Canadian guidelines for colorectal cancer screening.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Telford JJ
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3202353 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Canadian guidelines for colorectal cancer screening.
Canadian journal of gastroenterology = Journal canadien de gastroenterologie 20110901 9
Decisions regarding colorectal cancer screening will continue to depend on local resources, which in some jurisdictions includes programmatic screening and individual patient preferences. I encourage gastroenterologists to participate in programmatic screening and assist in developing the colonoscopy quality assurance and improvement programs. Our involvement would ensure that we remain leaders in this area and that our expertise in quality in endoscopy is recognized. Finally, participation in p ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundCancer screening guidelines reflect the costs and benefits of population-based screening based on evidence from clinical trials. While most of the existing literature on compliance with cancer screening guidelines only measures raw screening rates in the target age groups, we used a novel approach to estimate degree of guideline compliance across Canadian provinces for breast, colorectal and prostate cancer screening. Measuring compliance as the change in age-specific screening rates at the guideline-recommended initiation age (50), we generally found screening patterns across Canadian provinces that were not consistent with guideline compliance.MethodsWe calculated age-cancer-specific screening rates for ages 40-60 using the Canadian Community Health Survey (2003 and 2005), a cross-sectional, nationally representative survey of health status, health care utilization and health determinants in the Canadian population. We estimated the degree of compliance using logistic regression to measure the change in adjusted screening rates at the guideline-recommended initiation age for each province in the sample.ResultsFor breast cancer, after adjusting for age trends and other covariates, being above age 50 in Quebec increased the probability of being screened by 19 percentage points, from an average screening rate of 24% among 40-49 year olds. None of the other regions exhibited a statistically significant change in screening rates at age 50. Additional analyses indicated that these patterns reflect asymptomatic screening and that Quebec's breast cancer screening program enhanced the degree of guideline compliance in that province. Colorectal cancer screening practice was consistent with guidelines only in Saskatchewan, as screening rates increased at age 50 by 12 percentage points, from an average rate of 6% among 40-49 year olds. For prostate cancer, the regions examined here are not compliant with Canadian guidelines since screening rates were quite high, and there was not a discrete increase at any particular age.ConclusionsScreening practice for breast, colorectal and prostate cancer was generally not consistent with Canadian clinical guidelines. Quebec (breast) and Saskatchewan (colorectal) were exceptions to this, and the impact of Quebec's breast cancer screening program suggests a role for policy in improving screening guideline compliance.
| S-EPMC2908097 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Now colorectal cancer is the second most common cancer in males and the fourth most common cancer in females in Korea. Since most of colorectal cancers occur after the prolonged transformation of adenomas into carcinomas, early detection and removal of colorectal adenomas are one of the most effective methods to prevent colorectal cancer. Considering the increasing incidence of colorectal cancer and polyps in Korea, it is very important to establish Korean guideline for colorectal cancer screening and polyp detection. The guideline was developed by the Korean Multi-Society Take Force and we tried to establish the guideline by evidence-based methods. Parts of the statements were draw by systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Herein we discussed epidemiology of colorectal cancers and adenomas in Korea and optimal methods for screening of colorectal cancer and detection of adenomas including fecal occult blood tests, radiologic tests, and endoscopic examinations.
| S-EPMC3363119 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Modern management of colorectal cancer (crc) with peritoneal metastasis (pm) is based on a combination of cytoreductive surgery (crs), systemic chemotherapy, and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (hipec). Although the role of hipec has recently been questioned with respect to results from the prodige 7 trial, the role and benefit of a complete crs were confirmed, as observed with a 41-month gain in median survival in that study, and 15% of patients remaining disease-free at 5 years. Still, crc with pm is associated with a poor prognosis, and good patient selection is essential. Many questions about the optimal management approach for such patients remain, but all patients with pm from crc should be referred to, or discussed with, a pm surgical oncologist, because cure is possible. The objective of the present guideline is to offer a practical approach to the management of pm from crc and to reflect on the new practice standards set by recent publications on the topic.
