Disparities In Colorectal Cancer Screening Research Articles

Nativity Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Hispanics in the United States.

Hispanics in the United States (U.S.) have previously exhibited lower guideline-concordant colorectal cancer (CRC) screening uptake than non-Hispanic (NH) Whites, with disparities accentuated in foreign-born Hispanics, however it is unclear whether nativity-related CRC screening disparities have changed in the last two decades and whether these disparities are attenuated after adjusting for socioeconomic and demographic characteristics. We evaluated CRC screening adherence in foreign- and U.S.-born Hispanics compared to U.S.-born NH Whites. We used 2019 National Health Interview Survey data to compare the prevalence of up-to-date CRC screening per the 2019 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendations among Hispanic nativity subgroups (i.e., foreign- and U.S.-born) and U.S.-born NH Whites using unadjusted and adjusted weighted log-linked binomial regression. Foreign- and U.S.-born Hispanics had a significantly lower unadjusted prevalence of up-to-date screening than U.S.-born NH Whites (47.18% and 64.18% versus 70.70%; p < 0.0001 and p = 0.0109, respectively). After adjusting for socioeconomic and demographic differences, the prevalence of up-to-date screening was lower in foreign-born Hispanics compared to U.S.-born NH Whites [adjusted prevalence ratio 0.80 (95% confidence interval 0.70-0.91)]; however, no statistically significant difference was observed between U.S.-born Hispanics and NH Whites. Our results suggest a low screening uptake in foreign-born Hispanics independent of socioeconomic and demographic differences. Future interventions should target foreign-born Hispanics to address disparities and promote early detection and prevention of CRC regardless of socioeconomic factors.

Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Asian American Populations and Strategies to Address These Disparities

Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Asian American Populations and Strategies to Address These Disparities

Engaging with Rural Communities for Colorectal Cancer Screening Outreach Using Modified Boot Camp Translation

Abstract: Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality are disproportionately high among rural residents and Medicaid enrollees. Objectives: To address disparities, we used a modified community engagement approach, Boot Camp Translation (BCT). Research partners, an advisory board, and the rural community informed messaging about CRC outreach and a mailed fecal immunochemical test program. Methods: Eligible rural patients (English-speaking and ages 50–74) and clinic staff involved in patient outreach participated in a BCT conducted virtually over two months. We applied qualitative analysis to BCT transcripts and field notes. Results: Key themes included: the importance of directly communicating about the seriousness of cancer, leveraging close clinic-patient relationships, and communicating the test safety, ease, and low cost. Conclusions: Using a modified version of BCT delivered in a virtual format, we were able to successfully capture community input to adapt a CRC outreach program for use in rural settings. Program materials will be tested during a pragmatic trial to address rural CRC screening disparities.

Multilevel Interventions to Improve Colorectal Cancer Screening in an Urban Native American Community: A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial

Native Americans have the highest burden of colorectal cancer (CRC) and the lowest rates of CRC screening across the United States.1 The disparities in CRC screening were made worse during the pandemic, creating an unmet need to implement evidence-based, multilevel interventions to improve CRC screening uptake. This can be achieved through an organized outreach program with identification of screen-eligible individuals using health records from the clinic; and a screening program with the following: (1) a mailed invitation, (2) a package of materials so patients can complete a fecal immunochemical test (FIT) kit from their homes, (3) reminder calls and a letter, and (4) navigation to a diagnostic colonoscopy.2-5 We conducted a pilot randomized controlled trial of a program of outreach vs usual care for completion of CRC screening at an urban clinic serving the Native American community. Applying the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR),6 we also conducted patient and provider interviews to understand barriers and facilitators to the organized program and CRC screening in general.

