Mailed fecal immunochemical test outreach for colorectal cancer screening: Summary of a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-sponsored Summit.

Uptake of colorectal cancer screening remains suboptimal. Mailed fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) offers promise for increasing screening rates, but optimal strategies for implementation have not been well synthesized. In June 2019, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention convened a meeting of subject matter experts and stakeholders to answer key questions regarding mailed FIT implementation in the United States. Points of agreement included: 1) primers, such as texts, telephone calls, and printed mailings before mailed FIT, appear to contribute to effectiveness; 2) invitation letters should be brief and easy to read, and the signatory should be tailored based on setting; 3) instructions for FIT completion should be simple and address challenges that may lead to failed laboratory processing, such as notation of collection date; 4) reminders delivered to initial noncompleters should be used to increase the FIT return rate; 5) data infrastructure should identify eligible patients and track each step in the outreach process, from primer delivery through abnormal FIT follow-up; 6) protocols and procedures such as navigation should be in place to promote colonoscopy after abnormal FIT; 7) a high-quality, 1-sample FIT should be used; 8) sustainability requires a program champion and organizational support for the work, including sufficient funding and external policies (such as quality reporting requirements) to drive commitment to program investment; and 9) the cost effectiveness of mailed FIT has been established. Participants concluded that mailed FIT is an effective and efficient strategy with great potential for increasing colorectal cancer screening in diverse health care settings if more widely implemented.

Colonoscopy vs the Fecal Immunochemical Test: Which is Best?

Although there is no debate around the effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening in reducing disease burden, there remains a question regarding the most effective and cost-effective screening modality. Current United States guidelines present a panel of options that include the 2 most commonly used modalities, colonoscopy and stool testing with the fecal immunochemical test (FIT). Large-scale comparative effectiveness trials comparing colonoscopy and FIT for colorectal cancer outcomes are underway, but results are not yet available. This review will separately state the "best case" for FIT and colonoscopy as the screening tool of first choice. In addition, the review will examine these modalities from a health economics perspective to provide the reader further context about the relative advantages of these commonly used tests.

Risk of Cancers Proximal to the Colon in Fecal Immunochemical Test Positive Screenees in a Colorectal Cancer Screening Program.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: In more than half of the colorectal cancer screening participants with a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) result, no advanced neoplasia (AN) is detected at colonoscopy. The positive FIT result could also be generated by cancers located proximal to the colon: upper gastrointestinal, oral cavity, nose, and throat cancers. We evaluated screenees' risk of being diagnosed with a cancer proximal to the colon within the 3 years and compared risks between those with a positive vs those with a negative FIT. METHODS: Data of Dutch colorectal cancer screening participants who underwent biennial FIT-based screening 2014-2018 were collected from the national screening database and linked to the National Cancer Registry. Screenees were classified into 3 groups: FIT-positives with AN (FIT+/AN+), FIT-positives without AN (FIT+/AN-), and FIT-negatives (FIT-). We compared the cumulative incidence of cancers proximal to the colon in each group 3 years after FIT. A Cox regression analysis with left truncation and right censoring, using FIT positivity as time-dependent variable and stratified for sex, was performed to compare the hazard of cancers proximal to the colon in participants who were FIT-positive vs FIT-negative. RESULTS: Three-year cumulative incidence of cancers proximal to the colon in FIT+/AN+ (n = 65,767), FIT+/AN- (n = 50,661), and FIT- (n = 1,831,647) screenees was 0.7%, 0.6%, and 0.4%, respectively (P < .001). FIT-positives were older and more frequently male than FIT-negatives (P < .001). Significantly more cancers proximal to the colon were detected among FIT-positives (P < .001; hazard ratio, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.44-1.67). CONCLUSION: FIT-positive screenees were at significantly increased risk of being diagnosed with a cancer proximal to the colon within 3 years after FIT, although the 3-year cumulative incidence was still less than 1%.

