Socioeconomic differences in participation and diagnostic yield within the Dutch national colorectal cancer screening programme with faecal immunochemical testing.

BACKGROUND: CRC mortality rates are higher for individuals with a lower socioeconomic status (SES). Screening could influence health inequalities. We therefore aimed to investigate SES differences in participation and diagnostic yield of FIT screening. METHODS: All invitees in 2014 and 2015 in the Dutch national CRC screening programme were included in the analyses. We used area SES as a measure for SES and divided invitees into quintiles, with Quintile 1 being the highest SES. Logistic regression analysis was used to compare the participation rate, positivity rate, colonoscopy uptake, positive predictive value (PPV) and detection rate across the SES groups. RESULTS: Participation to FIT screening was significantly lower for Quintile 5 (67.0%) compared to the other Quintiles (73.0% to 75.1%; adjusted OR quintile 5 versus quintile 1: 0.73, 95%CI: 0.72-0.74), as well as colonoscopy uptake after a positive FIT (adjusted OR 0.73, 95%CI: 0.69-0.77). The detection rate per FIT participant for advanced neoplasia gradually increased from 3.3% in Quintile 1 to 4.0% in Quintile 5 (adjusted OR 1.20%, 95%CI 1.16-1.24). As a result of lower participation, the yield per invitee was similar for Quintile 5 (2.04%) and Quintile 1 (2.00%), both being lower than Quintiles 2 to 4 (2.20%-2.28%). CONCLUSIONS: Screening has the potential to reduce health inequalities in CRC mortality, because of a higher detection in participants with a lower SES. However, in the Dutch screening programme, this is currently offset by the lower participation in this group.

Clinical Validation of a Multitarget Fecal Immunochemical Test for Colorectal Cancer Screening : A Diagnostic Test Accuracy Study.

BACKGROUND: The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is used in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, yet it leaves room for improvement. OBJECTIVE: To develop a multitarget FIT (mtFIT) with better diagnostic performance than FIT. DESIGN: Diagnostic test accuracy study. SETTING: Colonoscopy-controlled series. PARTICIPANTS: Persons (n = 1284) from a screening (n = 1038) and referral (n = 246) population were classified by their most advanced lesion (CRC [n = 47], advanced adenoma [n = 135], advanced serrated polyp [n = 30], nonadvanced adenoma [n = 250], and nonadvanced serrated polyp [n = 53]), along with control participants (n = 769). MEASUREMENTS: Antibody-based assays were developed and applied to leftover FIT material. Classification and regression tree (CART) analysis was applied to biomarker concentrations to identify the optimal combination for detecting advanced neoplasia. Performance of this combination, the mtFIT, was cross-validated using a leave-one-out approach and compared with FIT at equal specificity. RESULTS: The CART analysis showed a combination of hemoglobin, calprotectin, and serpin family F member 2-the mtFIT-to have a cross-validated sensitivity for advanced neoplasia of 42.9% (95% CI, 36.2% to 49.9%) versus 37.3% (CI, 30.7% to 44.2%) for FIT (P = 0.025), with equal specificity of 96.6%. In particular, cross-validated sensitivity for advanced adenomas increased from 28.1% (CI, 20.8% to 36.5%) to 37.8% (CI, 29.6% to 46.5%) (P = 0.006). On the basis of these results, early health technology assessment indicated that mtFIT-based screening could be cost-effective compared with FIT. LIMITATION: Study population is enriched with persons from a referral population. CONCLUSION: Compared with FIT, the mtFIT showed better diagnostic accuracy in detecting advanced neoplasia because of an increased detection of advanced adenomas. Moreover, early health technology assessment indicated that these results provide a sound basis to pursue further development of mtFIT as a future test for population-based CRC screening. A prospective screening trial is in preparation. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Stand Up to Cancer/Dutch Cancer Society, Dutch Digestive Foundation, and HealthHolland.

