, the post-diagnosis medical and prescription cost increments, and health plan change after CRC diagnosis. Augmented inverse probability weighting (AIPW) models were employed to estimate the benefits of CRC screening, adjusting the probabilities of pre-diagnosis screenings due to insurance cover types (commercial/employer, Medicare advantage, and dual Medicare-Medicaid or low-income subsidy (LIS) covers), and healthcare plans (pre-paid, only-in-network, pay-less in-network, and fee-for-service plans), ages, sex, race, residential states, and calendar year. Results: In the study cohort, 37.8% have pre-diagnosis screening records, 18% died within 1 year. Women, persons under age 45, and persons with dual covers were more present in the non-screening group than the screening one. CRC screening was associated with a significant reduction of one-year mortality after adjusting for age, sex, race, health plans, and other factors (death rates in the non-screening group vs the screening one were 23% vs 12%, adjusted OR = 0.57, 95%CI = 0.55 - 0.59). Persons with no screening records experienced higher one-year medical cost increases than those who had pre-diagnosis screenings (17.8% vs 14.8%). No significant difference in health plan changes and/or disruption among the two groups was obvious for persons having either dual- or commercial-cover beneficiaries, yet the screenings slightly induced more these plan changes in the Medicare advantage beneficiaries (OR = 1.06, 95%CI = 1.01 - 1.11). Conclusions: The real-world evidence from the US largest medical claims database suggested that, after adjusting for the screening probability due to healthcare plans and other confounders, CRC screening dramatically reduced one-year death risk, and slightly eased the 1-year financial burdens after CRC diagnosis.

Personalized colorectal cancer screening: study protocol of a mixed-methods study on the effectiveness of tailored intervals based on prior f-Hb concentration in a fit-based colorectal cancer screening program (PERFECT-FIT)

BackgroundIn 2014, the national population-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program was implemented in the Netherlands. Biennial fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) for hemoglobin (Hb) is used at a cut-off of 47 µg Hb per gram feces. The CRC screening program successfully started, with high participation rates and yield of screening. Now that the program has reached a steady state, there is potential to further optimize the program. Previous studies showed that prior fecal Hb (f-Hb) concentrations just below the FIT cut-off are associated with a higher risk for detection of advanced neoplasia (AN) at subsequent screening rounds. We aim to achieve a better balance between the harms and benefits of CRC screening by offering participants tailored invitation intervals based on prior f-Hb concentrations after negative FIT.MethodsThis mixed-methods study will be performed within the Dutch national CRC screening program and will consist of: (1) a randomized controlled trial (RCT), (2) focus group studies, and (3) decision modelling. The primary outcome is the yield of AN per screened individual in personalized screening vs. uniform screening. Secondary outcomes are perspectives on, acceptability of and adherence to personalized screening, as well as long-term outcomes of personalized vs. uniform screening. The RCT will include 20,000 participants of the Dutch CRC screening program; 10,000 in the intervention and 10,000 in the control arm. The intervention arm will receive a personalized screening interval based on the prior f-Hb concentration (1, 2 or 3 years). The control arm will receive a screening interval according to current practice (2 years). The focus group studies are designed to understand individuals’ perspectives on and acceptability of personalized CRC screening. Results of the RCT will be incorporated into the MISCAN-Colon model to determine long-term benefits, harms, and costs of personalized vs. uniform CRC screening.DiscussionThe aim of this study is to evaluate the yield, feasibility, acceptability and (cost-) effectiveness of personalized CRC screening through tailored invitation intervals based on prior f-Hb concentrations. This knowledge may be of guidance for health policy makers and may provide evidence for implementing personalized CRC screening in The Netherlands and/or other countries using FIT as screening modality.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05423886, June 21, 2022, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05423886

Type and Severity of Mental Illness and Participation in Colorectal Cancer Screening

The effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening programs depends on the participation rate. This study examined the association between type and severity of mental illness and colorectal cancer screening participation. Between 2012 and 2017, a total of 46,919 individuals were invited to sigmoidoscopy screening in Norway, and 70,019 were invited to fecal immunochemical testing. In 2022, logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between the use of antipsychotics, anxiolytics, hypnotics, and antidepressants in the year preceding the screening invitation and screening participation, adjusted for demographic and socioeconomic factors. Defined daily doses of individual drugs were used to assess dose‒response relationships. Overall, 19.2% (24.8% of women, 13.4% of men) of all invitees used at least 1 psychotropic medication. Nonparticipation in the 2 arms combined was associated with the use of anxiolytics (60.7% in users vs 43.2% in nonusers; OR=1.53; 95% CI=1.45, 1.62) and antipsychotics (64.3% vs 43.8%; OR=1.41; 95% CI=1.30, 1.53) and increased with higher doses for both drugs. Hypnotics and antidepressants were only weakly associated with nonparticipation in higher doses. Participation rates were 57.3%, 52.3%, 42.9%, and 35.4% in those prescribed 0, 1, 2, and 3-4 classes of psychotropic medications, respectively. The associations between the use of psychotropic medications and nonparticipation were similar for the 2 screening tests. These findings show significant disparities in colorectal cancer screening participation for individuals with mental illness, independent of the screening method. Moreover, screening participation varied depending on the type and severity of mental illness. Targeted interventions are warranted to ensure that people with mental illness are supported to access the benefits of colorectal cancer screening.

S297 Missed Opportunities in Colorectal Cancer Screening Education: An Analysis of NCI-Designated Cancer Center Website Content

Introduction: The NCI-Designated Cancer Centers (NCC) are the authority on cancer education for both health care professionals and patients. These centers serve as the primary source of information and guidance for patients on current age-appropriate cancer screening guidelines. Due to a higher incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) in younger adults, the American Cancer Society (ACS) has decreased the age at which to begin screening to 45 years-old in average risk adults. We aimed to analyze the websites of 71 NCC to determine whether or not these websites provide information on all possible screening modalities as well as if one screening modality is more emphasized than another. Methods: We reviewed the websites of 71 NCC and performed a content analysis. In particular, we recorded if each NCC website mentioned the following as options for CRC screening: high sensitivity FOBT, FIT, sDNA-FIT, colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy with FIT, and computed tomography (CT) colonography. Special notation was made of NCC websites that discussed all possible screening modalities as well as risks and benefits of CRC screening. Results: In totality, of the 71 NCC websites, only 8.4% (6/71) mentioned all seven possible screening modalities. All 71 websites, however, specifically cited the role of colonoscopy in screening for CRC. In terms of non-invasive testing, 42.3% of NCC websites (30/71) discussed high sensitivity FOBT, 30.9% (22/71) discussed FIT, 28.2% (20/71) discussed sDNA-FIT, and 35.2% (25/71) discussed CT colonography. In terms of invasive testing aside from colonoscopy, 36.6% (26/71) cited flexible sigmoidoscopy as an option for CRC screening and 14.0% (10/71) cited flexible sigmoidoscopy with FIT. Conclusion: Overall, less than 10% of NCI-Designated Cancer Centers actually mention to all of the possible options for CRC screening on their websites, which represents a missed educational opportunity for both patients and health care professionals. As hypothesized, these websites primarily emphasize the role of colonoscopy in detecting CRC. Less than half of the NCC websites even referenced non-invasive testing options for CRC screening, which may be an important consideration for patients who are either high-risk for or unwilling to undergo a colonoscopy. We believe that educating patients about all of the various options for CRC screening may help increase screening adherence for CRC in the long-term.

Colonoscopic Screening and Risk of All-Cause and Colorectal Cancer Mortality in Young and Older Individuals.

The incidence of early-onset colorectal cancer (CRC) and associated mortality have been increasing. However, the potential benefits of CRC screening are largely unknown in young individuals. We aimed to evaluate the effect of CRC screening with colonoscopy on all-cause and CRC mortality among young (aged < 45 years) and older (aged ≥ 45 years) individuals. This cohort study included 528,046 Korean adults free of cancer at baseline who underwent a comprehensive health examination. The colonoscopic screening group was defined as those who reported undergoing colonoscopy for CRC screening. Mortality follow-up until December 31, 2019 was ascertained based on nationwide death certificate data from the Korea National Statistical Office. Colonoscopic screening was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality in both young and older individuals. Multivariable-adjusted time-dependent hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for all-cause mortality comparing ever- to never-screening were 0.86 (0.75-0.99) for young individuals and 0.71 (0.65-0.78) for older individuals. Colonoscopic screenings were also associated with a reduced risk of CRC mortality without significant interaction by age, although this association was significant only among participants aged ≥ 45 years, with corresponding time-dependent hazard ratios of 0.47 (0.15-1.44) for young individuals and 0.52 (0.31-0.87) for those aged ≥ 45 years. Colonoscopic CRC screening decreased all-cause mortality among both young and older individuals, while significantly decreased CRC mortality was observed only in those aged ≥ 45 years. Screening initiation at an earlier age warrants more rigorous confirmatory studies.

