A scoping review of risk-stratified bowel screening: current evidence, future directions.

PURPOSE: In this scoping review, we examined the international literature on risk-stratified bowel screening to develop recommendations for future research, practice and policy. METHODS: Six electronic databases were searched from inception to 18 October 2021: Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Forward and backwards citation searches were also undertaken. All relevant literature were included. RESULTS: After de-deduplication, 3,629 records remained. 3,416 were excluded at the title/abstract screening stage. A further 111 were excluded at full-text screening stage. In total, 102 unique studies were included. Results showed that risk-stratified bowel screening programmes can potentially improve diagnostic performance, but there is a lack of information on longer-term outcomes. Risk models do appear to show promise in refining existing risk stratification guidelines but most were not externally validated and less than half achieved good discriminatory power. Risk assessment tools in primary care have the potential for high levels of acceptability and uptake, and therefore, could form an important component of future risk-stratified bowel screening programmes, but sometimes the screening recommendations were not adhered to by the patient or healthcare provider. The review identified important knowledge gaps, most notably in the area of organisation of screening services due to few pilots, and what risk stratification might mean for inequalities. CONCLUSION: We recommend that future research focuses on what organisational challenges risk-stratified bowel screening may face and a consideration of inequalities in any changes to organised bowel screening programmes.

The burden of COVID-19 infection in a rural Tamil Nadu community.

BACKGROUND: There have been over 30 million cases of COVID-19 in India and over 430,000 deaths. Transmission rates vary from region to region, and are influenced by many factors including population susceptibility, travel and uptake of preventive measures. To date there have been relatively few studies examining the impact of the pandemic in lower income, rural regions of India. We report on a study examining COVID-19 burden in a rural community in Tamil Nadu. METHODS: The study was undertaken in a population of approximately 130,000 people, served by the Rural Unit of Health and Social Affairs (RUHSA), a community health center of CMC, Vellore. We established and evaluated a COVID-19 PCR-testing programme for symptomatic patients-testing was offered to 350 individuals, and household members of test-positive cases were offered antibody testing. We also undertook two COVID-19 seroprevalence surveys in the same community, amongst 701 randomly-selected individuals. RESULTS: There were 182 positive tests in the symptomatic population (52.0%). Factors associated with test-positivity were older age, male gender, higher socioeconomic status (SES, as determined by occupation, education and housing), a history of diabetes, contact with a confirmed/suspected case and attending a gathering (such as a religious ceremony, festival or extended family gathering). Amongst test-positive cases, 3 (1.6%) died and 16 (8.8%) suffered a severe illness. Amongst 129 household contacts 40 (31.0%) tested positive. The two seroprevalence surveys showed positivity rates of 2.2% (July/Aug 2020) and 22.0% (Nov 2020). 40 tested positive (31.0%, 95% CI: 23.02 - 38.98). Our estimated infection-to-case ratio was 31.7. CONCLUSIONS: A simple approach using community health workers and a community-based testing clinic can readily identify significant numbers of COVID-19 infections in Indian rural population. There appear, however, to be low rates of death and severe illness, although vulnerable groups may be under-represented in our sample. It's vital these lower income, rural populations aren't overlooked in ongoing pandemic monitoring and vaccine roll-out in India.

Direct access CT for suspicion of brain tumour: an analysis of referral pathways in a population-based patient group.

BACKGROUND: Brain tumour patients see their primary care doctor on average three or more times before diagnosis, so there may be an opportunity to identify 'at risk' patients earlier. Suspecting a brain tumour diagnosis is difficult because brain tumour-related symptoms are typically non-specific. METHODS: We explored the predictive value of referral guidelines (Kernick and NICE 2005) for brain imaging where a tumour is suspected, in a population-based patient group referred for direct access CT of the head. A consensus panel reviewed whether non-tumour findings were clinically important or whether further investigation was necessary. RESULTS: Over a 5-year period, 3257 head scans were performed; 318 scans were excluded according to pre-specified criteria. 53 patients (1.8%) were reported to have intracranial tumours, of which 42 were significant (diagnostic yield of 1.43%). There were no false negative CT scans for tumour. With symptom-based referral guidelines primary care doctors can identify patients with a 3% positive predictive value (PPV). 559 patients had non-tumour findings, 31% of which were deemed clinically significant. In 34% of these 559 patients, referral for further imaging and/or specialist assessment from primary care was still thought warranted. CONCLUSION: Existing referral guidelines are insufficient to stratify patients adequately based on their symptoms, according to the likelihood that a tumour will be found on brain imaging. Identification of non-tumour findings may be significant for patients and earlier specialist input into interpretation of these images may be beneficial. Improving guidelines to better identify patients at risk of a brain tumour should be a priority, to improve speed of diagnosis, and reduce unnecessary imaging and costs. Future guidelines may incorporate groups of symptoms, clinical signs and tests to improve the predictive value.