Rural-Urban Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Screening, Diagnosis, Treatment, and Survivorship Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Rural residents have a higher prevalence of colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality compared to urban individuals. Policies have been aimed at improving access to CRC screening to reduce these outcomes. However, little attention has been paid to other determinants of CRC-related outcomes, such as stage at diagnosis, treatment, or survivorship care. The main objective of this analysis was to evaluate literature describing differences in CRC screening, stage at diagnosis, treatment, and survivorship care between rural and urban individuals. We conducted a systematic review of electronic databases using a combination of MeSH and free-text search terms related to CRC screening, stage at diagnosis, treatment, survivorship care, and rurality. We identified 921 studies, of which 39 were included. We assessed methodological quality using the ROBINS-E tool and summarized findings descriptively. A meta-analysis was performed of studies evaluating CRC screening using a random-effects model. Seventeen studies reported disparities between urban and rural populations in CRC screening, 12 on treatment disparities, and 8 on staging disparities. We found that rural individuals were significantly less likely to report any type of screening at any time period (pooled odds ratio = 0.81, 95% CI, 0.76-0.86). Results were inconclusive for disparities in staging at diagnosis and treatment. One study reported a lower likelihood of use of CRC survivorship care for rural individuals compared to urban individuals. There remains an urgent need to evaluate and address CRC disparities in rural areas. Investigators should focus future work on assessing the quality of staging at diagnosis, treatment, and survivorship care in rural areas.

Abstract C129: Impact of COVID-19 on colorectal cancer screening disparities: Results from a large commercially insured population in the United States

Abstract Background: Although colorectal cancer (CRC) screening reduces both CRC incidence and CRC-related mortality, it is underutilized, especially among those with lower socioeconomic status (SES) and in racial and ethnic minoritized populations who have been disproportionately impacted by COVID-19. The shift in healthcare priorities to contain and mitigate COVID-19 over the last few years reduced clinical capacity for non-urgent care, including CRC screening. This study aimed to assess the impact of COVID-19 on disparities in CRC screening. Methods: Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS) insures approximately one third of Americans. We leveraged BCBS Axis data to examine temporal patterns in CRC screening among individuals aged 45-75 years during 2017-2021, focusing on three periods: 1) first wave of COVID-19 outbreak (Mar-Apr 2020); 2) second wave of COVID-19 outbreak (i.e., the Delta variant, Jan-Feb 2021); and 3) the most recent 2-month interval for which data are available (Nov-Dec 2021). Both invasive and non-invasive CRC screening procedures were identified, and beneficiaries who received screening one year before were excluded. Screening rates within each 2-month interval were calculated. Neighborhood SES was assessed by Social Deprivation Index at the zip code level and categorized into quintiles. Results: The study cohort included 27,628,570 individuals. Throughout the 5-year period, except for the 1st wave of COVID-19 outbreak, screening rates were higher in areas with higher SES. Prior to the pandemic (Jan 2017–Feb 2020), the average bimonthly screening rate in areas with the highest SES was 2.1%, compared to 1.7% in areas with the lowest SES (p &amp;lt;0.001). During the 1st wave of COVID-19 outbreak, screening rate decreased to approximately 0.8% across all SES quintiles. During the 2nd wave of COVID-19 outbreak, screening rates were 1.7% and 1.3% in the highest and lowest SES areas, respectively. For the last 2-month interval in our study period (Nov-Dec 2021), screening rates increased to 2.4% and 1.8% in areas with the highest and lowest SES, respectively. Among 9,565,516 beneficiaries with known race and ethnicity, 8.0%, 11.0%, 3.3% and 0.4% were non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic/Latino, Asian, and Native Americans/Pacific Islanders, respectively. Across all racial and ethnic groups, the average bimonthly screening rate was 1.9% prior to the pandemic, 0.7% in Mar-Apr 2020, 1.5% in Jan-Feb 2021, and 2.1% in Nov-Dec 2021. Conclusion: After the onset of COVID-19, CRC screening rate decreased broadly and reached a similar level in all SES groups in early 2020, but it then recovered at a different pace for individuals with different SES, maintaining and even exacerbating inequities that existed prior to the pandemic. Screening patterns were comparable across different racial and ethnic groups who were privately insured through BCBS. Findings from this very large study may help inform interventions to address social and structural determinants of health and reduce the disproportionate burden of CRC in individuals residing in socially deprived areas. Citation Format: Arfan Siddique, Rong Wang, Jacquelyne Gaddy, Cary Gross, Xiaomei Ma. Impact of COVID-19 on colorectal cancer screening disparities: Results from a large commercially insured population in the United States [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 C129.

