Andrea Gini1, Erik E L Jansen2, Nadine Zielonke2, Reinier G S Meester2, Carlo Senore3, Ahti Anttila4, Nereo Segnan3, Dominika Novak Mlakar5, Harry J de Koning2, Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar2. 1. Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Department of Public Health, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. Electronic address: a.gini@erasmusmc.nl. 2. Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Department of Public Health, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. 3. Epidemiology and Screening Unit-CPO, Città Della Salute e Della Scienza, University Hospital, Turin, Italy. 4. Finnish Cancer Registry, Helsinki, Finland. 5. National Institute for Public Health, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Populations differ with respect to their cancer risk and screening preferences, which may influence the performance of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs. This review aims to systematically compare the mortality effect of CRC screening across European regions. METHODS: Six databases including Embase, Medline, Web of Science, PubMed publisher, Google Scholar and Cochrane Library were searched for relevant studies published before March 2018. Bibliographic searches were conducted to select studies assessing the effect of various screening tests (guaiac fecal occult blood test [gFOBT]; flexible sigmoidoscopy [FS]; fecal immunochemical test [FIT] and colonoscopy) on CRC mortality in Europe (PROSPERO protocol: CRD42016042433). Abstract reviewing, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were conducted independently by two reviewers. RESULTS: A total of 18 studies were included; of which, 11 were related to gFOBT, 4 to FS, 2 to FIT and 1 to colonoscopy; 8 were randomised clinical trials, and 10, observational studies, and an approximately equal number of studies represented Northern, Western and Southern European regions. Among individuals invited to screening, CRC mortality reductions varied from 8% to 16% for gFOBT and from 21% to 30% for FS. When studies with a high risk of bias were considered, ranges were more extensive. The estimated effectiveness of gFOBT and FS screening appeared similar across different European regions. CONCLUSIONS: CRC mortality impact of inviting individuals with similar adopted screening strategies (gFOBT or FS) may be consistent across several European settings.
BACKGROUND: Populations differ with respect to their cancer risk and screening preferences, which may influence the performance of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs. This review aims to systematically compare the mortality effect of CRC screening across European regions. METHODS: Six databases including Embase, Medline, Web of Science, PubMed publisher, Google Scholar and Cochrane Library were searched for relevant studies published before March 2018. Bibliographic searches were conducted to select studies assessing the effect of various screening tests (guaiac fecal occult blood test [gFOBT]; flexible sigmoidoscopy [FS]; fecal immunochemical test [FIT] and colonoscopy) on CRC mortality in Europe (PROSPERO protocol: CRD42016042433). Abstract reviewing, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were conducted independently by two reviewers. RESULTS: A total of 18 studies were included; of which, 11 were related to gFOBT, 4 to FS, 2 to FIT and 1 to colonoscopy; 8 were randomised clinical trials, and 10, observational studies, and an approximately equal number of studies represented Northern, Western and Southern European regions. Among individuals invited to screening, CRC mortality reductions varied from 8% to 16% for gFOBT and from 21% to 30% for FS. When studies with a high risk of bias were considered, ranges were more extensive. The estimated effectiveness of gFOBT and FS screening appeared similar across different European regions. CONCLUSIONS:CRC mortality impact of inviting individuals with similar adopted screening strategies (gFOBT or FS) may be consistent across several European settings.
Authors: Mohd Fazeli Sazali; Syed Sharizman Syed Abdul Rahim; Richard Avoi; Mohd Rohaizat Hassan; Firdaus Hayati; Zahir Izuan Azhar; Mohammad Saffree Jeffree; Khamisah Awang Lukman; Naing Oo Tha; Helmy Sajali; Azman Atil; Muhammad Aklil Abd Rahim Journal: Asian Pac J Cancer Prev Date: 2021-01-01
Authors: Beverly B Green; Melissa L Anderson; Andrea J Cook; Jessica Chubak; Sharon Fuller; Richard T Meenan; Sally W Vernon Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2021-05-28 Impact factor: 6.473
Authors: G Defossez; Z Uhry; P Delafosse; E Dantony; T d'Almeida; S Plouvier; N Bossard; A M Bouvier; F Molinié; A S Woronoff; M Colonna; P Grosclaude; L Remontet; A Monnereau Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2021-06-24 Impact factor: 4.430