Colorectal Cancer Screening Research Articles

Risk-stratified screening and colorectal cancer incidence and mortality: A retrospective study from the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial

ObjectiveTo determine whether risk stratification can optimize the benefits of flexible sigmoidoscopy (FSG) screening. MethodsThe Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial was conducted from 1993 to 2001 in the United States. A colorectal cancer (CRC) risk stratification tool was developed in the control arm (n = 64,207) from the PLCO cohort and validated in the UK Biobank (n = 270,726). PLCO participants (n = 130,021) were classified into low-, medium-, and high-risk groups. Cumulative incidence and mortality were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the associations between screening and CRC incidence and mortality. ResultsThe CRC risk stratification tool was based on age, gender, body mass index, smoking status, family history of CRC, diabetes, regular use of aspirin, and CRC screening history. Compared with the control arm, FSG screening was significantly associated with a reduction in mortality in both the medium-risk (HR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.63–0.92) and high-risk groups (0.58, 0.46–0.73), but not in the low-risk group (0.85, 0.61–1.19). FSG screening also reduced distal CRC incidence and mortality in the medium-risk and high-risk groups. Furthermore, it was associated with a reduction in incidence (0.74, 0.59–0.92) and mortality (0.59, 0.40–0.87) of proximal colon cancer in the high-risk group. ConclusionsFSG screening yielded more benefits for the high-risk group than for the low-risk and medium-risk groups, supporting the development of a risk-stratified CRC screening strategy.

A Stool DNA-Based SDC2 Methylation Test for the Early Detection of Colorectal Cancer in an Asymptomatic, High-Risk Population: A Multicenter Prospective Randomized Trial.

Noninvasive stool DNA-based methylation testing has emerged as an effective strategy for the early colorectal cancer (CRC) detection. Syndecan-2 (SDC2) methylation frequently occurs in all stages of CRC; therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of a stool DNA-based SDC2 methylation test for detecting CRC in asymptomatic or high-risk CRC populations. This multicenter prospective study was conducted to determine the clinical performance of the SDC2 methylation test on stool DNA using real-time polymerase chain reaction. Stool samples were collected from asymptomatic individuals before colonoscopy, and the test results were independently analyzed through comparison with colonoscopic findings and pathological outcomes as reference standards. Of the 1,124 evaluable participants, 20 had CRC, 73 had advanced adenomatous polyps (≥1.0 cm), 469 had nonadvanced adenomatous polyps (<1.0 cm), 178 had non-neoplastic polyps, and 384 had negative colonoscopy results. The stool SDC2 methylation test had a sensitivity and specificity of 95.0% and 81.5%, respectively, for detecting CRC, while the sensitivity for detecting advanced adenomatous polyps and CRC was 58.1%. The rate of adenoma detection increased with polyp size (P < 0.01), and sensitivity was not associated with CRC stage (P = 0.864). The stool DNA-based SDC2 methylation test attained a high sensitivity for CRC detection in an asymptomatic high-risk population. Further large-scale clinical studies are required to validate the clinical utility of this test as a population-based CRC screening tool.

Systematic review: Mortality associated with raised faecal immunochemical test and positive faecal occult blood results.

Faecal haemoglobin (f-Hb) testing is used in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and increasingly to guide the investigation in patients with symptoms suggestive of CRC. Studies have demonstrated increased mortality with raised f-Hb. To assess the association of raised f-Hb with all-cause, non-CRC (any cause excluding CRC) and cause-specific mortality. We searched Medline and Embase on 9 February 2024 to identify papers reporting mortality after faecal immunochemical (FIT) or guaiac faecal occult blood tests (gFOBT). The primary outcome was all-cause mortality following a positive compared to a negative test. The search identified 3155 papers. Ten met the inclusion criteria: three reported gFOBT and seven reported FIT results, as screening tests. These reported a total of 14,687,625 f-Hb results. Elevated f-Hb was associated with an increased risk of all-cause, non-CRC and cause-specific mortality including death from cardiovascular, digestive and respiratory diseases. Crude risk ratios for all-cause mortality with a positive versus negative test were derived from six papers (three reporting gFOBT, three FIT). An increased risk was demonstrated in five, with RRs ranging from 1.11 (95% CI: 1.06-1.16) to 2.95 (95% CI: 2.85-3.05). For non-CRC mortality risk, RRs ranged from 1.09 (95% CI: 1.04-1.15) to 2.79 (95% CI: 2.70-2.89). We did not perform meta-analysis due to a limited number of papers reporting suitable results for each type of f-Hb test. All-cause, non-CRC and cause-specific mortality appear higher in those with raised f-Hb. Population-based studies are warranted to elicit whether this association occurs in symptomatic patients.

