A delay in the diagnosis of colorectal cancer screened by fecal immunochemical tests during the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal cohort study.

PURPOSE: There is concern that the COVID-19 pandemic may cause people to refrain from undergoing examination resulting in delayed detection of colorectal cancer (CRC). The purpose of this study was to investigate whether there was a delay in CRC detection due to withholding of screening. METHODS: The colonoscopy screening rate and the CRC detection rate were calculated for patients who underwent fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) from 2018 to 2021 in the longitudinal cohort. The stages of CRC cases detected as a result of positive FIT in each year were compared. RESULTS: A total of 39,521 patients were initially screened by FIT over a 4-year period. The FIT-positive rate was 4.7% (441 /9,349) in 2018, 4.6% (420 /9,156) in 2019, 4.9% (453 /9,255) in 2020, and 4.3% (504 /11,760) in 2021. The colonoscopy screening rate for positive FIT results was lower in 2020 than in 2019 (25.8% vs. 38.1%, P < 0.001), and higher in 2021 than in 2020 (56.7% vs. 25.8%, P < 0.001). The CRC detection rate among colonoscopy recipients was higher in 2021 than in 2020 (13% vs. 4%, P = 0.014). Stage 1 or higher CRC accounted for 25.0% (1/4) in 2020, and 78% (18/23) in 2021. Among the CRC cases detected each year, 1 (14%), 1 (25%), and 10 (43%) did not undergo colonoscopy despite positive FIT results in the previous year. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic has reduced the detection of CRC by screening colonoscopy following FIT and might have led to a delay in the detection of CRC.

Barriers associated with inadequate follow-up of abnormal fecal immunochemical test results in a safety-net system: A mixed-methods analysis.

In safety-net healthcare systems, colonoscopy completion within 1-year of an abnormal fecal immunochemical test (FIT) result rarely exceeds 50%. Understanding how electronic health records (EHR) documented reasons for missed colonoscopy match or differ from patient-reported reasons, is critical to optimize effective interventions to address this challenge. We conducted a convergent mixed-methods study which included a retrospective analysis of EHR data and semi-structured interviews of adults 50-75 years old, with abnormal FIT results between 2014 and 2020 in a large safety-net healthcare system. Of the 299 patients identified, 59.2% (n = 177) did not complete a colonoscopy within one year of their abnormal result. EHR abstraction revealed a documented reason for lack of follow-up colonoscopy in 49.2% (n = 87/177); patient-level (e.g., declined colonoscopy; 51.5%) and multi-factorial reasons (e.g., lost to follow-up; 37.9%) were most common. In 18 patient interviews, patient (e.g., fear of colonoscopy), provider (e.g., lack of result awareness), and system-level reasons (e.g., scheduling challenges) were most common. Only three reasons for lack of colonoscopy overlapped between EHR data and patient interviews (competing health issues, lack of transportation, and abnormal FIT result attributed to another cause). In a cohort of safety-net patients with abnormal FIT results, the most common reasons for lack of follow-up were patient-related. Our analysis revealed a discordance between EHR documented and patient-reported reasons for lack of colonoscopy after an abnormal FIT result. Mixed-methods analyses, as in the present study, may give us the greatest insight into modifiable determinants to develop effective interventions beyond quantitative and qualitative data analysis alone.

A Patient Self-Made Point-of-Care Fecal Test Improves Diagnostic Accuracy Compared with Fecal Calprotectin Alone in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients.

BACKGROUND: Monitoring inflammatory bowel disease patients may be challenging. Fecal calprotectin is one of the most performed tests. Other fecal biomarkers are less used in clinical practice. Rapid fecal tests that could be performed by patients may be a useful strategy to closely monitor disease activity. METHODS: We performed a prospective observational study including consecutive inflammatory bowel disease patients referred for colonoscopy in a single center. Certest FOB + Transferrin + Calprotectin + Lactoferrin® (Certest Biotec S.L, Zaragoza, Spain), a one-step point-of-care test which simultaneously detects these four biomarkers was performed. Endoscopic inflammatory activity was defined using the Mayo score (≥1) in ulcerative colitis, SES-CD (>3) and Rutgeerts scores (≥1) for Crohn's disease. RESULTS: Out of a total of 106 patients (56.5% female, mean age 51 years), 54 (50.9%) were diagnosed with ulcerative colitis and 52 (49.1%) with Crohn's disease. Endoscopic activity was detected in 42 patients (39.0%). Fecal calprotectin provided the best sensitivity (97.6%), with limited specificity (34.4%). Compared to calprotectin, the other 3 fecal biomarkers showed better specificity (87.5-92.1%) and lower sensitivity (45.2-59.5%). Patients with a negative result in all biomarkers (19/106-17.9%) had 100% (CI 95% 97.4-100) negative predictive value, while patients with the 4 biomarkers positive (13/106-12.3%) had 100% (CI 95% 96.1-100) positive predictive value of endoscopic inflammatory activity. AUROC of this 4 biomarker point-of-care test was 0.845 (95% CI 0.771-0.920), significantly higher than the AUROCs of any of the 4 biomarkers. CONCLUSIONS: This test may be a useful strategy to monitor inflammatory activity in clinical practice by excluding or prioritizing patients in need of a colonoscopy.

