Diagnostic yield from symptomatic lower gastrointestinal endoscopy in the UK: A British Society of Gastroenterology analysis using data from the National Endoscopy Database.

BACKGROUND: The value of lower gastrointestinal endoscopy (LGIE; colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy) relates to its ability to detect clinically relevant findings, predominantly cancers, preneoplastic polyps or inflammatory bowel disease. There are concerns that many LGIEs are performed on low-risk patients with limited benefit. AIMS: To determine the diagnostic outcomes of LGIE for common symptoms. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study of diagnostic LGIE between March 2019 and February 2020 using the UK National Endoscopy Database. We used mixed-effects logistic regression models, incorporating random (endoscopist) and fixed (symptoms, patient age, and sex) effects upon two dependent variables (large polyp [≥10 mm] and cancer diagnosis). Adjusted positive predictive values (aPPVs) were calculated. RESULTS: We analysed 384,510 LGIEs; 33.2% were performed on patients aged under 50 and 53.6% on women. Regarding colonoscopies, the unadjusted PPV for cancer was 1.5% (95% CI: 1.4-1.5); higher for men than women (1.9% vs. 1.1%, p < 0.01). The PPV for large polyps was 3.2% (95% CI: 3.1-3.2). The highest colonoscopy cancer aPPVs were in the over 50s (1.9%) and in those with rectal bleeding (2.5%) or anaemia (2.1%). Cancer aPPVs for other symptoms were <1% despite representing 54.3% of activity. In patients under 50, aPPVs were 0.4% for cancer and 1.6% for large polyps. Results were similar for sigmoidoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: Most colonoscopies were performed on patients with low-risk symptoms, where cancer risk was similar to the general population. Cancer and large polyp yield was highest in elderly patients with rectal bleeding or anaemia, although still fell short of FIT-based screening yields.

Trends in Colorectal Cancer Screening from the National Health Interview Survey: Analysis of the Impact of Different Modalities on Overall Screening Rates.

Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer-related mortality in adults in the United States. Despite compelling evidence of improved outcomes in colorectal cancer, screening rates are not optimal. This study aimed to characterize colorectal cancer screening trends over the last two decades and assess the impact of various screening modalities on overall colorectal cancer screening rates. Using National Health Interview Survey data from 2005 to 2021, we examined colorectal cancer screening [colonoscopy, multitarget stool DNA (mt-sDNA), fecal occult blood test (FOBT)/fecal immunochemical test, sigmoidoscopy, CT colonography] rates among adults ages 50-75 years (n = 85,571). A pseudo-time-series cross-sectional (pseudo-TSCS) analysis was conducted including a random effects generalized least squares regression model to estimate the relative impact of each modality on changes in colorectal cancer screening rates. Among 50 to 75 year olds, the estimated colorectal cancer screening rate increased from 47.7% in 2005 to 69.9% in 2021, with the largest increase between 2005 and 2010 (47.7%-60.7%). Rates subsequently plateaued until 2015 but increased from 63.5% in 2015 to 69.9% in 2018. This was primarily driven by the increased use of mt-sDNA (2.5% in 2018 to 6.6% in 2021). Pseudo-TSCS analysis results showed that mt-sDNA contributed substantially to the increase in overall screening rates (77.3%; P < 0.0001) between 2018 and 2021. While colorectal cancer screening rates increased from 2005 to 2021, they remain below the 80% goal. The introduction of mt-sDNA, a noninvasive screening test may have improved overall rates. Sustained efforts are required to further increase screening rates to improve patient outcomes and offering a range of screening options is likely to contribute to achieving this goal. PREVENTION RELEVANCE: This retrospective study highlights the importance of convenient stool-based colorectal cancer screening options to achieve the national goal of 80% for overall colorectal cancer screening rates. Empowering screening-eligible individuals with a choice for their colorectal cancer screening tests is imperative.

Effects of screening for colorectal cancer: Development, documentation and validation of a multistate Markov model.