Utility of Stool-Based Tests for Colorectal Cancer Detection: A Comprehensive Review.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a significant global health issue where early detection is crucial for improving treatment outcomes and survival rates. This comprehensive review assesses the utility of stool-based tests in CRC screening, including traditional fecal occult blood tests (FOBT), both chemical (gFOBT) and immunochemical techniques (FIT), as well as multitarget stool DNA (mt-sDNA) as a novel and promising biomarker. The advancements, limitations and the impact of false positives and negatives of these methods are examined. The review analyzed various studies on current screening methods, focusing on laboratory tests and biomarkers. Findings indicate that while FIT and mt-sDNA tests offer enhanced sensitivity and specificity over traditional guaiac-based FOBT, they also come with higher costs and potential for increased false positives. FIT shows better patient adherence due to its ease to use, but incorrect usage and interpretation of FOBT can lead to significant diagnostic errors. In conclusion, despite the improvements in FOBT methods like FIT in CRC detection, careful consideration of each method's benefits and drawbacks is essential. Effective CRC screening programs should combine various methods tailored to specific population needs, aiming for early detection and reduced mortality rates.

Adherence to national guidelines for colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer screenings in Japanese workplaces: a survey-based classification of enterprises’ practices into “overscreening,” “underscreening,” and “guideline-adherence screening”

BackgroundWorkplace cancer screening programs are determined as part of an employee’s benefits package and health checkups are perceived positively. However, the current status of workplace cancer screening programs in Japan is unavailable. This study aimed to assess the adherence to national guidelines for colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer screenings in the workplace among Japanese enterprises and identify factors associated with excessive or inadequate screenings.MethodsA cross-sectional study design was employed. Data were obtained from a survey conducted by the “Corporate Action to Promote Cancer Control” between November and December 2022 among registered partner enterprises in Japan. The survey included questions on background characteristics, cancer screening practices, and intervention approaches. The analysis included 432 enterprises that provided complete responses regarding colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer screenings.ResultsThe guideline-adherence rates for colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer screenings in the workplace were 12.7%, 3.0%, and 8.8%, respectively. Enterprises had lower adherence to screening guidelines than local governments. Colorectal (70.8%) and breast (67.1%) cancer screenings were predominantly categorized as “overscreening” and cervical (60.6%) cancer screening, as “underscreening.” Factors such as enterprise scale, health insurance associations, and the number of interventional approaches were significantly associated with increased “overscreening” (101–1000: β = 0.13, p = 0.01; ≥ 1000: β = 0.17, p < 0.01; health insurance association: β = 0.23, p < 0.01; and approaches: β = 0.42, p < 0.01) and reduced “underscreening” (101–1000: β = -0.13, p = 0.01; ≥ 1000: β = -0.17, p < 0.01; health insurance association: β = -0.18, p < 0.01; and approaches: β = -0.48, p < 0.01).ConclusionAdherence to national guidelines for colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer screenings in the workplace was suboptimal among Japanese enterprises. Therefore, appropriate cancer screening measures and interventions to ensure guideline adherence and optimization of screening benefits while minimizing potential harms should be expeditiously implemented.

Application of fecal immunochemical test in colorectal cancer screening: A community-based, cross-sectional study in average-risk individuals in Hainan.

The incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) in China is steadily rising, with a high proportion of advanced-stage diagnoses. This highlights the significance of early detection and prevention measures to enhance survival rates. Fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) is a globally recommended CRC screening method; however, limited research has been conducted on its application in Hainan. To assess the efficacy and adherence of FIT screening among average-risk individuals in Hainan, while also examining the risk factors associated with positive FIT results. This population-based cross-sectional study implemented FIT screening for CRC in 2000 asymptomatic participants aged 40-75 years from five cities and 21 community health centers in Hainan Province. The study was conducted from August 2022 to April 2023, employing a stratified sampling method to select participants. Individuals with positive FIT results subsequently underwent colonoscopy. Positive predictive values for confirmed CRC and advanced adenoma were calculated, and the relationship between relevant variables and positive FIT results was analyzed using χ 2 tests and multivariate logistic regression. A total of 1788 participants completed the FIT screening, with a median age of 57 years (interquartile range: 40-75). Among them, 503 (28.1%) were males, and 1285 (71.9%) were females, resulting in an 89.4% compliance rate for FIT screening. The overall positivity rate of FIT was 4.4% [79 out of 1788; 95% confidence interval (CI): 3%-5%]. The specific positivity rates for Haikou, Sanya, Orient City, Qionghai City, and Wuzhishan City were 9.6% (45 of 468; 95%CI: 8%-11%), 1.3% (6 of 445; 95%CI: 0.1%-3.1%), 2.7% (8 of 293; 95%CI: 1.2%-4.3%), 3.3% (9 of 276; 95%CI: 1.0%-6.3%), and 4.2% (11 of 406; 95%CI: 1.2%-7.3%), respectively. Significant associations were found between age, dietary habits, and positive FIT results. Out of the 79 participants with positive FIT results, 55 underwent colonoscopy, demonstrating an 82.2% compliance rate. Among them, 10 had a clean gastrointestinal tract, 43 had polyps or adenomas, and 2 were confirmed to have CRC, yielding a positive predictive value of 3.6% (95%CI: 0.9%-4.2%). Among the 43 participants with polyps or adenomas, 8 were diagnosed with advanced adenomas, resulting in an advanced adenoma rate of 14.5% (95%CI: 10.1%-17.7%). In the Hainan region, FIT screening for CRC among asymptomatic individuals at average risk is feasible and well-received.

Association between food insecurity and colorectal cancer screening using the New York State Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS)

Association between food insecurity and colorectal cancer screening using the New York State Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS)

The role of generative language systems in increasing patient awareness of colon cancer screening.

This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of ChatGPT (Chat Generative Pretrained Transformer) in answering patients' questions about colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, with the ultimate goal of enhancing patients' awareness and adherence to national screening programs. 15 questions on CRC screening were posed to ChatGPT4. The answers were rated by 20 gastroenterology experts and 20 non-experts in three domains (accuracy, completeness, and comprehensibility), and by 100 patients in three dichotomic domains (completeness, comprehensibility and trustability). According to expert rating, the mean accuracy score was 4.8±1.1 on a scale ranging from 1 to 6. Men completeness score was 2.1±0.7 and mean comprehensibility score was 2.8±0.4 on a scale ranging from 1 to 3. Overall, accuracy (4.8±1.1 vs 5.6±0.7, P<0.001) and completeness (2.1±0.7 vs 2.7±0.4, P<0.001) scores were significantly lower for expert compared to non-expert, while comprehensibility was comparable among the two groups (2.7±0.4 vs 2.8±0.3, P=0.546). Patients rated all questions as complete, comprehensible and trustable in 97 to 100% of cases. ChatGPT shows good performance with the potential to enhance awareness about CRC and improve screening outcomes. Generative language systems may be further improved after proper training in accordance with scientific evidence and current guidelines.