Short-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on a population-based screening program for colorectal cancer in Catalonia (Spain).

The COVID-19 pandemic caused the suspension at all levels of the Catalan FIT-based CRC screening program on March 12, 2020. Screening invitations to FIT were resumed on September 1, 2020. We aimed to assess the short-term impact of the pandemic and describe strategies implemented to minimize harm by the disruption of the FIT-based CRC screening in the Metropolitan Area of Barcelona. We analyzed participation rate, colonoscopy adherence, time intervals to colonoscopy, detection rates, and advanced-stage cancers in 2019 and 2020. To identify perceived distress levels during the suspension of the screening we conducted a phone interview. As a result of the suspension, 43% of the individuals due for screening did not receive their invitation by December 31, 2020. A percent decrease of 5.1% in participation and of 8.9% in colonoscopy adherence among invitees between January-March was observed, with a recovery to 2019 levels when the screening activities were restarted. The time interval between a positive test to colonoscopy was longer in 2020 than in 2019. A decrease in advanced neoplasia rate and an increase in later stages of CRC were also observed. Individuals with a positive test did not report higher levels of perceived distress compared to those with a negative test. Although the disruption of screening had a temporary impact on participation and colonoscopy adherence, timing delay continues and a large backlog in the invitation of the target population remains. Thus, it is critical to implement strategies to minimize the long-term effects.

A Review of the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Colorectal Cancer Screening: Implications and Solutions.

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted all aspects of medical care, including cancer screening and preventative measures. Colorectal cancer screening declined significantly at the onset of the pandemic as the result of an intentional effort to conserve resources, prioritize emergencies and reduce risk of transmission. There has already been an increase in diagnosis at more advanced stages and symptomatic emergencies due to suspended screenings. As endoscopy units find their way back to pre-pandemic practices, a backlog of cases remains. The missed CRC diagnoses amongst the missed screenings carry a risk of increased morbidity and mortality which will only increase as time-to-diagnosis grows. This review discusses the impact of COVID-19 on colonoscopy screening rates, trends in stages/symptoms/circumstances at diagnosis, and economic and social impact of delayed diagnosis. Triaging and use of FITs are proposed solutions to the challenge of catching up with the large number of pandemic-driven missed CRC screenings.

Impact of SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic on Colorectal Cancer Screening Delay: Effect on Stage Shift and Increased Mortality.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic had a sudden, dramatic impact on healthcare. In Italy, since the beginning of the pandemic, colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs have been forcefully suspended. We aimed to evaluate whether screening procedure delays can affect the outcomes of CRC screening. METHODS: We built a procedural model considering delays in the time to colonoscopy and estimating the effect on mortality due to up-stage migration of patients. The number of expected CRC cases was computed by using the data of the Italian screened population. Estimates of the effects of delay to colonoscopy on CRC stage, and of stage on mortality were assessed by a meta-analytic approach. RESULTS: With a delay of 0-3 months, 74% of CRC is expected to be stage I-II, while with a delay of 4-6 months there would be a 2%-increase for stage I-II and a concomitant decrease for stage III-IV (P = .068). Compared to baseline (0-3 months), moderate (7-12 months) and long (> 12 months) delays would lead to a significant increase in advanced CRC (from 26% to 29% and 33%, respectively; P = .008 and P < .001, respectively). We estimated a significant increase in the total number of deaths (+12.0%) when moving from a 0-3-months to a >12-month delay (P = .005), and a significant change in mortality distribution by stage when comparing the baseline with the >12-months (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Screening delays beyond 4-6 months would significantly increase advanced CRC cases, and also mortality if lasting beyond 12 months. Our data highlight the need to reorganize efforts against high-impact diseases such as CRC, considering possible future waves of SARS-CoV-2 or other pandemics.