Endoscopic screening for gastric cancer: A cost-utility analysis for countries with an intermediate gastric cancer risk.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic screening for gastric cancer is debatable in countries with an intermediate risk. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this article is to determine the cost-utility of screening strategies for gastric cancer in a European country. METHODS: We conducted a cost-utility analysis using a Markov model comparing three screening strategies versus no screening: stand-alone upper endoscopy, endoscopy combined with a colorectal cancer screening colonoscopy after a positive faecal occult blood test or pepsinogens serologic screening. Clinical data were collected from systematic reviews, costs from published national data and utilities as quality-adjusted life years (QALY). The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. The threshold was set at €37,000 (2016 prices). RESULTS: Upper endoscopy combined with screening colonoscopy (every 10 or 5 years) had an ICER of 15,407/QALY and €30,908/QALY respectively, stand-alone endoscopic screening (every five years) an ICER of €70,693/QALY and pepsinogens screening an ICER of €143,344/QALY. Sensitivity analyses revealed that only endoscopic costs <€75, a provision of only three endoscopies per patient or a gastric cancer risk >25/100,000 would make stand-alone endoscopic screening cost-effective. CONCLUSION: Endoscopic gastric cancer screening in Europe can be cost-effective if combined with a screening colonoscopy in countries with a gastric cancer risk ≥10 per 100,000.

Colorectal Cancer: Cost-effectiveness of Colonoscopy versus CT Colonography Screening with Participation Rates and Costs.

Purpose To compare the cost-effectiveness of computed tomographic (CT) colonography and colonoscopy screening by using data on unit costs and participation rates from a randomized controlled screening trial in a dedicated screening setting. Materials and Methods Observed participation rates and screening costs from the Colonoscopy or Colonography for Screening, or COCOS, trial were used in a microsimulation model to estimate costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained with colonoscopy and CT colonography screening. For both tests, the authors determined optimal age range and screening interval combinations assuming a 100% participation rate. Assuming observed participation for these combinations, the cost-effectiveness of both tests was compared. Extracolonic findings were not included because long-term follow-up data are lacking. Results The participation rates for colonoscopy and CT colonography were 21.5% (1276 of 5924 invitees) and 33.6% (982 of 2920 invitees), respectively. Colonoscopy was more cost-effective in the screening strategies with one or two lifetime screenings, whereas CT colonography was more cost-effective in strategies with more lifetime screenings. CT colonography was the preferred test for willingness-to-pay-thresholds of €3200 per QALY gained and higher, which is lower than the Dutch willingness-to-pay threshold of €20 000. With equal participation, colonoscopy was the preferred test independent of willingness-to-pay thresholds. The findings were robust for most of the sensitivity analyses, except with regard to relative screening costs and subsequent participation. Conclusion Because of the higher participation rates, CT colonography screening for colorectal cancer is more cost-effective than colonoscopy screening. The implementation of CT colonography screening requires previous satisfactory resolution to the question as to how best to deal with extracolonic findings. © RSNA, 2018 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Do Men and Women Need to Be Screened Differently with Fecal Immunochemical Testing? A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

Background: Several studies suggest that test characteristics for the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) differ by gender, triggering a debate on whether men and women should be screened differently. We used the microsimulation model MISCAN-Colon to evaluate whether screening stratified by gender is cost-effective.Methods: We estimated gender-specific FIT characteristics based on first-round positivity and detection rates observed in a FIT screening pilot (CORERO-1). Subsequently, we used the model to estimate harms, benefits, and costs of 480 gender-specific FIT screening strategies and compared them with uniform screening.Results: Biennial FIT screening from ages 50 to 75 was less effective in women than men [35.7 vs. 49.0 quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained, respectively] at higher costs (€42,161 vs. -€5,471, respectively). However, the incremental QALYs gained and costs of annual screening compared with biennial screening were more similar for both genders (8.7 QALYs gained and €26,394 for women vs. 6.7 QALYs gained and €20,863 for men). Considering all evaluated screening strategies, optimal gender-based screening yielded at most 7% more QALYs gained than optimal uniform screening and even resulted in equal costs and QALYs gained from a willingness-to-pay threshold of €1,300.Conclusions: FIT screening is less effective in women, but the incremental cost-effectiveness is similar in men and women. Consequently, screening stratified by gender is not more cost-effective than uniform FIT screening.Impact: Our conclusions support the current policy of uniform FIT screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 26(8); 1328-36. ©2017 AACR.

