Colorectal Cancer Screening Guidelines Research Articles

Cost effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening in the Dominican Republic.

e23033 Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence in the Dominican Republic (DR) is increasing, and CRC now ranks as the third-most prevalent cancer in the DR. There are no national CRC screening guidelines in the DR, and CRC screening is not routinely performed. We evaluated the impact of nationwide CRC screening by comparing the cost-effectiveness of four CRC screening strategies to the current practice of no screening. Methods: We developed a Markov model comparing four CRC screening strategies to the current practice of no screening, or natural history (NH): colonoscopy every ten years (Colo); sigmoidoscopy every five years (Sig); fecal immunochemical test biennially (FIT); and fecal occult blood test biennially (FOBT). Model inputs for screening arms were derived from international randomized controlled trials whenever possible. Data from The Rosa Emilia Sánchez Pérez de Tavares National Cancer Institute in the DR was used to estimate baseline CRC incidence, stage distribution and mortality. Screening was implemented from age 45 to 75. We assumed a 60.6% adherence rate for each screening arm. The model was cross validated by comparing the estimated lifetime impact of each screening arm on CRC incidence and mortality to estimates derived from the MIcrosimulation SCreening Analysis (MISCAN) Colorectal Cancer Model in the US. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of each screening strategy. Secondary outcomes included life expectancy, total cost, CRC incidence and CRC-related mortality. The willingness to pay threshold (WTP) was set to the 2022 DR gross domestic product per person ($10,111.20/life year gained). Results: In the NH strategy, 2.3% of the population developed CRC, and 1.2% died from CRC, with a lifetime cost of 203.47 per person. Compared to NH, FIT prevented 27% of CRCs and 37% of CRC deaths, with a lifetime cost of 244.76 per person. Colo was more effective than FIT, preventing 33% and 43% of CRC cases and deaths, respectively, compared to NH. However, the ICER for Colo exceeded the WTP threshold. One-way sensitivity analyses showed that the model is most sensitive to test performance characteristics and test costs. Conclusions: Among the evaluated CRC screening strategies, FIT is the cost-effective option, averting a significant number of CRC cases and deaths, at an incremental cost that is well within the WTP threshold for the DR. Inclusion of local data on the effectiveness and acceptability of the tested CRC screening modalities would improve this model, and strengthen the credibility of our findings. [Table: see text]

Is annual screening by fecal immunochemical test necessary after a recent colonoscopy?

The population-based colorectal cancer screening guidelines in Japan recommend an annual fecal immunochemical test (FIT). However, there is no consensus on the need for annual FIT screening for patients who recently performed a total colonoscopy (TCS). Therefore, we evaluated the repeated TCS results for patients with positive FIT after a recent TCS to assess the necessity of an annual FIT. We reviewed patients with positive FIT in opportunistic screening from April 2017 to March 2022. The patients were divided into two groups: those who had undergone TCS within the previous 5 years (previous TCS group) and those who had not (non-previous TCS group). We compared the detection rates of advanced neoplasia and colorectal cancer between the two groups. Of 671 patients, 151 had received TCS within 5 years and 520 had not. The detection rates of advanced neoplasia in the previous TCS and non-previous TCS groups were 4.6% and 12.1%, respectively (p < 0.01), and the colorectal cancer detection rates were 0.7% and 1.5%, respectively (no significant difference). The adenoma detection rates were 33.8% in the previous TCS group and 40.0% in the non-previous TCS group (no significant difference). Only a few patients were diagnosed with advanced neoplasia among the patients with FIT positive after a recent TCS. For patients with adenomatous lesions on previous TCS, repeated TCS should be performed according to the surveillance program without an annual FIT. The need for an annual FIT for patients without adenomatous lesions on previous TCS should be prospectively assessed in the future.