Barriers and facilitators to colonoscopy following fecal immunochemical test screening for colorectal cancer: A key informant interview study.

OBJECTIVES: People who are referred for colonoscopy, following an abnormal colorectal cancer (CRC) screening result, are at increased risk of CRC. Despite this, many individuals decline the procedure. The aim of this study was to investigate why. METHODS: As little is currently known about non-attendance at follow-up colonoscopy, and follow-up of abnormal screening results is a nurse-led process, we decided to conduct key informant interviews with Specialist Screening Practitioners ([SSPs] nurses working in the English Bowel Cancer Screening Program). Interviews were conducted online. Transcripts were assessed using inductive and deductive coding techniques. RESULTS: 21 SSPs participated in an interview. Five main types of barriers and facilitators to colonoscopy were described, namely: Sociocultural, Practical, Psychological, Health-related and COVID-related. Key psychological and sociocultural factors included: 'Fear of pain and discomfort associated with the procedure' and 'Lack of support from family and friends'. Key practical, health-related and COVID-related factors included: 'Family and work commitments', 'Existing health conditions as competing priorities' and 'Fear of getting COVID-19 at the hospital'. CONCLUSIONS: A range of barriers and facilitators to follow-up colonoscopy exist. Future studies conducted with patients are needed to further explore barriers to colonoscopy. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Strategies to reduce non-attendance should adopt a multifaceted approach.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Utilization of EGD and Colonoscopy in the United States: An Analysis of the GIQuIC Registry.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has limited the ability to perform endoscopy. The aim of this study was to quantify the impact of the pandemic on endoscopy volumes and indications in the United States. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of data from the GI Quality Improvement Consortium (GIQuIC) registry. We compared volumes of colonoscopy and esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) during the pandemic (March-September 2020) to before the pandemic (January 2019-February 2020). The primary outcome was change in monthly volumes. Secondary outcomes included changes in the distribution of procedure indications and in procedure volume by region of United States, patient characteristics, trainee involvement, and practice setting, as well as colorectal cancer diagnoses. RESULTS: Among 451 sites with 3514 endoscopists, the average monthly volume of colonoscopies and EGDs dropped by 38.5% and 33.4%, respectively. There was regional variation, with the greatest and least decline in procedures in the Northeast and South, respectively. There was a modest shift in procedure indications from prevention to diagnostic, an initial increase in performance in the hospital setting, and a decrease in procedures with trainees. The decline in volume of colonoscopy and EGD during the first 7 months of the pandemic was equivalent to approximately 2.7 and 2.4 months of prepandemic productivity, respectively. Thirty percent fewer colorectal cancers were diagnosed compared to expected. CONCLUSION: These data on actual endoscopy utilization nationally during the pandemic can help in anticipating impact of delays in care on outcomes and planning for the recovery phase.

Modelling the impacts of COVID-19 pandemic on the quality of population-based colorectal cancer screening.

COVID-19 pandemic has severely affected regular public health interventions including population-based cancer screening. Impacts of such screening delays on the changes in structure and screening process and the resultant long-term outcomes are unknown. It is therefore necessary to develop a systematic framework to assess theses impacts related to these components of quality. Using population-based cancer screening with fecal immunochemical test (FIT) as an illustration, the main analysis was to assess how various scenarios of screening delays were associated with the capacity for primary screening and full time equivalent (FTE) for colonoscopy and impact long-term outcomes based on a Markov decision tree model on population level. The second analysis was to quantify how the extent of COVID-19 epidemic measured by social distancing index affected capacity and FTE that were translated to delays with an exponential relationship. COVID-19 epidemic led to 25%, 29%, 34%, and 39% statistically significantly incremental risks of late cancer for the delays of 0.5-year, 1-year,1.5-year, and 2-year, respectively compared with regular biennial FIT screening. The corresponding statistically findings of four delayed schedules for death from colorectal cancer (CRC) were 26%, 28%, 29%, and 30%, respectively. The higher social distancing index led to a lower capacity of uptake screening and a larger reduction of FTE, resulting in longer screening delay and longer waiting time, which further impacted long-term outcomes as above. In summary, a systematic modelling approach was developed for demonstrating the strong impact of screening delays caused by COVID-19 epidemic on long-term outcomes illustrated with a Taiwan population-based FIT screening of CRC.