Risk factors for advanced colorectal neoplasia and colorectal cancer detected at surveillance: a nationwide study in the modern era.

AIM: Recommendations for surveillance after colonoscopy are based on risk factors for metachronous advanced colorectal neoplasia (AN) and colorectal cancer (CRC). The value of these risk factors remains unclear in populations enriched by individuals with a positive faecal immunochemical test and were investigated in a modern setting. METHODS AND RESULTS: This population-based cohort study included all individuals in the Netherlands of ≥55 years old with a first adenoma diagnosis in 2015. A total of 22,471 patients were included. Data were retrieved from the Dutch Nationwide Pathology Databank (Palga). Primary outcomes were metachronous AN and CRC. Patient and polyp characteristics were evaluated by multivariable Cox regression analyses. During follow-up, 2416 (10.8%) patients were diagnosed with AN, of which 557 (2.5% from the total population) were CRC. Adenomas with high-grade dysplasia (hazard ratio [HR] 1.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.40-1.83), villous histology (HR 1.91, 95% CI 1.59-2.28), size ≥10 mm (HR 1.12, 95% CI 1.02-1.23), proximal location (HR 1.12, 95% CI 1.02-1.23), two or more adenomas (HR 1.28, 95% CI 1.16-1.41), and serrated polyps ≥10 mm (HR 1.67, 95% CI 1.42-1.97) were independent risk factors for metachronous AN. In contrast, only adenomas with high-grade dysplasia (HR 2.49, 95% CI 1.92-3.24) were an independent risk factor for metachronous CRC. CONCLUSIONS: Risk factors for metachronous AN and CRC were identified for populations with access to a faecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based screening programme. If only risk factors for metachronous CRC are considered, a reduction in criteria for surveillance seems reasonable.

The Association Between Screening for Colorectal Cancer and Mental and Physical Health.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer screening reduces colorectal cancer morbidity and mortality. Identifying the factors associated with screening participation is needed to overcome barriers to screening. While several of those factors have been identified, the impact of mental and physical health on screening behaviour is not well understood. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study compared the self-reported mental and physical health of those who did screen for colorectal cancer and those who did not. Participants of the Australasian Colorectal Cancer Family Registry Cohort that were aged 45-75 years and had never been diagnosed with colorectal cancer were asked to complete a questionnaire detailing their colorectal cancer screening participation in the preceding 5 years, and a validated questionnaire of mental and physical health. Multivariable logistic regression was used to adjust for measured potential confounders. RESULTS: Of the 1130 eligible participants, 781 had a family history of colorectal cancer (69.5%), and 819 reported colorectal cancer screening in the past 5 years (72%). After adjusting for potential confounders, there was no evidence that overall mental or physical health was associated with colorectal cancer screening. However, those reporting higher levels of general health were more likely to participate in colorectal cancer screening (OR = 1.02 (100 point scale), 95% CI 1.004, 1.037, P = .014). CONCLUSION: We found limited evidence that mental and physical health were associated with colorectal cancer screening. The high proportion of participants with a family history of colorectal cancer limits the generaliseability of the findings to the general population, although we observed no differences in findings by strength of family history.

Impact of organised colorectal cancer screening on age-specific population incidences: evidence from a quasi-experimental study in Sweden.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) incurs a significant disease burden globally. Organised CRC screening programmes have been widely implemented for early detection and prevention. To understand the public health impact of these programmes, quantitative evidence of changes in overall and age-specific population incidences is fundamental. We aimed to provide such evidence by exploiting a time lag in the implementation of organised screening in Sweden: two out of 21 regions (these two regions comprise nearly 20% of the total Swedish population) have offered organised screening since 2008; the other regions have offered CRC screening since 2021. Using registry data on diagnosed CRC cases and socio-demographics for all regions in Sweden over the period 1970-2019, Bayesian structural time series modelling and difference-in-differences were applied to analyse the impact of screening on age-specific population incidences over time (CRC cases per 100.000 persons/year). After inviting birth-year cohorts aged 60-69 years for stool-based testing, the incidence rate in the 70-74-year age group decreased significantly over time, with an average reduction of - 44·40 (95% CI - 58·15 to - 31·31) from 2011 to 2019 in the intervention regions. In the overall population aged 60-74 years, there was a net incidence decrease of - 7·99 (95% CI - 13·85 to - 2·39) since the initiation of organised screening in the intervention regions (2008-2019). Organised CRC screening for 60-69-year-olds generated a change in age-specific incidence patterns with a long-lasting incidence decrease in the 70-74-year-old population, implying reductions in the excess mortality and burden of the disease.