Colorectal cancer screening knowledge among community pharmacists: A national survey

BackgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) screening can reduce CRC morbidity and mortality. Community pharmacies could be a viable option for delivering home-based CRC screening tests such as fecal immunochemical tests (FITs). However, little is known about community pharmacists' knowledge about CRC screening guidelines. ObjectiveWe assessed community pharmacists' knowledge about CRC screening to identify education and training needs for a pharmacy-based CRC screening program. MethodsBetween September 2022 and January 2023, we conducted an online national survey of community pharmacists practicing in the United States. Responders were eligible if they were currently-licensed community pharmacists and currently practiced in the United States. The survey assessed knowledge of national CRC screening guidelines, including recommended starting age, frequency of screening, different screening modalities, and follow-up care. Using multiple linear regression, we evaluated correlates of community pharmacists' level of CRC screening knowledge, defined as the total number of knowledge questions answered correctly from "0" (no questions correct) to "5" (all questions correct). ResultsA total of 578 eligible community pharmacists completed the survey, with a response rate of 59%. Most community pharmacists correctly answered the question about the next steps following a positive FIT (87%) and the question about where a FIT can be done (84%). A minority of community pharmacists responded correctly to questions about the age to start screening with FIT (34%) and how often a FIT should be repeated (28%). Only 5% of pharmacists answered all knowledge questions correctly. Community pharmacists answered more CRC screening knowledge questions correctly as their years in practice increased. Board-certified community pharmacists answered more CRC screening knowledge questions correctly compared to those who were not board-certified. ConclusionTo ensure the successful implementation of a pharmacy-based CRC screening program, community pharmacists need to be educated about CRC screening and trained to ensure comprehensive patient counseling and preventive service delivery.

Effectiveness of fecal DNA syndecan-2 methylation testing for detection of colorectal cancer in a high-risk Chinese population.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is among the most prevalent and life-threatening malignancies worldwide. Syndecan-2 methylation (mSDC2) testing has emerged as a widely used biomarker for early detection of CRC in stool and serum samples. Cancer (CRC) is among the most prevalent and life-threatening malignancies worldwide. mSDC2 testing has emerged as a widely used biomarker for early detection of CRC in stool and serum samples. To validate the effectiveness of fecal DNA mSDC2 testing in the detection of CRC among a high-risk Chinese population to provide evidence-based data for the development of diagnostic and/or screening guidelines for CRC in China. A high-risk Chinese cohort consisting of 1130 individuals aged 40-79 years was selected for evaluation via fecal mSDC2 testing. Sensitivity and specificity for CRC, advanced adenoma (AA) and advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACN) were determined. High-risk factors for the incidence of colorectal lesions were determined and a logistic regression model was constructed to reflect the efficacy of the test. A total of 1035 high-risk individuals were included in this study according to established criteria. Among them, 16 suffered from CRC (1.55%), 65 from AA (6.28%) and 189 from non-AAs (18.26%); 150 patients were diagnosed with polyps (14.49%). Diagnoses were established based upon colonoscopic and pathological examinations. Sensitivities of the mSDC2 test for CRC and AA were 87.50% and 40.00%, respectively; specificities were 95.61% for other groups. Positive predictive values of the mSDC2 test for CRC, AA and ACN were 16.09%, 29.89% and 45.98%, respectively; the negative predictive value for CRC was 99.79%. After adjusting for other high-risk covariates, mSDC2 test positivity was found to be a significant risk factor for the occurrence of ACN (P < 0.001). Our findings confirmed that offering fecal mSDC2 testing and colonoscopy in combination for CRC screening is effective for earlier detection of malignant colorectal lesions in a high-risk Chinese population.

Colorectal cancer information avoidance is associated with screening adherence.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth most common cancer among U.S. men and women and the second deadliest. Effective screening modalities can either prevent CRC or find it earlier, but fewer than two thirds of U.S. adults are adherent to CRC screening guidelines. We tested whether people who defensively avoid CRC information have lower adherence to CRC screening recommendations and weaker intentions for being screened and whether CRC information avoidance adds predictive ability beyond known determinants of screening. Participants, aged 45-75 years, completed a survey about known structural determinants of CRC screening (healthcare coverage, healthcare use, provider recommendation), CRC information avoidance tendencies, and screening behavior (n = 887) and intentions (n = 425). Models were tested with multivariable regression and structural equation modeling (SEM). To the extent that participants avoided CRC information, they had lower odds of being adherent to CRC screening guidelines (OR = 0.55) and if non-adherent, less likely to intend to be screened (b=-0.50). In the SEM model, avoidance was negatively associated with each known structural determinant of screening and with lower screening adherence (ps < 0.01). Fit was significantly worse for nested SEM models when avoidance was not included, (i.e., the paths to avoidance were fixed to zero). Information avoidance was associated with screening behavior and other known structural determinants of screening adherence, potentially compounding its influence. Novel strategies are needed to reach avoiders, including health communication messaging that disrupts avoidance and interventions external to the healthcare system, with which avoiders are less engaged.

