Literature DB >> 26719225

Reduced and Full-Preparation CT Colonography, Fecal Immunochemical Test, and Colonoscopy for Population Screening of Colorectal Cancer: A Randomized Trial.

Lapo Sali1, Mario Mascalchi2, Massimo Falchini2, Leonardo Ventura2, Francesca Carozzi2, Guido Castiglione2, Silvia Delsanto2, Beatrice Mallardi2, Paola Mantellini2, Stefano Milani2, Marco Zappa2, Grazia Grazzini2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Population screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) is widely adopted, but the preferred strategy is still under debate. We aimed to compare reduced (r-CTC) and full cathartic preparation CT colonography (f-CTC), fecal immunochemical test (FIT), and optical colonoscopy (OC) as primary screening tests for CRC.
METHODS: Citizens of a district of Florence, Italy, age 54 to 65 years, were allocated (8:2.5:2.5:1) with simple randomization to be invited by mail to one of four screening interventions: 1) biennial FIT for three rounds, 2) r-CTC, 3) f-CTC, 4) OC. Patients tested positive to FIT or CTC (at least one polyp ≥6mm) were referred to OC work-up. The primary outcomes were participation rate and detection rate (DR) for cancer or advanced adenoma (advanced neoplasia). All statistical tests were two-sided.
RESULTS: Sixteen thousand eighty-seven randomly assigned subjects were invited to the assigned screening test. Participation rates were 50.4% (4677/9288) for first-round FIT, 28.1% (674/2395) for r-CTC, 25.2% (612/2430) for f-CTC, and 14.8% (153/1036) for OC. All differences between groups were statistically significant (P = .047 for r-CTC vs f-CTC; P < .001 for all others). DRs for advanced neoplasia were 1.7% (79/4677) for first-round FIT, 5.5% (37/674) for r-CTC, 4.9% (30/612) for f-CTC, and 7.2% (11/153) for OC. Differences in DR between CTC groups and FIT were statistically significant (P < .001), but not between r-CTC and f-CTC (P = .65).
CONCLUSIONS: Reduced preparation increases participation in CTC. Lower attendance and higher DR of CTC as compared with FIT are key factors for the optimization of its role in population screening of CRC.
© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26719225     DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djv319

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst        ISSN: 0027-8874            Impact factor:   13.506


  26 in total

1.  Patients' experience of screening CT colonography with reduced and full bowel preparation in a randomised trial.

Authors:  Lapo Sali; Leonardo Ventura; Grazia Grazzini; Alessandra Borgheresi; Silvia Delsanto; Massimo Falchini; Beatrice Mallardi; Paola Mantellini; Stefano Milani; Stefano Pallanti; Marco Zappa; Mario Mascalchi
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-11-06       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 2.  CT colonography: role in FOBT-based screening programs for colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Lapo Sali; Grazia Grazzini; Mario Mascalchi
Journal:  Clin J Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-04-26

3.  Insurance Coverage for CT Colonography Screening: Impact on Overall Colorectal Cancer Screening Rates.

Authors:  Maureen A Smith; Jennifer M Weiss; Aaron Potvien; Jessica R Schumacher; Ronald E Gangnon; David H Kim; Lauren A Weeth-Feinstein; Perry J Pickhardt
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2017-07-11       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  The choice and definition of summary measure for meta-analysis of clinical studies with binary outcomes: effect on clinical interpretation.

Authors:  Andrew A Plumb; Steve Halligan; Susan Mallett
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2020-02-12       Impact factor: 3.039

5.  Bowel preparation in CT colonography: Is diet restriction necessary? A randomised trial (DIETSAN).

Authors:  Davide Bellini; Domenico De Santis; Damiano Caruso; Marco Rengo; Riccardo Ferrari; Tommaso Biondi; Andrea Laghi
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-08-10       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Colorectal Findings at Repeat CT Colonography Screening after Initial CT Colonography Screening Negative for Polyps Larger than 5 mm.

Authors:  Perry J Pickhardt; B Dustin Pooler; Ifeanyi Mbah; Jennifer M Weiss; David H Kim
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2016-08-22       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Cost analysis of colorectal cancer screening with CT colonography in Italy.

Authors:  Paola Mantellini; Giuseppe Lippi; Lapo Sali; Grazia Grazzini; Silvia Delsanto; Beatrice Mallardi; Massimo Falchini; Guido Castiglione; Francesca Maria Carozzi; Mario Mascalchi; Stefano Milani; Leonardo Ventura; Marco Zappa
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2017-07-05

8.  Wnt/catenin β1/microRNA 183 predicts recurrence and prognosis of patients with colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Yuzhuo Chen; Weiliang Song
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2018-01-26       Impact factor: 2.967

Review 9.  CT colonography for population screening of colorectal cancer: hints from European trials.

Authors:  Lapo Sali; Daniele Regge
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2016-09-14       Impact factor: 3.039

10.  CT-Colonography vs. Colonoscopy for Detection of High-Risk Sessile Serrated Polyps.

Authors:  J E G IJspeert; C J Tutein Nolthenius; E J Kuipers; M E van Leerdam; C Y Nio; M G J Thomeer; K Biermann; M J van de Vijver; E Dekker; J Stoker
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-03-29       Impact factor: 10.864

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.