Abstract C117: Implementing on overdue colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in the Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) primary care setting: 12-month post intervention results

Abstract PURPOSE: We partnered with the largest FQHC in New Haven, CT to address overdue colorectal cancer screening with evidence-based interventions (EBI). We report on the 12-month follow up of a cohort of 3,127 patients overdue for CRC screening who received 1 or more evidence based interventions (EBIs) in October, 2021. BACKGROUND: Sociocultural and medical concerns are barriers to colonoscopy uptake contributing to disparities in CRC screening. An additional barrier is system level capacity. COVID-19 associated delays exacerbated the existing backlog of individuals overdue for CRC screening, underscoring the need to expand Fecal Immunochemical Testing (FIT) screening capacity. At the time of the study, colonoscopy was the front-line cancer screening strategy in this and other primary care settings in this region. METHODS: We tested the unique and additive value of multiple EBIs for increasing CRC screening in this low-income urban population. The EBIs included: medical reminder to all recipients (Arms 1-4), supplemented with information to address social determinants of health [SDOH]) barriers (Arm 2), offer of assistance from trained community health workers (CHW) to address SDOH barriers (Arm 3), and offer of educational intervention (video and pre- and post- survey) (Arm 4). Twelve-month outcomes include: 1) CRC screening test ordered; 2) CRC screening completed. RESULTS: Of the 3,127 randomized patients, ages 50-75, 77% were Hispanic (33%) or Black (44%). At 12 months post-intervention, 1,692 (54.1%) of the cohort received an order for CRC screening, and 541 (17.3%) of the cohort completed screening. With no path to CRC screening other than a provider order, among patients for whom CRC screening was ordered, nearly one-third (32%) completed screening within 12 months of the intervention. There were no differences in either outcome based on intervention Arm. DISCUSSION: Among the 3,127 individuals who were due or overdue for screening at the time of intervention, only 9 had documented CRC cancer screening in the 5 years before randomization. The promotion of stool-based testing may have brought individuals into CRC screening. There were no differences in CRC screening (colonoscopy or FIT) orders or completed tests across the 4 arms of the study, suggesting that the provider endorsed mailed screening reminder with information on in-home, stool-based testing option (FIT), and notice that CRC screening is now recommended beginning at age 45 was key to behavior change. Provider engagement and post-pandemic care-seeking on part of patients, as well as increased awareness of CRC screening following the death of high-profile actor at age 43 likely contributed to increased uptake of CRC screening. SUMMARY: A mailed reminder is a cost effective, scalable intervention that may be effective in safety net primary care settings that serve high-risk individuals. Closing the screening gap in CRC screening should include educating patients about their CRC screening options as well as the change in recommended age to begin CRC screening. Citation Format: Beth A. Jones, Sakinah C. Suttiratana, Sarah A. DeGiovanni, Levita Robinson, Michael Couturie, Steven J. Parra, Louie M. Gangcuangco, Laney Zhang, Denise Stevens, Margarita Vargas-Torres. Implementing on overdue colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in the Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) primary care setting: 12-month post intervention results [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 C117.

Abstract C133: Identifying sexual and gender minority colorectal cancer screening disparities via the 2020 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System

Abstract Introduction: Health disparities exist for US sexual and gender minorities (SGM) relative to the general population, including cancer screening disparities with variation across disease sites. Limited data exist to describe the frequency of guideline-concordant colorectal cancer screening (CRC) among SGM people, with few studies using nationally-representative samples. This study aims to assess CRC screening participation among SGM people leveraging nationally-representative US health survey data. Methods: Data from the 2020 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) were used to compare CRC screening participation among screening-eligible SGM to that of the straight, cisgender population. 86,519 individuals aged 50 and older without a lifetime cancer diagnosis and with complete information on demographics, health access, and sexual orientation and gender identity (collected in 33 of 53 participating US states/territories) were included in the analysis. Odds of lifetime CRC screening participation by test type (colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, blood stool test, stool DNA test, virtual colonoscopy) for gender minority (GM: transgender man, transgender woman, gender non-conforming) vs. cisgender individuals and sexual minority (SM: gay/lesbian, bisexual, something else) vs. straight individuals were compared via weighted logistic regression models adjusted for age, demographics, and health access. Results: Of the overall sample, 0.44% and 3.6% identified as GM and SM, respectively. Prevalence of lifetime CRC screening by any test was 65.4% vs. 78.9% for GM vs. cisgender individuals and 77.1% vs. 78.9% for SM vs. straight individuals. GM reported lower odds of screening participation relative to cisgender individuals in 4 of 5 test types: colonoscopy adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 0.38 (95% CI 0.13, 1.08); sigmoidoscopy 0.58 (0.28, 1.22); blood stool test 0.84 (0.31, 2.28); stool DNA test 0.52 (0.22, 1.20); virtual colonoscopy 1.36 (0.64, 2.90). SM reported lower odds of screening participation relative to straight individuals in 2 of 5 test types: colonoscopy 1.05 (0.83, 1.32); sigmoidoscopy 0.94 (0.74, 1.19); blood stool test 0.95 (0.77, 1.17); stool DNA test 1.11 (0.81, 1.51); virtual colonoscopy 1.12 (0.81, 1.53). None of the AORs were statistically significant. Conclusions: Disparities in CRC screening participation persist for GM relative to cisgender individuals. These findings suggest the need for additional subgroup analyses among GM, study replication in other data sources, and interventions to improve access to CRC screening for GM. Citation Format: Frank M. Wolf, Ash Alpert, Molly Schwalb, Danielle German. Identifying sexual and gender minority colorectal cancer screening disparities via the 2020 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System [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 C133.