Burden of waiting for surveillance CT colonography in patients with screen-detected 6-9 mm polyps.

PURPOSE: We assessed the burden of waiting for surveillance CT colonography (CTC) performed in patients having 6-9 mm colorectal polyps on primary screening CTC. Additionally, we compared the burden of primary and surveillance CTC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In an invitational population-based CTC screening trial, 101 persons were diagnosed with <3 polyps 6-9 mm, for which surveillance CTC after 3 years was advised. Validated questionnaires regarding expected and perceived burden (5-point Likert scales) were completed before and after index and surveillance CTC, also including items on burden of waiting for surveillance CTC. McNemar's test was used for comparison after dichotomization. RESULTS: Seventy-eight (77 %) of 101 invitees underwent surveillance CTC, of which 66 (85 %) completed the expected and 62 (79 %) the perceived burden questionnaire. The majority of participants (73 %) reported the experience of waiting for surveillance CTC as 'never' or 'only sometimes' burdensome. There was almost no difference in expected and perceived burden between surveillance and index CTC. Waiting for the results after the procedure was significantly more burdensome for surveillance CTC than for index CTC (23 vs. 8 %; p = 0.012). CONCLUSION: Waiting for surveillance CTC after primary CTC screening caused little or no burden for surveillance participants. In general, the burden of surveillance and index CTC were comparable. KEY POINTS: • Waiting for surveillance CTC within a CRC screening caused little burden • The vast majority never or only sometimes thought about their polyp(s) • In general, the burden of index and surveillance CTC were comparable • Awaiting results was more burdensome for surveillance than for index CTC.

Cost-effectiveness of routine screening for Lynch syndrome in colorectal cancer patients up to 70 years of age.

PURPOSE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of routine Lynch syndrome (LS) screening among colorectal cancer (CRC) patients ≤70 years of age. METHODS: A population-based series of CRC patients ≤70 years of age was routinely screened for LS. We calculated life years gained (LYG) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for different age cutoffs and comparing age-targeted screening with the revised Bethesda guidelines. RESULTS: Screening 1,117 CRC patients identified 23 LS patients, of whom 7 were ≤50 years of age, 7 were 51-60, and 9 were 61-70. Additionally, 70 LS carriers were identified among relatives (14, 42, and 14 per age category). Screening amounted to 205.9 LYG or 43.6, 118.0, and 44.3 LYG per age category. ICERs were [euro ]4.226/LYG for screening CRC patients ≤60 years of age compared with those ≤50 years and [euro ]7.051/LYG for screening CRC patients ≤70 years compared with those ≤60 years. The revised Bethesda guidelines identified 70 of 93 (75%) LS carriers. The ICER for LS screening in CRC patients ≤70 years of age compared with the revised Bethesda guidelines was [euro ]7.341/LYG. All ICERs remained less than [euro ]13.000/LYG in one-way sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Routine LS screening by analysis of microsatellite instability, immunohistochemistry, and MLH1 hypermethylation in CRC patients ≤70 years of age is a cost-effective strategy with important clinical benefits for CRC patients and their relatives.Genet Med 18 10, 966-973.