Knowledge, Attitudes, and Beliefs About Colorectal Cancer Screening in Puerto Rico

The purpose of this study was to describe the psychosocial factors influencing participation in colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) among Puerto Rican men and women. We conducted seven focus groups in metropolitan and rural areas of Puerto Rico (PR) with men and women (using gender specific groups) aged 50 to 80 years (n = 51) who were non-adherent to CRC guidelines. The focus group guide included questions related to colorectal cancer (CRC) and CRC screening knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs. We analyzed data using a modified grounded theory approach to identify emergent themes. Focus groups revealed seven major themes that represented barriers to CRCS: (1) lack of CRC knowledge, (2) lack of knowledge about colorectal cancer screening tests as well as the required preparation, (3) embarrassment, (4) low perceived benefit of CRCS and sense of fatalism, (5) transportation (mostly among participants in rural areas), (6) lack of time, and (7) financial burden. All participants understood the benefits of CRCS once the procedure was explained. Additionally, participants reported a lack of provider recommendation for CRCS. In this group of Puerto Rican participants who were non-adherent to CRCS, there were misconceptions about CRC, screening tests available, and preparation and testing procedures. Participants’ low levels of knowledge and negative attitudes concerning CRCS and low reported provider recommendation were important deterrents to screening. These findings suggest the need for educational efforts to increase knowledge and attitudes about CRCS and improved patient-provider communication to reduce missed opportunities to recommend.

A Culturally Adapted Colorectal Cancer Education Video for the Somali Community in Minnesota: A Pilot Investigation.

This study aims to develop and test feasibility of a colorectal cancer (CRC) education video appropriate for Somali immigrants. One-group pretest-posttest design. Minneapolis, MN. Thirty-one Somali men (mean age = 60.6; SD = 13.0). A CRC education video was developed in the Somali language with Somali community partners. Participants were invited to a workshop and watched the video. Levels of understanding about CRC and screening were assessed before vs after the video. Binomial tests were conducted to examine changes in level of understanding. Analysis on pre-post, within-person changes in understanding about cancer, and CRC screening showed that proportions with a positive change in understanding risks of cancer (80%) and benefits of CRC screening (90%) were significantly higher than expected if the video had no effect (50%; P = .012, P < .001, respectively). Ninety-three percent of participants agreed that the video contained useful information. These results provide evidence of usefulness of culturally tailored videos to facilitate CRC screening in the Somali community. Results of this study were limited by a small sample size and lack of a control group.

S257 Persistent Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Tell-Tale Sign for New Guidelines

Introduction: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening can reduce CRC incidence and mortality; however, screening participation is low in minority populations. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recently recommended lowering the age to initiate CRC screening from 50 to 45 years, raising concerns that implementing new guidelines will exacerbate well-known race/ethnicity disparities in screening. To address this gap, we examined temporal trends in CRC screening by age and race/ethnicity in a population-based sample. Methods: We estimated the proportion of adults (age 50-75 years) up-to-date with CRC screening using population-based data from the National Health Interview Survey. We examined temporal trends in screening during the period 2000-2018, overall and by age (50-54, 55-59, 60-64, 65-69, and 70-75 years) and race/ethnicity (White, Hispanic, Black, Asian). In parallel, we examined trends in colonoscopy use in adults age 45-49 years. Results: In adults age 50-75 years, the overall proportion up-to-date with CRC screening increased from 36.7% in 2000 to 66.1% in 2018. By 2018, screening rates were 68.7%, 64.4%, 56.5%, and 57.1% in Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians, respectively (Figure 1). The increase was significant in all race and ethnicity groups, but Hispanics and Asians remained less likely to undergo screening compared to Whites and Blacks (all P < 0.01). CRC screening was lowest among newly eligible individuals age 50-54 years. Differences in screening by race/ethnicity were concentrated in this youngest age group but disappeared over time in older groups. For example, screening rates were 51.0%, 50.0%, 35.5%, and 32.2% for adults age 50-54 years (Figure 1) and 78.4%. 78.1%, 78.1%, and 69.0% for adults 70-75 years (Figure 1F) in Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians, respectively. Hispanics and Asian Adults age 50-54 years were less likely to be screened compared to Whites and Blacks from 2000 to 2018 (all P < 0.01). In adults age 45-49 years, colonoscopy use increased from 6.5% in 2000 to 17.7% in 2018 and was lowest among Hispanics and Asians. Conclusion: CRC screening has increased over 2000 to 2018 in all racial, ethnicity and age groups. Uptake remains low in certain segments, particularly newly eligible Hispanic and Asian adults age 50-54 years. Disparities observed in adults age 50-54 years may occur in adults age 45-49 years as new recommendations are implemented. Care must be taken to ensure the benefits of CRC screening are realized equitably by all race/ethnicity and age groups.Figure 1.: Proportion of adults up-to-date with colorectal cancer screening by age and race/ethnicity group.