Disparities in Rates of Multitarget Stool DNA Test Completion for Colorectal Cancer Screening.

The aim was to assess patient adherence to multitarget stool DNA testing as well as factors associated with adherence. In the United States, disparities in colorectal cancer screening exist along racial and socioeconomic lines. While some studies suggest that stool-based screening tests may help reduce the screening gap, the data for multitarget stool DNA testing is unclear. We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study on multitarget stool DNA testing ordered between April 2020 and July 2021. We calculated the proportion of patients who completed testing and used multivariate logistic regression to identify covariates associated with test adherence. Among 797 patients ordered for multitarget stool DNA testing, 481 patients (60.4%) completed testing. Adherence rates by patient subgroups ranged from 35.8% to 78.1%. Higher test adherence was found in Asian patients (odds ratio 2.65, 95% CI 1.36-5.18) and those who previously completed colorectal cancer screening (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.01-2.09), while Black patients (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.39-0.87), patients with resident primary care physicians (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.21-0.56), and patients contacted through an outreach program (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.25-0.87) had lower adherence. A significant proportion of patients ordered for multitarget stool DNA testing did not complete testing. Differences in adherence rates among patient subgroups may be reflective of underlying disparities in health care access.

Cancer Screening Disparities Before and After the COVID-19 Pandemic

Breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer-screening disparities existed prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, and it is unclear whether those have changed since the pandemic. To assess whether changes in screening from before the pandemic to after the pandemic varied for immigrants and for people with limited income. This population-based, cross-sectional study, using data from March 31, 2019, and March 31, 2022, included adults in Ontario, Canada, the country's most populous province, with more than 14 million people, almost 30% of whom are immigrants. At both dates, the screening-eligible population for each cancer type was assessed. Neighborhood income quintile, immigrant status, and primary care model type. For each cancer screening type, the main outcome was whether the screening-eligible population was up to date on screening (a binary outcome) on March 31, 2019, and March 31, 2022. Up to date on screening was defined as having had a mammogram in the previous 2 years, a Papanicolaou test in the previous 3 years, and a fecal test in the previous 2 years or a flexible sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy in the previous 10 years. The overall cohort on March 31, 2019, included 1 666 943 women (100%) eligible for breast screening (mean [SD] age, 59.9 [5.1] years), 3 918 225 women (100%) eligible for cervical screening (mean [SD] age, 45.5 [13.2] years), and 3 886 345 people eligible for colorectal screening (51.4% female; mean [SD] age, 61.8 [6.4] years). The proportion of people up to date on screening in Ontario decreased for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers, with the largest decrease for breast screening (from 61.1% before the pandemic to 51.7% [difference, -9.4 percentage points]) and the smallest decrease for colorectal screening (from 65.9% to 62.0% [difference, -3.9 percentage points]). Preexisting disparities in screening for people living in low-income neighborhoods and for immigrants widened for breast screening and colorectal screening. For breast screening, compared with income quintile 5 (highest), the β estimate for income quintile 1 (lowest) was -1.16 (95% CI, -1.56 to -0.77); for immigrant vs nonimmigrant, the β estimate was -1.51 (95% CI, -1.84 to -1.18). For colorectal screening, compared with income quintile 5, the β estimate for quntile 1 was -1.29 (95% CI, 16 -1.53 to -1.06); for immigrant vs nonimmigrant, the β estimate was -1.41 (95% CI, -1.61 to -1.21). The lowest screening rates both before and after the COVID-19 pandemic were for people who had no identifiable family physician (eg, moving from 11.3% in 2019 to 9.6% in 2022 up to date for breast cancer). In addition, patients of interprofessional, team-based primary care models had significantly smaller reductions in β estimates for breast (2.14 [95% CI, 1.79 to 2.49]), cervical (1.72 [95% CI, 1.46 to 1.98]), and colorectal (2.15 [95% CI, 1.95 to 2.36]) postpandemic screening and higher uptake of screening in general compared with patients of other primary care models. In this cross-sectional study in Ontario that included 2 time points, widening disparities before compared with after the COVID-19 pandemic were found for breast cancer and colorectal cancer screening based on income and immigrant status, but smaller declines in disparities were found among patients of interprofessional, team-based primary care models than among their counterparts. Policy makers should investigate the value of prioritizing and investing in improving access to team-based primary care for people who are immigrants and/or with limited income.

Racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in colorectal cancer screening in a large organization with universal insurance before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

Israel is regarded as a country with a developed economy and a moderate income inequality index. In this population-based study, we aimed to measure the inequalities in colorectal cancer screening within Clalit Health, an organization with universal insurance, before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Retrospective analysis within Clalit Health Services, Israel. We evaluated the rate of being up to date with screening (having a colonoscopy within 10 years or a fecal occult blood test within 1 year) and the colonoscopy completion rate (having a colonoscopy within 6 months of a positive fecal occult blood test) among subjects aged 50-75 in 2019-2021. In 2019, out of 918,135 subjects, 61.3% were up to date with screening; high socioeconomic status: 65.9% (referent), medium-socioeconomic status: 60.1% (odds ratio 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.80-0.82), low-socioeconomic status: 59.0% (odds ratio 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.74-0.75); Jews: 61.9% (referent), Arabs: 59.7% (odds ratio 0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.90-0.92), Ultraorthodox-Jews: 51.7% (odds ratio 0.77, 95% confidence interval 0.75-0.78). Out of 21,308 with a positive fecal occult blood test, the colonoscopy completion rate was 51.8%; high-socioeconomic status: 59.8% (referent), medium-socioeconomic status: 54.1% (odds ratio 0.79, 95% confidence interval 0.73-0.86), low-socioeconomic status: 45.5% (odds ratio 0.60, 95% confidence interval 0.56-0.65); Jews: 54.7% (referent), Ultraorthodox-Jews: 51.4% (odds ratio 0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.90-0.92), Arabs: 44.7% (odds ratio 0.77, 95% confidence interval 0.75-0.78). In 2020-2021, there was a slight drop in the rate of being up to date with screening, while most of the discrepancies were kept or slightly increased with time. We report significant inequalities in colorectal cancer screening before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic in Israel, despite a declared policy of equality and universal insurance.

Inequities in colorectal and breast cancer screening: At the intersection of race/ethnicity, sexuality, and gender

ObjectiveTo investigate the joint impact of sexual orientation, gender identity, and race/ethnicity on colorectal and breast cancer screening disparities in the United States. MethodsUtilizing sampling weighted data from the 2016 and 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, we assessed differences in two metrics via chi-square statistics: 1) lifetime uptake, and 2) up-to-date colorectal and breast cancer screening by sexual orientation and gender identity, within and across racial/ethnic classifications. ResultsWithin specific races/ethnicities, lifetime CRC screening was higher among gay/lesbian (within NH-White, Hispanic, and Asian/Pacific Islander) and bisexual individuals (Hispanic) compared to straight individuals, and lowest overall among transgender women and transgender nonconforming populations (p < 0.05). Asian transgender women had the lowest lifetime CRC screening (13.0%; w.n. = 1,428). Lifetime breast cancer screening was lowest among the Hispanic bisexual population (86.6%; w.n. = 26,940) and Hispanic transgender nonconforming population (71.8%; w.n. = 739); within all races, SGM individuals (except NH-White, Hispanic, and Black bisexual populations, and NH-White transgender men) had greater breast cancer screening adherence compared to straight individuals. ConclusionsDue to small, unweighted sample sizes, results should be interpreted with caution. Heterogeneity in screening participation by SGM status within and across racial/ethnic groups were observed, revealing the need to disaggregate data to account for intersecting identities and for studies with larger sample sizes to increase estimate reliability.