Polyp detection with colonoscopy assisted by the GI Genius artificial intelligence endoscopy module compared with standard colonoscopy in routine colonoscopy practice (COLO-DETECT): a multicentre, open-label, parallel-arm, pragmatic randomised controlled trial

Increased polyp detection during colonoscopy is associated with decreased post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. The COLO-DETECT trial aimed to assess the clinical effectiveness of the GI Genius intelligent endoscopy module for polyp detection, comparing colonoscopy assisted by GI Genius (computer-aided detection [CADe]-assisted colonoscopy) with standard colonoscopy in routine practice. We did a multicentre, open-label, parallel-arm, pragmatic randomised controlled trial in 12 National Health Service (NHS) hospitals (ten NHS Trusts) in England, among adults (aged ≥18 years) undergoing planned colonoscopy for gastrointestinal symptoms or for surveillance due to personal or family history (ie, symptomatic indications), or colorectal cancer screening. Randomisation (1:1) to CADe-assisted colonoscopy or standard colonoscopy was done with a web-based dynamic adaptive algorithm, immediately before colonoscopy, with stratification by age group, sex, colonoscopy indication (screening or symptomatic), and NHS Trust. Recruiting staff, participants, and colonoscopists were unmasked to trial allocation; histopathologists, co-chief investigators, and trial statisticians were masked. CADe-assisted colonoscopy consisted of standard colonoscopy plus the GI Genius module active for at least the entire inspection phase of colonoscope withdrawal. The primary outcome was mean adenomas per procedure (total number of adenomas detected divided by total number of procedures); the key secondary outcome was adenoma detection rate (proportion of colonoscopies with at least one adenoma). Analysis was by intention to treat (ITT), with outcomes compared between groups by mixed-effects regression modelling, in which effect estimates were adjusted for randomisation stratification variables. Data were imputed for outcome measures with more than 5% missing values. All participants who underwent colonoscopy were assessed for safety. The trial is registered on ISRCTN (ISRCTN10451355) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04723758), and is complete. Between March 29, 2021, and April 6, 2023, 2032 participants (1132 [55·7%] male, 900 [44·3%] female; mean age 62·4 years [SD 10·8]) were recruited and randomly assigned: 1015 to CADe-assisted colonoscopy and 1017 to standard colonoscopy. 1231 (60·6%) participants were undergoing screening and 801 (39·4%) had symptomatic indications. Mean adenomas per procedure was 1·56 (SD 2·82; n=1001 participants with available data) in the CADe-assisted colonoscopy group versus 1·21 (1·91; n=1009) in the standard colonoscopy group, representing an adjusted mean difference of 0·36 (95% CI 0·14-0·57; adjusted incidence rate ratio 1·30 [95% CI 1·15-1·47], p<0·0001). Adenomas were detected in 555 (56·6%) of 980 participants in the CADe-assisted colonoscopy group versus 477 (48·4%) of 986 in the standard colonoscopy group, representing a proportion difference of 8·3% (95% CI 3·9-12·7; adjusted odds ratio 1·47 [95% CI 1·21-1·78], p<0·0001). Numbers of adverse events were similar between the CADe-assisted colonoscopy and standard colonoscopy groups (adverse events: 25 vs 19; serious adverse events: four vs six), and no adverse events in the CADe-assisted colonoscopy group were deemed to be related to GI Genius use on independent review. Results of the COLO-DETECT trial support the use of GI Genius to increase detection of premalignant colorectal polyps in routine colonoscopy practice. Medtronic.

Active vs Passive Screening for Colorectal Cancer: Insights From the National Colonoscopy Study.

Active vs Passive Screening for Colorectal Cancer: Insights From the National Colonoscopy Study.

Factors Associated With Mailed Fecal Immunochemical Test Completion in an Integrated Academic-Community Healthcare System.

Mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach is an effective strategy to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. The aim of this study was to determine the patient-level, clinic-level, and geographic-level factors associated with CRC screening completion in a mailed FIT outreach program. This retrospective cohort study was conducted in the integrated healthcare system of University of Washington Medicine and included patients aged 50-75 years, who were due for CRC screening, and had a primary care encounter in the past 3 years. Eligible patients received mailed outreach that included a letter with information about CRC screening, FIT kit, and a prepaid return envelope. CRC screening and factors associated with completion were obtained from electronic health records and the CRC screening program database. Of the 9,719 patients who received mailed outreach, 29.6% completed FIT mailed outreach. The median FIT return time was 27 days (interquartile range 14-54). On multivariate analysis, patients with a higher area deprivation index, insured through Medicaid, living without a partner, and whose last primary care visit was >12 months ago were less likely to complete a FIT compared with their counterparts. Over a 12-month period, overall CRC screening across the health system increased by 2 percentage points (68%-70%). Mailed FIT outreach in an integrated academic-community practice was feasible, with 32% of invited patients completing CRC screening by FIT or colonoscopy, on par with published literature. Patient and geographic-level factors were associated with CRC screening completion. These data will inform additional interventions aimed to increase CRC screening participation in this population.

Effectiveness of workplace cancer screening interventions: a systematic review

IntroductionCancer cases are rising globally, with a noticeable rise in younger adults. Screening and early detection are effective in decreasing mortality. Workplaces can play a role in promoting cancer screening uptake. This systematic review investigated the effectiveness of workplace breast, lung, colorectal, and cervical cancer screening interventions, and the factors impacting their effectiveness.MethodologySix databases (Embase, Medline, Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Scopus) were searched, and cancer screening promotion and cancer screening uptake was analysed using effect direction plots. Magnitude of effectiveness (i.e., change in knowledge or screening rate) was also evaluated.ResultsIn total, 13,426 articles were identified. After screening and applying the eligibility criteria, 21 articles were included in the analysis. A positive effect direction was seen for all workplace cancer screening promotion interventions. Magnitude of effectiveness for cancer screening promotion interventions resulted in a > 30% change in knowledge or screening uptake in 4/7 of breast cancer, in 3/4 of cervical cancer and 1/3 colorectal cancer screening promotion interventions. For workplace cancer screening uptake interventions, a positive effect direction was observed for the majority (18/22). Cancer screening uptake interventions showed a > 30% change in magnitude of screening rate in 4/7 breast cancer, 5/10 colorectal cancer and in 1/5 cervical cancer workplace interventions. No studies for lung cancer were eligible. Factors positively influencing effectiveness included an interest in health and previous healthcare use, while fear of cancer and embarrassment of screening negatively influenced effectiveness.ConclusionWorkplace cancer screening promotion and uptake interventions can effectively improve cancer screening knowledge and increase uptake of screening tests.

The challenge of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in low and middle-income countries (LMIC): Acceptance, knowledge, and preferences in Brazil.

153 Background: Presenting an increasing incidence and high mortality rates, CRC is a challenge that many LMIC face and struggle to establish an effective screening strategy. Brazil is one of the few Latin American countries and LMIC that have a population-based CRC screening program, targeting ages 50-74 and performing a fecal occult blood test (FT) every 2 years and colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy as a confirmatory test. Methods: We conducted a survey in patients visiting the primary care unit in the months of January and March 2024 in three distinct settings (Rural, Suburban, and Urban) aiming to estimate acceptance, knowledge, and preferences regarding FT and colonoscopy. Patients aged 50-74 were invited to join this study, excluding those with a history of CRC, and we used the integrated digital charting platform to set demographic variables. At the end of the survey, participants were invited to undergo CRC screening. Those who refuse to screen would select the main reason. Results: A total of 1,031 individuals responded the survey, which 52% were females and the median age was 62 years. A total of 763 (74%) accepted to undergo CRC screening with an overall preference for FT (72%) compared to colonoscopy (53,5%). FT acceptance remained somewhat constant in both gender subgroups (70-75%), and a lower colonoscopy acceptance in the male subgroup (46%). In the subdivided geographic setting groups, the rural population (12%) had the lowest knowledge score and the lowest overall acceptance rate (65%), ranking “No symptoms” as the main reason for not screening. The suburban and urban subgroups showed an equivalent overall acceptance rate (74-75%), ranking “Busy schedule” and “Healthy lifestyle” as the main reasons for not screening. Conclusions: Data suggests that an effective CRC screening depends on multiple factors. While literature sustains the weight of cost and long waiting times, this study contributes adding a new, more granular perspective. Efforts in patient education, and clarification of misconceptions and anxieties could prove to be an important step in the right direction. A closer contact between patient and healthcare provider could make the difference between screening or not. A leave of absence or mailed FT might be of great benefit for those with a busy schedule, while interaction with CRC survivors seems to drastically increase colonoscopy acceptance, an important intervention that should be encouraged and widespread. Although this study has its limitations due to sample size and geographic characteristics, it lays down a new layer in understanding the individuals and planning actions to prevent the advance of CRC in LMIC.

