Fecal Immunochemical Test Screening Research Articles

Increasing bowel cancer screening using SMS in general practice: the SMARTscreen cluster randomised trial.

Australia has one of the highest incidences of colorectal cancer (CRC) worldwide. The Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) is a best-practice, organised screening programme, but uptake is low (40.9%) and increasing participation could reduce morbidity and mortality associated with CRC. Endorsement by GPs is strongly associated with increasing screening uptake. This study (SMARTscreen) aimed to test whether a multi-intervention short message service (SMS) sent by general practices to 50-60-year-old patients who were due to receive the NBCSP kit would increase NBCSP uptake, by comparing it with usual care. A stratified cluster randomised controlled trial was undertaken, involving 21 Australian general practices in Western Victoria, Australia. For intervention practices, people due to receive the NBCSP kit within a 6-month study period were sent an SMS just before receiving the kit. The SMS included a personalised message from the person's general practice endorsing the kit, a motivational narrative video, an instructional video, and a link to more information. Control practices continued with usual care, comprising at-home testing with a faecal immunochemical test (FIT) through the NBCSP. The primary outcome was the between-arm percentage difference in uptake of FIT screening within 12 months from randomisation, which was estimated using generalised linear model regression. In total, 39.2% (1143/2914) of people in 11 intervention practices and 23.0% (583/2537) of people in 10 control practices had a FIT result in their electronic health records - a difference of 16.5% (95% confidence interval = 2.02 to 30.9). The SMS intervention increased NBCSP kit return in 50-60-year-old patients in general practice. This finding informed a larger trial - SMARTERscreen - to test this intervention in a broader Australian population.

Abstract A138: Impact of racial disparities in follow-up colonoscopy for abnormal stool-screening test results on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality: A simulation modeling analysis

Abstract Introduction: The benefits of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs for average-risk adults rely on completion of follow-up colonoscopy (FU-Col) after a positive result from either the stool-based fecal immunochemical test (FIT) or multi-target stool DNA (mt-sDNA) test. Existing data demonstrate significantly lower rates of FU-Col for Black Americans than White Americans. However, the contribution of differential FU-Col rates on disparate CRC outcomes among Black and White Americans has not been rigorously evaluated. Methods: We used the CRC-Adenoma Incidence and Mortality (CRC-AIM) model as our analysis platform, with inputs from published literature that report Black adults are approximately 15% less likely to complete FU-Col compared to White adults. CRC-AIM was validated against United Kingdom Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening Trial and three National Cancer Institute’s Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) CRC models. We simulated screening with annual FIT and triennial mt-sDNA between ages 45 and 75 versus no screening. We considered two scenarios that assumed perfect adherence to FIT/mt-sDNA screening: 1) FU-Col rates for Black adults are 15% lower than those for White adults; 2) Black adults have the same FU-Col rates as White adults. In a secondary analysis, we considered real-world adherence to FIT (43%) and mt-sDNA (66%) and reran these two scenarios. Lifetime outcomes per 1,000 individuals were reported. Results: Assuming perfect adherence to FIT/mt-sDNA screening and 15% lower FU-Col rates, estimated life-year gains (LYG) from annual FIT and triennial mt-sDNA screening strategies compared to no screening was 227 and 239 per 1,000 individuals, respectively. If Black adults had the same FU-Col rates as White adults, the LYG would increase to 243 and 256 for FIT and mt-sDNA screening, respectively, which corresponds to a 7% improvement in LYG. Furthermore, elimination of racial disparities in FU-Col rates would reduce CRC incidence by 8% and 9% for FIT and mt-sDNA screening, respectively and reduce CRC mortality by 10% for both FIT and mt-sDNA screening. Secondary analysis shows that eliminating disparities in FU-Col would lead to 9-11% improvement in LYGs, 5-9% improvement in CRC incidence, and 7-11% improvement in CRC mortality for Black adults considering the real-world adherence to FIT/mt-sDNA screening. Conclusions: Data from this novel simulation modeling study that accounts for differences in FU-Col rates between Black and White Americans suggest that focused efforts to eliminate this gap would improve the anticipated LYG, CRC incidence, and CRC mortality benefits associated with stool-based CRC screening by over 7%, 8%, and 10%, respectively. Further investigation of this under-appreciated contributor to established racial disparities in CRC control may lead to innovative solutions for improving health equity. Citation Format: Oguz Alagoz, A. Mark Fendrick, Vahab Vahdat, Chris Estes, A. Burak Ozbay, Travelle Ellis, Paul J. Limburg, Durado Brooks. Impact of racial disparities in follow-up colonoscopy for abnormal stool-screening test results on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality: A simulation modeling analysis [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 A138.