Simulation models are a powerful tool to overcome gaps of evidence needed to inform medical decision-making. Here, we present development and application of COSIMO, a Markov-based Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Multi-state Simulation Model to simulate effects of CRC screening, along with a thorough assessment of the model's ability to reproduce real-life outcomes. Firstly, we provide a comprehensive documentation of COSIMO's development, structure and assumptions. Secondly, to assess the model's external validity, we compared model-derived cumulative incidence and prevalences of colorectal neoplasms to (a) results from KolosSal, a study in German screening colonoscopy participants, (b) registry-based estimates of CRC incidence in Germany, and (c) outcome patterns of randomized sigmoidoscopy screening studies. We found that (a) more than 90% of observed prevalences in the KolosSal study were within the 95% confidence intervals of the model-predicted neoplasm prevalences; (b) the 15-year cumulative CRC incidences estimated by simulations for the German population deviated by 0.0% to 0.2% units in men and 0.0% to 0.3% units in women when compared to corresponding registry-derived estimates; and (c) the time course of cumulative CRC incidence and mortality in the modeled intervention group and control group closely resembles the time course reported from sigmoidoscopy screening trials. Overall, COSIMO adequately predicted colorectal neoplasm prevalences and incidences in a German population for up to 25 years, with estimated patterns of the effect of screening colonoscopy resembling those seen in registry data and real-world studies. This suggests that the model may represent a valid tool to assess the comparative effectiveness of CRC screening strategies.

Colorectal Cancer Screening With Repeated Fecal Immunochemical Test Versus Sigmoidoscopy: Baseline Results From a Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The comparative effectiveness of sigmoidoscopy and fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is unknown. METHODS: Individuals aged 50-74 years living in Southeast Norway were randomly invited between 2012 and 2019 to either once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy or FIT screening every second year. Colonoscopy was recommended after sigmoidoscopy if any polyp of ≥10 mm, ≥3 adenomas, any advanced adenomas, or CRC was found or, subsequent to, FIT >15 µg hemoglobin/g feces. Data for this report were obtained after complete recruitment in both groups and included 2 full FIT rounds and part of the third round. Outcome measures were participation, neoplasia detection, and adverse events. Age-standardized detection rates and age-adjusted odds ratios (ORs) were calculated. RESULTS: We included 139,291 individuals: 69,195 randomized to sigmoidoscopy and 70,096 to FIT. The participation rate was 52% for sigmoidoscopy, 58% in the first FIT round, and 68% for 3 cumulative FIT rounds. Compared to sigmoidoscopy, the detection rate for CRC was similar in the first FIT round (0.25% vs 0.27%; OR, 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75-1.13) but higher after 3 FIT rounds (0.49% vs 0.27%; OR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.54-2.27). Advanced adenoma detection rate was lower in the first FIT round compared to sigmoidoscopy at 1.4% vs 2.4% (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.53-0.62) but higher after 3 cumulative FIT rounds at 2.7% vs 2.4% (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.05-1.23). There were 33 (0.05%) serious adverse events in the sigmoidoscopy group compared to 47 (0.07%) in the FIT group (P = .13). CONCLUSIONS: Participation was higher and more CRC and advanced adenomas were detected with repeated FIT compared to sigmoidoscopy. The risk of perforation and bleeding was comparable. Clinicaltrials.gov, Number: NCT01538550.

Has National Colorectal Cancer Awareness Month increased endoscopy screening rates and public interest in colorectal cancer?

