Flexible Sigmoidoscopy and CT Colonography Screening: Patients' Experience with and Factors for Undergoing Screening-Insight from the Proteus Colon Trial.

Purpose To compare the acceptability of computed tomographic (CT) colonography and flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening and the factors predicting CT colonographic screening participation, targeting participants in a randomized screening trial. Materials and Methods Eligible individuals aged 58 years (n = 1984) living in Turin, Italy, were randomly assigned to be invited to screening for colorectal cancer with FS or CT colonography. After individuals who had died or moved away (n = 28) were excluded, 264 of 976 (27.0%) underwent screening with FS and 298 of 980 (30.4%) underwent CT colonography. All attendees and a sample of CT colonography nonattendees (n = 299) were contacted for a telephone interview 3-6 months after invitation for screening, and screening experience and factors affecting participation were investigated. Odds ratios (ORs) were computed by means of multivariable logistic regression. Results For the telephone interviews, 239 of 264 (90.6%) FS attendees, 237 of 298 (79.5%) CT colonography attendees, and 182 of 299 (60.9%) CT colonography nonattendees responded. The percentage of attendees who would recommend the test to friends or relatives was 99.1% among FS and 93.3% among CT colonography attendees. Discomfort associated with bowel preparation was higher among CT colonography than FS attendees (OR, 2.77; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.47, 5.24). CT colonography nonattendees were less likely to be men (OR, 0.36; 95% CI: 0.18, 0.71), retired (OR, 0.31; 95% CI: 0.13, 0.75), to report regular physical activity (OR, 0.37; 95% CI: 0.20, 0.70), or to have read the information leaflet (OR, 0.18; 95% CI: 0.08, 0.41). They were more likely to mention screening-related anxiety (mild: OR, 6.30; 95% CI: 2.48, 15.97; moderate or severe: OR, 3.63; 95% CI: 1.87, 7.04), erroneous beliefs about screening (OR, 32.15; 95% CI: 6.26, 165.19), or having undergone a recent fecal occult blood test (OR, 13.69; 95% CI: 3.66, 51.29). Conclusion CT colonography and FS screening are well accepted, but further reducing the discomfort from bowel preparation may increase CT colonography screening acceptability. Negative attitudes, erroneous beliefs about screening, and organizational barriers are limiting screening uptake; all these factors are modifiable and therefore potentially susceptible to interventions. © RSNA, 2017 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Offering people a choice for colorectal cancer screening.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the population coverage and diagnostic yield of offering an immunochemical faecal occult blood test (FIT) to non-responders to a flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) invitation. DESIGN: A cohort study conducted in a population-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programme. In this programme, eligible men and women aged 58 (Turin; 43,748 subjects) or 60 (Verona; 19,970 subjects) are invited, with a personal letter signed by their general practitioner, to undergo an FS. Bowel preparation is limited to a single enema self-administered at home. Subjects in whom one distal polyp >5 mm (≥ 10 mm in Turin) or at least one adenoma (one advanced adenoma or more than two adenomas in Turin) is detected at FS are referred for colonoscopy. People who do not respond to the invitation to undergo an FS are invited to have an FIT (OC-Sensor; Eiken, Tokyo, Japan; single sample, cut-off 100 ng/ml). Attendance rate and neoplasia yield were analysed in four consecutive birth cohorts. RESULTS: Overall participation rate for the FS invitation was 39.3% in Verona and 29.9% in Turin. Of the eligible non-responders to the FS invitation, 19.3% (95% CI 18.9% to 19.7%) underwent an FIT. As a result, the proportion of people undergoing screening by FS or FIT was 55.2% in Verona and 39.3% in Turin, with no gender differences in either centre. FIT detected 8.3% of all advanced adenomas and 20.4% of all CRCs diagnosed at screening. CONCLUSIONS: A strategy involving the sequential offer of FS and FIT is a feasible and efficient approach. FIT in people not attending for FS increases screening uptake and detection of advanced adenomas and CRCs.