UK Lung Cancer RCT Pilot Screening Trial: baseline findings from the screening arm provide evidence for the potential implementation of lung cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer screening using low-dose CT (LDCT) was shown to reduce lung cancer mortality by 20% in the National Lung Screening Trial. METHODS: The pilot UK Lung Cancer Screening (UKLS) is a randomised controlled trial of LDCT screening for lung cancer versus usual care. A population-based questionnaire was used to identify high-risk individuals. CT screen-detected nodules were managed by a pre-specified protocol. Cost effectiveness was modelled with reference to the National Lung Cancer Screening Trial mortality reduction. RESULTS: 247 354 individuals aged 50-75 years were approached; 30.7% expressed an interest, 8729 (11.5%) were eligible and 4055 were randomised, 2028 into the CT arm (1994 underwent a CT). Forty-two participants (2.1%) had confirmed lung cancer, 34 (1.7%) at baseline and 8 (0.4%) at the 12-month scan. 28/42 (66.7%) had stage I disease, 36/42 (85.7%) had stage I or II disease. 35/42 (83.3%) had surgical resection. 536 subjects had nodules greater than 50 mm(3) or 5 mm diameter and 41/536 were found to have lung cancer. One further cancer was detected by follow-up of nodules between 15 and 50 mm(3) at 12 months. The baseline estimate for the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of once-only CT screening, under the UKLS protocol, was £8466 per quality adjusted life year gained (CI £5542 to £12 569). CONCLUSIONS: The UKLS pilot trial demonstrated that it is possible to detect lung cancer at an early stage and deliver potentially curative treatment in over 80% of cases. Health economic analysis suggests that the intervention would be cost effective-this needs to be confirmed using data on observed lung cancer mortality reduction. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 78513845.

Mobile health for cancer in low to middle income countries: priorities for research and development.

Many current global health opportunities have less to do with new biomedical knowledge than with the coordination and delivery of care. While basic research remains vital, the growing cancer epidemic in countries of low and middle income warrants urgent action - focusing on both research and service delivery innovation. Mobile technology can reduce costs, improve access to health services, and strengthen health systems to meet the interrelated challenges of cancer and other noncommunicable diseases. Experience has shown that even very poor and remote communities that only have basic primary health care can benefit from mobile health (or 'mHealth') interventions. We argue that cancer researchers and practitioners have an opportunity to leverage mHealth technologies that have successfully targeted other health conditions, rather than reinventing these tools. We call for particular attention to human centred design approaches for adapting existing technologies to suit distinctive aspects of cancer care and to align delivery with local context - and we make a number of recommendations for integrating mHealth delivery research with the work of designers, engineers and implementers in large-scale delivery programmes.

Performance measures in three rounds of the English bowel cancer screening pilot.