BACKGROUND: National Colorectal Cancer Awareness Month occurs each March to promote awareness and screening for colorectal cancer. The effectiveness of this public health campaign is unknown. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of National Colorectal Cancer Awareness Month on rates of screening endoscopies and on public interest in colorectal cancer. METHODS: To examine the impact of National Colon Cancer Awareness Month on screening endoscopy rates, the National Endoscopy Database was retrospectively reviewed from 2002 through 2014. A time series of monthly number of colorectal cancer screening endoscopies per endoscopist in the data set was evaluated. To examine public interest in colorectal cancer, Google Trends data were collected on the monthly rates of terms related to colorectal cancer from January 2004 to July 2019. Impact of the month on screening endoscopies and public interest was assessed through an analysis of variance. Seasonality was tested for by how well a sinusoidal model fit the time series as opposed to a linear model utilizing a sum-of-squares F test. RESULTS: Review of National Endoscopy Database yielded 1,398,996 endoscopies, 94% were colonoscopies and 6% sigmoidoscopies, with 47% for colorectal cancer screening. Colorectal cancer screening endoscopy rates were not impacted by the month of the year, and these rates had no seasonality. However, Google searches related to colorectal cancer were significantly impacted by month of the year, specifically March, with significant seasonality observed in the data. CONCLUSIONS: National Colorectal Cancer Awareness Month is associated with an increased public interest in colorectal cancer based on user Google search trends. Yet, this has not translated into a demonstrable increase in the rates of screening. This presents an opportunity to capitalize on this increased public interest and harness this enthusiasm into increased screening.

Racial disparity in healthcare utilization among patients with Irritable Bowel Syndrome: results from a multicenter cohort.

BACKGROUND: Racial disparity in healthcare is defined as differences in healthcare services received by racial groups not due to difference in needs or preferences. As irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is highly correlated with social factors, healthcare disparities are important factors in the sociocultural model of IBS. We used healthcare utilization as a lens to examine potential racial disparities in IBS. METHODS: We retrospectively matched 3823 IBS minority patients who self-identified as "Hispanic," "Black," or "Asian" to white IBS controls and examined the number of patients with gastroenterology consults, gastroenterology procedures, and IBS-related Primary Care visits within each cohort from 2003 to 2017. KEY RESULTS: Minority IBS patients were less likely to receive a gastroenterology consult than white IBS controls. Both Black and Asian IBS patients were more likely to have an IBS-related Primary Care visit than white IBS controls. All 3 minority IBS cohorts received significantly more gastroenterology procedures compared to white IBS controls. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: Minority IBS patients are more likely to receive gastroenterology procedures than white IBS patients. Further studies are needed to determine whether increased procedure likelihood in minority IBS patients represents a communication gap between minority patients and their providers or patient preference.

Association between lifestyle and site-specific advanced colorectal lesions in screening with faecal immunochemical test and sigmoidoscopy.

BACKGROUND: Lifestyle factors may help to identify individuals at high-risk for colorectal cancer (CRC). AIMS: To examine the association between lifestyle, referral for follow-up colonoscopy and proximal neoplasia detection in CRC screening. METHODS: In this observational study, 14,832 individuals aged 50-74 years were invited to faecal immunochemical test (FIT) or sigmoidoscopy screening. Advanced lesions (AL), including advanced adenomas, advanced serrated lesions and CRC were divided according to location: distal-only, or proximal with or without distal AL. We collected information on smoking habit, body mass index and alcohol intake through a questionnaire. RESULTS: Out of 3,318 FIT and 2,988 sigmoidoscopy participants, 516 (16%) and 338 (11%), respectively, were referred for follow-up colonoscopy after a positive screening test. Two-hundred-and-fifty-six (4%) had distal-only and 119 (2%) proximal AL. In FIT participants, obesity and high alcohol intake were associated with proximal AL; odds ratio (95% confidence interval) 2.68 (1.36-5.26) and 2.16 (1.08-4.30), respectively. In sigmoidoscopy participants, current smoking was associated with proximal AL; 4.58 (2.24-9.38), and current smoking and obesity were associated with referral for colonoscopy; 2.80 (2.02-3.89) and 1.42 (1.01-2.00), respectively. CONCLUSION: Current smoking, obesity and high alcohol intake were associated with screen-detected proximal colorectal AL. Current smoking and obesity were associated with referral for follow-up colonoscopy in sigmoidoscopy screening.

Factors Associated with Colorectal Cancer Screening among Mississippi Adults: Findings from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System.