A pragmatic randomized trial of mailed fecal immunochemical testing to increase colorectal cancer screening among low-income and minoritized populations.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is underused, particularly among low-income and minoritized populations, for whom the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has challenged progress in achieving equity. METHODS: A hub-and-spoke model was used. The hub was a nonacademic organization and the spokes were three community health center (CHC) systems overseeing numerous clinic sites. Via a cluster-randomized trial design, nine clinic sites were randomized to intervention and 16 clinic sites were randomized to usual care. Patient-level interventions included invitation letters, mailed fecal immunochemical tests (FITs), and call/text-based reminders. Year 1 intervention impact, which took place during the COVID-19 pandemic, was assessed as the proportion completing screening among individuals not up to date at baseline, which compared intervention and nonintervention clinics accounting for intraclinic cluster variation; confidence intervals (CIs) around differences not including 0 were interpreted as statistically significant. RESULTS: Among 26,736 patients who met eligibility criteria, approximately 58% were female, 55% were Hispanic individuals, and 44% were Spanish speaking. The proportion completing screening was 11.5 percentage points (ppts) (95% CI, 6.1-16.9 ppts) higher in intervention versus usual care clinics. Variation in differences between intervention and usual care clinics was observed by sex (12.6 ppts [95% CI, 7.2-18.0 ppts] for females; 8.8 ppts [95% CI, 4.7-13.9 ppts] for males) and by racial and ethnic group (13.8 ppts [95% CI, 7.0-20.6 ppts] for Hispanic individuals; 13.0 ppts [95% CI, 3.6-22.4 ppts] for Asian individuals; 11.3 ppts [95% CI, 5.8-16.8 ppts] for non-Hispanic White individuals; 6.1 ppts [95% CI, 0.8-10.4 ppts] for Black individuals). CONCLUSIONS: A regional mailed FIT intervention was effective for increasing CRC screening rates across CHC systems serving diverse, low-income populations.

Longitudinal adherence to annual colorectal cancer screening among Black persons living in the United States enrolled in a community-based randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: This study examined repeat colorectal cancer screening rates at 12 and 24 months as part of a randomized intervention trial among Black persons living in the United States and factors associated with screening adherence. METHODS: Participants completed a survey assessing demographics and Preventive Health Model (PHM) factors (e.g., self efficacy, susceptibility) and received either a culturally targeted photonovella plus free fecal immunochemical test (FIT) kits (intervention group) or a standard educational brochure plus free FIT kits (comparison group). FIT return was assessed at 6, 12, and 24 months. Descriptive statistics summarized patterns of repeat screening. Logistic regression models assessed FIT uptake overtime, and demographic and PHM factors associated with screening adherence. RESULTS: Participants (N = 330) were U.S.-born (93%), non-Hispanic (97%), and male (52%). Initial FIT uptake within 6 months of enrollment was 86.6%, and subsequently dropped to 54.5% at 12 months and 36.6% at 24 months. Higher FIT return rates were observed for the brochure group at 24 months (51.5% vs 33.3% photonovella, p = .023). Multiple patterns of FIT kit return were observed: 37% completed FIT at all three time points (full adherence), 22% completed two of three (partial adherence), 29% completed one of three (partial adherence), and 12% did not return any FIT kits (complete nonadherence). Predictors of full adherence were higher levels of education and self-efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: Full adherence to repeat screening was suboptimal. Most participants had partial adherence (one or two of three) to annual FIT screening. Future studies should focus on strategies to support repeat FIT screening.