The synchronous upregulation of a specific protein cluster in the blood predicts both colorectal cancer risk and patient immune status

BackgroundEarly detection and treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC) is crucial for improving patient survival rates. This study aims to identify signature molecules associated with CRC, which can serve as valuable indicators for clinical hematological screening. MethodWe have systematically searched the Human Protein Atlas database and the relevant literature for blood protein-coding genes. The CRC dataset from TCGA was used to compare the acquired genes and identify differentially expressed molecules (DEMs). Weighted Gene Co-expression Network Analysis (WGCNA) was employed to identify modules of co-expressed molecules and key molecules within the DEMs. Signature molecules of CRC were then identified from the key molecules using machine learning. These findings were further validated in clinical samples. Finally, Logistic regression was used to create a predictive model that calculated the likelihood of CRC in both healthy individuals and CRC patients. We evaluated the model’s sensitivity and specificity using the ROC curve. ResultBy utilizing the CRC dataset, WGCNA analysis, and machine learning, we successfully identified seven signature molecules associated with CRC from 1478 blood protein-coding genes. These markers include S100A11, INHBA, QSOX2, MET, TGFBI, VEGFA and CD44. Analyzing the CRC dataset showed its potential to effectively discriminate between CRC and normal individuals. The up-regulated expression of these markers suggests the existence of an immune evasion mechanism in CRC patients and is strongly correlated with poor prognosis. ConclusionThe combined detection of the seven signature molecules in CRC can significantly enhance diagnostic efficiency and serve as a novel index for hematological screening of CRC.

Association between racial residential segregation and screening uptake for colorectal and cervical cancer among Black and White patients in five US health care systems.

Despite increased recognition that structural racism contributes to poorer health outcomes for racial and ethnic minorities, there are knowledge gaps about how current patterns of racial residential segregation are associated with cancer screening uptake. The authors examined associations between Black residential segregation and screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) and cervical cancer among non-Hispanic Black and non-Hispanic White adults. This was a retrospective study of CRC and cervical cancer screening-eligible adults from five health care systems within the Population-Based Research to Optimize the Screening Process (PROSPR II) Consortium (cohort entry, 2010-2012). Residential segregation was measured using site-specific quartiles of the Black local isolation score (LIS). The outcome was receipt of CRC or cervical cancer screening within 3 years of cohort entry (2010-2015). Logistic regression was used to calculate associations between the LIS and screening completion, adjusting for patient-level covariates. Among CRC (n=642,661) and cervical cancer (n=163,340) screening-eligible patients, 456,526 (71.0%) and 106,124 (65.0%), respectively, received screening. Across PROSPR sites, living in neighborhoods with higher LIS tended to be associated with lower odds of CRC screening (Kaiser Permanente Northern California: adjusted odds ratio [aOR] LIS trend in Black patients, 0.95 [p<.001]; aOR LIS trend in White patients, 0.98 [p<.001]; Kaiser Permanente Southern California: aOR LIS trend in Black patients, 0.98 [p=.026]; aOR LIS trend in White patients, 1.01 [p=.023]; Kaiser Permanente Washington: aOR LIS trend in White patients, 0.97 [p=.002]. However, for cervical cancer screening, associations with the LIS varied by site and race (Kaiser Permanente Washington: aOR LIS trend in White patients, 0.95 [p<.001]; Mass General Brigham: aOR LIS trend in Black patients, 1.12 [p<.001]; aOR LIS trend in White patients, 1.03 [p<.001]). Across five diverse health care systems, the direction of the association between Black residential segregation and screening varied by PROSPR site, race, and screening type. Additional research, including studies that examine multiple dimensions of segregation and structural racism using intersectional approaches, are needed to further disentangle these relationships.