Exploring Gender Disparities in Factors Influencing Colorectal Cancer Screening Compliance in Singapore.

The uptake of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening remains suboptimal in Singapore. Existing research highlights gender-related disparities in screening behaviors. This study aims to evaluate the gender differences in factors associated with CRC screening compliance in Singapore, with a specific focus on cancer screening beliefs and knowledge on CRC screening guidelines. Data were collected from an online survey on cancer screening belief, knowledge, and practices in Singapore. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify independent factors associated with compliance in CRC screening. The study included 633 participants aged 50-69 years, eligible for CRC screening. Only 132 participants (20.9%) complied with CRC screening guidelines with no significant gender differences observed in compliance rates. Most participants held positive beliefs on routine screening (86.9%) and perceived screening benefits in improving treatment outcomes (89.6%) and reducing mortality rates (77.6%). However, both genders exhibited limited knowledge regarding CRC screening guidelines. Only 28.3% were aware that CRC screening should commence at age 50 years. While nearly half of participants knew FIT (44.7%) and colonoscopy (52.0%) as CRC screening modalities, only 27.5% and 15.2% recognized the recommended intervals for FIT and colonoscopy screening respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed a positive association between knowledge on CRC screening guidelines and CRC screening compliance for both genders. Gender-specific variations were observed in the factors associated with CRC screening compliance. Specifically, women with a family history of cancer, believing in routine cancer screening, and prior adherence to breast cancer screening and men within the older cohort (55-69 years) were more likely to comply with CRC screening. Low compliance with CRC screening was observed in Singapore. Targeted interventions should address gender-specific factors and highlight CRC screening guidelines as a crucial component of cancer education for entire screening eligible population in order to improve CRC screening compliance.

Improving Concordance Between Clinicians With Australian Guidelines for Bowel Cancer Prevention Using a Digital Application: Randomized Controlled Crossover Study.

Australia's bowel cancer prevention guidelines, following a recent revision, are among the most complex in the world. Detailed decision tables outline screening or surveillance recommendations for 230 case scenarios alongside cessation recommendations for older patients. While these guidelines can help better allocate limited colonoscopy resources, their increasing complexity may limit their adoption and potential benefits. Therefore, tools to support clinicians in navigating these guidelines could be essential for national bowel cancer prevention efforts. Digital applications (DAs) represent a potentially inexpensive and scalable solution but are yet to be tested for this purpose. This study aims to assess whether a DA could increase clinician adherence to Australia's new colorectal cancer screening and surveillance guidelines and determine whether improved usability correlates with greater conformance to guidelines. As part of a randomized controlled crossover study, we created a clinical vignette quiz to evaluate the efficacy of a DA in comparison with the standard resource (SR) for making screening and surveillance decisions. Briefings were provided to study participants, which were tailored to their level of familiarity with the guidelines. We measured the adherence of clinicians according to their number of guideline-concordant responses to the scenarios in the quiz using either the DA or the SR. The maximum score was 18, with higher scores indicating improved adherence. We also tested the DA's usability using the System Usability Scale. Of 117 participants, 80 were included in the final analysis. Using the SR, the adherence of participants was rated a median (IQR) score of 10 (7.75-13) out of 18. The participants' adherence improved by 40% (relative risk 1.4, P<.001) when using the DA, reaching a median (IQR) score of 14 (12-17) out of 18. The DA was rated highly for usability with a median (IQR) score of 90 (72.5-95) and ranked in the 96th percentile of systems. There was a moderate correlation between the usability of the DA and better adherence (rs=0.4; P<.001). No differences between the adherence of specialists and nonspecialists were found, either with the SR (10 vs 9; P=.47) or with the DA (13 vs 15; P=.24). There was no significant association between participants who were less adherent with the DA (n=17) and their age (P=.06), experience with decision support tools (P=.51), or academic involvement with a university (P=.39). DAs can significantly improve the adoption of complex Australian bowel cancer prevention guidelines. As screening and surveillance guidelines become increasingly complex and personalized, these tools will be crucial to help clinicians accurately determine the most appropriate recommendations for their patients. Additional research to understand why some practitioners perform worse with DAs is required. Further improvements in application usability may optimize guideline concordance further.