OBJECTIVES: To compare performance measures across all three rounds of the English bowel cancer screening faecal occult blood test pilot and their relation to social deprivation and ethnicity. METHODS: In each round in three primary care trusts, data for a restricted population of over 48,500 aged 60-69 years were analysed. Individual-based data included postcode linked to area-based data on the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) 2004, and ethnicity. Outcomes were the rates of screening and colonoscopy uptake, positivity and detection of neoplasia (adenomas or bowel cancer) and bowel cancer, and the positive predictive values (PPVs) of a positive test for neoplasia and bowel cancer. Sensitivity was calculated by the proportional incidence method using data on interval cancers identified from cancer registrations. RESULTS: The overall uptake rate was 61.8%, 57.0% and 58.7% in the first, second and third rounds, respectively. Although the PPV for cancer decreased over the course of the three rounds (10.9% in the 1st round, 6.5% in 3rd round), the PPV for all neoplasia remained relatively constant (42.6% in 1st round, 36.9% in 3rd round). Deprivation and non-white ethnic background (principally Indian subcontinent in the pilot region) were associated with low screening and colonoscopy uptake rates, and this changed little over the three screening rounds. Uptake was lower in men, although differences in uptake between men and women decreased over time. Non-participation in previous rounds was a strong predictor of low uptake. CONCLUSIONS: Performance measures are commensurate with expectations in a screening programme reaching its third round of screening, but a substantial ongoing effort is needed, particularly to address the effects of deprivation and ethnicity in relation to uptake.

Interval cancers in a FOBT-based colorectal cancer population screening programme: implications for stage, gender and tumour site.

BACKGROUND: Between 2000 and 2007, a demonstration pilot of biennial guaiac faecal occult blood test (GFOBT) screening was carried out in Scotland. METHODS: Interval cancers were defined as cancers diagnosed within 2 years (ie, a complete screening round) of a negative GFOBT. The stage and outcome of the interval cancers were compared with those arising contemporaneously in the non-screened Scottish population. In addition, the gender and site distributions of the interval cancers were compared with those in the screen-detected group and the non-screened population. RESULTS: Of the cancers diagnosed in the screened population, interval cancers comprised 31.2% in the first round, 47.7% in the second, and 58.9% in the third, although this was due to a decline in the numbers of screen-detected cancers rather than an increase in interval cancers. There were no consistent differences in the stage distribution of interval cancers and cancers from the non-screened population, and, in all three rounds, both overall and cancer-specific survival were significantly better for patients diagnosed with interval cancers (p<0.01). The percentage of cancers arising in women was significantly higher in the interval cancer group (50.2%) than in either the screen-detected group (35.3%, p<0.001) or the non-screened group (40.6%, p<0.001). In addition, the proportion of both right-sided and rectal cancers was significantly higher in the interval cancer group than in either the screen-detected (p<0.001) or non-screened (p<0.004) groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although GFOBT screening is associated with substantial interval cancer rates that increase with screening round, the absolute numbers do not. Interval cancers are associated with a better prognosis than cancers arising in a non-screened population, and GFOBT appears to preferentially detect cancers in men and the left side of the colon at the expense of cancers in women and in the right colon and rectum.

Temporal trends and predictors of phthalate, phthalate replacement, and phenol biomarkers in the LIFECODES Fetal Growth Study.

BACKGROUND: Exposure to many phthalates and phenols is declining as replacements are introduced. There is little information on temporal trends or predictors of exposure to these newer compounds, such as phthalate replacements, especially among pregnant populations. OBJECTIVE: Examine temporal trends and predictors of exposure to phthalates, phthalate replacements, and phenols using single- and multi-pollutant approaches. METHODS: We analyzed data from 900 singleton pregnancies in the LIFECODES Fetal Growth Study, a nested case-cohort with recruitment from 2007 to 2018. We measured and averaged concentrations of 12 phthalate metabolites, four phthalate replacement metabolites, and 12 phenols in urine at three timepoints during pregnancy. We visualized and analyzed temporal trends and predictors of biomarker concentrations. To examine chemical mixtures, we derived clusters of individuals with shared exposure profiles using a finite mixture model and examined temporal trends and predictors of cluster assignment. RESULTS: Exposure to phthalates and most phenols declined across the study period, while exposure to phthalate replacements (i.e., di(isononyl) cyclohexane-1,2-dicarboxylic acid, diisononyl ester [DINCH] and di-2-ethylhexyl terephthalate [DEHTP]) and bisphenol S (BPS) increased. For example, the sum of DEHTP biomarkers increased multiple orders of magnitude, with an average concentration of 0.92 ng/mL from 2007 to 2008 and 61.9 ng/mL in 2017-2018. Biomarkers of most chemical exposures varied across sociodemographic characteristics, with the highest concentrations observed in non-Hispanic Black or Hispanic participants relative to non-Hispanic White participants. We identified five clusters with shared exposure profiles and observed temporal trends in cluster membership. For example, at the end of the study period, a cluster characterized by high exposure to phthalate replacements was the most prevalent. SIGNIFICANCE: In a large and well-characterized pregnancy cohort, we observed exposure to phthalate replacements and BPS increased over time while exposure to phthalates and other phenols decreased. Our results highlight the changing nature of exposure to consumer product chemical mixtures.