Small bowel neuroendocrine tumors: Unique features and low lethality compared with small bowel adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Population-based studies comparing clinical characteristics and survival disparities between patients with small bowel adenocarcinoma (SBA) and small bowel neuroendocrine tumors (SBNETs) in the United States are limited. METHODS: Data for patients with SBA or SBNETs, obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database for the years between 2000 and 2018 were analyzed. RESULTS: Between 2000 and 2018, the age-adjusted incidence of SBA experienced a marginal increase whereas SBNETs demonstrated a significant increase, emerging as the predominant subtype of small bowel cancer (SBC). Diagnoses peaked at ages 65-69 years for SBA and 60-64 years for SBNETs, with the latter exhibiting a heightened age-specific incidence and maintaining equilibrium in gender distribution. Clinicopathologic disparities revealed SBA's duodenal predilection, larger tumor size, and advanced stages, contrasting with SBNETs' ileal predilection, early-stage presentation, and superior outcomes. SBNETs patients underwent surgery more frequently but received less chemotherapy and radiation than SBA patients. Factors intricately correlated with a diagnosis of SBNETs included female gender, White race, advanced age, marital status, recent diagnoses, superior tumor differentiation, smaller size, distal location, and early-stage presentation. Survival analysis unveiled a remarkable 79% reduction in the mortality risk for SBNETs compared with SBA. Subgroup analysis further confirmed the consistently favorable survival advantages of SBNETs, highlighting the clinical relevance of histological classification in prognostication. CONCLUSION: Compared with SBA, SBNETs exhibited distinctive clinicopathological features characterized by a higher inclination toward low-grade and early-stage manifestations, thereby contributing to superior survival outcomes.

Adenoma characteristics in the English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme.

AIM: The English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme detects colorectal cancers and premalignant polyps in a faecal occult blood test-positive population. The aim of this work is to describe the detection rates and characteristics of adenomas within the programme, identify predictive factors influencing the presence or absence of carcinoma within adenomas and identify the factors predicting the presence of advanced colonic neoplasia in different colon segments. METHOD: The Bowel Cancer Screening System was retrospectively searched for polyps detected during colonoscopies between June 2006 and June 2012, at which time a guaiac test was being used. Data on size, location and histological features were collected, and described. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to determine the significant factors influencing the development of carcinoma within an adenoma. RESULTS: A total of 229 419 polyps were identified; after exclusions 136 973 adenomas from 58 334 patients were evaluated. Over half were in the rectum or sigmoid colon. Subcentimetre adenomas accounted for 69.8% of the total. The proportion of adenomas containing advanced histological features increased with increasing adenoma size up to 35 mm, then plateaued. A focus of carcinoma was found in 2282 (1.7%) adenomas, of which 95.6% were located distally. Carcinoma was identified even in diminutive adenomas (0.1%). The proportion of adenomas containing cancer was significantly higher in women than men (2.0% vs. 1.5%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This national, prospectively captured dataset adds robust information about histological features of adenomas that convey an increased risk for colorectal cancer, and identifies caecal adenomas, high-grade dysplasia, increasing adenoma size, distal location and female sex as independent risk factors associated with carcinoma.

Comparing the resource implications of old and new colorectal adenoma surveillance guidelines in Australia.

BACKGROUND: The latest update to the Australian adenoma surveillance guideline in 2018 introduced a novel risk stratification system with updated surveillance recommendations. The resource implications of adopting this new system are unclear. AIMS: To quanitfy the resource demands of adopting new over old adenoma surveillance guidelines. METHODS: We studied data from 2443 patients undergoing colonoscopies, in which a clinically significant lesion was identified in their latest, or previous procedure(s) across five Australian hospitals. We excluded procedures with inflammatory bowel disease, new or prior history of colorectal cancer or resection, inadequate bowel preparation and incomplete procedures. Old and new Australian surveillance intervals were calculated according to the number, size and histological characteristics of lesions identified. We used these data to compare the rate of procedures according to each guideline. RESULTS: Based on the procedures for 766 patients, the new surveillance guidelines significantly increased the number of procedures allocated an interval of 1 year (relative risk (RR): 1.57, P = 0.009) and 10 years (RR: 3.83, P < 0.00001) and reduced those allocated to half a year (RR: 0.08, P = 0.00219), 3 years (RR: 0.51, P < 0.00001) and 5 years (RR: 0.59, P < 0.00001). Overall, this reduced the relative number of surveillance procedures by 21% over 10 years (25.92 vs 32.78 procedures/100 patient-years), which increased to 22% after excluding patients 75 or older at the time of surveillance (19.9 vs 25.65 procedures/100 patient-years). CONCLUSION: The adoption of the latest Australian adenoma surveillance guidelines can reduce demand for surveillance colonoscopy by more than a fifth (21-22%) over 10 years.