Abstract C122: Patient perspectives on factors influencing repeat colorectal cancer screening in a Federally Qualified Health Center

Abstract Background. The life-saving benefits of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening can be maximized only if screening is completed at recommended intervals. The fecal immunochemical test (FIT), an inexpensive stool-based test recommended yearly, is the primary screening modality in many Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) and remains underutilized. To inform system interventions, we sought to identify patient perspectives on factors that influence the likelihood of repeated FIT screening over time in a large FQHC. Methods. Between September 2022 and March 2023, we conducted semi-structured interviews with patients who were due for FIT screening and completed at least one prior FIT test at a large FQHC that serves a primarily Latino population in Los Angeles County. Our interview guide explored patients’ perceived barriers and facilitators to repeat FIT over time and experiences with FIT clinic processes of care. Audio-recorded interviews were conducted in patients’ preferred language (English or Spanish), transcribed, and translated. Transcripts were coded using ATLAS.ti, and themes were summarized. Results. Among 17 interview participants, the majority were female (82%), Latino (94%), and Spanish-speaking (88%). The median age was 57 years (range 52-70), and 41% had an 8th grade education or less. Interviews revealed that patient, family, and provider/system factors influenced receipt of sequential rounds of annual FIT CRC screening. At the patient level, perceived importance of disease prevention and early detection on the part of patients facilitated proactive engagement in regular screening. Additionally, many patients thought the process of FIT completion and return was easy, although some patients did express low confidence in stool sample collection and time and work constraints impeding in-person FIT return. Another recurrent theme was motivation from family, both direct support (assistance with FIT completion and transportation to clinic) and indirect motivation (an intrinsic desire to stay healthy for family). At the provider/system level, language discordance hindered communication with providers, and in-language FIT instructions and availability of bilingual staff to translate were identified as facilitators. Patient suggestions to improve FIT completion included client text and letter reminders when due for CRC screening; print education that underscores the purpose of screening; and appointment consolidation for cancer and other preventive care screenings. Conclusion. Interventions to improve regular FIT-based CRC screening may benefit from emphasizing the importance of early detection; improving patient knowledge and confidence in how to perform stool sample collection; family support; and language-concordant staff and resources for multi-lingual and medically underserved populations. Citation Format: Narissa J. Nonzee, Beth A. Glenn, Debra Rosen, Genesis Sandoval, Diana Trujillo, Folasade P. May, Alison K. Herrmann, Christine Park, Alicia Lwin, Joanna Quintanilla, Jessica Tuan, Lauren Cai, Roshan Bastani. Patient perspectives on factors influencing repeat colorectal cancer screening in a Federally Qualified Health Center [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 C122.

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.

Cost-Effectiveness of Liquid Biopsy for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Patients Who Are Unscreened

Despite recommendations for universal screening, adherence to colorectal cancer screening in the US is approximately 60%. Liquid biopsy tests are in development for cancer early detection, but it is unclear whether they are cost-effective for colorectal cancer screening. To estimate the cost-effectiveness of liquid biopsy for colorectal cancer screening in the US. In this economic evaluation, a Markov model was developed to compare no screening and 5 colorectal cancer screening strategies: colonoscopy, liquid biopsy, liquid biopsy following nonadherence to colonoscopy, stool DNA, and fecal immunochemical test. Adherence to first-line screening with colonoscopy, stool DNA, or fecal immunochemical test was assumed to be 60.6%, and adherence for liquid biopsy was assumed to be 100%. For colonoscopy, stool DNA, and fecal immunochemical test, patients who did not adhere to testing were not offered other screening. In colonoscopy-liquid biopsy hybrid, liquid biopsy was second-line screening for those who deferred colonoscopy. Scenario analyses were performed to include the possibility of polyp detection for liquid biopsy. No screening, colonoscopy, fecal immunochemical test, stool DNA, liquid biopsy, and colonoscopy-liquid biopsy hybrid screening. Model outcomes included life expectancy, total cost, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. A strategy was considered cost-effective if it had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio less than the US willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per life-year gained. This study used a simulated cohort of patients aged 45 years with average risk of colorectal cancer. In the base case, colonoscopy was the preferred, or cost-effective, strategy with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $28 071 per life-year gained. Colonoscopy-liquid biopsy hybrid had the greatest gain in life-years gained but had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $377 538. Colonoscopy-liquid biopsy hybrid had a greater gain in life-years if liquid biopsy could detect polyps but remained too costly. In this economic evaluation of liquid biopsy for colorectal cancer screening, colonoscopy was a cost-effective strategy for colorectal cancer screening in the general population, and the inclusion of liquid biopsy as a first- or second-line screening strategy was not cost-effective at its current cost and screening performance. Liquid biopsy tests for colorectal cancer screening may become cost-effective if their cost is substantially lowered.