Training and competence assessment in GI endoscopy: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Training procedural skills in GI endoscopy once focused on threshold numbers. As threshold numbers poorly reflect individual competence, the focus gradually shifts towards a more individual approach. Tools to assess and document individual learning progress are being developed and incorporated in dedicated training curricula. However, there is a lack of consensus and training guidelines differ worldwide, which reflects uncertainties on optimal set-up of a training programme. AIMS: The primary aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the currently available literature for the use of training and assessment methods in GI endoscopy. Second, we aimed to identify the role of simulator-based training as well as the value of continuous competence assessment in patient-based training. Third, we aimed to propose a structured training curriculum based on the presented evidence. METHODS: A literature search was carried out in the available medical and educational literature databases. The results were systematically reviewed and studies were included using a predefined protocol with independent assessment by two reviewers and a final consensus round. RESULTS: The literature search yielded 5846 studies. Ninety-four relevant studies on simulators, assessment methods, learning curves and training programmes for GI endoscopy met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-seven studies on simulator validation were included. Good validity was demonstrated for four simulators. Twenty-three studies reported on simulator training and learning curves, including 17 randomised control trials. Increased performance on a virtual reality (VR) simulator was shown in all studies. Improved performance in patient-based assessment was demonstrated in 14 studies. Four studies reported on the use of simulators for assessment of competence levels. Current simulators lack the discriminative power to determine competence levels in patient-based endoscopy. Eight out of 14 studies on colonoscopy, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endosonography reported on learning curves in patient-based endoscopy and proved the value of this approach for measuring performance. Ten studies explored the numbers needed to gain competence, but the proposed thresholds varied widely between them. Five out of nine studies describing the development and evaluation of assessment tools for GI endoscopy provided insight into the performance of endoscopists. Five out of seven studies proved that intense training programmes result in good performance. CONCLUSIONS: The use of validated VR simulators in the early training setting accelerates the learning of practical skills. Learning curves are valuable for the continuous assessment of performance and are more relevant than threshold numbers. Future research will strengthen these conclusions by evaluating simulation-based as well as patient-based training in GI endoscopy. A complete curriculum with the assessment of competence throughout training needs to be developed for all GI endoscopy procedures.

Evolution of Screen-Detected Small (6-9 mm) Polyps After a 3-Year Surveillance Interval: Assessment of Growth With CT Colonography Compared With Histopathology.

OBJECTIVES: Volumetric growth assessment has been proposed for predicting advanced histology at surveillance computed tomography (CT) colonography (CTC). We examined whether is it possible to predict which small (6-9 mm) polyps are likely to become advanced adenomas at surveillance by assessing volumetric growth. METHODS: In an invitational population-based CTC screening trial, 93 participants were diagnosed with one or two 6-9 mm polyps as the largest lesion(s). They were offered a 3-year surveillance CTC. Participants in whom surveillance CTC showed lesion(s) of ≥6 mm were offered colonoscopy. Volumetric measurements were performed on index and surveillance CTC, and polyps were classified into growth categories according to ±30% volumetric change (>30% growth as progression, 30% growth to 30% decrease as stable, and >30% decrease as regression). Polyp growth was related to histopathology. RESULTS: Between July 2012 and May 2014, 70 patients underwent surveillance CTC after a mean surveillance interval of 3.3 years (s.d. 0.3; range 3.0-4.6 years). In all, 33 (35%) of 95 polyps progressed, 36 (38%) remained stable, and 26 (27%) regressed, including an apparent resolution in 13 (14%) polyps. In 68 (83%) of the 82 polyps at surveillance, histopathology was obtained; 15 (47%) of 32 progressing polyps were advanced adenomas, 6 (21%) of 28 stable polyps, and none of the regressing polyps. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of 6-9 mm polyps will not progress to advanced neoplasia within 3 years. Those that do progress to advanced status can in particular be found among the lesions that increased in size on surveillance CTC.

Simulated colonoscopy training leads to improved performance during patient-based assessment.