Evaluation of a Faith-Placed Health Education Service on Bowel Cancer Screening in Mosques in East London.

BACKGROUND: Bowel cancer screening using faecal immunochemical testing is provided in the United Kingdom with the aim of reducing mortality from colorectal cancer. However, there are low participant rates among ethnic minorities across the United Kingdom. Faith-placed interventions have the potential to improve screening rates among such populations, but studies examining their effectiveness are scarce. METHODS: We delivered a presentation on bowel cancer screening to 204 Muslims in seven mosques in East London (intervention group). All participants completed a questionnaire regarding attitudes, perceptions and knowledge of bowel cancer screening before and after the presentation. Concurrently, we administered the questionnaire to 72 subjects attending a mosque that did not receive the presentation (comparison group). RESULTS: The intervention group showed a greater willingness to do the test (90% vs. 67%, p < 0.001) and to recommend it to others (96% vs. 74%, p < 0.001), ability to complete the test by themselves (94% vs. 56%, p < 0.001) and confidence in noticing symptoms (78% vs. 32%, p < 0.001) after the presentation compared to before. There was a significant difference between the intervention group post-presentation and the comparison group on intention to do the test (90% vs. 79%, p = 0.02), recommending it to others (96% vs. 83%, p < 0.001), and confidence in their ability to complete the test by themselves (94% vs. 63%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: A culture-sensitive, faith-placed health education intervention delivered in mosques can substantially improve knowledge of bowel cancer screening and increase the intention to participate in the screening programme. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The intervention presentation was developed using insights from four public involvement sessions with four to six members representative of the East London Muslim community. The sessions sought attendees' thoughts on appropriate ways to approach the intervention design for their community and asked for their views on the acceptability, appropriateness of messaging, format/design and likely impact of the presentation. Their views were then utilised to improve the presentation.

Enhancing colorectal cancer prevention: a national assessment of public awareness in Egypt.

BACKGROUND: Despite the increasing incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) in the Egyptian population, it still seems that there is a significant lack of awareness regarding the disease. This study aimed to assess the Egyptian population's awareness of CRC regarding its risk factors, the screening procedures, and the appropriate responses to its diagnosis. METHOD: A cross-sectional study was conducted in Egypt between July 2022 and March 2023 and recruited a convenient sample of adults from seven governorates representing different geographic areas, and socioeconomic and educational backgrounds with the help of the validated Bowel Cancer Awareness Measure (CAM) version 2.1. The modified Arabic questionnaire was validated through a pilot study including 30 patients. Then it was presented through a Google form before being shared via online methods and face-to-face interviews. The questionnaire provided both numerical and categorical data, which were analyzed accordingly. The Chi-square, the Fisher exact, and the Man-Whitney test were used to compare colorectal cancer poor and good knowledge groups. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to predict the factors that affected the awareness level of the study population. RESULTS: Nine hundred forty individuals participated in the survey. Their ages ranged from 18 to 86 years old, with an average of 37.38 ± 12.22 years. The mean Knowledge score was 14.29 ± 7.05 out of 37 with most of our participants (71%) having poor knowledge about CRC. Most of the participants (64.1%) chose colonoscopy as the best screening modality, followed by an abdominal CT (27.8%), and fecal occult blood (15.5%). The study revealed significant differences between participants with good and poor knowledge of colorectal cancer. (78.5%) of participants with good CRC knowledge lived in cities, (85.4%) attained university or higher educational level, and (87.2%) of them were nonsmokers (p < 0.05%). CONCLUSION: In general, there was a lack of awareness about Colorectal cancer among the Egyptian population especially among rural and lower educational levels, and more health education campaigns are required to enhance CRC prevention efforts in Egypt.