| S-EPMC7755452 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) provides an effective strategy for early detection and prevention of the disease; however, global screening rates are still low. This study aims at assessing the awareness of CRC risk factors, warning signs, and attitudes towards CRC guidelines and screening modalities, in order to identify the barriers to and correlates of CRC screening in the Lebanese population. A self-administered questionnaire was distributed to 371 participants in the largest health care medical center in Lebanon. A validated 12- and 9-item Cancer Awareness Measurement questionnaire was used to assess participants' awareness of CRC risk factors and warning signs. 83% and 67% of participants were not aware of CRC risk factors and warning signs, respectively, 15% have previously undergone CRC screening, 56% were aware of the necessity for screening, and 43% were willing to undergo screening. Factors affecting awareness of the necessity for CRC screening, past screening and willingness to screen included awareness of risk factors and warning signs, undergoing regular physician check-ups, having a family physician as a primary source of knowledge of CRC, and knowing a family member or friend diagnosed with CRC. Barriers to screening were related to participants' evaluation of the screening technique and misconceptions about this disease. Serious active measures should be taken by health care sectors, authoritative groups, primary care physicians, and awareness campaigns to fill the gap in awareness of this disease and to alleviate the barriers and misconceptions around it.
| S-EPMC6634322 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionWe aimed to systematically evaluate quality of shared decision-making (SDM) in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and consensus statements (CSs).MethodsSearch for CRC screening guidances was from 2010 to November 2021 in EMBASE, Web of Science, MEDLINE, Scopus and CDSR, and the World Wide Web. Three independent reviewers and an arbitrator rated the quality of each guidance using a SDM quality assessment tool (maximum score: 31). Reviewer agreement was 0.88.ResultsSDM appeared in 41/83 (49.4%) CPGs and 9/19 (47.4%) CSs. None met all the quality criteria, and 51.0% (52/102) failed to meet any quality items. Overall compliance was low (mean 1.63, IQR 0-2). Quality was better in guidances published after 2015 (mean 1, IQR 0-3 vs. mean 0.5, IQR 0-1.5; p = 0.048) and when the term SDM was specifically reported (mean 4.5, IQR 2.5-4.5 vs. mean 0.5, IQR 0-1.5; p < 0.001). CPGs underpinned by systematic reviews showed better SDM quality than consensus (mean 1, IQR 0-3 vs. mean 0, IQR 0-2, p = 0.040).ConclusionSDM quality was suboptimal and mentioned in less than half of the guidances, and recommendations were scarce. Guideline developers should incorporate evidence-based SDM recommendations in guidances to underpin the translation of evidence into practice.
| S-EPMC9786598 | biostudies-literature
Project description:High-quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and consensus statements (CSs) are essential for evidence-based medicine. The purpose of this systematic review was to appraise the quality and reporting of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening CPGs and CSs. After prospective registration (Prospero no: CRD42021286156), a systematic review searched CRC guidances in duplicate without language restrictions in ten databases, 20 society websites, and grey literature from 2018 to 2021. We appraised quality with AGREE II (% of maximum score) and reporting with RIGHT (% of total 35 items) tools. Twenty-four CPGs and 5 CSs were analysed. The median overall quality and reporting were 54.0% (IQR 45.7-75.0) and 42.0% (IQR 31.4-68.6). The applicability had low quality (AGREE II score <50%) in 83% of guidances (24/29). Recommendations and conflict of interest were low-reported (RIGHT score <50%) in 62% guidances (18/29) and 69% (20/29). CPGs that deployed systematic reviews had better quality and reporting than CSs (AGREE: 68.5% vs. 35.5%; p = 0.001; RIGHT: 74.6% vs. 41.4%; p = 0.001). In summary, CRC screening CPGs and CSs achieved low quality and reporting. It is necessary a revision and an improvement of the current guidances. Their development should apply a robust methodology using proper guideline development tools to obtain high-quality evidence-based documents.