Communication quality predicts patients’ colorectal cancer screening behavior

The purpose of the present study was to investigate the quality of patient/clinician communication as one potential factor that impacts colorectal cancer screening behavior. As part of a larger randomized controlled trial conducted between 2011 and 2016 in the setting of community and academic family medicine or internal medicine practices in Michigan, USA, patients completed a pre-encounter survey, completed their regularly scheduled visit with their primary care clinician (which was audio-recorded), completed a post-encounter survey, and allowed 6-month follow-up chart audit. We trained 10 coders to rate 216 of the audio-recorded conversations between 216 patients and their primary care physicians for 6 specific features of communication quality (using 7-point scales), including the extent to which participants enacted attention to medical content, engagement, emotional expression, relationships, face, and accommodation. At least 3 coders rated each conversation, and intraclass correlations (i.e., reliability assessment) were in the good to excellent range. We found that patient and clinician attention to face (an identity goal) was a significant predictor of colorectal cancer screening at 6 months follow up. Measuring communication in terms of attention to multiple goals reveals unexpected findings about the aspects of communication that impact colorectal cancer screening behavior. The focus of many interventions to improve colorectal cancer screening rates is on the content (i.e., task goals) of clinicians' communication (such as presenting the different options for screening), yet the content of communication was not a significant predictor of screening in the present study. Rather, clinicians' and patients’ attention to identity goals predicted screening behavior, which suggests that interventions may not need to be overly complex and that simply improving the quality of attention to identity goals in clinician communication might be one of the most straightforward yet impactful ways to improve colorectal cancer screening uptake among patients.

Association of US county-level social vulnerability index with breast, colorectal, and lung cancer screening, incidence, and mortality rates across US counties.

Despite being the second leading cause of death in the United States, cancer disproportionately affects underserved communities due to multiple social factors like economic instability and limited healthcare access, leading to worse survival outcomes. This cross-sectional database study involves real-world data to explore the relationship between the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), a measure of community resilience to disasters, and disparities in screening, incidence, and mortality rates of breast, colorectal, and lung cancer. The SVI encompasses four themes: socioeconomic status, household composition & disability, minority status & language, and housing type & transportation. Using county-level data, this study compared cancer metrics in U.S. counties and the impact of high and low SVI. Two-sided statistical analysis was performed to compare SVI tertiles and cancer screening, incidence, and mortality rates. The outcomes were analyzed with logistic regression to determine the odds ratio of SVI counties having cancer metrics at or above the median. Our study encompassed 3,132 United States counties. From publicly available SVI data, we demonstrated that high SVI scores correlate with low breast and colorectal cancer screening rates, along with high incidence and mortality rates for all three types of cancers. County level SVI has impact on incidence rates of cancers; breast cancer rates were lowest in high SVI counties, while colorectal and lung cancer rates were highest in the same counties. Age-adjusted mortality rates for all three cancers increased across SVI tertiles. After risk adjustment, a 10-point SVI increase correlated with lower screening and higher mortality rates. In conclusion, our study establishes a significant correlation between SVI and cancer metrics, highlighting the potential to identify marginalized communities with health disparities for targeted healthcare initiatives. It underscores the need for further longitudinal studies on bridging the gap in overall cancer care in the United States.