Awareness, attitude and barriers of colorectal cancer screening among high-risk populations in China: a cross-sectional study

ObjectiveTo assess the awareness, attitude and barriers of colorectal cancer screening among high-risk populations in China.DesignA cross-sectional study was employed.SettingThis study was conducted in nine hospitals in Hunan province, China.ParticipantsIndividuals...

Improving Fecal Immunochemical Testing Rates for Colon Cancer Screening in the Outpatient Setting.

The amount of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening using the noninvasive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) at a federally qualified health center, Five Rivers Health Clinic (Dayton, Ohio), has been low historically. Our quality improvement (QI) project aimed to improve CRC screening adherence in eligible patients who opted for FIT. Three hundred ninety-two patients with FIT orders for CRC were screened during an 11-month period. The preintervention group (pre-I) was enrolled from December 1, 2018 to May 31, 2019, and the postintervention group (post-I) from June 1, 2019 to October 31, 2019. Three interventions were used: resident physicians trained during clinic meetings regarding FIT education for patients, posters displayed in patient rooms outlining the benefits of CRC screening, and standardized US mail reminder letters sent to FIT patients. Patient demographics and clinical variables were collected along with return rate. The return rate for post-I was twice that of pre-I (74.4%, 95% confidence interval 64.6-82.3 vs 31.1, 95% confidence interval 26.2-36.6; P < 0.001). The pre-I/post-I groups did not differ on demographic and clinical characteristics, and, except for race, none of these variables was associated with returning the FIT screening card. The compliance rate for FIT completion and return more than doubled among our clinic patients after using a three-component QI intervention. Except for a difference in race, the lack of association between demographic and clinical characteristics with either pre-I/post-I group or return/no return of the FIT card leads us to conclude that our QI program for increasing FIT compliance is effective. Other settings where CRC screening is a prominent component of preventive care may benefit from adopting a similar QI intervention.

Development and Validation of Three Regional Microsimulation Models for Predicting Colorectal Cancer Screening Benefits in Europe.

Background. Validated microsimulation models have been shown to be useful tools in providing support for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening decisions. Aiming to assist European countries in reducing CRC mortality, we developed and validated three regional models for evaluating CRC screening in Europe. Methods. Microsimulation Screening Analysis–Colon (MISCAN-Colon) model versions for Italy, Slovenia, and Finland were quantified using data from different national institutions. These models were validated against the best available evidence for the effectiveness of screening from their region (when available): the Screening for COlon REctum (SCORE) trial and the Florentine fecal immunochemical test (FIT) screening study for Italy; the Norwegian Colorectal Cancer Prevention (NORCCAP) trial and the guaiac fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) Finnish population-based study for Finland. When published evidence was not available (Slovenia), the model was validated using cancer registry data. Results. Our three models reproduced age-specific CRC incidence rates and stage distributions in the prescreening period. Moreover, the Italian and Finnish models replicated CRC mortality reductions (reasonably) well against the best available evidence. CRC mortality reductions were predicted slightly larger than those observed (except for the Florentine FIT study), but consistently within the corresponding 95% confidence intervals. Conclusions. Our findings corroborate the MISCAN-Colon reliability in supporting decision making on CRC screening. Furthermore, our study provides the model structure for an additional tool (EU-TOPIA CRC evaluation tool: http://miscan.eu-topia.org) that aims to help policymakers and researchers monitoring or improving CRC screening in Europe.

Validity and Reliability of the Instruments to Measure Colorectal Cancer Screening Benefits and Barriers-Turkish Version.