On repeated diagnostic testing in screening for a medical condition: How often should the diagnostic test be repeated?

In screening large populations a diagnostic test is frequently used repeatedly. An example is screening for bowel cancer using the fecal occult blood test (FOBT) on several occasions such as at 3 or 6 days. The question that is addressed here is how often should we repeat a diagnostic test when screening for a specific medical condition. Sensitivity is often used as a performance measure of a diagnostic test and is considered here for the individual application of the diagnostic test as well as for the overall screening procedure. The latter can involve an increasingly large number of repeated applications, but how many are sufficient? We demonstrate the issues involved in answering this question using real data on bowel cancer at St Vincents Hospital in Sydney. As data are only available for those testing positive at least once, an appropriate modeling technique is developed on the basis of the zero-truncated binomial distribution which allows for population heterogeneity. The latter is modeled using discrete nonparametric maximum likelihood. If we wish to achieve an overall sensitivity of 90%, the FOBT should be repeated for 2 weeks instead of the 1 week that was used at the time of the survey. A simulation study also shows consistency in the sense that bias and standard deviation for the estimated sensitivity decrease with an increasing number of repeated occasions as well as with increasing sample size.

Barriers and enablers to bowel cancer screening participation in remote Tasmania: A qualitative study using the theoretical domains framework.

OBJECTIVE: Identify barriers and enablers for remote Tasmanians participating in bowel cancer screening through the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program. SETTING: A small remote Tasmanian community. PARTICIPANTS: Tasmanian remote community members aged 50 years and over. DESIGN: A qualitative study conducted 16 semi-structured interviews. Two researchers conducted in-person and telephone interviews. Questions were directed by an interview guide developed using the Theoretical Domains Framework for behaviour change and Behaviour Change Wheel. Two researchers analysed data using directed content analysis with a flexible inductive approach. RESULTS: Four themes related to barriers and enablers to completing the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program screening kit in remote Tasmania. Themes included the subject of screening, physical screening kit, the process and outcome of the kit. Several barrier and enabler sub-themes overlapped or were linked, as many enablers mitigated barriers. For example, social influences, awareness level, steps in completing screening, and planning and timing to screen. Social support and discussing screening with others were key enablers, whereas lack of these were barriers. For remote communities, taking the kit to the post office was a barrier from often knowing the post officer. A bowel bus providing screening and information support services may reduce the travel burden of follow-up diagnostic tests and support low-literacy individuals to screen. CONCLUSION: Barriers and enablers exist within each stage of the screening process, from what influences an individual decision to screen, through to the outcome. To improve screening rates in rural/remote Tasmania, barriers and enablers to screening must be considered.

Small Bowel Carcinoma in the Setting of Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

Small bowel carcinomas are rare in the general population, but the incidence is increasing. Patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) are at significantly higher risk of small bowel adenocarcinomas than their non-IBD counterparts, with Crohn's patients having at least a 12-fold increased risk and ulcerative colitis patients with a more controversial and modest 2-fold increased risk compared with the general population. IBD patients with small bowel carcinomas present with nonspecific symptoms that overlap with typical IBD symptoms, and this results in difficulty making a preoperative diagnosis. Cross-sectional imaging is rarely diagnostic, and most cancers are found incidentally at the time of surgery performed for an IBD indication. As such, most small bowel carcinomas are found at advanced stages and carry a poor prognosis. Oncologic surgical resection is the treatment of choice for patients with locoregional disease with little evidence available to guide adjuvant therapy. Patients with metastatic disease are treated with systemic chemotherapy, and surgery is reserved for palliation in this population. Prognosis is poor with few long-term survivors reported.

Tight Junction Claudins and Occludin Are Differentially Regulated and Expressed in Genomically Defined Subsets of Colon Cancer.

Metastatic colon cancer remains incurable despite improvements in survival outcomes. New therapies based on the discovery of colon cancer genomic subsets could improve outcomes. Colon cancers from genomic studies with publicly available data were examined to define the expression and regulation of the major tight junction proteins claudins and occludin in genomic groups. Putative regulations of the promoters of tight junction genes by colon-cancer-deregulated pathways were evaluated in silico. The effect of claudin mRNA expression levels on survival of colon cancer patients was examined. Common mutations in colon-cancer-related genes showed variable prevalence in genomically identified groups. Claudin genes were rarely mutated in colon cancer patients. Genomically identified groups of colon cancer displayed distinct regulation of claudins and occludin at the mRNA level. Claudin gene promoters possessed clustered sites of binding sequences for transcription factors TCF4 and SMADs, consistent with a key regulatory role of the WNT and TGFß pathways in their expression. Although an effect of claudin mRNA expression on survival of colon cancer patients as a whole was not prominent, survival of genomic subsets was significantly influenced by claudin mRNA expression. mRNA expression of the main tight junction genes showed differential regulation in various genomically defined subgroups of colon cancer. These data pinpoint a distinct role of claudins and pathways that regulate them in these subgroups and suggest that subgroups of colon cancer should be considered in future efforts to therapeutically target claudins.

