Projected Colorectal Cancer Incidence and Mortality Based on Observed Adherence to Colonoscopy and Sequential Stool-Based Screening

Author:

Meester Reinier G.S.1ORCID,Lansdorp-Vogelaar Iris1ORCID,Winawer Sidney J.2,Church Timothy R.3ORCID,Allen John I.4,Feld Andrew D.5,Mills Glenn6,Jordan Paul A.6,Corley Douglas A.7,Doubeni Chyke A.8ORCID,Hahn Anne I.9ORCID,Lobaugh Stephanie M.9,Fleisher Martin10,O'Brien Michael J.11,Zauber Ann G.9

Affiliation:

1. Public Health Department, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands;

2. Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA;

3. Division of Environmental Health Sciences, University of Minnesota School of Public Health, and Masonic Cancer Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA;

4. Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Michigan School of Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA;

5. Gastroenterology Clinic, Kaiser Permanente Washington (KPWA), Seattle, Washington, USA;

6. Feist-Weiller Cancer Center, Health Department, Louisiana State University, Shreveport, Louisiana, USA;

7. Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente, San Francisco, California, USA;

8. Family Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA;

9. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA;

10. Department of Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York;

11. Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Boston University Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Modeling supporting recommendations for colonoscopy and stool-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tests assumes 100% sequential participant adherence. The impact of observed adherence on the long-term effectiveness of screening is unknown. We evaluated the effectiveness of a program of screening colonoscopy every 10 years vs annual high-sensitivity guaiac-based fecal occult blood testing (HSgFOBT) using observed sequential adherence data. METHODS: The MIcrosimulation SCreening ANalysis (MISCAN) model used observed sequential screening adherence, HSgFOBT positivity, and diagnostic colonoscopy adherence in HSgFOBT-positive individuals from the National Colonoscopy Study (single-screening colonoscopy vs ≥4 HSgFOBT sequential rounds). We compared CRC incidence and mortality over 15 years with no screening or 10 yearly screening colonoscopy vs annual HSgFOBT with 100% and differential observed adherence from the trial. RESULTS: Without screening, simulated incidence and mortality over 15 years were 20.9 (95% probability interval 15.8–26.9) and 6.9 (5.0–9.2) per 1,000 participants, respectively. In the case of 100% adherence, only screening colonoscopy was predicted to result in lower incidence; however, both tests lowered simulated mortality to a similar level (2.1 [1.6–2.9] for screening colonoscopy and 2.5 [1.8–3.4] for HSgFOBT). Observed adherence for screening colonoscopy (83.6%) was higher than observed sequential HSgFOBT adherence (73.1% first round; 49.1% by round 4), resulting in lower simulated incidence and mortality for screening colonoscopy (14.4 [10.8–18.5] and 2.9 [2.1–3.9], respectively) than HSgFOBT (20.8 [15.8–28.1] and 3.9 [2.9–5.4], respectively), despite a 91% adherence to diagnostic colonoscopy with FOBT positivity. The relative risk of CRC mortality for screening colonoscopy vs HSgFOBT was 0.75 (95% probability interval 0.68–0.80). Findings were similar in sensitivity analyses with alternative assumptions for repeat colonoscopy, test performance, risk, age, and projection horizon. DISCUSSION: Where sequential adherence to stool-based screening is suboptimal and colonoscopy is accessible and acceptable—as observed in the National Colonoscopy Study—offering screening colonoscopy can increase screening effectiveness.

Funder

National Cancer Institute

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3