OBJECTIVES: Mississippi has one of the highest mortality rates in colorectal cancer (CRC) and one of the lowest rates of CRC screening in the United States. The purpose of the study was to assess the characteristics of Mississippians who met the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on CRC screening and type of the test they used. METHODS: We analyzed the data from the 2018 Mississippi Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (N = 5843), which included a CRC screening module for participants who were 50 years old or older. Respondents in this module were asked when, if ever, they had last undergone a colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, or stool occult test. Their responses were then categorized according to their compliance with the USPSTF recommendations on CRC screening. We compared the compliance with responders' sociodemographic and risk factors. Data analysis accounted for the complex sampling design. RESULTS: The majority of the CRC screening tests are colonoscopies: 60.1% of Mississippians aged 50 to 75 years had received one within 10 years. In addition, 7.8% had taken a stool test within the last year, and 1.9% had undergone sigmoidoscopy within 5 years. The prevalence of individuals aged 50 to 75 in Mississippi who met the USPSTF recommendation for CRC screening in 2018 was 62.6%. Women (65.5%), married (67.5%), those with health insurance (66.5%) or annual household income of ≥$75,000 (71.6%), those with a regular healthcare provider (68.0%), or those who quit smoking (70.4%) had higher compliance than their counterparts. After controlling for the covariates, the adults aged 50 to 75 who had health insurance or had a personal healthcare provider were 2.52 and 2.95 times more likely to be compliant, respectively (P < 0.001). Those who had quit smoking were 2.27 times more likely to be compliant with the USPSTF than current smokers (P < 0.001). Weight status, binge drinking, or physical inactivity was not associated with the CRC screening rates. CONCLUSIONS: Mississippi adults aged 50 to 75 were more likely to be compliant with the CRC screening standards if they had insurance coverage or access to care. To further increase the overall CRC screening rate and for the benefit of the 70 × 2020 state initiative, certain screenings such as stool test need to be promoted and recommended by family practitioners, and certain subgroups of the population such as smokers need to be targeted and educated.

Cancer Screening Among Women Prescribed Opioids: A National Study.

PURPOSE: Prior work suggests that there are competing demands between addressing pain and other issues in primary care, potentially lessening delivery of evidence-based cancer screening. We assessed the association between opioid therapy and cancer screening among women in a nationally representative US sample. METHODS: We conducted an observational analysis of the 2005-2015 Medical Expenditure Panel Surveys. We included all women aged ≥18 years without cancer and with opioid prescription and preventive care services data. Logistic regression analyses examined associations between receipt of opioid prescription (any vs none) and receipt of breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screenings. Analyses were adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics, health status, health conditions, and usual source of care, as well as health care utilization. RESULTS: Of 53,982 participants, 15.8% reported ≥1 opioid prescription. Compared with women not prescribed opioids, those prescribed opioids were more likely to visit their doctor (median number of visits per year = 5, vs 1). Without adjustment for number of visits, women prescribed opioids were more likely to receive all 3 cancer screenings; the adjusted odds ratio for breast cancer screening was 1.26 (95% CI, 1.16-1.38), that for cervical cancer screening was 1.22 (95% CI, 1.13-1.33), and that for colorectal cancer screening was 1.22 (95% CI, 1.12-1.33). With adjustment for number of visits, adjusted odds ratios decreased (breast 1.07 [95% CI, 0.98-1.18]; cervical 1.01 [95% CI, 0.93-1.09]; colorectal 1.04 [95% CI, 0.95-1.14]). CONCLUSIONS: In a nationally representative sample, receipt of opioid prescriptions was not associated with less recommended cancer screenings. Rather, women receiving opioids had greater adjusted odds of receiving breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening, although the associations were attenuated by adjusting for their more frequent office visits relative to women not receiving opioids.

The Impact of Team-Based Primary Care on Guideline-Recommended Disease Screening.