Evaluating changes to home bowel cancer screening kits: an end-user perspective study.

PURPOSE: Many people do not participate in mail-out bowel cancer screening programs due to difficulties using the screening kit. The current study investigated the ways the screening kit could be modified to improve usability. METHODS: 1,109 people evaluated 15 different screening kit modifications. Participants reported on how these kit modifications would affect their screening barriers, their future screening intentions, and how much they would recommend that the modification is made to the current screening kit used the program. All responses were given via an online survey conducted between April and December of 2021. RESULTS: Seventeen percent of previous NBCSP non-participators indicated that a one-sample test would increase their intention to participate. Recommendation ratings demonstrated higher levels of support for modifications that included providing a barcode naming label (M = 9.06, 95% CI [8.81, 9.31]), having a larger diameter opening of the collection tube (M = 8.42, 95% CI [8.10, 8.74]), and highlighting the expiry date on the kit packaging (M = 8.59, 95% CI [8.29, 8.89]). There were lower levels of support for modifications that reduced the size of the packaging the kit is sent in (M = 6.47, 95% CI [6.09, 6.85]), removed branding from kit packaging (M = 5.98, 95% CI [5.57, 6.39]), and removed the information booklet that comes with the screening kit (M = 5.25, 95% CI [4.78, 5.72]). CONCLUSION: These findings highlight multiple ways in which bowel cancer screening kits can be changed to increase usability for invitees of national bowel cancer screening programs. Findings have implications for all screening programs that use immunochemical-based bowel cancer screening kits.

Socioeconomic differences in expected discomfort from colonoscopy and colon capsule endoscopy.

Individual income and educational level are associated with participation rates in colorectal cancer screening. We aimed to investigate the expected discomfort from the endoscopic diagnostic modalities of colonoscopy and colon capsule endoscopy in different socioeconomic groups as a potential barrier for participation. In a randomized clinical trial within the Danish colorectal cancer screening program, we distributed questionnaires to 2031 individuals between August 2020 and December 2022 to investigate the expected procedural and overall discomfort from investigations using visual analogue scales. Socioeconomic status was determined by household income and educational level. Multivariate continuous ordinal regressions were performed to estimate the odds of higher expected discomfort. The expected procedural and overall discomfort from both modalities were significantly higher with increasing educational levels and income, except for procedural discomfort from colon capsule endoscopy between income quartiles. The odds ratios for higher expected discomfort increased significantly with increasing educational level, whereas the differences between income groups were less substantial. Bowel preparation contributed most to expected discomfort in colon capsule endoscopy, whereas in colonoscopy, the procedure itself was the largest contributor. Individuals with prior experiences of colonoscopy reported significantly lower expected overall but not procedural discomfort from colonoscopy. The threshold for acceptable discomfort between subgroups is unknown, but the expected discomfort in colon capsule endoscopy and colonoscopy was higher in higher socioeconomic subgroups, suggesting that expected discomfort is not a significant contributor to the inequalities in screening uptake.

Deep learning identifies inflamed fat as a risk factor for lymph node metastasis in early colorectal cancer.