Colorectal Cancer Prevention: Is Chat Generative Pretrained Transformer (Chat GPT) ready to Assist Physicians in Determining Appropriate Screening and Surveillance Recommendations?

To determine whether a publicly available advanced language model could help determine appropriate colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and surveillance recommendations. Poor physician knowledge or inability to accurately recall recommendations might affect adherence to CRC screening guidelines. Adoption of newer technologies can help improve the delivery of such preventive care services. An assessment with 10 multiple choice questions, including 5 CRC screening and 5 CRC surveillance clinical vignettes, was inputted into chat generative pretrained transformer (ChatGPT) 3.5 in 4 separate sessions. Responses were recorded and screened for accuracy to determine the reliability of this tool. The mean number of correct answers was then compared against a control group of gastroenterologists and colorectal surgeons answering the same questions with and without the help of a previously validated CRC screening mobile app. The average overall performance of ChatGPT was 45%. The mean number of correct answers was 2.75 (95% CI: 2.26-3.24), 1.75 (95% CI: 1.26-2.24), and 4.5 (95% CI: 3.93-5.07) for screening, surveillance, and total questions, respectively. ChatGPT showed inconsistency and gave a different answer in 4 questions among the different sessions. A total of 238 physicians also responded to the assessment; 123 (51.7%) without and 115 (48.3%) with the mobile app. The mean number of total correct answers of ChatGPT was significantly lower than those of physicians without [5.62 (95% CI: 5.32-5.92)] and with the mobile app [7.71 (95% CI: 7.39-8.03); P < 0.001]. Large language models developed with artificial intelligence require further refinements to serve as reliable assistants in clinical practice.

Colonoscopy screening for colorectal cancer in Egypt: a nationwide cross-sectional study

BackgroundCurrent guidelines advocate for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in adults who are at risk by using direct visualization methods such as colonoscopy. However, in Egypt, there is a paucity of data regarding the current practice of colonoscopy screening. Moreover, more information is needed about the knowledge and attitudes of potential participants regarding the procedure and possible barriers that can limit their participation.MethodsWe conducted a nationwide cross-sectional study using an interview-based survey of patients aged 45 years or above who presented to outpatient clinics of nine university hospitals throughout Egypt. Participants were surveyed to assess their compliance with CRC colonoscopy screening guidelines, their knowledge of and attitude towards colonoscopy screening, and their perspective on potential barriers to colonoscopy screening.ResultsA total of 1,453 participants responded to our survey in the nine study centers. Only a minority of participants (2.3%) were referred for CRC screening. Referral rates were higher among those who knew someone with a history of CRC (5.3% vs 1.5%, p < 0.001) or had a discussion with their physician about CRC (25.8% vs 0.7%, p < 0.001). Few responders (3.2%) had good knowledge regarding CRC screening. After introducing the concept of CRC screening to all participants, most patients (66.7%) showed a positive attitude towards having the procedure. Financial burden and fear of results were the two most frequently cited barriers to undergoing CRC screening (81.1%; and 60.1%, respecteively).ConclusionsDespite the positive attitude, there is insufficient knowledge about CRC screening among eligible participants in Egypt. This has probably contributed to low compliance with current CRC screening guidelines and needs to be addressed at the national level.

Impact of revising colorectal cancer screening guidelines on health care resources in Canada.

