Erin L Symonds1, Joanne M Osborne2, Stephen R Cole2, Peter A Bampton3, Robert J L Fraser4, Graeme P Young5. 1. Flinders Centre for Innovation in Cancer, Flinders University, Bedford Park, South Australia Bowel Health Service, Repatriation General Hospital, Daw Park, South Australia Erin.Symonds@health.sa.gov.au. 2. Flinders Centre for Innovation in Cancer, Flinders University, Bedford Park, South Australia Bowel Health Service, Repatriation General Hospital, Daw Park, South Australia. 3. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Flinders Medical Centre, Bedford Park, South Australia. 4. Flinders Centre for Innovation in Cancer, Flinders University, Bedford Park, South Australia Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Flinders Medical Centre, Bedford Park, South Australia Bowel Health Service, Repatriation General Hospital, Daw Park, South Australia. 5. Flinders Centre for Innovation in Cancer, Flinders University, Bedford Park, South Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Positive rates in faecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based colorectal cancer screening programmes vary, suggesting that differences between programmes may affect test results. We examined whether demographic, pathological, behavioural, and environmental factors affected haemoglobin concentration and positive rates where samples are mailed. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study; 34,298 collection devices were sent, over five years, to screening invitees (median age 60.6). Participant demographics, temperature on sample postage day, and previous screening were recorded. Outcomes from colonoscopy performed within a year following FIT were collected. Multivariate logistic regression identified significant predictors of test positivity. RESULTS: Higher positive rate was independently associated with male gender, older age, lower socioeconomic status, and distally located neoplasia, and negatively associated with previous screening (p < 0.05). Older males had higher faecal haemoglobin concentrations and were less likely to have a false positive result at colonoscopy (p < 0.05). High temperature on the sample postage day was associated with reduced haemoglobin concentration and positivity rate (26-35℃: Odds ratio 0.78, 95% confidence interval 0.66-0.93), but was not associated with missed significant neoplasia at colonoscopy (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Haemoglobin concentrations, and therefore FIT positivity, were affected by factors that vary between screening programmes. Participant demographics and high temperature at postage had significant effects. The impact of temperature could be reduced by seasonal scheduling of invitations. The importance of screening, and following up positive test results, particularly in older males, should be promoted.
OBJECTIVES: Positive rates in faecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based colorectal cancer screening programmes vary, suggesting that differences between programmes may affect test results. We examined whether demographic, pathological, behavioural, and environmental factors affected haemoglobin concentration and positive rates where samples are mailed. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study; 34,298 collection devices were sent, over five years, to screening invitees (median age 60.6). Participant demographics, temperature on sample postage day, and previous screening were recorded. Outcomes from colonoscopy performed within a year following FIT were collected. Multivariate logistic regression identified significant predictors of test positivity. RESULTS: Higher positive rate was independently associated with male gender, older age, lower socioeconomic status, and distally located neoplasia, and negatively associated with previous screening (p < 0.05). Older males had higher faecal haemoglobin concentrations and were less likely to have a false positive result at colonoscopy (p < 0.05). High temperature on the sample postage day was associated with reduced haemoglobin concentration and positivity rate (26-35℃: Odds ratio 0.78, 95% confidence interval 0.66-0.93), but was not associated with missed significant neoplasia at colonoscopy (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Haemoglobin concentrations, and therefore FIT positivity, were affected by factors that vary between screening programmes. Participant demographics and high temperature at postage had significant effects. The impact of temperature could be reduced by seasonal scheduling of invitations. The importance of screening, and following up positive test results, particularly in older males, should be promoted.
Authors: Germaine Wong; Richard L Hope; Kirsten Howard; Jeremy R Chapman; Antoni Castells; Simon D Roger; Michael J Bourke; Petra Macaskill; Robin Turner; Gabrielle Williams; Wai Hon Lim; Charmaine E Lok; Fritz Diekmann; Nicholas B Cross; Shaundeep Sen; Richard D M Allen; Steven J Chadban; Carol A Pollock; Allison Tong; Armando Teixeira-Pinto; Jean Y H Yang; Narelle Williams; Eric Hoi Kit Au; Anh Kieu; Laura James; Jonathan C Craig Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2019-04-30 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Gregory C Knapp; Avinash Sharma; Bolatito Olopade; Olusegun I Alatise; Olalekan Olasehinde; Olujide O Arije; Philip E Castle; T Peter Kingham Journal: World J Surg Date: 2019-11 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Charles Cock; Shahzaib Anwar; Susan E Byrne; Rosie Meng; Susanne Pedersen; Robert J L Fraser; Graeme P Young; Erin L Symonds Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2019-03-05 Impact factor: 3.199
Authors: Jean A Shapiro; Janet K Bobo; Timothy R Church; Douglas K Rex; Gary Chovnick; Trevor D Thompson; Ann G Zauber; David Lieberman; Theodore R Levin; Djenaba A Joseph; Marion R Nadel Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2017-10-10 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Jade Law; Anand Rajan; Harry Trieu; John Azizian; Rani Berry; Simon W Beaven; James H Tabibian Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2021-08-04 Impact factor: 3.487
Authors: Mark S Johnstone; Gillian Miller; Grace Pang; Paul Burton; Georgios Kourounis; Jack Winter; Emilia Crighton; David Mansouri; Paul Witherspoon; Karen Smith; Stephen T McSorley Journal: Ann Clin Biochem Date: 2022-03-03 Impact factor: 2.587