Impact of Various Risk Factors on the Positive Fecal Immunochemical Test for Colorectal Cancer in the Iranian Population.

Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the most prevalent cancer with high mortality worldwide. We aimed to evaluate the incidence of CRC based on the positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) result in the Iranian population. Methods: The present study was conducted on the health assessment data recorded in the SINA (Integrated Health Information System) in 2018 and 2019 from individuals who had participated in the national program, including asymptomatic people aged 50-69 years or had risk factors of CRC such as family or past personal history of CRC as well as symptomatic individuals, for the early detection and prevention of CRC in Mashhad, Iran. Results: The study participants included 140,463 eligible individuals, of whom 8258 (5.88%) and 145 (2.21%) were positive for FIT and diagnosed with colon cancer, respectively. Unfortunately, only 654 people had undergone colonoscopy. Our results indicated that age, fast food intake (≥two units per day), family history of CRC in first or second-degree relatives, some gastrointestinal diseases such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and CRC, as well as bleeding per anus, constipation, abdominal cramp, and losing body weight were associated with increased risk of positive FIT. However, some other factors, including having a hard job, physical activity, and Iranian nationality (compared to non-Iranians), were associated with a low risk of positive FIT screening tests for CRC. Conclusion: A high number of high-risk persons in Mashhad were positive for the FIT test in 2018-2019, and many of them were diagnosed with CRC, according to the colonoscopy results. Therefore, screening is highly recommended as the first step in the early detection of CRC.

Screening uptake of colonoscopy versus fecal immunochemical testing in first-degree relatives of patients with non-syndromic colorectal cancer: A multicenter, open-label, parallel-group, randomized trial (ParCoFit study).

Colonoscopy screening is underused by first-degree relatives (FDRs) of patients with non-syndromic colorectal cancer (CRC) with screening completion rates below 50%. Studies conducted in FDR referred for screening suggest that fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) was not inferior to colonoscopy in terms of diagnostic yield and tumor staging, but screening uptake of FIT has not yet been tested in this population. In this study, we investigated whether the uptake of FIT screening is superior to the uptake of colonoscopy screening in the familial-risk population, with an equivalent effect on CRC detection. This open-label, parallel-group, randomized trial was conducted in 12 Spanish centers between February 2016 and December 2021. Eligible individuals included asymptomatic FDR of index cases <60 years, siblings or ≥2 FDR with CRC. The primary outcome was to compare screening uptake between colonoscopy and FIT. The secondary outcome was to determine the efficacy of each strategy to detect advanced colorectal neoplasia (adenoma or serrated polyps ≥10 mm, polyps with tubulovillous architecture, high-grade dysplasia, and/or CRC). Screening-naïve FDR were randomized (1:1) to one-time colonoscopy versus annual FIT during 3 consecutive years followed by a work-up colonoscopy in the case of a positive test. Randomization was performed before signing the informed consent using computer-generated allocation algorithm based on stratified block randomization. Multivariable regression analysis was performed by intention-to-screen. On December 31, 2019, when 81% of the estimated sample size was reached, the trial was terminated prematurely after an interim analysis for futility. Study outcomes were further analyzed through 2-year follow-up. The main limitation of this study was the impossibility of collecting information on eligible individuals who declined to participate. A total of 1,790 FDR of 460 index cases were evaluated for inclusion, of whom 870 were assigned to undergo one-time colonoscopy (n = 431) or FIT (n = 439). Of them, 383 (44.0%) attended the appointment and signed the informed consent: 147/431 (34.1%) FDR received colonoscopy-based screening and 158/439 (35.9%) underwent FIT-based screening (odds ratio [OR] 1.08; 95% confidence intervals [CI] [0.82, 1.44], p = 0.564). The detection rate of advanced colorectal neoplasia was significantly higher in the colonoscopy group than in the FIT group (OR 3.64, 95% CI [1.55, 8.53], p = 0.003). Study outcomes did not change throughout follow-up. In this study, compared to colonoscopy, FIT screening did not improve screening uptake by individuals at high risk of CRC, resulting in less detection of advanced colorectal neoplasia. Further studies are needed to assess how screening uptake could be improved in this high-risk group, including by inclusion in population-based screening programs. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02567045).