78 Background: The rising incidence of early-onset colorectal cancer (CRC) has prompted U.S. organizations to lower the recommended CRC screening age for average risk adults from 50 to 45 years old, while Canadian programs remain unchanged. Canadian guidelines also differ from the U.S. in preferentially screening with a fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and recommending against colonoscopies as a screening test. Differences in national healthcare administration warrants investigation into the resource impact of updating screening guidance in Canada. Methods: Microsimulation modeling was performed using OncoSim (version 3.6) to project health and economic outcomes of different CRC screening strategies based on Canadian population data. Four simulated birth cohorts of the Canadian population born between 1973–1992 were tracked for a 40-year span from the year the oldest in each cohort turned 40 until the youngest in the same cohort turned 75. Colorectal adenoma rates were adjusted according to cohort risk ratios estimated from historical incidence data to reflect real-world CRC rates. Outcomes were reported for the cumulative cohort. Results: Compared to FIT screening at age 50, FIT screening at 45 reduced deaths by 5,220, incidence by 11,980, and added 96,100 health-adjusted life years (HALY). Colonoscopy screening at age 45 led to 17,870 fewer deaths, 74,250 fewer cases and added 314,960 HALYs. FIT and colonoscopy screening at age 45 had incremental costs of CAD$3,259 and $7,881 per HALY gained vs. a FIT at age 50, respectively. Across screening strategies, the greatest benefits were observed in the youngest cohort. Colonoscopy screening at age 45 resulted in 10,679,540 more total colonoscopies than the current capacity of 8,966,979 with FIT screening at age 50. Lowering the screening age to 45 with a FIT increased colonoscopy demand by 329,555. The total cost of CRC care (screening, diagnosis and treatment) increased with lower screening ages and colonoscopy first modalities, while the cost of CRC management (diagnosis and treatment) decreased with lower screening ages and colonoscopy first approaches. Conclusions: Adjusting current CRC screening guidelines demonstrates significant resource implications with proportional health benefits. Lower screening ages and colonoscopy first approaches have the largest resource demand and greatest health outcomes, while the incremental cost per HALY gained for all screening strategies is modest compared to standard benchmarks. [Table: see text]

A nudge strategy to increase the uptake of colorectal cancer screening in Saudi Arabia: A pragmatic randomized trial in the Hail region.

The purpose of this research was to examine the effectiveness of using a nudge strategy to encourage eligible clients to participate in colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) at primary care facilities. Additionally, it emphasizes the good outcomes of utilizing nudge in primary healthcare settings by reflecting on the novel experience of family physicians and nurses in the field of CRCS. Nudge is a cost-effective intervention that serves as a choice architect to assist people in making wise decisions for their lives. It is a subtly changed environment or combination of words that push individuals to make a decision without restricting their alternatives. This is a six-month, pragmatic trial with open-label recruitment that enrolled people with an average CRC risk from four screening healthcare zones that included 34 public primary care facilities. The study protocol is registered and can be accessed here: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05785975. An obvious increase in the proportion of the uptake of CRCS screening is higher in the two intervention sites-Al Hait General Hospital Zone (38%) and Al-Shamli General Hospital Zone (26%), than in the two control sites, Bagaa General Hospital Zone (18%) and King Khalid Hospital Zone (18%). Using the nudge strategy to increase CRCS uptake is valuable and effective; additionally, front-line family physicians and nurses in primary care are encouraged to use a planned, positive, and highly selective set of words when offering screening. Policymakers could make use of these research outcomes when designing new guidelines for CRCS.

Abstract A040: Examining the geographical distribution of a colorectal cancer awareness community outreach program

Abstract Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a significant health issue in the United States, ranking as the third most diagnosed cancer and the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths. The incidence of CRC varies across the east coast of the United States due to multiple factors, including disparities in lifestyle, healthcare accessibility, and environmental exposures. Community-based participatory research plays a vital role in identifying effective interventions to enhance awareness of cancer risk and prevention in specific communities. Methods: This study focused on Asian Americans, Blacks, and Hispanics residing in the Greater Philadelphia (PA), New Jersey (NJ), and New York City (NYC) areas. The Synergistic Partnership for Enhancing Equity in Cancer Health (SPEECH) collaborated with community-based organizations' leaders and staff to streamline recruitment, workshop delivery, and survey data collection. The workshop curriculum covered essential CRC information, including facts, dietary habits, and screening guidelines. Pre- and post-workshop surveys were used to assess changes in CRC knowledge and screening intention. The distribution of participants was analyzed using Arc GIS. Results: [GXM1] The study population consisted of 212 Asian, 172 Hispanic/Latino, and 126 African American/Black participants. Geographical data was obtainable for 486 participants, primarily from New York (n=286, 58.8%), Pennsylvania (n=150, 30.9%), and New Jersey (n=49, 10.1%). These states form the Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York City (PNN) region, which is known for its high concentrations of neighborhoods experiencing persistent poverty, especially in areas densely populated by minorities. Distinct examples include neighborhoods within the Bronx borough of New York City and Philadelphia County in Pennsylvania. Alarmingly, in some counties within the PNN region, as many as 26% of the census tracts are categorized as persistently impoverished. This pattern of concentrated poverty is supported by several existing studies and research reports. Conclusions: The distribution of participants aligned with the study area of SPEECH and areas characterized by persistent poverty. These findings provide valuable insights to guide efforts in improving cancer health equity in the identified regions. Citation Format: Thoin F. Begum, Ellen Kim, Lin Zhu, Yin Tan, Evelyn T. González, Marilyn A. Fraser, Yingzhang Lin, Nathaly Rubio-Torio, Tenya Blackwell, Carolyn Martin, Safa Ibrahim, Ming-Chin Yeh, Grace X. Ma. Examining the geographical distribution of a colorectal cancer awareness community outreach program [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 16th AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2023 Sep 29-Oct 2;Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2023;32(12 Suppl):Abstract nr A040.