The spread of early-stage (T1 and T2) adenocarcinomas to locoregional lymph nodes is a key event in disease progression of colorectal cancer (CRC). The cellular mechanisms behind this event are not completely understood and existing predictive biomarkers are imperfect. Here, we used an end-to-end deep learning algorithm to identify risk factors for lymph node metastasis (LNM) status in digitized histopathology slides of the primary CRC and its surrounding tissue. In two large population-based cohorts, we show that this system can predict the presence of more than one LNM in pT2 CRC patients with an area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) of 0.733 (0.67-0.758) and patients with any LNM with an AUROC of 0.711 (0.597-0.797). Similarly, in pT1 CRC patients, the presence of more than one LNM or any LNM was predictable with an AUROC of 0.733 (0.644-0.778) and 0.567 (0.542-0.597), respectively. Based on these findings, we used the deep learning system to guide human pathology experts towards highly predictive regions for LNM in the whole slide images. This hybrid human observer and deep learning approach identified inflamed adipose tissue as the highest predictive feature for LNM presence. Our study is a first proof of concept that artificial intelligence (AI) systems may be able to discover potentially new biological mechanisms in cancer progression. Our deep learning algorithm is publicly available and can be used for biomarker discovery in any disease setting. © 2021 The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Colorectal cancer incidence trends by tumour location among adults of screening-age in England: a population-based study.

AIM: Proximal and distal colorectal cancers (CRCs) exhibit different clinical, molecular and biological patterns. The aim of this study was to determine temporal trends in the age-standardized incidence rates (ASIRs) of proximal and distal CRC following the introduction of the English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) in 2006. METHOD: The National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service database was used to identify incident cases of CRC among adults of screening age (60-74 years) between 2001 and 2017. ASIRs were calculated using the European Standard Population 2013 and incidence trends analysed by anatomical subsite (proximal, caecum to descending colon; distal, sigmoid to rectum), sex and Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) quintile using Joinpoint regression software. RESULTS: Between 2001 and 2017, 541 515 incident cases of CRC were diagnosed [236 167 proximal (43.6%) and 305 348 distal (56.4%)]. A marginal reduction in the proximal ASIR was noted from 2008 [annual percentage change (APC) -1.4% (95% CI -2.0% to -0.9%)] compared with a greater reduction in distal ASIR from 2011 to 2014 [APC -6.6% (95% CI -11.5% to -1.5%)] which plateaued thereafter [APC -0.5% (95% CI -3.2% to 2.2%)]. Incidence rates decreased more rapidly in men than women. Adults in IMD quintiles 4-5 experienced the greatest reduction in distal tumours [APC -3.5% (95% CI -4.3% to -2.7%)]. CONCLUSION: Following the introduction of the English BCSP, the incidence of CRC has subsequently reduced among adults of screening age, with this trend being most pronounced in distal tumours and in men. There is also evidence of a reduction in the deprivation gap for distal tumour incidence. Strategies to improve the detection of proximal tumours are warranted.

How consequences of colorectal cancer treatment are managed: a qualitative study of stakeholder experiences about supportive care and current practices.

PURPOSE: Colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors experience treatment-effects such as symptoms and functional impairments. There is limited evidence about how these are managed and what services or supports are available in the community. We aimed to identify current practice and available supports for managing consequences of treatment from clinician and CRC survivor perspectives. METHODS: This qualitative study, informed by an interpretivist constructionist paradigm, included semi-structured interviews. Clinicians with experience of treating CRC patients and adult CRC survivors were recruited across Australia. Interviews explored experiences about problems experienced after CRC treatment and how these were managed. Data collection and analysis, using thematic analysis, was iterative whereby emergent themes during analysis were incorporated into subsequent interviews. RESULTS: We interviewed 16 clinicians and 18 survivors. Survivors experienced a range of consequences of treatment amendable to support including allied health, information, and self-management. Barriers to support access included clinicians' worry about patient out-of-pocket expenses, long waitlists, lack of awareness about existing supports, and perception no therapeutic options were available. Healthcare professionals with expertise in CRC were often difficult to identify outside of cancer settings. Survivorship care could be improved with individualised timely information and identification of pathways to access healthcare providers with expertise in managing consequences of CRC treatment within primary care. CONCLUSIONS: To improve CRC survivor lives posttreatment, routine assessment of consequences of treatment, individualised care planning involving relevant healthcare professionals, access to supportive care when needed, and improved information provision and engagement of a range of health professionals in follow-up care are needed.

