Literature DB >> 27890769

Real-Time Monitoring of Results During First Year of Dutch Colorectal Cancer Screening Program and Optimization by Altering Fecal Immunochemical Test Cut-Off Levels.

Esther Toes-Zoutendijk1, Monique E van Leerdam2, Evelien Dekker3, Frank van Hees4, Corine Penning4, Iris Nagtegaal5, Miriam P van der Meulen4, Anneke J van Vuuren6, Ernst J Kuipers6, Johannes M G Bonfrer7, Katharina Biermann8, Maarten G J Thomeer9, Harriët van Veldhuizen10, Sonja Kroep4, Marjolein van Ballegooijen4, Gerrit A Meijer11, Harry J de Koning4, Manon C W Spaander6, Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND & AIMS: After careful pilot studies and planning, the national screening program for colorectal cancer (CRC), with biennial fecal immunochemical tests (FITs), was initiated in The Netherlands in 2014. A national information system for real-time monitoring was developed to allow for timely evaluation. Data were collected from the first year of this screening program to determine the importance of planning and monitoring for optimal screening program performance.
METHODS: The national information system of the CRC screening program kept track of the number of invitations sent in 2014, FIT kits returned, and colonoscopies performed. Age-adjusted rates of participation, the number of positive test results, and positive predictive values (PPVs) for advanced neoplasia were determined weekly, quarterly, and yearly.
RESULTS: In 2014, there were 741,914 persons invited for FIT; of these, 529,056 (71.3%; 95% CI, 71.2%-71.4%) participated. A few months into the program, real-time monitoring showed that rates of participation and positive test results (10.6%; 95% CI, 10.5%-10.8%) were higher than predicted and the PPV was lower (42.1%; 95% CI, 41.3%-42.9%) than predicted based on pilot studies. To reduce the burden of unnecessary colonoscopies and alleviate colonoscopy capacity, the cut-off level for a positive FIT result was increased from 15 to 47 μg Hb/g feces halfway through 2014. This adjustment decreased the percentage of positive test results to 6.7% (95% CI, 6.6%-6.8%) and increased the PPV to 49.1% (95% CI, 48.3%-49.9%). In total, the first year of the Dutch screening program resulted in the detection of 2483 cancers and 12,030 advanced adenomas.
CONCLUSIONS: Close monitoring of the implementation of the Dutch national CRC screening program allowed for instant adjustment of the FIT cut-off levels to optimize program performance.
Copyright © 2017 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Advanced Neoplasia; Colon Cancer; Early Detection; Population

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27890769     DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2016.11.022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastroenterology        ISSN: 0016-5085            Impact factor:   22.682


  55 in total

1.  Two Medicaid health plans' models and motivations for improving colorectal cancer screening rates.

Authors:  Jennifer K Coury; Jennifer L Schneider; Beverly B Green; Laura-Mae Baldwin; Amanda F Petrik; Jennifer S Rivelli; Malaika R Schwartz; Gloria D Coronado
Journal:  Transl Behav Med       Date:  2020-02-03       Impact factor: 3.046

2.  Development of blood-based biomarker tests for early detection of colorectal neoplasia: Influence of blood collection timing and handling procedures.

Authors:  Niels Lech Pedersen; Mathias Mertz Petersen; Jon J Ladd; Paul D Lampe; Robert S Bresalier; Gerard J Davis; Christina Demuth; Sarah Ø Jensen; Claus L Andersen; Linnea Ferm; Ib J Christensen; Hans J Nielsen
Journal:  Clin Chim Acta       Date:  2020-04-06       Impact factor: 3.786

3.  Direct detection of early-stage cancers using circulating tumor DNA.

Authors:  Jillian Phallen; Mark Sausen; Vilmos Adleff; Alessandro Leal; Carolyn Hruban; James White; Valsamo Anagnostou; Jacob Fiksel; Stephen Cristiano; Eniko Papp; Savannah Speir; Thomas Reinert; Mai-Britt Worm Orntoft; Brian D Woodward; Derek Murphy; Sonya Parpart-Li; David Riley; Monica Nesselbush; Naomi Sengamalay; Andrew Georgiadis; Qing Kay Li; Mogens Rørbæk Madsen; Frank Viborg Mortensen; Joost Huiskens; Cornelis Punt; Nicole van Grieken; Remond Fijneman; Gerrit Meijer; Hatim Husain; Robert B Scharpf; Luis A Diaz; Siân Jones; Sam Angiuoli; Torben Ørntoft; Hans Jørgen Nielsen; Claus Lindbjerg Andersen; Victor E Velculescu
Journal:  Sci Transl Med       Date:  2017-08-16       Impact factor: 17.956

4.  Participant-Related Risk Factors for False-Positive and False-Negative Fecal Immunochemical Tests in Colorectal Cancer Screening: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Clasine M de Klerk; Lisanne M Vendrig; Patrick M Bossuyt; Evelien Dekker
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-08-29       Impact factor: 10.864

5.  The compliance rate for the second diagnostic evaluation after a positive fecal occult blood test: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Rachel Gingold-Belfer; Haim Leibovitzh; Doron Boltin; Nidal Issa; Tsachi Tsadok Perets; Ram Dickman; Yaron Niv
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2019-02-06       Impact factor: 4.623

6.  Influence of Varying Quantitative Fecal Immunochemical Test Positivity Thresholds on Colorectal Cancer Detection: A Community-Based Cohort Study.

Authors:  Kevin Selby; Christopher D Jensen; Jeffrey K Lee; Chyke A Doubeni; Joanne E Schottinger; Wei K Zhao; Jessica Chubak; Ethan Halm; Nirupa R Ghai; Richard Contreras; Celette Skinner; Aruna Kamineni; Theodore R Levin; Douglas A Corley
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2018-09-18       Impact factor: 25.391

7.  Effect of Sex, Age, and Positivity Threshold on Fecal Immunochemical Test Accuracy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kevin Selby; Emma H Levine; Cecilia Doan; Anton Gies; Hermann Brenner; Charles Quesenberry; Jeffrey K Lee; Douglas A Corley
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2019-08-22       Impact factor: 22.682

8.  Comparative benefit and cost-effectiveness of mailed-out faecal immunochemical tests vs collection at the general practitioner.

Authors:  Elisabeth F P Peterse; Caroline B Osoro; Marc Bardou; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
Journal:  Aliment Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2021-03-08       Impact factor: 8.171

9.  The Costs and Benefits of Risk Stratification for Colorectal Cancer Screening Based On Phenotypic and Genetic Risk: A Health Economic Analysis.

Authors:  Chloe Thomas; Olena Mandrik; Catherine L Saunders; Deborah Thompson; Sophie Whyte; Simon Griffin; Juliet A Usher-Smith
Journal:  Cancer Prev Res (Phila)       Date:  2021-05-26

10.  A prospective study of faecal immunochemical testing following polypectomy in a colorectal cancer screening population.

Authors:  David J Gibson; Blathnaid Nolan; Joanna Rea; Maire Buckley; Gareth Horgan; Kieran Sheahan; Glen A Doherty; Diarmuid O'Donoghue; Hugh E Mulcahy; Alan Smith; Garret Cullen
Journal:  Frontline Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-11-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.