The Diagnostic Performance of Fecal Immunochemical Tests for Detecting Advanced Neoplasia at Surveillance Colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: An increasing burden on health care resources has resulted in a backlog of individuals requiring colonoscopy, with delays in surveillance possibly detrimental for individuals at increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). This study investigated the use of a 2-sample fecal immunochemical test (FIT) to establish those most likely to have advanced neoplasia (AN) and in need of prioritized surveillance colonoscopy. METHODS: This was a prospective study conducted in the tertiary care setting. Participants completed a 2-sample FIT (OC-Sensor, Eiken Chemical Company) within 90 days of surveillance colonoscopy. The sensitivity of FIT for detection of AN (CRC or advanced adenoma) in moderate- and high-risk individuals was determined at fecal hemoglobin thresholds between 2 and 80 µg/g feces. RESULTS: A total of 766 patients were included (median age, 66.1 years [interquartile range, 58.1-72.9]; 49.9% male), with AN detected in 8.6% (66/766, including 5 CRC). For moderate-risk individuals (with prior history of adenoma or a significant family history of CRC), sensitivity of FIT for AN ranged from 73.5% at 2 µg/g feces, to 10.2% at 80 µg/g feces. For high-risk conditions (confirmed/suspected genetic syndromes or prior CRC), sensitivity of FIT was similar, ranging from 70.6% at the lowest positivity threshold of 2 µg/g feces, to 11.8% at 80 µg/g feces. Independent variables in the whole cohort for association with detection of AN at surveillance colonoscopy were age (odds ratio, 1.03; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.06) and FIT hemoglobin result ≥10 µg/g feces (odds ratio, 1.81; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-3.16). CONCLUSIONS: The use of FIT before surveillance colonoscopy provides clinicians with insights into the risk of AN. This raises the possibility of a method to triage individuals, facilitating the more efficient management of endoscopic resources.

Feasibility and Colonoscopy Yield Using the Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT)-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening in a Latin America Country.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Organized colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is not widely practiced in Latin America and the results of regional studies may help overcome barriers for implementation of national screening programs. We aimed to describe the implementation and findings of a fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based program in Brazil. METHODS: In a prospective population-based study, asymptomatic individuals (50-75 years old) from Sao Paulo city were invited to undergo FIT for CRC screening. Participants with positive FIT (≥10 µg Hb/g feces) were referred for colonoscopy. Subjects were classified into groups according to the presence of CRC, precursor lesions, and other benign findings, possibly related to bleeding. RESULTS: Of a total of 9881 subjects, 7.8% had positive FIT and colonoscopy compliance was 68.9% (n = 535). Boston scale was considered adequate in 99% and cecal intubation rate was 99.4%. CRC was diagnosed in 5.9% of the cases, adenoma in 63.2%, advanced adenoma in 31.4%, and advanced neoplasia in 33.0%. Age was positively associated with CRC (P = .03). Higher FIT concentrations were associated with increased detection of CRC (P < .008), advanced adenoma (P < .001), and advanced neoplasia (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a FIT-based CRC screening program was feasible in a low-resource setting, and there was a high yield for neoplasia in individuals with a positive FIT. This approach could be used as a model to plan and disseminate organized CRC screening more broadly in Brazil and Latin America.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on Risk Stratification for Colorectal Cancer Screening and Post-Polypectomy Surveillance: Expert Review.