BACKGROUND: Virtual reality (VR) endoscopy simulators are increasingly being used in the training of novice endoscopists. There are, however, insufficient data regarding the effect of simulator training on the early learning curve of novice endoscopists. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the clinical performance of novice endoscopists during colonoscopy after intensive and prolonged training on a VR endoscopy simulator. DESIGN: Prospective study. SETTING: Single university medical center. PATIENTS: Patient-based assessment (PBA) of performance was carried out on patients routinely scheduled for colonoscopy. INTERVENTIONS: Eighteen trainees without any endoscopic experience were included in the study. They were divided into 2 groups. The simulator-training program consisted of either 50 (group I) or 100 (group II) VR colonoscopies. After 10, 30, and 50 (group I) and after 20, 60, and 100 (group II) VR colonoscopies, trainees underwent both simulator-based assessment and PBA. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Cecal intubation time, colonic insertion depth, and cecal intubation rate. RESULTS: Eighteen novices participated in the study. All completed VR training and assessments. The mean cecal intubation time on the SBA decreased from a baseline of 9.50 minutes to 2.20 minutes at completion of the training (P = .002). Colonic insertion depth during PBA improved from 29.4 cm to 63.7 cm (P < .001). The learning effect of simulator training ceased after 60 colonoscopies. LIMITATIONS: Single-center study, no formal sample size calculation. CONCLUSIONS: VR training by using a colonoscopy simulator leads to a significant improvement in performance with the simulator itself and, more importantly, to significantly improved performances during patient-based colonoscopy. This study demonstrates the rationale for intensive simulator training in the early learning curve of novices performing colonoscopy.

A benefit-risk assessment of the use of proton pump inhibitors in the elderly.

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are among the most commonly used drugs worldwide, and their intake increases with age. Despite a relatively safe profile, a range of studies have reported associations between use of PPIs and various adverse events. The most important adverse events, such as pneumonia, bone fractures, bacterial enteric infections, and diminished vitamin absorption are critically discussed in this review in view of the body of evidence, including underlying biological mechanisms, evidence of causality, and consistency. Most of the reported risks are relatively small and sometimes based on inconsistent evidence. For an individual patient, and particularly the elderly, it is relevant to question the indication of use and balance the benefit and potential harm of PPI therapy. This approach can minimize morbidity and reduce healthcare costs. In this review, the use and safety of PPIs among the elderly is described.

A comparative study of diagnostic scoring systems for autoimmune pancreatitis.

OBJECTIVE: Several diagnostic scoring systems for autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) have been proposed including the Asian, HISORt (Histology, Imaging, Serology, Other organ involvement and Response to therapy), and International Consensus Diagnostic Criteria (ICDC), which have been compared by a few studies. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of these criteria in patients diagnosed with AIP between May 1992 and August 2011. METHODS: Scoring systems were applied retrospectively using data obtained in the initial evaluation period, before pancreatic resection was performed. RESULTS: One hundred fourteen cases with AIP were included. Eighty-two percent met the diagnostic criteria for AIP according to either the Asian, HISORt, or ICDC criteria. Only 33% met the Asian criteria, probably mainly related to a low rate of diagnostic pancreatography. In 18%, all scoring systems failed to confirm the diagnosis, even though these patients were considered to have a firm diagnosis of AIP. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of AIP patients, the 3 major diagnostic scoring systems for AIP proved to be complementary rather than overlapping. Our data indicate that one-fifth of our AIP patients do not meet any of these scoring systems. The ICDC, Asian, and HISORt criteria should be considered as useful clinical tools but not as criterion standard for the diagnosis.

Quality evaluation through self-assessment: a novel method to gain insight into ERCP performance.