INTRODUCTION: Family Medicine Groups, implemented in Quebec in 2002, are interprofessional primary care teams designed to improve timely access to high-quality primary care. This study investigates whether Family Medicine Groups increased rates of guideline-recommended screenings for 3 chronic diseases: colorectal cancer (colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy), breast cancer (mammography), and osteoporosis (bone mineral density testing). METHODS: Using population-based administrative health data from the provincial insurer (2000-2010), the authors examined elderly and chronically ill patients who registered with a general practitioner in the first 15 months of the Family Medicine Group policy. Propensity score weighting and a difference-in-differences model estimated differential change in biennial screening rates among Family Medicine Group and non-Family Medicine Group patients over 5 years of follow-up (analysis, 2016-2018). RESULTS: Rates of mammography, colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy, and bone mineral density testing increased after patient registration with a general practitioner, similarly for both Family Medicine Group and non-Family Medicine Group patients. Colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy rates increased by 9.7% and 10.4% for Family Medicine Group and non-Family Medicine Group patients, mammography rates by 5.3% and 3.4%, and bone mineral density testing by 4.2% and 7.1%. Difference-in-differences estimates showed no detectable effect of Family Medicine Groups on disease screening rates: -0.06 percentage points (95% CI= -0.32, 0.20) for colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy, 1.01 percentage points (95% CI= -0.25, 2.27) for mammography, and -0.32 (95% CI= -0.71, -0.07) for bone mineral density testing. CONCLUSIONS: This study found no evidence that Family Medicine Groups affected screening rates for these 3 chronic diseases. Limitations in the implementation of the Family Medicine Group policy in its early years may have contributed to this lack of impact. Interprofessional primary care teams may need to include elements other than organizational changes to increase disease prevention efforts.

Long-term Risk of Colorectal Cancer After Removal of Conventional Adenomas and Serrated Polyps.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Endoscopic screening reduces incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer (CRC) because precursor lesions, such as conventional adenomas or serrated polyps, are removed. Individuals with polypectomies are advised to undergo colonoscopy surveillance to prevent CRC. However, guidelines for surveillance intervals after diagnosis of a precursor lesion, particularly for individuals with serrated polyps, vary widely, and lack sufficient supporting evidence. Consequently, some high-risk patients do not receive enough surveillance and lower-risk subjects receive excessive surveillance. METHODS: We examined the association between findings from first endoscopy and CRC risk among 122,899 participants who underwent flexible sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy in the Nurses' Health Study 1 (1990-2012), Nurses' Health Study 2 (1989-2013), or the Health Professionals Follow-up Study (1990-2012). Endoscopic findings were categorized as no polyp, conventional adenoma, or serrated polyp (hyperplastic polyp, traditional serrated adenoma, or sessile serrated adenoma, with or without cytological dysplasia). Conventional adenomas were classified as advanced (≥10 mm, high-grade dysplasia, or tubulovillous or villous histology) or nonadvanced, and serrated polyps were assigned to categories of large (≥10 mm) or small (<10 mm). We used a Cox proportional hazards regression model to calculate the hazard ratios (HRs) of CRC incidence, after adjusting for various potential risk factors. RESULTS: After a median follow-up period of 10 years, we documented 491 incident cases of CRC: 51 occurred in 6161 participants with conventional adenomas, 24 in 5918 participants with serrated polyps, and 427 in 112,107 participants with no polyp. Compared with participants with no polyp detected during initial endoscopy, the multivariable HR for incident CRC in individuals with an advanced adenoma was 4.07 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.89-5.72) and the HR for CRC in individuals with a large serrated polyp was 3.35 (95% CI 1.37-8.15). In contrast, there was no significant increase in risk of CRC in patients with nonadvanced adenomas (HR 1.21; 95% CI 0.68-2.16, P = .52) or small serrated polyps (HR 1.25; 95% CI 0.76-2.08; P = .38). CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide support for guidelines that recommend repeat lower endoscopy within 3 years of a diagnosis of advanced adenoma and large serrated polyps. In contrast, patients with nonadvanced adenoma or small serrated polyps may not require more intensive surveillance than patients without polyps.

Strategies for Colorectal Cancer Screening.

The incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) is increasing worldwide. CRC has high mortality when detected at advanced stages, yet it is also highly preventable. Given the difficulties in implementing major lifestyle changes or widespread primary prevention strategies to decrease CRC risk, screening is the most powerful public health tool to reduce mortality. Screening methods are effective but have limitations. Furthermore, many screen-eligible people remain unscreened. We discuss established and emerging screening methods, and potential strategies to address current limitations in CRC screening. A quantum step in CRC prevention might come with the development of new screening strategies, but great gains can be made by deploying the available CRC screening modalities in ways that optimize outcomes while making judicious use of resources.