Value of fecal immunochemical test in colorectal cancer screening

Screening and early diagnosis and treatment have been proven effective in reducing the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer. Colonoscopy combined with pathological examination is the gold standard for colorectal cancer screening. However, due to the invasiveness, high cost and the need for professional endoscopists of colonoscopy, it is not feasible to directly use this method for mass population screening. Fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is one of the screening techniques recommended by authoritative international guidelines for colorectal cancer screening, and has been widely used in population-based colorectal cancer screening programs in countries around the world. This paper elaborates on the value of FIT in colorectal cancer screening from different aspects, such as the technical principles, the screening efficiency, the screening strategies, and the population effects and benefits. Additionally, it describes the current situation of colorectal cancer screening in China and summarizes the challenges faced in colorectal cancer screening in order to optimize the FIT-based colorectal cancer screening strategies in the population and provide theoretical reference for effective colorectal cancer screening.

Government Housing Assistance and Cancer Screening Among Adults With Low Income

Access to affordable housing may support cancer control for adults with low income by alleviating financial barriers to preventive care. This study examines relationships between cancer screening and receipt of government housing assistance among adults with low income. Data are from the 2019 and 2021 National Health Interview Survey. Eligible respondents were classified as up-to-date or not with breast cancer (BC), cervical cancer (CVC) and colorectal cancer (CRC) screening guidelines. Multivariable logistic regression was used to model guideline-concordant screening by receipt of government housing assistance, overall and stratified by urban-rural status, race/ethnicity, and age. Analyses were performed in 2023. Analyses for BC, CVC and CRC screening included 2,258, 3,132, and 3,233 respondents, respectively. There was no difference in CVC screening by housing assistance status, but screening for BC and CRC was higher among those who received assistance compared to those who did not (59.7% vs. 50.8%, p<0.01 for BC; 57.1% vs. 44.1%, p<0.01 for CRC). In models adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics, health status and insurance, these differences were not statistically significant for either BC or CRC screening. In stratified adjusted models, housing assistance was statistically significantly associated with increased BC screening in urban areas (aOR=1.35, 95% CI=1.00-1.82) and among Hispanic women (aOR=2.20, 95% CI=1.01-4.78) and women 45-54 years of age (aOR=2.10, 95% CI=1.17-3.75). Policies that address housing affordability may enhance access to BC screening for some subgroups, including women in urban areas, Hispanic women, and younger women. More research on the mechanisms that link housing assistance to BC screening is needed.

Cancer Screening Prevalence and Preference among Hospitalized Women With and Without Obesity.