BACKGROUND: The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Committee on Outcomes Research has recommended monitoring nine endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)-specific quality indicators for quality assurance in ERCP. With the development of a self-assessment tool for ERCP (Rotterdam Assessment Form for ERCP-RAF-E), key indicators can easily be assessed. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to test in daily practice an easy-to-use form for assessment of procedural quality in ERCP and to determine ERCP quality outcomes in a tertiary referral hospital. DESIGN: This was a prospective study carried out in a tertiary referral hospital. In January 2008, a quality self-assessment programme was started. Five qualified endoscopists participated in this study. All ERCPs were appraised using RAF-E. Primary parameters were common bile duct (CBD) cannulation rate and procedural success. The indication was classified and procedural difficulty was graded; success rates of therapeutic interventions were measured for all different difficulty degrees. RESULTS: A total number of 1691 ERCPs were performed. 1515 (89.6%) of these were appraised using RAF-E. Median CBD cannulation success rate was 94.1%. Successful sphincterotomy was accomplished in almost all patients (median 100%; range 98.2-100%). Stent placement was successful in 97.8% and complete stone extraction, if indicated, was achieved in 86.8%. CONCLUSIONS: Quality indicators for ERCP can be measured using the Rotterdam self-assessment programme for ERCP. Outcome data in ERCPs obtained with this RAF-E provide insight into the quality of individual as well as group performance and can be used to assess and set standards for quality control in ERCP.

Comparing quality, safety, and costs of colonoscopies performed by nurse vs physician trainees.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We evaluated the quality and safety of colonoscopies performed by nurse and physician endoscopy trainees as well as the cost differences. METHODS: We performed a study of 7 nurse and 8 physician (gastroenterology fellows) endoscopy trainees at 2 medical centers in the Netherlands from September 2008 through April 2012. At the beginning of the study, the subjects had no experience in endoscopy; they were trained in gastrointestinal endoscopy according to the regulations of the Dutch Society of Gastroenterology, performing a minimum of 100 colonoscopies. Each trainee then performed 135 consecutive colonoscopies (866 total by nurse trainees and 1080 by physician trainees) under supervision of a gastroenterologist; the colonoscopies were evaluated for quality and safety. We performed statistical analyses of data, assessing multilevel and cost minimization. The mean age of the patients was 57 years, and about half were women in each group. RESULTS: The endoscopic quality and safety were comparable between nurse and physician trainees. Overall rates of cecal intubation were 95% for nurses and 93% for physicians (P = .38), including procedures that required assistance from a supervisor; mean withdrawal times were 10.4 and 9.8 minutes, respectively (P = .44). Each group detected 27% of adenomas and had a 0.5% rate of complication. In both groups, the rates of unassisted cecal intubation gradually increased with the number of colonoscopies performed, from 70% for nurses and 74% for physicians at the beginning to 89% and 86%, respectively, at the end of the assessment period. Using a strategy in which 1 gastroenterologist supervises 3 nurses, the personnel costs decreased from $64.65 to $54.58. CONCLUSIONS: In a supervised setting, nurse endoscopists perform colonoscopies according to quality and safety standards that are comparable with those of physician endoscopist and can substantially reduce costs.

Nurse-led follow-up at home vs. conventional medical outpatient clinic follow-up in patients with incurable upper gastrointestinal cancer: a randomized study.

CONTEXT: Upper gastrointestinal cancer is associated with a poor prognosis. The multidimensional problems of incurable patients require close monitoring and frequent support, which cannot sufficiently be provided during conventional one to two month follow-up visits to the outpatient clinic. OBJECTIVES: To compare nurse-led follow-up at home with conventional medical follow-up in the outpatient clinic for patients with incurable primary or recurrent esophageal, pancreatic, or hepatobiliary cancer. METHODS: Patients were randomized to nurse-led follow-up at home or conventional medical follow-up in the outpatient clinic. Outcome parameters were quality of life (QoL), patient satisfaction, and health care consumption, measured by different questionnaires at one and a half and four months after randomization. As well, cost analyses were done for both follow-up strategies in the first four months. RESULTS: In total, 138 patients were randomized, of which 66 (48%) were evaluable. At baseline, both groups were similar with respect to clinical and sociodemographic characteristics and health-related QoL. Patients in the nurse-led follow-up group were significantly more satisfied with the visits, whereas QoL and health care consumption within the first four months were comparable between the two groups. Nurse-led follow-up was less expensive than conventional medical follow-up. However, the total costs for the first four months of follow-up in this study were higher in the nurse-led follow-up group because of a higher frequency of visits. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that conventional medical follow-up is interchangeable with nurse-led follow-up. A cost utility study is necessary to determine the preferred frequency and duration of the home visits.