Perceptions of benefits and barriers are important determinants in understanding colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) behaviors. There is a need for standardized Turkish tools that measure the benefits and barriers of fecal occult blood test (FOBT) and colonoscopy (COL). The aim of this study was to assess the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the "Instruments to Measure CRCS Benefits and Barriers." This methodological study was carried out in 2 stages in primary care and in 394 adults between the ages of 50 and 70 years. In the first stage, some items of the scales demonstrated low/unacceptable corrected item-total and factor loadings, and in the second stage, it was decided to add emoji-based facial scales, which include emoji expressions. Results with the emoji-based facial scales included internal consistency coefficients of 0.85 for FOBT benefits, 0.79 for FOBT barriers, 0.84 for COL benefits, and 0.86 for COL barriers; the item-total correlations of FOBT varied between 0.39 and 0.73, whereas those of COL varied between 0.38 and 0.76. The factor loadings of all items were higher than 0.40. The emoji-based facial scale for CRC Screening Benefits and Barriers is a valid and reliable tool for measuring the benefits and barriers perceptions of 50- to 70-year-old Turkish adults. The Instruments to Measure CRCS Benefits and Barriers-Turkish version can provide insights for nurses and healthcare professionals to understand individuals' perceived FOBT and COL benefits and barriers and to develop effective interventions to increase CRCS rates.

Abstract PO-266: Factors affecting Appalachian Kentuckians' beliefs related to colorectal cancer and colorectal cancer screening

Abstract Background: Rural Appalachian Kentucky has much higher colorectal cancer (CRC) morbidity (50.6 per 100,00) and mortality (19.8 per 100,000) than the U.S. Appalachian Kentucky CRC screening rates are 36% compared with 27% statewide and 53% nationally. This study assessed factors affecting Appalachian Kentuckians’ beliefs related to CRC and CRC screening. Methods: Appalachian Kentuckians 50 years of age and older who were not up-to-date on CRC screening (N = 190) completed a survey including subscales measuring perceived CRC susceptibility and perceived benefits of CRC screening. Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis tests compared differences in beliefs and Spearman’s Rho examined the correlation between variables. Results: Sixty-two percent were concerned about developing CRC, and 94.7% had completed CRC screening previously. Participants felt more susceptible to CRC if they had a family history of CRC (p &amp;lt; .01) and if their healthcare provider recommended CRC screening (13.03 versus 12.19, p &amp;lt; .01). Perceived benefits of CRC screening were not significantly associated with demographic or healthcare access variables. Conclusions: Although many participants were concerned about developing CRC, very few had completed CRC screening. These findings and those of previous research provide information to guide tailored interventions to promote CRC screening in Appalachian Kentuckians. Individuals with a family history of cancer may perceive a higher CRC susceptibility and be more likely to complete CRC screening. Healthcare providers’ recommendations for CRC screening can influence perceived CRC susceptibility and potentially influence completion of CRC screening in this population. Citation Format: Mollie E. Aleshire, Adebola Adegboyega, Shuying Sha, Jennifer Hatcher. Factors affecting Appalachian Kentuckians' beliefs related to colorectal cancer and colorectal cancer screening [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Virtual Conference: Thirteenth AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2020 Oct 2-4. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2020;29(12 Suppl):Abstract nr PO-266.

Fecal Immunologic Test Results and Diagnostic Colonoscopy in a Mexican Population at Average Risk for Colorectal Cancer.

Colorectal cancer is preventable and treatable by screening and early detection. Fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) for average risk individuals is an effective strategy for screening. Incidence and mortality in Mexico is increasing and large-scale screening programs do not yet exist. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of FIT-based colorectal cancer screening program in Mexico City. For more than 15 months, average risk individuals in Mexico City were invited to participate at Mexico's Instituto Nacional de Cancerologia (INCan, Mexico City, Mexico). Participants received an FIT kit for stool collection, results ≥20 ng/mL were referred for high quality colonoscopy. Participants' results were classified according to the most advanced clinical finding as: adenocarcinoma, high-risk adenomas, low-risk adenomas, serrated lesions, hyperplastic polyps, and no polyps. Sequential analyses were performed to assess the positive predictive value (PPV) of FIT. A total of 810 participants were eligible, 737 (91.0%) returned the FIT and 112 (15.2%) had an abnormal result. Of these participants, 87 (77.7%) completed colonoscopy. Clinical findings of participants included: seven (8.1%) adenocarcinomas, 18 (20.7%) high-risk adenomas, 23 (26.4%) low-risk adenomas, one (1.2%) serrated lesions, 14 (16.1%) hyperplasic polyps, and 24 (27.6%) no polyps. The PPV of FIT using the ≥20 ng/mL was 8.1% for cancer and 20.7% for high-risk adenomas. In conclusion, colorectal cancer screening with FIT is feasible at INCan in Mexico City, where resources are available. Further studies are needed to determine feasibility of colorectal cancer screening in other settings, as well as optimal hemoglobin detection cut-off points to maximize the population benefits of colorectal cancer screening with FIT in Mexico.

