Dataset Information

Population health interventions to improve colorectal cancer screening by fecal immunochemical tests: A systematic review.

ABSTRACT: Despite clear evidence that colorectal cancer (CRC) screening reduces mortality, screening, including fecal immunochemical tests (FIT), is underutilized. We conducted a systematic review to determine the evidence of efficacy of interventions to improve FIT completion that could be scaled and utilized in population health management. We systematically searched publication databases for studies evaluating provider- or system-level interventions to improve CRC screening by FIT between 1 January 1996 and 13 December 2017 without language restrictions. Twenty articles describing 25 studies were included, 23 were randomized controlled trials with 1 quasi-experimental and 1 observational study. Ten studies discussed mailed FIT outreach, 4 pre-FIT patient reminders, 3 tailored patient messages, 2 post-FIT reminders, 2 paired FIT with influenza vaccinations, 2 provider alerts and 1 study each described the use of high-quality small media and patient financial incentives. Mailed FIT outreach was consistently effective with median improvement in CRC screening of 21.5% (interquartile range (IQR) 13.6%-29.0%). FIT paired with vaccinations led to a median 15.9% (IQR 15.6%-16.3%) improvement, while pre-FIT and post-FIT reminders demonstrated modest efficacy with median 4.1% (IQR 3.6%-6.7%) and 3.1% (IQR 2.9%-3.3%) improvement in CRC screening, respectively. More than half the studies were at high or unclear risk of bias; heterogeneous study designs and characteristics precluded meta-analysis. FIT-based CRC screening programs utilizing multilevel interventions (e.g. mailed FIT outreach, FIT paired with other preventative services, and provider alerts) have the potential to significantly increase screening participation. However, such programs must also follow-up patients with abnormal FIT results.

SUBMITTER: Issaka RB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6322951 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Population health interventions to improve colorectal cancer screening by fecal immunochemical tests: A systematic review.

Issaka Rachel B RB Avila Patrick P Whitaker Evans E Bent Stephen S Somsouk Ma M

Preventive medicine 20181024

Despite clear evidence that colorectal cancer (CRC) screening reduces mortality, screening, including fecal immunochemical tests (FIT), is underutilized. We conducted a systematic review to determine the evidence of efficacy of interventions to improve FIT completion that could be scaled and utilized in population health management. We systematically searched publication databases for studies evaluating provider- or system-level interventions to improve CRC screening by FIT between 1 January 199 ...[more]

PMID: 30367972

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPerformance characteristics of fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) to screen for colorectal cancer (CRC) have been inconsistent.PurposeTo synthesize data about the diagnostic accuracy of FITs for CRC and identify factors affecting its performance characteristics.Data sourcesOnline databases, including MEDLINE and EMBASE, and bibliographies of included studies from 1996 to 2013.Study selectionAll studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of FITs for CRC in asymptomatic, average-risk adults.Data extractionTwo reviewers independently extracted data and critiqued study quality.Data synthesisNineteen eligible studies were included and meta-analyzed. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio of FITs for CRC were 0.79 (95% CI, 0.69 to 0.86), 0.94 (CI, 0.92 to 0.95), 13.10 (CI, 10.49 to 16.35), 0.23 (CI, 0.15 to 0.33), respectively, with an overall diagnostic accuracy of 95% (CI, 93% to 97%). There was substantial heterogeneity between studies in both the pooled sensitivity and specificity estimates. Stratifying by cutoff value for a positive test result or removal of discontinued FIT brands resulted in homogeneous sensitivity estimates. Sensitivity for CRC improved with lower assay cutoff values for a positive test result (for example, 0.89 [CI, 0.80 to 0.95] at a cutoff value less than 20 µg/g vs. 0.70 [CI, 0.55 to 0.81] at cutoff values of 20 to 50 µg/g) but with a corresponding decrease in specificity. A single-sample FIT had similar sensitivity and specificity as several samples, independent of FIT brand.LimitationsOnly English-language articles were included. Lack of data prevented complete subgroup analyses by FIT brand.ConclusionFecal immunochemical tests are moderately sensitive, are highly specific, and have high overall diagnostic accuracy for detecting CRC. Diagnostic performance of FITs depends on the cutoff value for a positive test result.Primary funding sourceNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and National Cancer Institute.