DESCRIPTION: Since the early 2000s, there has been a rapid decline in colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality, due in large part to screening and removal of precancerous polyps. Despite these improvements, CRC remains the second leading cause of cancer deaths in the United States, with approximately 53,000 deaths projected in 2023. The aim of this American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Clinical Practice Update Expert Review was to describe how individuals should be risk-stratified for CRC screening and post-polypectomy surveillance and to highlight opportunities for future research to fill gaps in the existing literature. METHODS: This Expert Review was commissioned and approved by the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee (CPUC) and the AGA Governing Board to provide timely guidance on a topic of high clinical importance to the AGA membership, and underwent internal peer review by the CPUC and external peer review through standard procedures of Gastroenterology. These Best Practice Advice statements were drawn from a review of the published literature and from expert opinion. Because systematic reviews were not performed, these Best Practice Advice statements do not carry formal ratings regarding the quality of evidence or strength of the presented considerations. Best Practice Advice Statements BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: All individuals with a first-degree relative (defined as a parent, sibling, or child) who was diagnosed with CRC, particularly before the age of 50 years, should be considered at increased risk for CRC. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: All individuals without a personal history of CRC, inflammatory bowel disease, hereditary CRC syndromes, other CRC predisposing conditions, or a family history of CRC should be considered at average risk for CRC. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: Individuals at average risk for CRC should initiate screening at age 45 years and individuals at increased risk for CRC due to having a first-degree relative with CRC should initiate screening 10 years before the age at diagnosis of the youngest affected relative or age 40 years, whichever is earlier. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: Risk stratification for initiation of CRC screening should be based on an individual's age, a known or suspected predisposing hereditary CRC syndrome, and/or a family history of CRC. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: The decision to continue CRC screening in individuals older than 75 years should be individualized, based on an assessment of risks, benefits, screening history, and comorbidities. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: Screening options for individuals at average risk for CRC should include colonoscopy, fecal immunochemical test, flexible sigmoidoscopy plus fecal immunochemical test, multitarget stool DNA fecal immunochemical test, and computed tomography colonography, based on availability and individual preference. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Colonoscopy should be the screening strategy used for individuals at increased CRC risk. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: The decision to continue post-polypectomy surveillance for individuals older than 75 years should be individualized, based on an assessment of risks, benefits, and comorbidities. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: Risk-stratification tools for CRC screening and post-polypectomy surveillance that emerge from research should be examined for real-world effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in diverse populations (eg, by race, ethnicity, sex, and other sociodemographic factors associated with disparities in CRC outcomes) before widespread implementation.

Examining the Sustainability of Core Capacity and Evidence-Based Interventions for FIT-Based CRC Screening: California Colorectal Cancer Control Program.

OBJECTIVES: We examined the extent to which funded satellite clinics could sustain the California Colon Cancer Control Program (C4P) strategies implemented in health systems to increase uptake of the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) or immunochemical fecal occult blood test (iFOBT) for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in the absence of future C4P funds. INTRODUCTION: Seven health systems consisting of 38 satellite clinics participated in C4P to examine the sustainability of the program in the absence future Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) funding. METHODS: Quantitative and qualitative methods with a close and open-ended survey approach, and a prospective cohort design were used to examine the sustainability of the C4P in health systems. RESULTS: A total of 61% of satellite clinics could not sustain funding stability. Only 26% could sustain funding stability. About, 71%, 26%, and 21% of the satellite clinics could sustain the small media platform, patient navigation services, and community health workers (CHWs), respectively. All the satellite clinics sustained the provider reminder system and professional development. Roughly, 71% and 42% of funded satellite clinics could not sustain the patient navigators and CHWs, respectively. The satellite clinics that could sustain funding stability, sustained patient navigation services and CHWs. Health systems that could not sustain funding stability, could not sustain patient navigation services and CHWs. Qualitatively, the need to support uninsured priority populations, health educators, patient navigators, care coordination activities, outreach services, and provision of enhanced services emerged. The need to support enhanced quality measures, expansion of funding, Medi-Cal Public Hospital Redesign and Incentive coverage, health plan, community linkages, resource sharing, and best practices specifically on CRC screening emerged. Themes such as automated reminder, limited personalized care delivery and capacity, transportation barriers, staff salary, expansion of care through patient navigation, and culturally appropriate media campaign also emerged. CONCLUSION: Overall, to address sustainability barriers, funding stability should be maintained in the health systems.

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

BACKGROUND AND AIM: 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. METHODS: Among 1 737 633 individuals with a FIT screening result for CRC in 2009, 101 143 (5.82%) were confirmed to be FIT positive. The CRC incidence over 10 years (up to 2018) of these participants was investigated using the National Cancer Registry. RESULTS: Out of the 101 143 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. CONCLUSIONS: 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.

Performance of the Asia-Pacific Colorectal Screening score in stratifying the risk of advanced colorectal neoplasia: A meta-analysis and systematic review.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: This study systematically reviewed and meta-analyzed the performance of the Asia-Pacific Colorectal Screening (APCS) score and its incorporation with the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) in stratifying the risk of advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACN). METHODS: We systematically searched for relevant articles in 12 electronic databases and registers on October 20, 2021, and updated the search to September 1, 2023. Random-effect models were used to obtain the pooled performance statistics of the APCS score for ACN risk. RESULTS: From the 101 records screened, 13 eligible studies in the Asia-Pacific region involving 69 762 subjects who had undergone colonoscopy were enrolled. The pooled prevalences of ACN in the average-risk (AR) tier (APCS 0-1), moderate-risk (MR) tier (APCS 2-3), and high-risk (HR) tier (APCS ≥ 4) groups were 0.9%, 3.1%, and 8.1%, respectively. Compared with the combined AR-MR group, the HR group was significantly associated with a higher ACN risk (pooled diagnostic odds ratio: 2.84, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.35-3.45, P < 0.001). The APCS score showed a sensitivity of 0.42 (95% CI: 0.40-0.44) and a specificity of 0.86 (95% CI: 0.85-0.86) for predicting the ACN risk, with a weighted area under the curve of 0.642 (95% CI: 0.610-0.657). The combination of the APCS score and FIT substantially improved ACN risk identification, demonstrating pooled diagnostic odds ratios of 4.02 (95% CI: 2.50-6.49) in the AR-MR groups and 5.44 (95% CI: 1.89-15.63) in the MR-HR groups. CONCLUSIONS: The APCS score could effectively stratify the ACN risk in the Asia-Pacific population. Incorporating FIT further improves its performance in identifying high-risk subjects who should be prioritized for colonoscopy screenings.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of single colonoscopy versus single fecal test for colorectal cancer diagnosis and treatment.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Regular endoscopy or fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is ideal for screening colorectal cancer. However, only a limited number of individuals undergo regular screening. This study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of a single colonoscopy with a single FIT performed for colorectal cancer screening. METHODS: A microsimulation model was constructed based on real-world observational data collected from three institutions between 2019 and 2022 that compared colonoscopy-based screening with FIT-based screening. The total costs of diagnosis and treatment of the detected lesions using the two strategies were calculated. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per life year gained (LYG) of the colonoscopy-based strategy was calculated. RESULTS: Data from 11 407 patients undergoing colonoscopies and 59 176 patients undergoing FITs were used to establish a model. In the base case analysis of screening strategies, colonoscopy was more cost-effective than FIT (ICER 415 193 yen/LYG). The ICER of the colonoscopy-based strategy among 60- to 69-year-old patients was lowest at 394 200 yen/LYG, whereas that in 20- to 29-year-old patients was highest. Monte Carlo simulations showed that the colonoscopy-based strategy was more cost-effective than the FIT-based strategy (net monetary benefit [NMB]: 5 695 957 yen vs 5 348 253 yen). When the adenoma detection rate in the colonoscopy was over 30% or the positive FIT rate was lower than 8.6% in the FIT-based strategy, the NMB of the colonoscopy-based strategy exceeded that of the FIT-based strategy. CONCLUSION: In the microsimulation model, colonoscopy is recommended as a one-time screening procedure in patients aged >60 years with >30% ADR or <8.6% positive FIT rate.

Comparing a fecal immunochemical test and circulating tumor DNA blood test for colorectal cancer screening adherence.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs are most effective at reducing disease incidence and mortality through sustained screening participation. A novel blood test modality is being explored for CRC screening, but it is unclear whether it will provide sustained screening participation. This study aimed to investigate whether a circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) blood test improved CRC screening re-participation when compared with a fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and to define the predictors of sustained CRC screening in an Australian population. METHODS: South Australians who initially participated in CRC screening using a ctDNA blood test (n = 36) or FIT (n = 547) were offered the same CRC screening test approximately 2 years later through an extended phase of a randomized controlled trial. Surveys collected demographic, psychosocial, and clinical information. Predictors of CRC screening re-participation were explored using chi-square, Wilcoxon tests, and logistic regression. RESULTS: Participants offered a second ctDNA blood test were equally likely to re-participate in CRC screening as those who completed a FIT in the first round and who were offered the same test (61% vs 66% re-participation respectively, P = 0.6). CRC fatalism, health activation, and self-efficacy were associated with repeated screening participation. Test awareness was predictive of repeated FIT-based CRC screening. CONCLUSIONS: Targeted interventions to improve CRC screening awareness and increase patient health activation may improve CRC screening adherence. A ctDNA blood test may be a suitable CRC screening option to maintain CRC screening adherence in people who do not participate in screening with FIT.

