BACKGROUND: Robust estimates of the prevalence of a family history of colorectal cancer in the general population are essential to inform planning of provision for colonoscopic surveillance and for clinical genetics services. However, there is a paucity of high-quality data. METHODS: Computerized record linkage was used to assess systematically the family history of 160 cancer-free community subjects and thereby provide prevalence data that are independent of participant recall. The data set comprised 2664 first- and second-degree relatives of study subjects, with 148 068 years at risk. RESULTS: Of people in the 30-70 years age range, 9.4 (95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 5.8 to 14.9) per cent had a first-degree relative affected by colorectal cancer, and 28.8 (95 per cent c.i. 22.3 to 36.2) per cent had an affected first- or second-degree relative. Between 0 and 3.1 per cent of study subjects merited colonic surveillance, depending on the stringency of the guidelines used. CONCLUSION: An appreciable proportion of the general population has a relative affected by colorectal cancer, sufficient to merit screening under certain criteria. In the absence of good-quality evidence supporting colonoscopic surveillance in groups at moderate risk, these data directly inform the planning of services for people with a family history of colorectal cancer. However, the clinical risk and financial implications of screening should be taken into account. Copyright 2005 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd.
BACKGROUND: Robust estimates of the prevalence of a family history of colorectal cancer in the general population are essential to inform planning of provision for colonoscopic surveillance and for clinical genetics services. However, there is a paucity of high-quality data. METHODS: Computerized record linkage was used to assess systematically the family history of 160 cancer-free community subjects and thereby provide prevalence data that are independent of participant recall. The data set comprised 2664 first- and second-degree relatives of study subjects, with 148 068 years at risk. RESULTS: Of people in the 30-70 years age range, 9.4 (95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 5.8 to 14.9) per cent had a first-degree relative affected by colorectal cancer, and 28.8 (95 per cent c.i. 22.3 to 36.2) per cent had an affected first- or second-degree relative. Between 0 and 3.1 per cent of study subjects merited colonic surveillance, depending on the stringency of the guidelines used. CONCLUSION: An appreciable proportion of the general population has a relative affected by colorectal cancer, sufficient to merit screening under certain criteria. In the absence of good-quality evidence supporting colonoscopic surveillance in groups at moderate risk, these data directly inform the planning of services for people with a family history of colorectal cancer. However, the clinical risk and financial implications of screening should be taken into account. Copyright 2005 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd.
Authors: Samir Gupta; Balambal Bharti; Dennis J Ahnen; Daniel D Buchanan; Iona C Cheng; Michelle Cotterchio; Jane C Figueiredo; Steven J Gallinger; Robert W Haile; Mark A Jenkins; Noralane M Lindor; Finlay A Macrae; Loïc Le Marchand; Polly A Newcomb; Stephen N Thibodeau; Aung Ko Win; Maria Elena Martinez Journal: Cancer Date: 2020-04-20 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Janneke A Wilschut; Ewout W Steyerberg; Monique E van Leerdam; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; J Dik F Habbema; Marjolein van Ballegooijen Journal: Cancer Date: 2011-03-08 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Jan T Lowery; Dennis J Ahnen; Paul C Schroy; Heather Hampel; Nancy Baxter; C Richard Boland; Randall W Burt; Lynn Butterly; Megan Doerr; Mary Doroshenk; W Gregory Feero; Nora Henrikson; Uri Ladabaum; David Lieberman; Elizabeth G McFarland; Susan K Peterson; Martha Raymond; N Jewel Samadder; Sapna Syngal; Thomas K Weber; Ann G Zauber; Robert Smith Journal: Cancer Date: 2016-06-03 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Sean P Cleary; Michelle Cotterchio; Mark A Jenkins; Hyeja Kim; Robert Bristow; Roger Green; Robert Haile; John L Hopper; Loic LeMarchand; Noralane Lindor; Patrick Parfrey; John Potter; Ban Younghusband; Steven Gallinger Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2008-12-27 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Malcolm G Dunlop; Albert Tenesa; Susan M Farrington; Stephane Ballereau; David H Brewster; Thibaud Koessler; Paul Pharoah; Clemens Schafmayer; Jochen Hampe; Henry Völzke; Jenny Chang-Claude; Michael Hoffmeister; Hermann Brenner; Susanna von Holst; Simone Picelli; Annika Lindblom; Mark A Jenkins; John L Hopper; Graham Casey; David Duggan; Polly A Newcomb; Anna Abulí; Xavier Bessa; Clara Ruiz-Ponte; Sergi Castellví-Bel; Iina Niittymäki; Sari Tuupanen; Auli Karhu; Lauri Aaltonen; Brent Zanke; Tom Hudson; Steven Gallinger; Ella Barclay; Lynn Martin; Maggie Gorman; Luis Carvajal-Carmona; Axel Walther; David Kerr; Steven Lubbe; Peter Broderick; Ian Chandler; Alan Pittman; Steven Penegar; Harry Campbell; Ian Tomlinson; Richard S Houlston Journal: Gut Date: 2012-04-05 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Kevin J Monahan; Nicola Bradshaw; Sunil Dolwani; Bianca Desouza; Malcolm G Dunlop; James E East; Mohammad Ilyas; Asha Kaur; Fiona Lalloo; Andrew Latchford; Matthew D Rutter; Ian Tomlinson; Huw J W Thomas; James Hill Journal: Gut Date: 2019-11-28 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Robert H Fletcher; Rebecca Lobb; Mark R Bauer; James Alan Kemp; Richard C Palmer; Ken P Kleinman; Irina Miroshnik; Karen M Emmons Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 5.128