Communication about colorectal cancer screening in Britain: public preferences for an expert recommendation.

BACKGROUND: Informed decision-making approaches to cancer screening emphasise the importance of decisions being determined by individuals' own values and preferences. However, advice from a trusted source may also contribute to autonomous decision-making. This study examined preferences regarding a recommendation from the NHS and information provision in the context of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. METHODS: In face-to-face interviews, a population-based sample of adults across Britain (n=1964; age 50-80 years) indicated their preference between: (1) a strong recommendation to participate in CRC screening, (2) a recommendation alongside advice to make an individual decision, and (3) no recommendation but advice to make an individual decision. Other measures included trust in the NHS and preferences for information on benefits and risks. RESULTS: Most respondents (84%) preferred a recommendation (47% strong recommendation, 37% recommendation plus individual decision-making advice), but the majority also wanted full information on risks (77%) and benefits (78%). Men were more in favour of a recommendation than women (86% vs 81%). Trust in the NHS was high overall, but the minority who expressed low trust were less likely to want a recommendation. CONCLUSION: Most British adults want full information on risks and benefits of screening but they also want a recommendation from an authoritative source. An 'expert' view may be an important part of autonomous health decision-making.

Are women ready for the new cervical screening protocol in England? A systematic review and qualitative synthesis of views about human papillomavirus testing.

BACKGROUND: A new protocol for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing within the UK cervical screening programme commenced in April 2011, creating new patient experiences. This is the first review to synthesise a substantial body of international evidence of women's information needs, views and preferences regarding HPV testing. We aimed to inform the development of educational materials to promote informed choice, reduce anxiety and improve disease control. METHODS: We searched 12 bibliographic databases. Two reviewers independently screened papers and assessed study quality; disagreements were resolved by discussion. Results were extracted verbatim and authors' findings treated as primary data. Studies were synthesised collaboratively using framework methods. RESULTS: We synthesised findings from 17 studies. Women had overwhelmingly negative concerns; an HPV diagnosis was daunting, had associated problems of disclosure of a sexually transmitted infection (STI), impacted on relationships and provoked fear of stigmatisation. Nevertheless, many thought HPV testing could be a preferable alternative to repeat cytology. Knowledge was poor; women struggled to interpret limited information in the context of existing knowledge about STIs and cervical cancer. CONCLUSION: Women are likely to be poorly informed, have limited understanding and many unanswered questions. This could increase anxiety and reduce ability to make informed choices, presenting a substantial challenge for those who design and provide information.

The Aarhus statement: improving design and reporting of studies on early cancer diagnosis.

Early diagnosis is a key factor in improving the outcomes of cancer patients. A greater understanding of the pre-diagnostic patient pathways is vital yet, at present, research in this field lacks consistent definitions and methods. As a consequence much early diagnosis research is difficult to interpret. A consensus group was formed with the aim of producing guidance and a checklist for early cancer-diagnosis researchers. A consensus conference approach combined with nominal group techniques was used. The work was supported by a systematic review of early diagnosis literature, focussing on existing instruments used to measure time points and intervals in early cancer-diagnosis research. A series of recommendations for definitions and methodological approaches is presented. This is complemented by a checklist that early diagnosis researchers can use when designing and conducting studies in this field. The Aarhus checklist is a resource for early cancer-diagnosis research that should promote greater precision and transparency in both definitions and methods. Further work will examine whether the checklist can be readily adopted by researchers, and feedback on the guidance will be used in future updates.

Negative screening colonoscopy after a positive guaiac faecal occult blood test: not a contraindication to continued screening.