Comparing different strategies for colorectal cancer screening in Italy: predictors of patients' participation.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to study predictors of patients' participation in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. METHODS: Men and women, aged 55-64 years, were randomized to the following: (i) biennial fecal occult blood test (FOBT) delivered by mail (n=2,266); (ii) FOBT delivered by a general practitioner (GP)/screening facility (n=5,893); (iii) "once-only" sigmoidoscopy (FS) (n=3,650); (iv) FS followed by FOBT for screenees with negative FS (n=10,867); and (v) patient's choice between FS and FOBT (n=3,579). A stratified (by screening arm) random sample of attenders and nonattenders was contacted by trained interviewers 4 months after the initial invitation. Subjects giving their consent were administered a questionnaire (available online) investigating perceptions of individual CRC risk, attitudes toward prevention, adoption of health protective behaviors, and reasons for attendance/nonattendance. Adjusted prevalence odds ratios (ORs) were computed by multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: The response rate was 71.9% (701 of 975) among nonattenders and 88.9% (773 of 870) among attenders. Adjusting for screening arm, center, gender, age, and education, participation was significantly higher among people who consulted their GP before undergoing screening (OR: 4.24; 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.11-5.78), who mentioned one first-degree relative with CRC (OR: 3.62; 95% CI: 2.02-6.49), who reported regular physical activity (OR: 1.85; 95% CI: 1.33-2.55), and who read the mailed information (letter only: OR: 1.85; 95% CI: 1.23-2.78; letter+leaflet: OR: 3.18; 95% CI: 2.12-4.76). People who considered screening to be ineffective (OR: 0.12; 95% CI: 0.08-0.19), those who considered it to be effective but reported even moderate levels of anxiety (OR: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.23-0.45), and those who mentioned previous knowledge of CRC screening tests were less likely to accept the invitation (OR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.34-0.70). CONCLUSIONS: Adoption of health protective behaviors is associated with a higher attendance rate, whereas anxiety represents a strong barrier, even among people who deemed screening to be effective. Increasing the proportion of people who consult their GP when making a decision regarding screening might enhance participation.

Management of Pt1 tumours removed by endoscopy during colorectal cancer screening: Outcome and treatment quality indicators.

INTRODUCTION: Limited information is available about outcomes of patients with malignant adenomas endoscopically resected at screening. The aim of the study was to evaluate diagnostic and therapeutic quality indicators and to correlate them with clinical and surgical outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed endoscopic and histology characteristics of all pT1 tumours endoscopically removed at the time of colonoscopy assessment in subjects with a positive screening test result in the context of a population-based program. RESULTS: 392 pT1 tumours were completely removed by endoscopy (en-bloc = 86.7%, piecemeal = 13.3%) and the histology report was considered complete in 83.2% of cases. Treatment was limited to endoscopic excision for 120 patients (30.7%, Group 1), 272 (69.3%, Group 2) underwent radicalisation surgery. In patients who had at least 1 lymph node examined, the rate of nodal involvement was 5.4% (13/239); no metastatic node was found in the 21 (27.6%) out of 76 patients with low-risk adenomas, who underwent surgery. CONCLUSION: Risk of nodal involvement in colorectal pT1 tumours is well predicted by known histologic features also in a screening setting, although it was lower than among patients from clinical series. Surgical overtreatment is still significantly present and there is ample room for improvement regarding diagnostic and therapeutic flow-chart.

Narrow band imaging vs. high definition colonoscopy for detection of colorectal adenomas in patients with positive faecal occult blood test: a randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: The impact of narrow band imaging in improving the adenoma detection rate in a screening scenario is still unclear. AIM: To evaluate whether narrow band imaging compared with high definition white light colonoscopy can enhance the adenoma detection rate during screening colonoscopy. METHODS: Consecutive patients presenting for screening colonoscopy were included into this study and were randomly assigned to the narrow band imaging group (Group 1) or standard colonoscopy group (Group 2). Primary end point was the adenoma detection rate and secondary aim was the detection rate of advanced adenomas. RESULTS: Overall, 117 patients were allocated to Group 1 and 120 to Group 2. Both the adenoma detection rate and the detection rate of advanced adenomas were not significantly different between the two groups (respectively, 52.1% vs. 55%, RR=0.95, 95% CI 0.75-1.20; 32.5% vs. 44.2%, RR=0.74, 95% CI 0.53-1.02). No significant difference between the proportions of polypoid and flat adenomas was found. Male gender, no prior history of screening, and endoscopist's adenoma detection rate were independent predictive factors of higher advanced adenoma detection rate. CONCLUSIONS: In a screening scenario, narrow band imaging did not improve the adenoma nor advanced adenoma detection rates compared to high definition white light colonoscopy.