S0279 Predicted Colorectal Cancer Outcomes With Reported Adherence to Follow-Up Colonoscopy After a Positive Stool-Based Test

INTRODUCTION: Colonoscopy (COL) non-adherence following a positive non-invasive colorectal cancer (CRC) screening test (e.g., multitarget stool DNA [mt-sDNA], fecal immunochemical test [FIT]) undermines the achievable benefits of screening. Given wide variations in the limited data reporting COL adherence after a positive non-invasive test, microsimulation modeling was used to estimate the clinical implications of this understudied input. METHODS: An average-risk US population cohort free of diagnosed CRC at age 40 that underwent triennial mt-sDNA or annual FIT screening from ages 50 to 75 was simulated using the validated CRC-AIM model. Three scenarios were modeled: (S1) assumed 100% adherence for initial screening and COL follow-up; (S2) reported adherence rates for initial mt-sDNA (71%) or FIT (43%) screening, with assumed 100% adherence to COL follow-up; and (S3) reported adherence rates for initial mt-sDNA or FIT screening and reported adherence rates for COL follow-up after positive mt-sDNA (73%) or FIT (47%). Sensitivity analyses were performed using 100% and reported adherence rates for mt-sDNA and FIT screening, with COL follow-up adherence ranging from 40%-100%. Patients without a COL follow-up were assumed to be non-adherent until CRC symptom onset. Outcomes for each scenario are per 1000 individuals. RESULTS: S1, S2, and S3 each yielded life-years gained (LYG) and reductions in CRC incidence and CRC mortality with either mt-sDNA or FIT screening vs no CRC screening (Table 1). Estimated LYG for mt-sDNA and FIT were 297 and 316 for S1, 284 and 245 for S2, and 203 and 113 for S3, respectively. Reductions in CRC incidence for mt-sDNA and FIT were 64% and 68% for S1, 61% and 50% for S2, and 43% and 23% for S3, respectively; reductions in CRC mortality were 72% and 76% for S1, 69% and 59% for S2, and 49% and 27% for S3, respectively. With assumed 100% adherence to mt-sDNA or FIT screening, the LYG transition was at 45% (LYG = 128) and 40% (LYG = 119) adherence for COL follow-up, respectively (Figure 1). At reported adherence for stool-tests, the additional LYG for mt-sDNA vs FIT ranged from 12 to 188 as follow-up COL adherence increased from 40% to 100% (Figure 2). CONCLUSION: These modeling analyses demonstrate that the inclusion of more realistic estimates for mt-sDNA, FIT, and COL follow-up adherence has substantial impact on the predicted outcomes. Using reported adherence rates, rather than assuming 100% adherence, mt-sDNA yields greater CRC screening benefits vs FIT.Table 1.: Predicted life-years gained (LYG), colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence reduction, and CRC mortality reduction for triennial multitarget stool DNA (mt-sDNA) and annual fecal immunochemical test (FIT) in 3 different adherence scenarios per 1000 individuals free of diagnosed colorectal cancer at age 40 and screened between 50–75 yearsFigure 1.: Percent difference in predicted life-years gained (LYG) per 1000 individuals assuming 100% adherence for triennial multitarget stool DNA (mt-sDNA) and annual fecal immunochemical test (FIT) at assumed adherence rate intervals for follow-up colonoscopy (COL) in individuals free of diagnosed colorectal cancer at age 40 and screened between 50–75 years. White boxes indicate 10% positive difference with mt-sDNA versus FIT. Dark gray boxes indicate >10% negative difference with mt-sDNA versus FIT.Figure 2.: Percent difference in predicted life-years gained (LYG) per 1000 individuals by reported adherence rates for triennial multitarget stool DNA (mt-sDNA) and annual fecal immunochemical test (FIT) at assumed adherence rate intervals for follow-up colonoscopy (COL) in individuals free of diagnosed colorectal cancer at age 40 and screened between 50–75 years. White boxes indicate 10% positive difference with mt-sDNA versus FIT. Dark gray boxes indicate >10% negative difference with mt-sDNA versus FIT.