Risk factors for colorectal cancer in a fecal immunochemical test-positive group: The National Health Insurance Service-National Health Screening Cohort.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) was the fourth most common cancer in Republic of Korea in 2019. It has a gradually increasing mortality rate, indicating the importance of screening for CRC. Among the various CRC screening test, fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is a simple yet most commonly used. Neverthelss, there have been only few long-term studies on subjects with FIT-positive. Therefore, in this study, we aimed to investigate the risk factors for CRC in FIT-positive patients using the National Health Insurance Service Bigdata database. Among 1737633 individuals with a FIT screening result for CRC in 2009, 101143 (5.82%) were confirmed to be FIT positive. The CRC incidence over 10years (up to 2018) of these participants was investigated using the National Cancer Registry. Out of the 101143 FIT-positive participants, 4395 (4.35%) were diagnosed with CRC. The FIT-positive patients who underwent a second round of screening showed a 5-year cumulative CRC incidence of approximately 1.25%, whereas those who did not showed an incidence of approximately 3.75%. Among the FIT-positive patients, the CRC incidence in the non-compliance group for the second round of screening was 2.8 times higher than that in the compliance group. In FIT-positive participants, non-compliance with the second round of screening was identified as a major risk factor for CRC development. It is necessary to establish appropriate strategies for managing risk factors for CRC in FIT-positive patients to increase the rate of compliance with the second round of CRC screening.

Feasibility and acceptability of motivational interviewing to promote colorectal cancer screening among average risk Chinese older adults

ObjectiveThis study aims to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of motivational interviewing to promote fecal immunochemical test (FIT) uptake among average-risk Chinese older adults and to preliminarily examine its effects on the knowledge level, perceived barriers to and benefits of the FIT, self-efficacy in screening, screening intention and FIT uptake. MethodsA one-group pre-test and post-test study design was adopted. A motivational interviewing intervention using face-to-face and telephone approaches was delivered to average-risk Chinese older adults aged 50–75 years. The number of participants approached, the number eligible for participation and intervention completion, and study retention rates were recorded. The knowledge, perceived benefits of, barriers to, self-efficacy in and intention to participate in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening were assessed before and after the intervention. FIT uptake was recorded 3 months after the intervention. Interviews were conducted to record the participants’ experiences of participating in the intervention. ResultsTwenty Chinese older adults completed the study. The motivational interviewing intervention improved the screening intention, knowledge of CRC and its screening, the perceived benefits of and self-efficacy in screening and perceived barriers to screening. Twelve participants (60.0%) had undergone FIT screening. Nineteen participants attended the interviews. They were all satisfied with the intervention. Three categories were generated regarding their experience in participating in the intervention, namely, (1) enhanced motivation and self-efficacy in screening, (2) enhanced understanding of the CRC screening program, and (3) areas for intervention improvement. ConclusionsThe implementation of a motivational interviewing intervention was feasible and was acceptable to average-risk Chinese older adults. A full-scale study should be conducted in the future. Trial registrationISRCTN39658070.

Interval post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer following a negative colonoscopy in a fecal immunochemical test-based screening program.

In the Dutch colorectal (CRC) screening program, fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-positive individuals are referred for colonoscopy. If no relevant findings are detected at colonoscopy, individuals are reinvited for FIT screening after 10 years. We aimed to assess CRC risk after a negative colonoscopy in FIT-positive individuals. In this cross-sectional cohort study, data were extracted from the Dutch national screening information system. Participants with a positive FIT followed by a negative colonoscopy between 2014 and 2018 were included. A negative colonoscopy was defined as a colonoscopy during which no more than one nonvillous, nonproximal adenoma < 10 mm or serrated polyp < 10 mm was found. The main outcome was interval post-colonoscopy CRC (iPCCRC) risk. iPCCRC risk was reviewed against the risk of interval CRC after a negative FIT (FIT IC) with a 2-year screening interval. 35 052 FIT-positive participants had a negative colonoscopy and 24 iPCCRCs were diagnosed, resulting in an iPCCRC risk of 6.85 (95 %CI 4.60-10.19) per 10 000 individuals after a median follow-up of 1.4 years. After 2.5 years of follow-up, age-adjusted iPCCRC risk was approximately equal to FIT IC risk at 2 years. Risk of iPCCRC within a FIT-based CRC screening program was low during the first years after colonos-copy but, after 2.5 years, was the same as the risk in FIT-negative individuals at 2 years, when they are reinvited for screening. Colonoscopy quality may therefore require further improvement and FIT screening interval may need to be reduced after negative colonoscopy.