Enhancing bowel screening: Preventing colorectal cancer by flexible sigmoidoscopy in New Zealand.

OBJECTIVES: The prevention of colorectal cancer (CRC) attainable from introducing once-in-a-lifetime flexible sigmoidoscopy (FSIG) screening was assessed. STUDY DESIGN: This is a review of relevant available information for the assessment of the impact and resource demands of FSIG in New Zealand. METHODS: The reduction in bowel cancer incidence achievable by one-off FSIG screening from 50 to 59 years of age, an age group for which bowel screening is not currently offered, was reviewed. The prevention of CRC attainable from an offer of screening at 55 years of age in New Zealand was also estimated. The number and cost of the FSIG screening procedures required and referrals for colonoscopies and the savings in treatment were calculated. RESULTS: Annually, about 27,500 FSIG screening procedures would be required if 50% of those turning 55 years of age accepted an offer of once-in-a-lifetime FSIG screening. This would result in three-four-fold fewer people being referred for colonoscopy than in the national 2-yearly faecal immunochemical test (FIT) screening programme and subsequently reduce demand for colonoscopy from a false-positive FIT. The number of CRC cases prevented would increase over 17 years to more than 300 per year by 2033. After 10-15 years of screening, the annual savings in health service costs, primarily from CRC prevented, were sufficient to completely fund the FSIG screening. CONCLUSIONS: Inclusion of FSIG screening in the national bowel screening programme would significantly reduce both the incidence and mortality of CRC in New Zealand, reduce the colonoscopy demand of current bowel screening and reduce long-term health service costs.

Randomized controlled trial: Flexible sigmoidoscopy as an adjunct to faecal occult blood testing in population screening.

OBJECTIVES: Flexible sigmoidoscopy screening at around age 60 can reduce colorectal cancer incidence. Insufficient evidence exists on flexible sigmoidoscopy at age 60 in a population being offered biennial faecal occult blood test screening from age 50. This randomized controlled trial assessed if flexible sigmoidoscopy would be an effective adjunct to faecal occult blood test. METHODS: In the Scottish Bowel Screening Programme between June 2014 and December 2015, 51,769 individuals were randomized to be offered flexible sigmoidoscopy instead of faecal occult blood test at age 60 or to continue faecal occult blood test. Those not accepting flexible sigmoidoscopy and those with normal flexible sigmoidoscopy were offered faecal occult blood test. All with flexible sigmoidoscopy-detected neoplasia or a positive faecal occult blood test result were offered colonoscopy. RESULTS: Overall flexible sigmoidoscopy uptake was 17.8%, higher in men than women, and decreased with increasing deprivation (25.7% in the least to 9.2% in the most deprived quintile). In those who underwent flexible sigmoidoscopy, detection rate for colorectal cancer was 0.13%, for adenoma 7.27%, and for total neoplasia 7.40%. In those who underwent colonoscopy after a positive flexible sigmoidoscopy, detection rate for colorectal cancer was 0.28%, adenoma 8.66%, and total neoplasia 8.83%. On an intention to screen basis, there was no difference in colorectal cancer detection rate between the study and control groups. Adenoma and total neoplasia detection rate were significantly higher in the study group, with odds ratios of 5.95 (95%CI: 4.69-7.56) and 5.10 (95%CI: 4.09-6.35), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In a single screening round at age 60, there was low uptake and neoplasia detection rate. Flexible sigmoidoscopy detected significantly more neoplasia than faecal occult blood test alone.