This study explored the prevalence of nonadherence and preferences for breast cancer (BRC) and colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among hospitalized women with and without obesity who were cancer-free at baseline. In addition, the study evaluated risk factors associated with nonadherence among hospitalized women with obesity. A prospective interventional study evaluated nonadherence prevalence and preference for cancer screening among hospitalized women aged 50 to 75 years. The intervention consisted of one-to-one bedside education via handouts about cancer screening. In addition, multivariable logistic regression models assessed associations between sociodemographic and clinical comorbidity variables believed to influence screening adherence among hospitalized women. Six months after discharge from the hospital, study participants received a follow-up telephone survey to determine adherence to BRC/CRC screening guidelines. Of 510 enrolled women, 61% were obese (body mass index ≥30 kg/m2). Women with and without obesity were equally nonadherent to BRC (34% vs 32%, P = 0.56) and CRC (26% vs 28%, P = 0.71) screening guidelines. Almost half of the study population preferred undergoing indicated BRC/CRC screening in the hospital regardless of obesity status. After adjustment for sociodemographic and clinical risk factors, not having a primary care physician (odds ratio [OR] 5.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.20-15.7) and nonadherence to CRC screening (OR 3.65, 95% CI 1.94-6.54) were associated with nonadherence to BRC screening among women with obesity. After similar adjustment, having an education less than high school level (OR 2.55, 95% CI 1.21-5.39) and nonadherence to BRC screening (OR 3.64, 95% CI 1.97-6.75) were associated with nonadherence to CRC among women with obesity. Women with obesity are at risk of being underscreened for obesity-related malignancies, and hospitalizations may offer screening opportunities for BRC and CRC.

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.

Engaging the community on colorectal cancer screening: Additional factors identified by African Americans as potential barriers during focus groups

ObjectiveAfrican-Americans have the highest rate of colorectal cancer deaths. Adherence to colorectal cancer screening guidelines can improve outcomes. The objective of this study was to evaluate physician trust and barriers to screening utilizing a unique bi-directional learning focus group involving African-American adults and health care learners. MethodsA focus group of African-American adults from a community church and university health care learners was conducted to identify colon cancer screening barriers. Health care learners were medical students, resident physicians and gastroenterology fellows. Pre-focus group surveys, including the Wake Forest Physician Trust Scale (WFPTS) and a colon cancer screening knowledge survey, were administered. Audio recording of the focus group was transcribed with subsequent thematic analysis. A post-focus group survey evaluated the colorectal cancer screening barriers identified during the focus group. Analysis of pre- and post- focus group surveys was performed using Fisher Exact test with significance set at p<0.05. ResultsThe focus group consisted of 18 members (7 African-American community members, 11 non-African American health care learners). WFPTS revealed that 83% (86% community members, 82% health care learners; p = 1.0) strongly agree / agree that their physician would advocate for their health. 77% (86% community members, 73% health care learners; p = 1.0) strongly agree / agree that they trusted their physician. 100% recognized that colon cancer screening is recommended. The focus group identified lack of awareness (81%), colonoscopy preparation (81%), trust in physician (60%), lack of insurance coverage (56%), transportation (56%), colonoscopy wait time (50%), insufficient physician discussion (50%) and fear of procedure or cancer (35%) as screening barriers. Post-focus group surveys revealed that community members more frequently identified racial disparity in health care (p = 0.0474), physician respect toward patients (p = 0.0128) and insufficient physician discussion (p = 0.0006) as screening barriers. ConclusionsFocus group discussion identified multiple barriers for colorectal cancer screening. Notably, differences in the perceptions of African-American community members and non-African-American health care learners about racial disparity in health care, physician respect toward patients and insufficient physician discussion were revealed. The integration of bi-directional focus group learning can be considered as a potential strategy to assist in the development of focused screening interventions.

679 Adherence to colorectal cancer screening guidelines of adults with cystic fibrosis: a single-center experience

679 Adherence to colorectal cancer screening guidelines of adults with cystic fibrosis: a single-center experience

S413 Effect of the 2018 American Cancer Society Colorectal Cancer Screening Guideline Update on Patients Presenting for Colonoscopy at an Academic Medical Center Endoscopy Unit

S413 Effect of the 2018 American Cancer Society Colorectal Cancer Screening Guideline Update on Patients Presenting for Colonoscopy at an Academic Medical Center Endoscopy Unit

Causes and Prevention of Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer.

Sporadic colorectal cancer (CRC) has historically been considered a disease of the elderly. However, early-onset colorectal cancer (eoCRC) incidence and prevalence have steadily increased over the last few decades, highlighting the critical need for a comprehensive understanding of its causes and prevention. This research examines the numerous factors contributing to the increasing incidence of eoCRC. These factors include a combination of genetic predispositions and environmental effects. We also investigate the impact of modifiable lifestyle factors like obesity, physical inactivity, and an unhealthy diet on eoCRC risk. Understanding these factors is critical in developing future diagnostic, prognostic, disease monitoring, and therapy planning strategies in managing eoCRC and will help optimize guidelines for CRC screening.