Improving colorectal cancer screening disparities among Somali-speaking patients in an Internal Medicine Residency Clinic

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third-most lethal cancer in the USA, and early detection through screening is crucial for improving outcomes. However, significant disparities in access and utilisation of CRC...

Hyperlocal disparities in breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening: An ecological study of social vulnerability in Miami-Dade county

Neighborhoods have been identified as important determinants of health-related outcomes, but limited research has assessed the influence of neighborhood context along the cancer continuum. This study used census tract-level data from the United States Census Bureau and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to characterize Miami-Dade County census tracts (n = 492) into social vulnerability clusters and assess their associated breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening participation rates. We identified disparities by social vulnerability cluster in cancer screening participation rates. Further investigation of geographic disparities in social vulnerability and cancer screening participation could inform equity-focused cancer control efforts.

Association Between Depression and Anxiety Status With Uptake of Colorectal Cancer Screening Among US Adults: A Population-Level Study.

Individuals with different mental disorders tend to experience higher rates of colorectal cancer (CRC)-related mortality compared to the general population. Discrepancies in CRC screening behaviors have been suggested as a potential contributing factor to this difference in mortality. However, existing evidence on this topic has been inconclusive and conflicting. This study aims to explore the relationship between mental health status (specifically, depression and/or anxiety) and the uptake of CRC screening. To achieve this, a larger and nationally representative sample from the adult population of the United States was utilized. We employed a cross-sectional approach using data from the 2019-2020 edition of the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS). The study examined disparities in CRC screening between individuals with self-reported history of depression diagnosis and the general population. Chi-square tests were used for analysis. Multivariable logistic regression models were applied to adjust for variables such as gender, age, education level, race, comorbidities, healthcare access, smoking status, household income, geographical residence, and insurance status. Adjusted odds ratios (AORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported. The findings of the study indicated that out of 5,398 eligible individuals, approximately 1,220 (weighted percentage: 22.8%) reported experiencing depression and/or anxiety, and approximately 4,154 (weighted percentage: 68.9%) reported adherence to colorectal cancer screening. In the bivariate analysis, there was no significant difference in participation in colorectal cancer screening between individuals with and without depression and/or anxiety (72.0% vs. 68.0%). Similarly, after adjusting for sociodemographic and health-related factors, the study found that the odds of participating in colorectal cancer screening did not vary based on an individual's depression status (OR 1.34, 95% CI 0.94-1.91, P = 0.05). Individuals with depression participate in colorectal cancer screening at comparable rates to the general population. The findings of this study suggest that factors beyond CRC screening may play significant roles in the higher CRC-associated mortality rate. Therefore, further research is needed to uncover the various mechanisms contributing to the increased cancer-related mortality rates among susceptible populations.

Colorectal cancer screening disparities in Asian Americans: the influences of patient-provider communication and social media use.

We examined the role of patient-provider communication (PPC) during in-person visits and via electronic communication and social media use on colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among Asian Americans (AAs) and Non-Hispanic Whites (NHWs) aged 50 and older. Health Information National Trends Survey 2017-2020 data were analyzed. AAs tended to evaluate the quality of PPC during their in-person visits to a health care provider lower than NHWs. AAs' CRC screening rate was lower than the rate of NHWs (78.8% vs. 84.4%). After adjusting for sociodemographics, healthcare access, and health status, the quality of PPC was the only significant predictor associated with a lower probability of CRC screening among AAs (Adjusted OR 0.74; 95% CI 0.56, 0.96); while the Internet to communicate with a health care provider was the only significant predictor of CRC screening among NHWs (Adjusted OR 1.76; CI 1.11, 2.79). AAs were more likely to use YouTube to watch a health-related video than NHWs (43.5% vs, 24%). However, social media use was not associated with CRC screening in both AAs and NHWs. Use of electronic communication technology may contribute to improve health information literacy and reduce the disparity. On-line communication may empower the culturally and linguistically diverse AAs by improving their confidence in communication with health care providers. Thus, communication technologies need to be strategically utilized and tailored to better meet the communication needs of racial/ethnic minorities. Online communication technologies may reduce the disparities in PPC related to cancer screening and cancer burden experienced by AAs.