Lower participation among immigrants in colorectal cancer screening in Norway.

Organized cancer screening programs should be equally accessible for all groups in society. We assessed differences in participation in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among different immigrant groups. Between 2012 and 2019, 140,000 individuals aged 50 to 74 years were randomly invited to sigmoidoscopy or repeated faecal immunochemical test (FIT) in a CRC screening trial. In this study, we included 46,919 individuals invited to sigmoidoscopy and 70,018 invited to the first round of FIT between 2012 and 2017. We examined difference in participation between non-immigrants and immigrants, and within different immigrant groups by geographic area of origin, using logistic regression models, adjusted for several sociodemographic factors and health factors. In total, we included 106,695 non-immigrants and 10,242 immigrants. The participation rate for FIT was 60% among non-immigrants, 58% among immigrants from Western countries and 37% among immigrants from non-Western countries. The participation rate for sigmoidoscopy was 53% among non-immigrants, 48% among immigrants from Western countries and 23% among immigrants from non-Western countries. Compared to non-immigrants, multivariate adjusted odds ratio for non-participation in FIT screening was 1.13 (95% confidence interval 1.04-1.23) and 1.82 (1.69-1.96) for immigrants from Western and non-Western countries. The corresponding numbers in sigmoidoscopy screening were 1.34 (1.21-1.48) and 2.83 (2.55-3.14). The lowest participation was observed in immigrants from Eastern Europe, Northern Africa and Western Asia, and South-Central Asia. Participation in CRC screening in Norway was particularly low among non-Western immigrants, which could put them at increased risk for late stage diagnosis of CRC. Participation was lower in sigmoidoscopy screening than in FIT screening, especially among immigrants from non-Western countries.

The impact on clinical outcomes and healthcare resources from discontinuing colonoscopy surveillance subsequent to low-risk adenoma removal: A simulation study using the OncoSim-Colorectal model.

To estimate the impact on clinical outcomes and healthcare resource use from recommending that patients with 1-2 low-risk adenomas (LRAs) return to routine fecal immunochemical test (FIT) screening instead of surveillance colonoscopy, from a Canadian provincial healthcare system perspective. The OncoSim-Colorectal microsimulation model simulated average-risk individuals eligible for FIT-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in Alberta, Canada. We simulated two surveillance strategies that applied to individuals with 1-2 LRAs (<10 mm) removed as part of the average risk CRC screening program: (a) Surveillance colonoscopy (status quo) and (b) return to FIT screening (new strategy); both at 5 years after polypectomy. A 75 ng/mL FIT positivity threshold was used in the base case. The simulations projected average annual CRC outcomes and healthcare resource use from 2023 to 2042. We conducted alternative scenarios and sensitivity analyses on key variables. Returning to FIT screening (versus surveillance colonoscopy) after polypectomy was projected to have minimal impact on long-term CRC incidence and deaths (not statistically significant). There was a projected decrease of one (4%) major bleeding event and seven (5%) perforation events per year. There was a projected increase of 4800 (1.5%) FIT screens, decrease of 3900 (5.1%) colonoscopies, and a decrease of $3.4 million (1.2%) in total healthcare costs per year, on average. The annual colonoscopies averted and healthcare cost savings increased over time. Results were similar in the alternative scenarios and sensitivity analyses. Returning to FIT screening would have similar clinical outcomes as surveillance colonoscopy but could reduce colonoscopy demand and healthcare costs.