Colorectal Cancer in Brunei Darussalam: An Overview and Rationale for National Screening Programme.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer worldwide after lung and breast cancers, and ranks second in terms of cancer mortality globally. Brunei Darussalam reports high incidence of CRC in the Southeast Asian region and has no formal national screening programme for CRC. Screening for CRC in Brunei Darussalam is offered in an opportunistic fashion for individuals with average or above average risks for CRC, that is, the individual has a positive family history of CRC or neoplasms and is more than 50 years old. Opportunistic screening is widely practiced but this is not standardised. The Ministry of Health in Brunei Darussalam is currently in the process of implementing a CRC screening programme as part of a larger national health screening based on the increasing incidence of non-communicable diseases (NCDs). This review article assesses the situation of CRC in Brunei Darussalam from the 1980s to present day, including incidence of CRC in different age groups, ethnicities and genders; relevant non-modifiable and modifiable risk factors of CRC in Brunei Darussalam setting; and common CRC screening techniques used in Brunei Darussalam as well as other Asia-Pacific countries. The review also discusses the merits of a national CRC screening programme. With the increasing incidence of CRC worldwide and in Brunei Darussalam, national screening for CRC in Brunei Darussalam is an important strategy to lower morbidity and mortality rates. A review of the progress and outcome of the national screening programme will be available a few years after rollout.

Colorectal cancer screening with faecal immunochemical testing, sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy: a microsimulation modelling study.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate benefits and harms of different colorectal cancer screening strategies, stratified by (baseline) 15-year colorectal cancer risk. DESIGN: Microsimulation modelling study using MIcrosimulation SCreening ANalysis-Colon (MISCAN-Colon). SETTING: A parallel guideline committee (BMJ Rapid Recommendations) defined the time frame and screening interventions, including selection of outcome measures. POPULATION: Norwegian men and women aged 50-79 years with varying 15-year colorectal cancer risk (1-7%). COMPARISONS: Four screening strategies were compared with no screening: biennial or annual faecal immunochemical test (FIT) or single sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy at 100% adherence. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Colorectal cancer mortality and incidence, burdens, and harms over 15 years of follow-up. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: Over 15 years of follow-up, screening individuals aged 50-79 at 3% risk of colorectal cancer with annual FIT or single colonoscopy reduced colorectal cancer mortality by 6 per 1000 individuals. Single sigmoidoscopy and biennial FIT reduced it by 5 per 1000 individuals. Colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, and annual FIT reduced colorectal cancer incidence by 10, 8, and 4 per 1000 individuals, respectively. The estimated incidence reduction for biennial FIT was 1 per 1000 individuals. Serious harms were estimated to be between 3 per 1000 (biennial FIT) and 5 per 1000 individuals (colonoscopy); harms increased with older age. The absolute benefits of screening increased with increasing colorectal cancer risk, while harms were less affected by baseline risk. Results were sensitive to the setting defined by the guideline panel. Because of uncertainty associated with modelling assumptions, we applied a GRADE rating of low certainty evidence to all estimates. CONCLUSIONS: Over a 15 year period, all screening strategies may reduce colorectal cancer mortality to a similar extent. Colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy may also reduce colorectal cancer incidence, while FIT shows a smaller incidence reduction. Harms are rare and of similar magnitude for all screening strategies.

Colorectal cancer screening with faecal immunochemical testing, sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy: a clinical practice guideline.

