Delivery of Cervical and Colorectal Cancer Screenings During the Pandemic in Community Health Centers: Practice Changes and Recovery Strategies.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic led to clinical practice changes, which affected cancer preventive care delivery. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on the delivery of colorectal cancer (CRC) and cervical cancer (CVC) screenings. RESEARCH DESIGN: Parallel mixed methods design using electronic health record data (extracted between January 2019 and July 2021). Study results focused on 3 pandemic-related periods: March-May 2020, June-October 2020, and November 2020-September 2021. SUBJECTS: Two hundred seventeen community health centers located in 13 states and 29 semistructured interviews from 13 community health centers. MEASURES: Monthly up-to-date CRC and CVC screening rates and monthly rates of completed colonoscopies, fecal immunochemical test (FIT)/fecal occult blood test (FOBT) procedures, Papanicolaou tests among age and sex-eligible patients. Analysis used generalized estimating equations Poisson modeling. Qualitative analysts developed case summaries and created a cross-case data display for comparison. RESULTS: The results showed a reduction of 75% for colonoscopy [rate ratio (RR) = 0.250, 95% CI: 0.224-0.279], 78% for FIT/FOBT (RR = 0.218, 95% CI: 0.208-0.230), and 87% for Papanicolaou (RR = 0.130, 95% CI: 0.125-0.136) rates after the start of the pandemic. During this early pandemic period, CRC screening was impacted by hospitals halting services. Clinic staff moved toward FIT/FOBT screenings. CVC screening was impacted by guidelines encouraging pausing CVC screening, patient reluctance, and concerns about exposure. During the recovery period, leadership-driven preventive care prioritization and quality improvement capacity influenced CRC and CVC screening maintenance and recovery. CONCLUSIONS: Efforts supporting quality improvement capacity could be key actionable elements for these health centers to endure major disruptions to their care delivery system and to drive rapid recovery.

Comparison of two frailty screening tools in older patients with colorectal cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Geriatric assessment (GA) is widely used to detect vulnerability in older patients. As this process is time-consuming, prescreening tools have been developed to identify patients at risk for frailty. We aimed to assess whether the Geriatric 8 (G8) or the Korean Cancer Study Group Geriatric Score (KG-7) shows better performance in identifying patients who are in need of full GA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A consecutive series of patients aged ≥ 60 years with colorectal cancer were included. The sensitivity, specificity, predictive value, and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated for the G8 and the KG-7 using the results of GA as the reference standard. ROC(Receiver Operating Characteristic) was used to evaluate the accuracy of the G8 and the KG-7. RESULTS: One hundred four patients were enrolled. A total of 40.4% of patients were frail according to GA, and 42.3% and 50.0% of patients were frail based on the G8 and the KG-7, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of the G8 were 90.5% (95% CI: 77.4-97.3%) and 90.3% (95% CI: 80.1-96.4%), respectively. For the KG-7, the sensitivity and specificity were 83.3% (95% CI: 68.6-93.0%) and 72.6% (95% CI: 59.8-83.1%), respectively. Compared to the KG-7, the G8 had a higher predictive accuracy (AUC: (95% CI): 0.90 (0.83-0.95) vs. 0.78 (0.69-0.85); p < 0.01). By applying the G8 and the KG-7, 60 and 52 patients would not need a GA assessment, respectively. CONCLUSION: Both the G8 and the KG-7 showed a great ability to detect frailty in older patients with colorectal cancer. In this population, compared to the KG-7, the G8 had a better performance in identifying those in need of a full Geriatric Assessment.