Primary care provider perspectives on the role of community pharmacy in colorectal cancer screening: a qualitative study

BackgroundThe United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) lists 32 grade A or B recommended preventive services for non-pregnant United States (US) adults, including colorectal cancer screening (CRC). Little guidance is given on how to implement these services with consistency and fidelity in primary care. Given limited patient visit time and competing demands, primary care providers (PCPs) tend to prioritize a small subset of these recommendations. Completion rates of some of these services, including CRC screening, are suboptimal. Expanding delivery of preventive services to other healthcare providers, where possible, can improve access and uptake, particularly in medically underserved areas or populations. Fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) (at-home, stool-based testing) for CRC screening can be distributed and resulted without PCP involvement. Pharmacists have long delivered preventive services (e.g., influenza vaccination) and may be a good option for expanding CRC screening delivery using FIT, but it is not clear how PCPs would perceive this expansion.MethodsWe used semi-structured interviews with PCPs in North Carolina and Washington state to assess perceptions and recommendations for a potential pharmacy-based FIT distribution program (PharmFIT™). Transcripts were coded and analyzed using a hybrid inductive-deductive content analysis guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to elucidate potential multi-level facilitators of and barriers to implementation of PharmFIT™.ResultsWe completed 30 interviews with PCPs in North Carolina (N = 12) and Washington state (N = 18). PCPs in both states were largely accepting of PharmFIT™, with several important considerations. First, PCPs felt that pharmacists should receive appropriate training for identifying patients eligible and due for FIT screening. Second, a clear understanding of responsibility for tracking tests, communication, and, particularly, follow-up of positive test results should be established and followed. Finally, clear electronic workflows should be established for relay of test result information between the pharmacy and the primary care clinic.ConclusionIf the conditions are met regarding pharmacist training, follow-up for positive FITs, and transfer of documentation, PCPs are likely to support PharmFIT™ as a way for their patients to obtain and complete CRC screening using FIT.

Colorectal Cancer Stage Distribution at First and Repeat Fecal Immunochemical Test Screening

For colorectal cancer (CRC) screening to be effective, it is important that screen-detected cancers are found at an early stage. Studies on stage distribution of screen-detected CRC at repeat screening of large population-based fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based screening programs and the impact of FIT cut-off values on staging currently are lacking. We obtained data for FIT-positive participants (FIT cut-off, 47 μg hemoglobin/g feces) at their first or second (ie, repeat) screening from the Dutch National Screening Database from 2014 to 2018. Tumor characteristics were acquired through linkage with The Netherlands Cancer Registry. We compared stage at diagnosis (I-II vs III-IV) of CRCs detected at a first or second screening. In addition, we analyzed the hypothetical yield and stage distribution of CRC for different FIT cut-off values up to 250 μg hemoglobin/g feces. At the first and second screenings, respectively, 15,755 and 3304 CRCs were detected. CRCs detected at the first or second screening were equally likely to be stages I to II (66.5% vs 67.7%; relative risk, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00-1.05). A hypothetical increase of the FIT cut-off value from 47 μg to 250 μg resulted in a reduction of detected CRCs by 88.3% and 79.0% at the first or second screening, respectively. Even then, the majority of detected CRCs (63%-64%) still would be diagnosed at stages I to II. FIT-based screening is effective in downstaging CRC, and also at repeat screening. Increasingly, the FIT cut-off level has a limited impact on the stage distribution of detected CRCs, although it greatly affects CRC detection and thus is important to keep low.

Tailoring a Text Messaging and Fotonovela Program to Increase Patient Engagement in Colorectal Cancer Screening in a Large Urban Community Clinic Population: Quality Improvement Project.