Estimate of Increase in Colorectal Cancer Diagnoses with Expansion of Fecal Immunochemical Testing in an Urban Safety-Net Population.

BACKGROUND: Fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is less effective in detecting advanced adenomas (AA) than colonoscopy. Increase in FIT for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening may lead to an increased number of undetected AAs which may develop into future CRCs. AIM: We determined the potential impact of FIT expansion on missed AAs and future CRC diagnoses in an urban, tertiary-care, safety-net hospital. METHODS: CRC and AA diagnoses were identified in patients undergoing colonoscopy for average-risk CRC screening or positive FIT between 2017 and 2019 at Boston Medical Center. Poisson regression modeling was used to estimate the frequency of AAs per year by age group using data from 2017 to 2019, assuming average outpatient volume and proportion of screening colonoscopies. Total number of patients who received FIT was extrapolated from those who underwent colonoscopy for positive FIT. We estimated AAs per year if 'one-time' FIT was used for screening in 75% and 100% of the population and subtracted this from the estimated AAs per year under the Poisson model to determine missed AAs. We used previously described, age and gender specific estimates of the annual progression of AA to CRC. RESULTS: The estimated number of CRCs detected per year is 4.6/1785 males and 4.6/2086 females screened. With 75% FIT expansion, we estimate an additional 3.5 (95% CI 1.3, 9.5) and 2.2 (95% CI 0.64, 7.6) CRCs; with 100% FIT expansion, we estimate an additional 7.4 (95% CI 3.7, 14.9) and 4.2 (95% CI 1.7, 10.5) CRCs, in 5 years, in males and females, respectively. CONCLUSION: Expansion of FIT may substantially increase CRC incidence.

Accuracy, Acceptability, and Application: Fecal Immunochemical Tests for Early Detection of Advanced Neoplasia in Colonoscopy-Based Surveillance.

BACKGROUND: The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is widely used in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, but limited data exist for its application in individuals at above-average risk for CRC who complete surveillance colonoscopies. AIM: To assess the accuracy, acceptability, and effectiveness of FIT in the interval between surveillance colonoscopies, for predicting advanced neoplasia (advanced adenoma or CRC) at the next colonoscopy. METHODS: Individuals enrolled in an Australian surveillance program were included. Diagnostic accuracy was determined for 614 individuals completing a two-sample FIT (OC-Sensor) ≤ 3 months preceding surveillance colonoscopy. 386 Individuals were surveyed to assess acceptability of interval FIT. Additionally, a retrospective analysis was performed on 7331 individuals offered interval FIT between colonoscopies, where a positive FIT (≥ 20 µg hemoglobin/g feces) triggered an early colonoscopy. Associations between interval FIT results and advanced neoplasia were determined using regression analysis. RESULTS: FIT detected CRC and advanced adenoma with sensitivities of 60.0% (3/5) and 27.1% (35/129), respectively. Most (89.1%, 344/386) survey respondents preferred completing interval FIT every 1-2 years. The detection rate of interval FIT for advanced neoplasia decreased with increasing FIT completion. Individuals returning a positive FIT had a higher risk of advanced neoplasia than those who did not complete FIT. Positive interval FIT reduced time-to-diagnosis for CRC and advanced adenoma by a median of 30 and 20 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: Interval FIT was well accepted and enabled earlier detection of advanced neoplasia in individuals at above-average risk of CRC. Given that interval FIT predicts advanced neoplasia, it may be used to personalize surveillance colonoscopy intervals.