Project description:An altered colonic microbiota probably increases colorectal adenoma (CRA) and cancer (CRC) risk, but large, unbiased fecal collections are needed to examine the relationship of gut microbiota diversity and composition to colorectal carcinogenesis. This study assessed whether fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) from CRA/CRC screening may fulfill this requirement. Using FIT, self-collected by members of Kaiser Permanente Hawaii (KPH), as well as interspersed quality control (QC) specimens, DNA was extracted and amplified to generate 16S rRNA microbiome profiles rarified at 10,000 reads. CRA/CRC were diagnosed by colonoscopy and histopathology. Covariates were from electronic KPH records. Of 921 participants' FIT devices, 538 (58%) yielded at least 10,000 rRNA reads and 1016 species-level variants mapped to 46 genera. Of the 538 evaluable participants, 63 (11.7%) were FIT-negative per protocol, and they were considered negative for CRA/CRC. Of the 475 FIT + participants, colonoscopy and pathologic review revealed that 8 (1.7%) had CRC, 71 (14.9%) had high-risk CRA, 107 (22.5%) had low-risk CRA, and 289 (60.8%) did not have CRA/CRC. Men were 2.27-fold [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.32-3.91] more likely than women to be FIT+ . Men also had 1.96-fold (CI 1.24-3.07) higher odds of low-risk CRA, with similar trends for high-risk CRA and CRC. CRA/CRC were not associated with overweight, obesity, diabetes, or antibiotic prescriptions in this study. QC analysis across 24 batches of FIT devices revealed QC outliers in four batches. With or without exclusion of the four QC-outlier batches, as well as lenient (1000-read) rarefaction, CRA/CRC had no consistent, statistically significant associations with fecal microbiome alpha diversity, beta diversity or genera relative abundance. CRA/CRC had expected associations with male sex but not with microbiome metrics. Fecal microbiome profiling using DNA extracted from at-home collected, re-used FIT devices is feasible, albeit with substantial challenges. Using FITs for prospective microbiome studies of CRA/CRC risk should consider the impact of the current findings on statistical power and requisite sample sizes.

Project description:BackgroundMailed reminders to promote colorectal cancer (CRC) screening by fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) have been shown to be effective in the Medicaid population, in which screening is underused. However, little is known regarding the cost-effectiveness of these interventions, with or without an included FIT kit.MethodsThe authors conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of a randomized controlled trial that compared the effectiveness of a reminder + FIT intervention versus a reminder-only intervention in increasing FIT screening. The analysis compared the costs per person screened for CRC screening associated with the reminder + FIT versus the reminder-only alternative using a 1-year time horizon. Input data for a cohort of 35,000 unscreened North Carolina Medicaid enrollees ages 52 to 64 years were derived from the trial and microcosting. Inputs and outputs were estimated from 2 perspectives-the Medicaid/state perspective and the health clinic/facility perspective-using probabilistic sensitivity analysis to evaluate uncertainty.ResultsThe anticipated number of CRC screenings, including both FIT and screening colonoscopies, was higher for the reminder + FIT alternative (n = 8131; 23.2%) than for the reminder-only alternative (n = 5533; 15.8%). From the Medicaid/state perspective, the reminder + FIT alternative dominated the reminder-only alternative, with lower costs and higher screening rates. From the health clinic/facility perspective, the reminder + FIT versus the reminder-only alternative resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $116 per person screened.ConclusionsThe reminder + FIT alternative was cost saving per additional Medicaid enrollee screened compared with the reminder-only alternative from the Medicaid/state perspective and likely cost-effective from the health clinic/facility perspective. The results also demonstrate that health departments and state Medicaid programs can efficiently mail FIT kits to large numbers of Medicaid enrollees to increase CRC screening completion.

Project description:BACKGROUND & AIMS:Biomarker assays could increase the accuracy of noninvasive detection of colorectal cancer (CRC); fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) are estimated to miss 27%-47% of CRCs and 70%-80% of advanced adenomas per round of screening. We investigated the conditions under which biomarker screens would be cost-effective compared with FIT screens of average-risk individuals. METHODS:We used the MISCAN-Colon microsimulation model to estimate the effects of various CRC screening test characteristics on life-years gained (LYG) and; age-specific all-cause mortality was based on the 2010 Dutch life tables. Simulated CRC incidence rate and CRC stage distribution were calibrated to observed data in The Netherlands from 1999 through 2003 (before opportunities for screening). Survival rates after diagnosis of CRC at an age younger than 75 years were based on CRC relative survival data from 1985 through 2004; survival for individuals diagnosed at an age of 75 years or older was adjusted to fit the observed age-increasing mortality/incidence ratio. We modeled FIT along with hypothetical biomarker tests with different test performance levels. For each biomarker test we calculated the maximum unit cost for the test to be cost-effective compared with FIT, assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of €50,000 ($56,000) per LYG. RESULTS:Biennial FIT screening of subjects 55-75 years old provided 84.9 LYG at a cost of €122,000 ($137,000) per 1000 participants. Considering a unit cost of €7 ($8) for FIT (including kit and analysis only, excluding organizational costs), a biomarker test that detects CRC with higher levels of specificity and sensitivity (100%) and advanced adenomas at a proportionally higher level of sensitivity (53%) should never exceed a cost of €51 ($57). The threshold cost could increase to more than €200 ($224) for high-performing biomarker tests in cases of limited colonoscopy capacity or higher uptake of this test. CONCLUSIONS:By using the MISCAN-Colon microsimulation model to estimate effects of CRC screening tests, we found that for a biomarker test with increased overall performance to be cost-effective, it should not exceed 7-fold the unit cost of FIT. This maximum would increase substantially if colonoscopy becomes more expensive or scarce, or if the new test has higher screening uptake. These values could be used to estimate the added value of new biomarkers compared with current FIT screening.

Dataset Information

Population health interventions to improve colorectal cancer screening by fecal immunochemical tests: A systematic review.

Publications

Population health interventions to improve colorectal cancer screening by fecal immunochemical tests: A systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets