Literature DB >> 26136839

Choosing the optimal method in programmatic colorectal cancer screening: current evidence and controversies.

Antoni Castells1.   

Abstract

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is an important health problem all over the world, being the third most common cancer and the second leading cause of cancer-related death in Western countries. The most important strategy for CRC prevention is screening (i.e. secondary prevention). Since it is widely accepted that adenomas and serrated polyps are the precursors of the vast majority of CRC, early detection and removal of these lesions is associated with a reduction of CRC incidence and, consequently, mortality. Moreover, cancers detected by screening are usually diagnosed at early stages and, therefore, curable by endoscopic or surgical procedures. This review will be address CRC screening strategies in average-risk population, which is defined by those individuals, men and women, 50 years of age or older, without any additional personal or familial predisposing risk factor. In order to maximize the impact of screening and ensure high coverage and equity of access, only organized screening programs (i.e. programmatic screening) should be implemented, as opposed to case-finding or opportunistic screening. For that reason and considering that the optimal approach for colorectal screening may differ depending on the scenario, this review will be focused on the advantages and limitations of each screening strategy in an organized setting.

Entities:  

Keywords:  biomarkers; colonoscopy; colorectal neoplasms; fecal occult blood testing; flexible sigmoidoscopy; screening

Year:  2015        PMID: 26136839      PMCID: PMC4480573          DOI: 10.1177/1756283X15578610

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Therap Adv Gastroenterol        ISSN: 1756-283X            Impact factor:   4.409


  94 in total

1.  Familial colorectal cancer risk: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Authors:  J Balmaña; A Castells; A Cervantes
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 32.976

2.  5-Fluorouracil adjuvant chemotherapy does not increase survival in patients with CpG island methylator phenotype colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Rodrigo Jover; Thuy-Phuong Nguyen; Lucía Pérez-Carbonell; Pedro Zapater; Artemio Payá; Cristina Alenda; Estefanía Rojas; Joaquín Cubiella; Francesc Balaguer; Juan D Morillas; Juan Clofent; Luis Bujanda; Josep M Reñé; Xavier Bessa; Rosa M Xicola; David Nicolás-Pérez; Antoni Castells; Montserrat Andreu; Xavier Llor; C Richard Boland; Ajay Goel
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2010-12-24       Impact factor: 22.682

Review 3.  Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer and the American Cancer Society.

Authors:  Sidney J Winawer; Ann G Zauber; Robert H Fletcher; Jonathon S Stillman; Michael J O'Brien; Bernard Levin; Robert A Smith; David A Lieberman; Randall W Burt; Theodore R Levin; John H Bond; Durado Brooks; Tim Byers; Neil Hyman; Lynne Kirk; Alan Thorson; Clifford Simmang; David Johnson; Douglas K Rex
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 22.682

4.  Importance of adenomas 5 mm or less in diameter that are detected by sigmoidoscopy.

Authors:  T E Read; J D Read; L F Butterly
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1997-01-02       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Cost-effectiveness of colonoscopy in screening for colorectal cancer.

Authors:  A Sonnenberg; F Delcò; J M Inadomi
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2000-10-17       Impact factor: 25.391

6.  Randomised controlled trial of faecal-occult-blood screening for colorectal cancer.

Authors:  J D Hardcastle; J O Chamberlain; M H Robinson; S M Moss; S S Amar; T W Balfour; P D James; C M Mangham
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1996-11-30       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Susceptibility genetic variants associated with colorectal cancer risk correlate with cancer phenotype.

Authors:  Anna Abulí; Xavier Bessa; Juan Ramón González; Clara Ruiz-Ponte; Alejandro Cáceres; Jenifer Muñoz; Victoria Gonzalo; Francesc Balaguer; Ceres Fernández-Rozadilla; Dolors González; Luisa de Castro; Juan Clofent; Luís Bujanda; Joaquín Cubiella; Josep M A Reñé; Juan Diego Morillas; Angel Lanas; Joaquim Rigau; Ana M A García; Mercedes Latorre; Joan Saló; Fernando Fernández Bañares; Lídia Argüello; Elena Peña; Angels Vilella; Sabino Riestra; Ramiro Carreño; Artemio Paya; Cristina Alenda; Rosa M Xicola; Brian J Doyle; Rodrigo Jover; Xavier Llor; Angel Carracedo; Antoni Castells; Sergi Castellví-Bel; Montserrat Andreu
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2010-06-02       Impact factor: 22.682

8.  Multitarget stool DNA testing for colorectal-cancer screening.

Authors:  Thomas F Imperiale; David F Ransohoff; Steven H Itzkowitz; Theodore R Levin; Philip Lavin; Graham P Lidgard; David A Ahlquist; Barry M Berger
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2014-03-19       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  Progress and challenges in colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Enrique Quintero; Cesare Hassan; Carlo Senore; Yutaka Saito
Journal:  Gastroenterol Res Pract       Date:  2012-04-04       Impact factor: 2.260

10.  A score to estimate the likelihood of detecting advanced colorectal neoplasia at colonoscopy.

Authors:  Michal F Kaminski; Marcin Polkowski; Ewa Kraszewska; Maciej Rupinski; Eugeniusz Butruk; Jaroslaw Regula
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2014-01-02       Impact factor: 23.059

View more
  4 in total

1.  A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis of MicroRNAs for Predicting Colorectal Cancer.

Authors:  Lin Yan; Wenhua Zhao; Haihua Yu; Yansen Wang; Yuanshui Liu; Chao Xie
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 1.889

Review 2.  The clinical role of microRNA-21 as a promising biomarker in the diagnosis and prognosis of colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Qiliang Peng; Xueli Zhang; Ming Min; Li Zou; Peipei Shen; Yaqun Zhu
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2017-07-04

3.  New fecal bacterial signature for colorectal cancer screening reduces the fecal immunochemical test false-positive rate in a screening population.

Authors:  Marta Malagón; Sara Ramió-Pujol; Marta Serrano; Joan Amoedo; Lia Oliver; Anna Bahí; Josep Oriol Miquel-Cusachs; Manel Ramirez; Xavier Queralt-Moles; Pau Gilabert; Joan Saló; Jordi Guardiola; Virginia Piñol; Mariona Serra-Pagès; Antoni Castells; Xavier Aldeguer; L Jesús Garcia-Gil
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-12-01       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Bile cholesterol and viscosity, the keys to discriminating adenomatous polyps from cholesterol polyps by a novel predictive scoring model.

Authors:  Eun-Young Kim; Tae-Ho Hong
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2020-08-14       Impact factor: 3.067

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.