Data linkage studies of primary care utilisation after release from prison: a scoping review

BackgroundPrimary care plays a central role in most, if not all, health care systems including the care of vulnerable populations such as people who have been incarcerated. Studies linking incarceration records to health care data can improve understanding about health care access following release from prison. This review maps evidence from data-linkage studies about primary care use after prison release.MethodsThe framework by Arksey and O’Malley and guidance by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) were used in this review. This scoping review followed methods published in a study protocol. Searches were performed (January 2012-March 2023) in MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science Core Collection using key-terms relating to two areas: (i) people who have been incarcerated and (ii) primary care. Using eligibility criteria, two authors independently screened publication titles and abstracts (step 1), and subsequently, screened full text publications (step 2). Discrepancies were resolved with a third author. Two authors independently charted data from included publications. Findings were mapped by methodology, key findings and gaps in research.ResultsThe database searches generated 1,050 publications which were screened by title and abstract. Following this, publications were fully screened (n = 63 reviewer 1 and n = 87 reviewer 2), leading to the inclusion of 17 publications. Among the included studies, primary care use after prison release was variable. Early contact with primary care services after prison release (e.g. first month) was positively associated with an increased health service use, but an investigation found that a large proportion of individuals did not access primary care during the first month. The quality of care was found to be largely inadequate (measured continuity of care) for moderate multimorbidity. There were lower levels of colorectal and breast cancer screening among people released from custody. The review identified studies of enhanced primary care programmes for individuals following release from prison, with studies reporting a reduction in reincarceration and criminal justice system costs.ConclusionsThis review has suggested mixed evidence regarding primary care use after prison release and has highlighted challenges and areas of suboptimal care. Further research has been discussed in relation to the scoping review findings.

Chinese national clinical practice guidelines on prevention, diagnosis and treatment of early colorectal cancer.

The incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer (CRC) in China are increasing in recent years. The clarified pathogenesis and detectable precancerous lesions of CRC make it possible to prevent, screen, and diagnose CRC at an early stage. With the development of endoscopic and surgical techniques, the choice of treatment for early CRC is also worth further discussion, and accordingly, a standard follow-up program after treatment needs to be established. This clinical practice guideline (CPG) was developed following the recommended process of the World Health Organization, adopting Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) in assessing evidence quality, and using the Evidence to Decision framework to formulate clinical recommendations, thereby minimizing bias and increasing transparency of the CPG development process. We used the Reporting Items for practice Guidelines in HealThcare (RIGHT) statement and Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) as reporting and conduct guides to ensure the guideline's completeness and transparency. This CPG comprises 46 recommendations concerning prevention, screening, diagnosis, treatment, and surveillance of CRC. In these recommendations, we have indicated protective and risk factors for CRC and made recommendations for chemoprevention. We proposed a suitable screening program for CRC based on the Chinese context. We also provided normative statements for the diagnosis, treatment, and surveillance of CRC based on existing clinical evidence and guidelines. The 46 recommendations in this CPG are formed with consideration for stakeholders' values and preferences, feasibility, and acceptability. Recommendations are generalizable to resource-limited settings with similar CRC epidemiology pattern as China.

The Annual Cost of Cancer Screening in the United States.

Cancer has substantial health, quality-of-life, and economic impacts. Screening may decrease cancer mortality and treatment costs, but the cost of screening in the United States is unknown. To estimate the annual cost of initial cancer screening (that is, screening without follow-up costs) in the United States in 2021. Model using national health care survey and cost resources data. U.S. health care systems and institutions. People eligible for breast, cervical, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancer screening with available data. The number of people screened and associated health care system costs by insurance status in 2021 dollars. Total health care system costs for initial cancer screenings in the United States in 2021 were estimated at $43 billion. Approximately 88.3% of costs were attributable to private insurance; 8.5% to Medicare; and 3.2% to Medicaid, other government programs, and uninsured persons. Screening for colorectal cancer represented approximately 64% of the total cost; screening colonoscopy represented about 55% of the total. Facility costs (amounts paid to facilities where testing occurred) were major drivers of the total estimated costs of screening. All data on receipt of cancer screening are based on self-report from national health care surveys. Estimates do not include costs of follow-up for positive or abnormal screening results. Variations in costs based on geography and provider or health care organization are not fully captured. The $43 billion estimated annual cost for initial cancer screening in the United States in 2021 is less than the reported annual cost of cancer treatment in the United States in the first 12 months after diagnosis. Identification of cancer screening costs and their drivers is critical to help inform policy and develop programmatic priorities, particularly for enhancing access to recommended cancer screening services. None.