Interactive or tailored digital interventions to increase uptake in cervical, breast, and colorectal cancer screening to reduce health inequity: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Significant health inequities exist in screening uptake for certain types of cancer. The review question was to identify and describe interactive, tailored digital, computer, and web-based interventions to reduce health inequity in cancer screening and review the effectiveness of such interventions in increasing screening rates versus usual care. METHODS: We searched four medical literature databases for randomized control trials (RCTs) published until 12 January 2023 that evaluated interventions aimed at increasing the percentage of breast, prostate, cervical, or colorectal cancer screening uptake. Meta-analysis was not conducted due to heterogeneity among studies. RESULTS: After screening 4200 titles and abstracts, 17 studies were included. Studies focused on colorectal ( n  = 10), breast ( n  = 4), cervical ( n  = 2), and prostate ( n  = 1) cancer screening. All were based in the USA except two. Most studies focused on ethnicity/race, while some included low-income populations. Intervention types were heterogeneous and used computer programs, apps, or web-based methods to provide tailored or interactive information to participants about screening risks and options. Some studies found positive effects for increasing cancer screening uptake in the intervention groups compared to usual care, but results were heterogeneous. CONCLUSION: Interventions that use individual and cultural tailoring of cancer screening educational material should be further developed and investigated outside of the USA. Designing effective digital intervention strategies, with components that can be adapted to remote delivery may be an important strategy for reducing health inequities in cancer screening during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

Projected long-term effects of colorectal cancer screening disruptions following the COVID-19 pandemic.

The aftermath of the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic may contribute to the widening of disparities in colorectal cancer (CRC) outcomes due to differential disruptions to CRC screening. This comparative microsimulation analysis uses two CISNET CRC models to simulate the impact of ongoing screening disruptions induced by the COVID-19 pandemic on long-term CRC outcomes. We evaluate three channels through which screening was disrupted: delays in screening, regimen switching, and screening discontinuation. The impact of these disruptions on long-term CRC outcomes was measured by the number of life-years lost due to CRC screening disruptions compared to a scenario without any disruptions. While short-term delays in screening of 3-18 months are predicted to result in minor life-years loss, discontinuing screening could result in much more significant reductions in the expected benefits of screening. These results demonstrate that unequal recovery of screening following the pandemic can widen disparities in CRC outcomes and emphasize the importance of ensuring equitable recovery to screening following the pandemic.

The impact of COVID-19 on screening for colorectal, gastric, breast, and cervical cancer in Korea.

OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected the utilization of healthcare services, including participation in cancer screening programs. We compared cancer screening participation rates for colorectal, gastric, breast, and cervical cancers among participants in the National Cancer Screening Program (NCSP) in 2019 and 2020 to address the potential distraction effect of COVID-19 on cancer screening. METHODS: Data from the NCSP for 4 cancer types (stomach, colorectal, breast, and cervical) in 2019 and 2020 were used to calculate cancer screening participation rates by calendar month, gender, age group, and geographical region. Monthly participation rates were analyzed per 1,000 eligible individuals. RESULTS: The screening participation rate decreased in 2020 compared to 2019 for all 4 cancers: colorectal (40.5 vs. 35.3%), gastric (61.9 vs. 54.6%), breast (63.8 vs. 55.8%), and cervical (57.8 vs. 52.2%) cancers. Following 2 major COVID-19 waves in March and December 2020, the participation rates in the 4 types of cancer screening dropped compared with those in 2019. The highest decline was observed in the elderly population aged 80 years and older (percentage change: -21% for colorectal cancer; -20% for gastric cancer; -26% for breast cancer; -20% for cervical cancer). CONCLUSIONS: After the 2 major COVID-19 waves, the screening participation rate for 4 types of cancer declined compared with 2019. Further studies are needed to identify the indirect effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer patients, such as delayed diagnoses of cancer or excess cancer deaths.