AIM: In guaiac faecal occult blood test (gFOBT) screening at least 50% of positive individuals will have a colonoscopy negative for colorectal neoplasia. The question of continuing screening in this group has not been addressed. METHOD: Data on participants aged 50-69 years with a positive gFOBT result and a negative colonoscopy were followed through the biennial screening pilot conducted between 2000 and 2007 in Scotland. RESULTS: In the first screening round, 1527 colonoscopies were negative for neoplasia. 1300 were re-invited in the second round, 905 accepted, and 157 had a positive gFOBT result, giving a positivity rate of 17.4%. Colonoscopy revealed 20 subjects with adenoma and six with invasive cancer. In the third screening round 1031 were invited for a third time and 730 accepted: 55 had a positive gFOBT test, giving a positivity rate of 7.5%. In this group, six colonoscopies revealed adenomas but there were no cancers diagnosed. In the third screening round, 108 individuals had had two positive gFOBT results and two subsequent negative colonoscopies. Eighty-four were invited for a third gFOBT, 66 accepted and 19 (25.6%) had a positive result none of whom had an adenoma or carcinoma. CONCLUSION: These data indicate that a negative colonoscopy following a positive gFOBT is not a contraindication for further screening, although this is likely to have a low yield of neoplastic pathology after two negative colonoscopies.

Modifiable and fixed factors predicting quality of life in people with colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: People with colorectal cancer have impaired quality of life (QoL). We investigated what factors were most highly associated with it. METHODS: Four hundred and ninety-six people with colorectal cancer completed questionnaires about QoL, functioning, symptoms, co-morbidity, cognitions and personal and social factors. Disease, treatment and co-morbidity data were abstracted from case notes. Multiple linear regression identified modifiable and unmodifiable factors independently predictive of global quality of life (EORTC-QLQ-C30). RESULTS: Of unmodifiable factors, female sex (P<0.001), more self-reported co-morbidities (P=0.006) and metastases at diagnosis (P=0.036) significantly predicted poorer QoL, but explained little of the variability in the model (R(2)=0.064). Adding modifiable factors, poorer role (P<0.001) and social functioning (P=0.003), fatigue (P=0.001), dyspnoea (P=0.001), anorexia (P<0.001), depression (P<0.001) and worse perceived consequences (P=0.013) improved the model fit considerably (R(2)=0.574). Omitting functioning subscales resulted in recent diagnosis (P=0.002), lower perceived personal control (P=0.020) and travel difficulties (P<0.001) becoming significant predictors. CONCLUSION: Most factors affecting QoL are modifiable, especially symptoms (fatigue, anorexia, dyspnoea) and depression. Beliefs about illness are also important. Unmodifiable factors, including metastatic (or unstaged) disease at diagnosis, have less impact. There appears to be potential for interventions to improve QoL in patients with colorectal cancer.

Depression and anxiety in patients repeatedly referred to secondary care with medically unexplained symptoms: a case-control study.

BACKGROUND: One third of referrals from primary to secondary care are for medically unexplained symptoms (MUS). We aimed to determine the association of depression and anxiety disorders with high use of specialist services by patients with MUS. We did this by comparing their prevalence in patients who had been repeatedly referred with symptoms for which they had received repeated specialist diagnoses of MUS with that in two control groups. We also determined the adequacy of treatment received. METHOD: A case-control study in five general practices in Edinburgh, UK. Data collection was by case note review and questionnaire. Cases were 193 adults with three or more referrals over 5 years, at least two of which resulted in a diagnosis of MUS. Controls were: (a) patients referred only once over 5 years (n=152); (b) patients with three or more referrals for symptoms always diagnosed as medically explained (n=162). RESULTS: In total, 93 (48%) of the cases met our criteria for current depression, anxiety or panic disorders. This compared with 38 (25%) and 52 (35.2%) of the control groups; odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) of 2.6 (1.6-4.1) and 1.6 (1.01-2.4), respectively. Almost half (44%) of the cases with current depression or anxiety had not received recent minimum effective therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Depression, anxiety and panic disorders are common in patients repeatedly referred to hospital with MUS. Improving the recognition and treatment of these disorders in these patients has the potential to provide better, more appropriate and more cost-effective medical care.