Medical mistrust, culturally targeted message framing, and colorectal cancer screening among African Americans.

Mistrust in the information and treatment provided by medical professionals and organizations hinders cancer screening among African Americans. However, its impact on responses to health messaging aimed at bolstering screening uptake is unknown. The present study examined the effects of medical mistrust on message framing and culturally targeted health messaging about colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Screening eligible African Americans (N = 457) completed the Group-Based Medical Mistrust scale and then viewed an informational video about CRC risks, prevention, and screening, during which all participants received either a gain or loss-framed message about screening. Half of participants received an additional culturally targeted screening message. After messaging, all participants completed Theory of Planned Behavior measures of CRC screening receptivity, as well as items assessing expectations about experiencing racism when obtaining CRC screening (i.e., anticipatory racism). Hierarchical multiple regressions showed that medical mistrust predicted lower screening receptivity and greater anticipatory racism. Additionally, effects of health messaging were moderated by medical mistrust. Among participants high in mistrust, targeted messaging-regardless of message frame-bolstered normative beliefs about CRC. Additionally, only targeted loss-framed messaging bolstered attitudes toward CRC screening. Although targeted messaging reduced anticipatory racism among participants with high mistrust, anticipatory racism did not mediate messaging effects. Findings indicate medical mistrust may be an important culturally-relevant individual difference to attend to in addressing CRC screening disparities, including its potential to impact responses to cancer screening messaging.

Implementing Mailed Colorectal Cancer Fecal Screening Tests in Real-World Primary Care Settings: Promising Implementation Practices and Opportunities for Improvement

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening reduces morbidity and mortality, but screening rates in the USA remain suboptimal. The Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) was established in 2009 to increase screening among groups disproportionately affected. The CRCCP utilizes implementation science to support health system change as a strategy to reduce disparities in CRC screening by directing resources to primary care clinics to implement evidence-based interventions (EBIs) proven to increase CRC screening. As COVID-19 continues to impede in-person healthcare visits and compel the unpredictable redirection of clinic priorities, understanding clinics’ adoption and implementation of EBIs into routine care is crucial. Mailed fecal testing is an evidence-based screening approach that offers an alternative to in-person screening tests and represents a promising approach to reduce CRC screening disparities. However, little is known about how mailed fecal testing is implemented in real-world settings. In this retrospective, cross-sectional analysis, we assessed practices around mailed fecal testing implementation in 185 clinics across 62 US health systems. We sought to (1) determine whether clinics that do and do not implement mailed fecal testing differ with respect to characteristics (e.g., type, location, and proportion of uninsured patients) and (2) identify implementation practices among clinics that offer mailed fecal testing. Our findings revealed that over half (58%) of clinics implemented mailed fecal testing. These clinics were more likely to have a CRC screening policy than clinics that did not implement mailed fecal testing (p = 0.007) and to serve a larger patient population (p = 0.004), but less likely to have a large proportion of uninsured patients (p = 0.01). Clinics that implemented mailed fecal testing offered it in combination with EBIs, including patient reminders (92%), provider reminders (94%), and other activities to reduce structural barriers (95%). However, fewer clinics reported having the leadership support (58%) or funding stability (29%) to sustain mailed fecal testing. Mailed fecal testing was widely implemented alongside other EBIs in primary care clinics participating in the CRCCP, but multiple opportunities for enhancing its implementation exist. These include increasing the proportion of community health centers/federally qualified health centers offering mailed screening; increasing the proportion that provide pre-paid return mail supplies with the screening kit; increasing the proportion of clinics monitoring both screening kit distribution and return; ensuring patients with abnormal tests can obtain colonoscopy; and increasing sustainability planning and support.

Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Screening by Time in the U.S. and Race/Ethnicity, 2010−2018

Longer time lived in the U.S. has been associated with worse health outcomes, especially preventable diseases, among racially and ethnically diverse groups of foreign-born individuals. This study evaluated the association between time lived in the U.S. and colorectal cancer screening adherence and whether this relationship differed by race and ethnicity. Data from the National Health Interview Survey for 2010-2018 among adults aged 50-75 years were used. Time in the U.S. was categorized as U.S.-born, foreign-born ≥15 years, and foreign-born <15 years. Colorectal cancer screening adherence was defined according to U.S. Preventive Services Task Force guidelines. Generalized linear models with Poisson distribution were used to calculate adjusted prevalence ratios and 95% CIs. Analyses were conducted in 2020-2022, were stratified by race and ethnicity, accounted for the complex sampling design, and were weighted to be representative of the U.S. Prevalence of colorectal cancer screening adherence was 63% overall, 64% for U.S.-born, 55% for foreign-born ≥15 years, and 35% for foreign-born <15 years. In fully adjusted models for all individuals, only foreign-born <15 years had lower adherence than U.S.-born (foreign-born≥15 years: prevalence ratio=0.97 [0.95, 1.00], foreign-born <15 years: prevalence ratio=0.79 [0.71, 0.88]). Results differed by race and ethnicity (p-interaction=0.002). In stratified analyses, findings for non-Hispanic White individuals (foreign-born ≥15 years: prevalence ratio=1.00 [0.96, 1.04], foreign-born <15 years: prevalence ratio=0.76 [0.58, 0.98]) and non-Hispanic Black individuals (foreign-born ≥15 years: prevalence ratio=0.94 [0.86, 1.02], foreign-born <15 years: prevalence ratio=0.61 [0.44, 0.85]) were similar to all individuals. Disparities by time in the U.S. were not observed among Hispanic/Latino individuals (foreign-born ≥15 years: prevalence ratio=0.98 [0.92, 1.04], foreign-born <15 years: prevalence ratio=0.86 [0.74, 1.01]) but persisted among Asian American/Pacific Islander individuals (foreign-born ≥15 years: prevalence ratio=0.84 [0.77, 0.93], foreign-born <15 years: prevalence ratio=0.74 [0.60, 0.93]). The relationship between colorectal cancer screening adherence and time in the U.S. varied by race and ethnicity. Culturally and ethnically tailored interventions are needed to improve colorectal cancer screening adherence among foreign-born people, especially among the most recently immigrated individuals.

Disparities in colorectal cancer: Trends of reduced screening among minority populations.

18 Background: Studies have shown that African Americans (AA) are at increased risk for Colorectal Cancer (CRC) compared to other groups. Despite advancements in CRC screening modalities, few studies have investigated disparities in CRC screening among this vulnerable population. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of patients of age 45 or older who were seen in Family Medicine (FM), Internal Medicine (IM), or Gastroenterology (GI) between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2021 at the Mayo Clinic. Information was collected regarding patient characteristics (age, sex, Charlson comorbidity score, race), and outcomes (whether a Cologuard test was ordered on the same day as the initial appointment, and whether the patient underwent a colonoscopy within 1 year after the initial appointment). Categorical variables were summarized with number and percentage of patients. Outcomes were compared between race groups (Caucasian, AA, Asian, Other) using unadjusted and multivariable logistic regression models. Multivariable models were adjusted for age, sex, and Charlson comorbidity score. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated. P-values &lt;0.05 were considered as statistically significant, and all statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Overall, 558,078 were included for analysis and 14,607 (2.6%) were AA. Overall, AA patients for less likely to have Cologuard ordered compared to Caucasians (OR=0.62, p&lt;0.001), notably driven by patient seen in the FM group (OR=0.54, p&lt;0.001) and no statistically significant difference was observed in the IM and GI groups (p=0.055 and p=0.43, respectively). Notably, compared to Caucasian patients, Asian patients were overall more likely to have Cologuard ordered (OR=1.23, p=0.003). In multivariable analysis assessing the likelihood of having a colonoscopy performed within 1 year of the initial appointment, the likelihood of a colonoscopy within 1 year of initial clinic visit was significantly lower for AA compared to Caucasian patients (OR=0.50, p=0.028). This difference was strongest in FM patients (OR=0.26, p=0.022) and was not significant for IM (OR=0.67, p=0.37) or GI (OR=2.31, p=0.25). Conclusions: In this study, we found that AA ethnicity is associated with reduced likelihood of having Cologuard ordered compared to Caucasian patients. Furthermore, AA patients were less likely to have colonoscopy ordered within 1 year of initial visit clinic visit among the overall cohort, highlighting important disparities in CRC screening among this vulnerable patient population notably for those seen in the FM group. Future studies are needed to assess other barriers for CRC screening in this population.