Carolyn M Rutter1, John M Inadomi2, Christopher E Maerzluft3. 1. Economics, Sociology & Statistics, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, USA. 2. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, 12348University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. 3. Research Programming Group, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Annual fecal immunochemical tests can reduce colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. However, screening is a multi-step process and most patients do not perfectly adhere to guideline-recommended screening schedules. Our objective was to compare the reduction in colorectal cancer incidence and life-years gained based on US guideline-concordant fecal immunochemical test screening to scenarios with a range of delays. METHOD: The Colorectal Cancer Simulated Population model for Incidence and Natural history (CRC-SPIN) microsimulation model was used to estimate the effect of systematic departures from fecal immunochemical test screening guidelines on lifetime screening benefit. RESULTS: The combined effect of consistent modest delays in screening initiation (1 year), repeated fecal immunochemical test screening (3 months), and receipt of follow-up or surveillance colonoscopy (3 months) resulted in up to 1.3 additional colorectal cancer cases per 10,000, 0.4 additional late-stage colorectal cancer cases per 10,000 and 154.7 fewer life-years gained per 10,000. A 5-year delay in screening initiation had a larger impact on screening effectiveness than consistent small delays in repeated fecal immunochemical test screening or receipt of follow-up colonoscopy after an abnormal fecal immunochemical test. The combined effect of consistent large delays in screening initiation (5 years), repeated fecal immunochemical test screening (6 months), and receipt of follow-up or surveillance colonoscopy (6 months) resulted in up to 3.7 additional colorectal cancer cases per 10,000, 1.5 additional late-stage colorectal cancer cases per 10,000 and 612.3 fewer life-years gained per 10,000. CONCLUSIONS: Systematic delays across the screening process can result in meaningful reductions in colorectal cancer screening effectiveness, especially for longer delays. Screening delays could drive differences in colorectal cancer incidence across patient groups with differential access to screening.
OBJECTIVE: Annual fecal immunochemical tests can reduce colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. However, screening is a multi-step process and most patients do not perfectly adhere to guideline-recommended screening schedules. Our objective was to compare the reduction in colorectal cancer incidence and life-years gained based on US guideline-concordant fecal immunochemical test screening to scenarios with a range of delays. METHOD: The Colorectal Cancer Simulated Population model for Incidence and Natural history (CRC-SPIN) microsimulation model was used to estimate the effect of systematic departures from fecal immunochemical test screening guidelines on lifetime screening benefit. RESULTS: The combined effect of consistent modest delays in screening initiation (1 year), repeated fecal immunochemical test screening (3 months), and receipt of follow-up or surveillance colonoscopy (3 months) resulted in up to 1.3 additional colorectal cancer cases per 10,000, 0.4 additional late-stage colorectal cancer cases per 10,000 and 154.7 fewer life-years gained per 10,000. A 5-year delay in screening initiation had a larger impact on screening effectiveness than consistent small delays in repeated fecal immunochemical test screening or receipt of follow-up colonoscopy after an abnormal fecal immunochemical test. The combined effect of consistent large delays in screening initiation (5 years), repeated fecal immunochemical test screening (6 months), and receipt of follow-up or surveillance colonoscopy (6 months) resulted in up to 3.7 additional colorectal cancer cases per 10,000, 1.5 additional late-stage colorectal cancer cases per 10,000 and 612.3 fewer life-years gained per 10,000. CONCLUSIONS: Systematic delays across the screening process can result in meaningful reductions in colorectal cancer screening effectiveness, especially for longer delays. Screening delays could drive differences in colorectal cancer incidence across patient groups with differential access to screening.
Authors: Thomas F Imperiale; Rachel N Gruber; Timothy E Stump; Thomas W Emmett; Patrick O Monahan Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2019-02-26 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Jennifer Nayor; John R Saltzman; Emily J Campbell; Molly L Perencevich; Kunal Jajoo; James M Richter Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2016-11-24 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Lucie de Jonge; Joachim Worthington; Francine van Wifferen; Nicolas Iragorri; Elisabeth F P Peterse; Jie-Bin Lew; Marjolein J E Greuter; Heather A Smith; Eleonora Feletto; Jean H E Yong; Karen Canfell; Veerle M H Coupé; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar Journal: Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2021-02-03
Authors: Melissa R Partin; Diana J Burgess; James F Burgess; Amy Gravely; David Haggstrom; Sarah E Lillie; Sean Nugent; Adam A Powell; Aasma Shaukat; Louise C Walter; David B Nelson Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2014-12-03 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Carolyn M Rutter; Jane J Kim; Reinier G S Meester; Brian L Sprague; Emily A Burger; Ann G Zauber; Mehmet Ali Ergun; Nicole G Campos; Chyke A Doubeni; Amy Trentham-Dietz; Stephen Sy; Oguzhan Alagoz; Natasha Stout; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Douglas A Corley; Anna N A Tosteson Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2017-11-17 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Douglas A Corley; Christopher D Jensen; Amy R Marks; Wei K Zhao; Jeffrey K Lee; Chyke A Doubeni; Ann G Zauber; Jolanda de Boer; Bruce H Fireman; Joanne E Schottinger; Virginia P Quinn; Nirupa R Ghai; Theodore R Levin; Charles P Quesenberry Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-04-03 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Jessica Chubak; Michael P Garcia; Andrea N Burnett-Hartman; Yingye Zheng; Douglas A Corley; Ethan A Halm; Amit G Singal; Carrie N Klabunde; Chyke A Doubeni; Aruna Kamineni; Theodore R Levin; Joanne E Schottinger; Beverly B Green; Virginia P Quinn; Carolyn M Rutter Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2016-02 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Else-Mariëtte B van Heijningen; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Ewout W Steyerberg; S Lucas Goede; Evelien Dekker; Wilco Lesterhuis; Frank ter Borg; Juda Vecht; Pieter Spoelstra; Leopold Engels; Clemens J M Bolwerk; Robin Timmer; Jan H Kleibeuker; Jan J Koornstra; Harry J de Koning; Ernst J Kuipers; Marjolein van Ballegooijen Journal: Gut Date: 2015-01-13 Impact factor: 23.059