Barrett's oesophagus: epidemiology, cancer risk and implications for management.

Although endoscopic surveillance of patients with Barrett's oesophagus has been widely implemented, its effectiveness is debateable. The recently reported low annual oesophageal adenocarcinoma risk in population studies, the failure to identify most Barrett's patients at risk of disease progression, the poor adherence to surveillance and biopsy protocols, and the significant risk of misclassification of dysplasia all tend to undermine the effectiveness of current management, in particular, endoscopic surveillance programmes, to prevent or improve the outcomes of patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma. The ongoing increase in incidence of Barrett's oesophagus and consequent growth of the surveillance population, together with the associated discomfort and costs of endoscopic surveillance, demand improved techniques for accurately determining individual risk of oesophageal adenocarcinoma. More accurate techniques are needed to run efficient surveillance programmes in the coming decades. In this review, we will discuss the current knowledge on the epidemiology of Barrett's oesophagus, and the challenging epidemiological dilemmas that need to be addressed when assessing the current screening and surveillance strategies.

[Faecal occult blood test for colorectal cancer screening: high quality for a good price]. / Ontlastingstest bevolkingsonderzoek darmkanker: goede kwaliteit tegen een goede prijs.

The Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) awarded the immunochemical faecal occult blood test (IFOBT) to FOB Gold of Sentinel following a European call for tenders. The contract-awarding procedure included the application of quality knock-out criteria, which were met by two suppliers. The decisive factor was the best price/quality ratio. A recent review indicated that, at present, no single IFOBT is better than any other. The decision to opt for a test manufactured by a different supplier than was used in the previous screening pilots made it necessary to re-determine the cut-off value. This value has now been set (88 ng/ml) and is confirmed by a laboratory test. Colonoscopy-related capacity planning, as well as its diagnostic yield, depends on numerous factors; therefore, the RIVM is currently monitoring the referral percentage and number of adenomas detected and is collaborating on quality terms. Any necessary adjustments are to be made during the introduction of the screening test.

Colorectal cancer screening--optimizing current strategies and new directions.

The first evidence that screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) could effectively reduce mortality dates back 20 years. However, actual population screening has, in many countries, halted at the level of individual testing and discussions on differences between screening tests. With a wealth of new evidence from various community-based studies looking at test uptake, screening-programme organization and the importance of quality assurance, population screening for CRC is now moving into a new realm, promising better results in terms of reducing CRC-specific morbidity and mortality. Such a shift in the paradigm requires a change from opportunistic, individual testing towards organized population screening with comprehensive monitoring and full-programme quality assurance. To achieve this, a combination of factors--including test characteristics, uptake, screenee autonomy, costs and capacity--must be considered. Thus, evidence from randomized trials comparing different tests must be supplemented by studies of acceptance and uptake to obtain the full picture of the effectiveness (in terms of morbidity, mortality and cost) the different strategies have. In this Review, we discuss a range of screening modalities and describe the factors to be considered to achieve a truly effective population CRC screening programme.

The price of autonomy: should we offer individuals a choice of colorectal cancer screening strategies?

A difference between colorectal cancer screening and screening for most other types of cancer is that various screening methods are available. A choice between screening methods is common in the USA. Most European programmes currently offer a single screening method, since it is recommended that only screening strategies with sufficient evidence for a reduction in colorectal cancer mortality are introduced. Faecal occult blood testing is widely accepted in Europe, and evidence on the effectiveness of flexible sigmoidoscopy is increasing. The availability of multiple effective screening options warrants deliberation on whether individuals should be given a choice between strategies. In this Personal View, we present arguments in favour and against offering a choice of screening strategies, together with the evidence substantiating these views. We also focus on screening invitees' autonomy, which is a crucial parameter in the debate.