Efficient organized colorectal cancer screening in Shenzhen: a microsimulation modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a global health issue with noticeably high incidence and mortality. Microsimulation models offer a time-efficient method to dynamically analyze multiple screening strategies. The study aimed to identify the efficient organized CRC screening strategies for Shenzhen City. METHODS: A microsimulation model named CMOST was employed to simulate CRC screening among 1 million people without migration in Shenzhen, with two CRC developing pathways and real-world participation rates. Initial screening included the National Colorectal Polyp Care score (NCPCS), fecal immunochemical test (FIT), and risk-stratification model (RS model), followed by diagnostic colonoscopy for positive results. Several start-ages (40, 45, 50 years), stop-ages (70, 75, 80 years), and screening intervals (annual, biennial, triennial) were assessed for each strategy. The efficiency of CRC screening was assessed by number of colonoscopies versus life-years gained (LYG). RESULTS: The screening strategies reduced CRC lifetime incidence by 14-27 cases (30.9-59.0%) and mortality by 7-12 deaths (41.5-71.3%), yielded 83-155 LYG, while requiring 920 to 5901 colonoscopies per 1000 individuals. Out of 81 screening, 23 strategies were estimated efficient. Most of the efficient screening strategies started at age 40 (17 out of 23 strategies) and stopped at age 70 (13 out of 23 strategies). Predominant screening intervals identified were annual for NCPCS, biennial for FIT, and triennial for RS models. The incremental colonoscopies to LYG ratios of efficient screening increased with shorter intervals within the same test category. Compared with no screening, when screening at the same start-to-stop age and interval, the additional colonoscopies per LYG increased progressively for FIT, NCPCS and RS model. CONCLUSION: This study identifies efficient CRC screening strategies for the average-risk population in Shenzhen. Most efficient screening strategies indeed start at age 40, but the optimal starting age depends on the chosen willingness-to-pay threshold. Within insufficient colonoscopy resources, efficient FIT and NCPCS screening strategies might be CRC initial screening strategies. We acknowledged the age-dependency bias of the results with NCPCS and RS.

Effective strategies for Fecal Immunochemical Tests (FIT) programs to improve colorectal cancer screening uptake among populations with limited access to the healthcare system: a rapid review.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the leading causes of cancer death globally. CRC screening can reduce the incidence and mortality of CRC. However, socially disadvantaged groups may disproportionately benefit less from screening programs due to their limited access to healthcare. This poor access to healthcare services is further aggravated by intersecting, cumulative social factors associated with their sociocultural background and living conditions. This rapid review systematically reviewed and synthesized evidence on the effectiveness of Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) programs in increasing CRC screening in populations who do not have a regular healthcare provider or who have limited healthcare system access. METHODS: We used three databases: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and EBSCOhost CINAHL. We searched for systematic reviews, meta-analysis, and quantitative and mixed-methods studies focusing on effectiveness of FIT programs (request or receipt of FIT kit, completion rates of FIT screening, and participation rates in follow-up colonoscopy after FIT positive results). For evidence synthesis, deductive and inductive thematic analysis was conducted. The findings were also classified using the Cochrane Methods Equity PROGRESS-PLUS framework. The quality of the included studies was assessed. RESULTS: Findings from the 25 included primary studies were organized into three intervention design-focused themes. Delivery of culturally-tailored programs (e.g., use of language and interpretive services) were effective in increasing CRC screening. Regarding the method of delivery for FIT, specific strategies combined with mail-out programs (e.g., motivational screening letter) or in-person delivery (e.g., demonstration of FIT specimen collection procedure) enhanced the success of FIT programs. The follow-up reminder theme (e.g., spaced out and live reminders) were generally effective. Additionally, we found evidence of the social determinants of health affecting FIT uptake (e.g., place of residence, race/ethnicity/culture/language, gender and/or sex). CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this rapid review suggest multicomponent interventions combined with tailored strategies addressing the diverse, unique needs and priorities of the population with no regular healthcare provider or limited access to the healthcare system may be more effective in increasing FIT screening. Decision-makers and practitioners should consider equity and social factors when developing resources and coordinating efforts in the delivery and implementation of FIT screening strategies.

