[Comparison of application effects of colonoscopy, fecal immunochemical test and a novel risk-adapted screening approach in colorectal cancer screening in Xuzhou population].

ABSTRACT

Objective: To compare the application effect of the colonoscopy, fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and novel risk-adapted screening approach in colorectal cancer screening in Xuzhou population. Methods: From May 2018 to April 2019, 4 280 subjects aged 50-74 were recruited from Gulou district, Yunlong district and Quanshan district of Xuzhou. They were randomly assigned to the colonoscopy group (n=863), FIT group (n=1 723) and novel risk-adapted screening approach group (n=1 694) according to the ratio of 1∶2∶2. For the novel risk-adapted screening approach group, after the risk assessment, high-risk subjects were invited to undergo colonoscopy and low-risk subjects were invited to undergo FIT examination. All FIT positive subjects were invited to undergo colonoscopy. Colonoscopy participation rate [(the number of colonoscopies completed/the number of colonoscopies invited to participate)×100%], detection rate of colorectal lesions [(the number of diagnosed patients/the number of colonoscopies completed)×100%], colonoscopy resource load (the number of colonoscopies completed/the number of diagnosed advanced tumors) and FIT resource load in each group were calculated and compared. Results: The age of all subjects was (61±6) years old, including 1 816 males (42.43%). There was no statistically significant difference in the socio-demographic characteristics of the subjects in different screening groups. The colonoscopy participation rate was 22.60% (195/863) in the colonoscopy group, 57.04% (77/135) in the FIT group, and 33.94% (149/439) in the novel risk-adapted screening approach group, respectively. The colonoscopy participation rate was higher in the FIT group than in the colonoscopy group and the novel risk-adapted screening approach group (P<0.001). The colonoscopy participation rate of novel risk-adapted screening group was significantly higher than the colonoscopy group (P<0.001). The detection rates of advanced tumors were 6.67% (13/195), 9.09% (7/77) and 8.72% (13/149), respectively, and the difference was not statistically significant (P>0.05). The colonoscopy resource load (95%CI) was 15 (13-17) in the colonoscopy group, 11 (9-14) in the FIT group and 11 (10-13) in the novel risk-adapted screening approach group, respectively. Among them, the colonoscopy resource load of high-risk individuals in the novel risk-adapted screening approach group was 12 (9-15). FIT resource loads (95%CI) were 207 (196-218) and 88 (83-94) in the FIT group and the novel risk-adapted screening approach group. Conclusion: The combined application of risk-adapted screening approach and FIT may have a good application effect in colorectal cancer screening.