| S-EPMC9734419 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNonadherence to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among Asian Americans is high but not well understood. This study examined correlates of screening intention among Filipino, Hmong, and Korean Americans who were nonadherent to CRC screening.MethodsUsing cross-sectional, preintervention survey data from 504 Asian Americans (115 Filipinos, 185 Hmong, and 204 Koreans) aged 50-75 years who were enrolled in a multisite cluster randomized controlled trial of lay health educator intervention, we analyzed correlates of self-reported CRC screening nonadherence, which was defined as not being up-to-date for fecal occult blood test, sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy.ResultsOnly 26.8% of participants indicated intention to obtain screening within 6 months (Hmong: 12.4%; Korean: 30.8%; and Filipino: 42.6%; P < .001). Only one third of participants had undergone a prior screening, and a majority did not know that screening is a method of CRC prevention method (61.3%) or had any knowledge of CRC screening guidelines (53.4%). Multivariable analyses revealed that patient-provider ethnicity concordance, provider's recommendation of screening, participants' prior CRC screening, perceived severity and susceptibility of CRC, and knowledge of guidelines were positively associated with screening intention. Specifically, knowing one or more screening guidelines doubled the odds of screening intention (adjusted odds ratio, 2.38; 95% confidence interval, 1.32-4.28). Hmong were less likely to have screening intention than Filipinos, which was unexplained by socio-demographics, health care factors, perceived needs for CRC screening, or knowledge of screening guidelines.ConclusionCRC screening intention among nonadherent Filipino, Hmong, and Korean Americans was low. Targeting knowledge of CRC screening guidelines may be effective strategies for increasing CRC screening intention among nonadherent Asian Americans. Cancer 2018;124:1560-7. © 2018 American Cancer Society.
| S-EPMC5875715 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCanada has one of the highest incidences of colorectal cancer (CRC) worldwide. CRC screening improves CRC outcomes and is cost-effective. This study compares Canadian CRC screening programs using essential elements of an organized screening program outlined by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC).MethodsWe collaborated with the Cancer Screening in 5 continents (CanScreen5) program, an initiative of IARC. Standardized data collection forms were sent to representatives of provincial and territorial CRC screening programs. Twenty-five questions were selected to reflect IARC's essential elements of an organized screening program. We performed a qualitative analysis of Canada's CRC screening programs and compared programs within Canada and internationally.ResultsCRC screening programs exist in 10 provinces and 2 territories. None of the programs in Canada met all the essential criteria of an organized screening program outlined by IARC. Three programs do not send invitations to participate in screening. Among those that do, 4 programs do not include a stool test kit in the invitations. While all provinces met the essential elements for leadership, governance, finance, and access to essential services, there was more heterogeneity in the domains of service delivery as well as information systems and quality assurance.ConclusionsThere is considerable heterogeneity in the design of CRC screening programs in Canada and worldwide. Programs should strive to meet all the essential IARC criteria for organized screening if local resources allow, such as issuing invitations and implementing systems to track and compare outcomes to maximize screening program quality, effectiveness, and impact.
| S-EPMC11317627 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To summarize and compare worldwide colorectal cancer (CRC) screening recommendations in order to identify similarities and disparities.A systematic literature search was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, CENTRAL and ISI Web of knowledge identifying all average-risk CRC screening guideline publications within the last ten years and/or position statements published in the last 2 years. In addition, a hand-search of the webpages of National Gastroenterology Society websites, the National Guideline Clearinghouse, the BMJ Clinical Evidence website, Google and Google Scholar was performed.Fifteen guidelines were identified. Six guidelines were published in North America, four in Europe, four in Asia and one from the World Gastroenterology Organization. The majority of guidelines recommend screening average-risk individuals between ages 50 and 75 using colonoscopy (every 10 years), or flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS, every 5 years) or fecal occult blood test (FOBT, mainly the Fecal Immunochemical Test, annually or biennially). Disparities throughout the different guidelines are found relating to the use of colonoscopy, rank order between test, screening intervals and optimal age ranges for screening.Average risk individuals between 50 and 75 years should undergo CRC screening. Recommendations for optimal surveillance intervals, preferred tests/test cascade as well as the optimal timing when to start and stop screening differ regionally and should be considered for clinical decision making. Furthermore, local resource availability and patient preferences are important to increase CRC screening uptake, as any screening is better than none.
| S-EPMC5757117 | biostudies-other
Project description:The annual Eastern Canadian Gastrointestinal Cancer Consensus Conference 2017 was held in St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, 28-30 September. Experts in radiation oncology, medical oncology, surgical oncology, and cancer genetics who are involved in the management of patients with gastrointestinal malignancies participated in presentations and discussion sessions for the purpose of developing the recommendations presented here. This consensus statement addresses multiple topics in the management of gastric, rectal, and colon cancer, including ? identification and management of hereditary gastric and colorectal cancer (crc);? palliative systemic therapy for metastatic gastric cancer;? optimum duration of preoperative radiation in rectal cancer-that is, short- compared with long-course radiation;? management options for peritoneal carcinomatosis in crc;? implications of tumour location for treatment and prognosis in crc; and? new molecular markers in crc.
| S-EPMC6092057 | biostudies-literature