Utility of Combined Use of Transabdominal Ultrasonography and Fecal Immunochemical Test Examinations in Ulcerative Colitis.

This study examined the utility of the combined use of transabdominal ultrasonography (TUS) and fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) to detect mucosal inflammation, vis-a-vis the Mayo endoscopic subscore (MES), in ulcerative colitis (UC). Sixty-three UC patients who underwent TUS and FIT were retrospectively enrolled. For TUS, the colon was divided into five segments, and the bowel wall thickness was measured and evaluated. The accuracy of FIT (> 100 ng/ml) in detecting mucosal inflammation (MES>0) was 0.93, whereas that of TUS (BWT>2 mm) in each segment was 0.84-0.97. The combined use of TUS and FIT may be helpful in noninvasive treatment strategies.

Proportions and characteristics of interval cancer in annual fecal immunochemical test screening and postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer: Results from a Japanese multicenter prospective study using questionnaires, the C-DETECT study.

OBJECTIVES: There are several types of colorectal cancer (CRC) according to the detection methods and intervals, including interval CRC (iCRC) and postcolonoscopy CRC (PCCRC). We aimed to examine their proportions and characteristics. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter prospective study using questionnaires in Japan ("C-DETECT study"), in which differences in CRC characteristics according to detection methods and intervals were examined from consecutive adult patients. Because the annual fecal immunochemical test (FIT) was used in population-based screening, the annual FIT-iCRC was assessed. RESULTS: In total, 1241 CRC patients (1064 with invasive CRC) were included. Annual FIT-iCRC (a), 3-year PCCRC (b), and CRC detected within 1 year after a positive FIT with noncompliance to colonoscopy (c) accounted for 4.5%, 7.0%, and 3.9% of all CRCs, respectively, and for 3.9%, 5.4%, and 4.3% of invasive CRCs, respectively. The comparison among these (a, b, c) and other CRCs (d) demonstrated differences in the proportions of ≥T2 invasion ([a] 58.9%, [b] 44.8%, [c] 87.5%, [d] 73.0%), metastasis ([a] 33.9%, [b] 21.8%, [c] 54.2%, [d] 43.9%), right-sided CRC ([a] 42.9%, [b] 40.2%, [c] 18.8%, [d] 28.6%), and female sex ([a] 53.6%, [b] 49.4%, [c] 27.1%, [d] 41.6%). In metastatic CRC, (a) and (b) showed a higher proportions of BRAF mutations ([a] [b] 12.0%, [c] [d] 3.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Annual FIT-iCRC and 3-year PCCRC existed in nonnegligible proportions. They were characterized by higher proportions of right-sided tumors, female sex, and BRAF mutations. These findings suggest that annual FIT-iCRC and 3-year PCCRC may have biological features different from those of other CRCs.

Profiling small RNAs in fecal immunochemical tests: is it possible?

Fecal microRNAs represent promising molecules with potential clinical interest as non-invasive diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers. Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening based on the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is an effective tool for prevention of cancer development. However, due to the poor sensitivity of FIT especially for premalignant lesions, there is a need for implementation of complementary tests. Improving the identification of individuals who would benefit from further investigation with colonoscopy using molecular analysis, such as miRNA profiling of FIT samples, would be ideal due to their widespread use. In the present study, we assessed the feasibility of applying small RNA sequencing to measure human miRNAs in FIT leftover buffer in samples from two European screening populations. We showed robust detection of miRNAs with profiles similar to those obtained from specimens sampled using the established protocol of RNA stabilizing buffers, or in long-term archived samples. Detected miRNAs exhibited differential abundances for CRC, advanced adenoma, and control samples that were consistent for FIT and RNA-stabilizing buffers. Interestingly, the sequencing data also allowed for concomitant evaluation of small RNA-based microbial profiles. We demonstrated that it is possible to explore the human miRNome in FIT leftover samples across populations and envision that the analysis of small RNA biomarkers can complement the FIT in large scale screening settings.