CLINICAL QUESTION: Recent 15-year updates of sigmoidoscopy screening trials provide new evidence on the effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening. Prompted by the new evidence, we asked: "Does colorectal cancer screening make an important difference to health outcomes in individuals initiating screening at age 50 to 79? And which screening option is best?" CURRENT PRACTICE: Numerous guidelines recommend screening, but vary on recommended test, age and screening frequency. This guideline looks at the evidence and makes recommendations on screening for four screening options: faecal immunochemical test (FIT) every year, FIT every two years, a single sigmoidoscopy, or a single colonoscopy. RECOMMENDATIONS: These recommendations apply to adults aged 50-79 years with no prior screening, no symptoms of colorectal cancer, and a life expectancy of at least 15 years. For individuals with an estimated 15-year colorectal cancer risk below 3%, we suggest no screening (weak recommendation). For individuals with an estimated 15-year risk above 3%, we suggest screening with one of the four screening options: FIT every year, FIT every two years, a single sigmoidoscopy, or a single colonoscopy (weak recommendation). With our guidance we publish the linked research, a graphic of the absolute harms and benefits, a clear description of how we reached our value judgments, and linked decision aids. HOW THIS GUIDELINE WAS CREATED: A guideline panel including patients, clinicians, content experts and methodologists produced these recommendations using GRADE and in adherence with standards for trustworthy guidelines. A linked systematic review of colorectal cancer screening trials and microsimulation modelling were performed to inform the panel of 15-year screening benefits and harms. The panel also reviewed each screening option's practical issues and burdens. Based on their own experience, the panel estimated the magnitude of benefit typical members of the population would value to opt for screening and used the benefit thresholds to inform their recommendations. THE EVIDENCE: Overall there was substantial uncertainty (low certainty evidence) regarding the 15-year benefits, burdens and harms of screening. Best estimates suggested that all four screening options resulted in similar colorectal cancer mortality reductions. FIT every two years may have little or no effect on cancer incidence over 15 years, while FIT every year, sigmoidoscopy, and colonoscopy may reduce cancer incidence, although for FIT the incidence reduction is small compared with sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy. Screening related serious gastrointestinal and cardiovascular adverse events are rare. The magnitude of the benefits is dependent on the individual risk, while harms and burdens are less strongly associated with cancer risk. UNDERSTANDING THE RECOMMENDATION: Based on benefits, harms, and burdens of screening, the panel inferred that most informed individuals with a 15-year risk of colorectal cancer of 3% or higher are likely to choose screening, and most individuals with a risk of below 3% are likely to decline screening. Given varying values and preferences, optimal care will require shared decision making.

Colonoscopy and Sigmoidoscopy Use among the Average-Risk Population for Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Trend Analysis.

Monitoring population-level colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy use is crucial to estimate the future burden of colorectal cancer and guide screening efforts. We conducted a systematic literature search on colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy use, published between November 2016 and December 2018 in the databases PubMed and Web of Science to update previous reviews and analyze time trends for various countries. In addition, we used data from the German and European Health Interview Surveys and the National Health Interview Survey to explore recent time trends for Germany and the US, respectively. The literature search yielded 23 new articles: fourteen from the US and nine from Australia, Canada, England, Germany, Saudi Arabia, and South Korea. Colonoscopy use within 10 years was highest and, apart from the youngest age groups eligible for colorectal cancer screening, kept increasing to levels close to 60% in the US and Germany. A recent steep increase was also observed for South Korea. Limited data were available on sigmoidoscopy use; regional studies from the US suggest that sigmoidoscopy has become rarely used. Despite high uptake and ongoing increase in the US, Germany, and South Korea, use of colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy has either remained low or essentially unknown for the majority of countries.

Management of acute sigmoid volvulus in a provincial centre-a 20-year experience.

AIM: At our institution there has been a long-standing early operative approach to large bowel volvulus as well as initial decompression with rigid sigmoidoscopy. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of this approach on reducing readmissions and complications. Secondary aims were to investigate the safety and efficacy of bedside rigid sigmoidoscopy in decompression of sigmoid volvulus and investigate the sensitivity of abdominal x-ray in the diagnosis of acute large bowel volvulus. METHOD: A retrospective study was conducted on all patients presenting with acute obstruction due to large bowel volvulus between 1 January 1998-1 January 2018. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients with acute sigmoid volvulus were identified that met the inclusion criteria with a median age of 81 years. The majority of patients 27/34 (79%) were booked for surgery on the first admission. Readmissions were reduced in the index operative group 1/20 (5%) vs the non-operative decompression group 3/4 (75%) RR 0.07 (CI 0.01-0.49 P=0.01). CONCLUSION: Early sigmoid colectomy was associated with low morbidity and found to be safe in the elderly, and the results suggest that early surgery is associated with reduced readmissions and a low complication rate, with index surgery preferable to urgent elective surgery. Rigid sigmoidoscopy is a safe method of decompression as a bridge to index surgery and was not associated with any complications in this series.