Low Incidence of Colorectal Advanced Neoplasia During Surveillance in Individuals with a Family History of Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Family history of colorectal cancer (CRC) is used to stratify individuals into risk categories which determine timing of initial screening and ongoing CRC surveillance. Evidence for long-term CRC risk following a normal index colonoscopy in family history populations is limited. AIMS: To assess the incidence of advanced neoplasia and associated risk factors in a population undergoing surveillance colonoscopies due to family history of CRC. METHODS: Surveillance colonoscopy findings were examined in 425 individuals with a family history of CRC, a normal index colonoscopy and a minimum of 10 years of follow-up colonoscopies. Advanced neoplasia risk was determined for three CRC family history categories (near-average, medium and high-risk), accounting for demographics and time after the first colonoscopy. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 13.5 years (IQR 11.5-16.0), with an incidence of advanced neoplasia of 14.35% (61/425). The number of affected relatives and age of CRC diagnosis in the youngest relative did not predict the risk of advanced neoplasia (p > 0.05), with no significant differences in advanced neoplasia incidence between the family history categories (p = 0.16). Patients ≥ 60 years showed a fourfold (HR 4.14, 95% CI 1.33-12.89) higher advanced neoplasia risk during surveillance than those < 40 years at index colonoscopy. With each subsequent negative colonoscopy, the risk of advanced neoplasia at ongoing surveillance was reduced. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of advanced neoplasia was low (14.35%), regardless of the family history risk category, with older age being the main risk for advanced neoplasia. Delaying onset of colonoscopy or lengthening surveillance intervals could be a more efficient use of resources in this population.

Implementation of risk stratification within bowel cancer screening: a community jury study exploring public acceptability and communication needs.

BACKGROUND: Population-based cancer screening programmes are shifting away from age and/or sex-based screening criteria towards a risk-stratified approach. Any such changes must be acceptable to the public and communicated effectively. We aimed to explore the social and ethical considerations of implementing risk stratification at three different stages of the bowel cancer screening programme and to understand public requirements for communication. METHODS: We conducted two pairs of community juries, addressing risk stratification for screening eligibility or thresholds for referral to colonoscopy and screening interval. Using screening test results (where applicable), and lifestyle and genetic risk scores were suggested as potential stratification strategies. After being informed about the topic through a series of presentations and discussions including screening principles, ethical considerations and how risk stratification could be incorporated, participants deliberated over the research questions. They then reported their final verdicts on the acceptability of risk-stratified screening and what information should be shared about their preferred screening strategy. Transcripts were analysed using codebook thematic analysis. RESULTS: Risk stratification of bowel cancer screening was acceptable to the informed public. Using data within the current system (age, sex and screening results) was considered an obvious next step and collecting additional data for lifestyle and/or genetic risk assessment was also preferable to age-based screening. Participants acknowledged benefits to individuals and health services, as well as articulating concerns for people with low cancer risk, potential public misconceptions and additional complexity for the system. The need for clear and effective communication about changes to the screening programme and individual risk feedback was highlighted, including making a distinction between information that should be shared with everyone by default and additional details that are available elsewhere. CONCLUSIONS: From the perspective of public acceptability, risk stratification using current data could be implemented immediately, ahead of more complex strategies. Collecting additional data for lifestyle and/or genetic risk assessment was also considered acceptable but the practicalities of collecting such data and how the programme would be communicated require careful consideration.

An evaluation of the feasibility of implementing the BeWEL lifestyle intervention programme for people at increased risk of colorectal cancer - from research to real life.

BACKGROUND: The BeWEL randomised controlled trial (RCT) of weight loss in people with colorectal adenomas demonstrated that a significant proportion of people are interested in lifestyle interventions (49%) and clinically relevant changes in body weight were achieved at 12-month follow-up. The current work aimed to assess the feasibility of the BeWEL programme invitation and delivery in a nonresearch setting to assess whether the original results could be replicated. METHODS: The original BeWel programme was modified through the provision of verbal introductions (vs. letter), requirement for people to contact BeWEL team (vs. BeWEL team contacting them), community delivery (vs. home), duration (12 weeks vs. 12 months) and two intervention visits (vs. 3) and inclusion of people with predisposition to colorectal cancer. Eligible people were informed about the BeWel programme from National Health Service (NHS) staff after colonoscopy procedures and invited to contact a dedicated Bowel Cancer UK lifestyle team. RESULTS: Findings demonstrated that programme uptake (10.6% vs. 33%) and retention (71% vs. 93%) was significantly lower than that obtained from the BeWEL RCT. For people who participated in the 3-month programme (n = 21), self-reported weight loss (mean: -7% body weight) was successful, and the programme was well received. CONCLUSIONS: The current approach to engaging clients with the BeWEL programme is unsustainable. Reliance on busy NHS staff to deliver invitations and the need for people to contact the delivery team (due to data protection) may have impacted on uptake. Alternative approaches to supporting weight management in this population should be explored further.