Appropriate annual screenings for colorectal cancer (CRC) are an essential preventive measure for the second-leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States. Studies have shown that CRC screening rates are influenced by various social determinants of health (SDOH) factors, including race, ethnicity, and geography. According to 2018 national data, participation in screening is lowest among Hispanic or Latinx individuals (56.1%). At an urban Federally Qualified Health Center, a quality improvement project was conducted to evaluate a texting program with a motivational fotonovela-a short narrative comic. Fotonovelas have previously been used in programs to improve knowledge of cervical cancer and human papillomavirus, vaccinations, and treatments for depression. This study aimed to encourage compliance with fecal immunochemical test (FIT) screening. Patient engagement involved a texting program with fotonovelas informed by behavior change techniques. This study sought to understand the qualitative characteristics of patient motivation, intention, and barriers to completing their screening. A total of 5241 English-speaking or Spanish-speaking Federally Qualified Health Center patients aged 50 to 75 years were randomized to either intervention (a 4-week tailored 2-way texting program with a fotonovela comic) or usual care (an SMS text message reminder and patient navigator phone call). The texting vendor used a proprietary algorithm to categorize patients in the intervention group into SDOH bands based on their home addresses (high impact=high social needs and low impact=low social needs). Over 4 weeks, patients were texted questions about receiving and returning their FIT, what barriers they may be experiencing, and their thoughts about the fotonovela. The SDOH index analysis showed that most of the patient population was in the SDOH band categories of high impact (555/2597, 21.37%) and very high impact (1416/2597, 54.52%). Patients sent 1969 total responses to the texting system. Thematic analysis identified 3 major themes in these responses: messages as a reminder, where patients reported that they were motivated to return the FIT and had already done so or would do so as soon as possible; increasing patients' understanding of screening importance, where patients expressed an increased knowledge about the purpose and importance of the FIT; and expressing barriers, where patients shared reasons for not completing the FIT. The texting program and fotonovela engaged a subset of patients in each SDOH band, including the high and very high impact bands. Creating culturally tailored messages can encourage patient engagement for accepting the content of the messaging, confirming intentions to complete their FIT, and sharing insights about barriers to behavior change. To better support all patients across the continuum of care with CRC screening, it is important to continue to develop and assess strategies that engage patients who did not return their home-mailed FIT.

EE11 Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Increasing Access to Colorectal Cancer Diagnosis in Countries with Limited Colonoscopy Capacities: An Example from Thailand

Low and middle-income countries face constraints in colorectal cancer (CRC) detection, including low access to diagnosis and limited colonoscopy capacity. We aim to conduct an economic evaluation of increasing access to diagnostic approaches, such as Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) screening and symptom evaluation, in Thailand which has limited colonoscopy capacities.

Developing a Social Marketing–Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Campaign Centered on Stool-Based Testing for Patients Utilizing Services at a Federally Qualified Healthcare Center

Background More than 50% of colorectal cancer (CRC)–related deaths could be prevented with early detection and treatment. Federally Qualified Healthcare Centers (FQHCs)—safety-net facilities that provide primary care services to uninsured, underinsured and minority patients—report some of the lowest CRC screening rates. Effective CRC screening interventions within FQHCs may help to promote CRC screening utilization among patients from diverse backgrounds. Focus of Article This study was designed to explore average-risk, patient perceptions of facilitators and impediments of using the Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) kit for CRC screening within the social marketing framework of the 4 “P’s”—product, price, place, and promotion. Research Aim To conduct formative research with priority populations (i.e., diverse, FQHC patients), assess acceptability of the FIT kit, and identify ways to better meet preferences and needs. Program Design/Approach Qualitative, Focus Groups. Importance to the Social Marketing Field Findings from this study would aid in the future development of a community-based prevention marketing intervention to promote CRC screening within FQHCs that serve diverse patient populations. Methods Focus groups were conducted in English and Spanish with CRC screening age-eligible patients from a South Florida FQHC System. Interview guides were designed to better understand FQHC patient perceptions of CRC Screening via the FIT kit (product) by up-to-date and not up-to-date participants. Additional topics included likes/dislikes (price), preferred location for completing CRC screening and receiving CRC prevention education (place), and strategies for persuasive communication to increase CRC screening among patients who visit FQHCs (promotion). Data were analyzed to identify FIT screening facilitators and impediments using thematic coding in MaxQDA. Results Five focus groups, involving 36 participants aged 50 and older, were conducted. Over half of participants self-identified as Hispanic (36%) or non-Hispanic Black (28%). Key facilitators were the convenience and simplicity of at-home testing (product), presumed affordability of it compared to colonoscopy (price), and ability to return by mail (place). Participants also shared numerous strategies for promotion, including direct referral from Primary Care Providers, mass media campaigns, mailed or electronic reminders from the clinic, and peer advocacy events in churches. Recommendations for Research or Practice Social marketing provides an adequate approach for developing a patient-centered campaign to promote CRC screening uptake at FQHCs. Future CRC screening promotional campaigns at FQHCs should build on the motivation that patients must prioritize their health by emphasizing the convenience of completing CRC screening at home with the capability of mailing it back. Clinics should also work to reduce patient responsibility by developing automated clinic system reminders to openly communicate with patients about CRC screening.

Double-contrast barium enema is no longer justified as a backup examination for colonoscopy in the population screening program: Population study in an organized fecal immunochemical test-based screening program.

