Population-level impact of the BMJ Rapid Recommendation for colorectal cancer screening: a microsimulation analysis.

OBJECTIVE: In 2019, a BMJ Rapid Recommendation advised against colorectal cancer (CRC) screening for adults with a predicted 15-year CRC risk below 3%. Using Switzerland as a case study, we estimated the population-level impact of this recommendation. DESIGN: We predicted the CRC risk of all respondents to the population-based Swiss Health Survey. We derived the distribution of risk-based screening start age, assuming predicted risk was calculated every 5 years between ages 25 and 70 and screening started when this risk exceeded 3%. Next, the MISCAN-Colon microsimulation model evaluated biennial faecal immunochemical test (FIT) screening with this risk-based start age. As a comparison, we simulated screening initiation based on age and sex. RESULTS: Starting screening only when predicted risk exceeded 3% meant 82% of women and 90% of men would not start screening before age 65 and 60, respectively. This would require 43%-57% fewer tests, result in 8%-16% fewer CRC deaths prevented and yield 19%-33% fewer lifeyears gained compared with screening from age 50. Screening women from age 65 and men from age 60 had a similar impact as screening only when predicted risk exceeded 3%. CONCLUSION: With the recommended risk prediction tool, the population impact of the BMJ Rapid Recommendation would be similar to screening initiation based on age and sex only. It would delay screening initiation by 10-15 years. Although halving the screening burdens, screening benefits would be reduced substantially compared with screening initiation at age 50. This suggests that the 3% risk threshold to start CRC screening might be too high.

Colorectal Cancer Screening Decision Based on Predicted Risk: Protocol for a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Incidence of and mortality from colorectal cancer (CRC) can be effectively reduced by screening with the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) or colonoscopy. Individual risk to develop CRC within 15 years varies from <1% to >15% among people aged 50 to 75 years. Communicating personalized CRC risk and appropriate screening recommendations could improve the risk-benefit balance of screening test allocations and optimize the use of limited colonoscopy resources. However, significant uncertainty exists regarding the feasibility and efficacy of risk-based screening. OBJECTIVE: We aim to study the effect of communicating individual CRC risk and a risk-based recommendation of the FIT or colonoscopy on participants' choice of screening test. We will also assess the feasibility of a larger clinical trial designed to evaluate the impact of personalized screening on clinical outcomes. METHODS: We will perform a pilot randomized controlled trial among 880 residents aged 50 to 69 years eligible to participate in the organized screening program of the Vaud canton, Switzerland. Participants will be recruited by mail by the Vaud CRC screening program. Primary and secondary outcomes will be self-assessed through questionnaires. The risk score will be calculated using the open-source QCancer calculator that was validated in the United Kingdom. Participants will be stratified into 3 groups-low (<3%), moderate (3% to <6%), and high (≥6%) risk-according to their 15-year CRC risk and randomized within each risk stratum. The intervention group participants will receive a newly designed brochure with their personalized risk and screening recommendations. The control group will receive the usual brochure of the Vaud CRC screening program. Our primary outcome, measured using a self-administered questionnaire, is appropriate screening uptake 6 months after the intervention. Screening will be defined as appropriate if participants at high risk undertake colonoscopy and participants at low risk undertake the FIT. We will also measure the acceptability of the risk score and screening recommendations and the psychological factors influencing screening behavior. We will also assess the feasibility of a full-scale randomized controlled trial. RESULTS: We expect that a total sample of 880 individuals will allow us to detect a difference of 10% (α=5%) between groups. The main outcome will be analyzed using a 2-tailed chi-squared test. We expect that appropriate screening uptake will be higher in the intervention group. No difference in overall screening uptake is expected. CONCLUSIONS: We will test the impact of personalized risk information and screening recommendations on participants' choice of screening test in an organized screening program. This study should advance our understanding of the feasibility of large-scale risk-based CRC screening. Our results may provide insights into the optimization of CRC screening by offering screening options with a better risk-benefit balance and optimizing the use of resources. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05357508; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05357508. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/46865.

[First epidemiological evaluation of the Vaud colorectal cancer screening program]. / Premier bilan du programme vaudois de dépistage du cancer colorectal.

The Vaud colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program, pioneer in Switzerland, offers since 2015 the choice between a biennial fecal immunological test (FIT) and a colonoscopy every 10 years to those aged 50 to 69. This first epidemiological evaluation of a Swiss CRC screening program shows an increasing uptake over the years and an equal distribution of choice of tests, but with regional differences. Quality of both FIT and colonoscopy fulfil the European norms. The high proportion of early-stage cancers (60% stage I) met expectations. The large increase in screening tests and limited colonoscopy capacity is leading to interprofessional discussions on strategies for prioritizing FIT, accompanied by additional orientation tools within the program and public sensitization, and for reducing the time taken to perform FIT positive colonoscopies.

Cet article résume les résultats de la première évaluation du programme vaudois de dépistage du cancer colorectal, réalisée selon des normes internationales. Ce programme, pionnier en Suisse, propose depuis 2015 le choix entre un test de détection de sang occulte dans les selles (FIT), tous les 2 ans, et une coloscopie, tous les 10 ans, aux personnes de 50 à 69 ans. La participation croît, avec un choix équilibré entre les 2 tests. Il existe cependant des différences régionales. La qualité des coloscopies et des FIT et la sécurité de réalisation des coloscopies sont conformes aux exigences. La forte proportion de cancers dépistés au stade précoce (60 % stade I) répond aux attentes. La forte croissance des dépistages et la capacité limitée en coloscopie mènent à des réflexions interprofessionnelles de stratégies de priorisation du FIT et de réduction des délais de réalisation des coloscopies sur FIT positif.

Relationship between benzodiazepine prescription, aggressive behavior, and behavioral disinhibition: a retrospective study in a Swiss prison.

BACKGROUND: Benzodiazepines are commonly prescribed in prisons amidst the controversies surrounding their potential role in causing behavioral disinhibition and aggressive behavior and their association with use and trafficking of illicit and addictive substances. The present study aimed to (1) ascertain the relationship between benzodiazepine prescription (including their dosage and duration of use) and aggressive behavior and behavioral disinhibition in prison and (2) investigate whether there was an association between benzodiazepine prescription, (including their dosage and duration of use) and using and trafficking illicit and addictive substances during imprisonment. METHODS: Data were extracted from the electronic database of an "open" Swiss prison (n = 1206, 1379 measures) over a 5-year period (2010-2015). Measures included benzodiazepine prescription, duration of benzodiazepine use and mean dosage, and punishable behaviors (physical and verbal aggression, disinhibited but not directly aggressive behaviors, property damage or theft, substance-related offenses, and rule transgression). We assessed the relationship between benzodiazepine prescription and punishable behaviors after propensity score matching. Logistic regressions were also used to test the relationship of benzodiazepine use duration and dosage with punishable behaviors among participants who received benzodiazepines. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, benzodiazepine prescription was not significantly associated with any punishable behavior. Among detained persons who took benzodiazepines, there was no significant association of dosage and duration of use with offenses involving illicit or addictive substance use or trafficking. CONCLUSIONS: Our study did not empirically support the occurrence of increased aggressive or disinhibited behaviors or increased risk of substance abuse in detained persons who received benzodiazepines in prison. This suggests a need to reconsider restrictions in prescribing benzodiazepines in the prison setting.