Currently, some countries still acknowledge double-contrast barium enema (DCBE) as a backup confirmatory examination when colonoscopy is not feasible or incomplete in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs. This study aims to compare the performance of colonoscopy and DCBE in terms of the risk of incident CRC after negative results in the fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based Taiwan Colorectal Cancer Screening Program. Subjects who had positive FITs and received confirmatory exams, either colonoscopy or DCBE, without the findings of neoplastic lesions from 2004 to 2013 in the screening program comprised the study cohort. Both the colonoscopy and DCBE subcohorts were followed until the end of 2018 and linked to the Taiwan Cancer Registry to identify incident CRC cases. Multivariate analysis was conducted to compare the risk of incident CRC in both subcohorts after controlling for potential confounders. A total of 102 761 colonoscopies and 5885 DCBEs were performed after positive FITs without neoplastic findings during the study period. By the end of 2018, 2113 CRCs (2.7 per 1000 person-years) and 368 CRCs (7.6 per 1000 person-years) occurred in the colonoscopy and DCBE subcohorts, respectively. After adjusting for major confounders, DCBE had a significantly higher risk of incident CRC than colonoscopy, with an adjusted HR of 2.81 (95% CI=2.51-3.14). In the FIT screening program, using DCBE as a backup examination was associated with a nearly threefold risk of incident CRC compared with colonoscopy, demonstrating that it is no longer justified as a backup examination for incomplete colonoscopy.

Barriers to colonoscopy in UK colorectal cancer screening programmes: Qualitative interviews with ethnic minority groups.

People from ethnic minority backgrounds are less likely to attend colonoscopy, following faecal immunochemical test screening, and are more likely to be diagnosed with colorectal cancer at an advanced stage as a result. The aim of this research was to explore the barriers and facilitators to attending colonoscopy, perceived by ethnic minority groups living in the United Kingdom. Semi-structured online and telephone interviews were conducted with thirty men and women of Black-African (n=5), Black-Caribbean (n=5), South Asian (n=10) and White British (n=10) descent. Participants were eligible for screening, but had not necessarily been invited for colonoscopy. All interviews were conducted in the participant's first language and were assessed using Framework-analysis, in line with a conceptual framework developed from previous interviews with healthcare professionals. Five thematic groups of barriers and facilitators were developed: 'Locus of control', 'Cultural attitudes and beliefs', 'Individual beliefs, knowledge and personal experiences with colonoscopy and cancer', 'Reliance on family and friends' and 'Health concerns'. Differences were observed, between ethnic groups, for: 'Locus of control', 'Cultural attitudes and beliefs' and 'Reliance on family and friends'. Black and South Asian participants frequently described the decision to attend colonoscopy as lying with 'God' (Muslims, specifically), 'the doctor', or 'family' (Locus of control). Black and South Asian participants also reported relying on friends and family for 'language, transport and emotional support' (Reliance on family and friends). Black-African participants, specifically, described cancer as 'socially taboo' (Cultural attitudes and beliefs). The results highlight several targets for culturally-tailored interventions to make colonoscopy more equitable.

Uptake patterns and predictors of colorectal cancer screening among adults resident in Spain: A population-based study from 2017 to 2020.

Although population screening has improved the early diagnosis of colorectal cancer (CRC), most cases are diagnosed in symptomatic patients. This study aimed to estimate the prevalence and evolution over time of uptake patterns to fecal immunochemical test (FIT) as a screening test for CRC among individuals aged 50-69 in Spain, and to determine the predictive factors for uptake patterns to this type of screening based on sociodemographic, health, and lifestyle characteristics. A cross-sectional study with 14,163 individuals from the 2017 Spanish National Health Survey and the 2020 European Health Survey was performed, including as the main variable uptake pattern to FIT screening within the last 2 years, with which we analyzed sociodemographic factors, health status and lifestyle habits. 38.01% of participants had undergone FIT in the previous 2 years, and from 2017 to 2020, a significant increase in the uptake rate for CRC was observed (2017: 32.35%, 2020: 43.92%, p < 0.001). The positive predictors to FIT uptake pattern included factors such as being between 57 and 69 years, having a higher educational level or a higher social class, having at least one chronic illness, frequent contact with the primary care physician, alcohol consumption and physical activity, while immigration and smoking habit were negative predictors. In Spain, although the evolution of FIT uptake pattern over time is positive, the prevalence of FIT uptake is still low (38.01%), not reaching the level considered as acceptable in the European guidelines. Moreover, there are disparities in CRC screening uptake among individuals.