Impact of delayed screening invitations on screen-detected and interval cancers in the Dutch colorectal cancer screening programme: individual-level data analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of delayed invitation on screen-detected and interval colorectal cancers (CRC) within a faecal immunochemical testing (FIT)-based CRC screening programme. DESIGN: All individuals that participated in 2017 and 2018 with a negative FIT and were eligible for CRC screening in 2019 and 2020 were included using individual-level data. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to assess the association between either the different time periods (ie, 'before', 'during' and 'after' the first COVID-19 wave) or the invitation interval on screen-detected and interval CRCs. RESULTS: Positive predictive value for advanced neoplasia (AN) was slightly lower during (OR=0.91) and after (OR=0.95) the first COVID-19 wave, but no significant difference was observed for the different invitation intervals. Out of all individuals that previously tested negative, 84 (0.004%) had an interval CRC beyond the 24 months since their last invitation. The time period of invitation as well as the extended invitation interval was not associated with detection rates for AN and interval CRC rate. CONCLUSION: The impact of the first COVID-19 wave on screening yield was modest. A very small proportion of the FIT negatives had an interval CRC possibly due to an extended interval, which potentially could have been prevented if they had received the invitation earlier. Nonetheless, no increase in interval CRC rate was observed, indicating that an extended invitation interval up to 30 months had no negative impact on the performance of the CRC screening programme and a modest extension of the invitation interval seems an appropriate intervention.

Primary care provider interventions for addressing cancer screening participation with marginalised patients: a scoping review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Cancer screening is an integral component of primary care, and providers can play a key role in facilitating screening. While much work has focused on patient interventions, there has been less attention on primary care provider (PCP) interventions. In addition, marginalised patients experience disparities in cancer screening which are likely to worsen if not addressed. The objective of this scoping review is to report on the range, extent and nature of PCP interventions that maximise cancer screening participation among marginalised patients. Our review will target cancers where there is strong evidence to support screening, including lung, cervical, breast and colorectal cancers. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a scoping review conducted in accordance with the framework by Levac et al. Comprehensive searches will be conducted by a health sciences librarian using Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Scopus, CINAHL Complete and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We will include peer-reviewed English language literature published from 1 January 2000 to 31 March 2022 that describes PCP interventions to maximise cancer screening participation for breast, cervical, lung and colorectal cancers. Two independent reviewers will screen all articles and identify eligible studies for inclusion in two stages: title and abstract, then full text. A third reviewer will resolve any discrepancies. Charted data will be synthesised through a narrative synthesis using a piloted data extraction form informed by the Template for Intervention Description and Replication checklist. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Since this is a synthesis of digitally published literature, no ethics approval is needed for this work. We will target appropriate primary care or cancer screening journals and conference presentations to publish and disseminate the results of this scoping review. The results will also be used to inform an ongoing research study developing PCP interventions for addressing cancer screening with marginalised patients.

Defensive information processing and nonadherence to health-protective behaviors.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: In this issue of Cancer, Clarke et al. measure defensive information processing (DIP) to avoid fecal immunochemical testing for colorectal cancer. DIP is a way of reducing the negative psychological effects of threats such as cancer and may influence health-protective behaviors such as the completion of recommended cancer screening. This editorial complements Clarke et al.'s study with a discussion of interventions for decreasing DIP around cancer screening and other health-protective recommendations.

Perspectives on Self-Sampling for Cancer Screening From Staff at Federally Qualified Health Centers in Rural and Segregated Counties: A Preliminary Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Self-sampling for colorectal and cervical cancer screening can address the observed geographic disparities in cancer burden by alleviating barriers to screening participation, such as access to primary care. This preliminary study examines qualitative themes regarding cervical and colorectal cancer self-sampling screening tools among federally qualified health center clinical and administrative staff in underserved communities. METHODS: In-depth interviews were conducted with clinical or administrative employees (≥18 years of age) from FQHCs in rural and racially segregated counties in Pennsylvania. Data were managed and analyzed using QSR NVivo 12. Content analysis was used to identify themes about attitudes towards self-sampling for cancer screening. RESULTS: Eight interviews were conducted. Average participant age was 42 years old and 88% of participants were female. Participants indicated that a shared advantage for both colorectal and cervical cancer self-sampling tests was their potential to increase screening rates by simplifying the screening process and offering an alternative to those who decline traditional screening. A shared disadvantage to self-sampling was the potential for inaccurate sample collection, either through the test itself or the sample collection by the patient. CONCLUSIONS: Self-sampling offers a promising solution to increase cervical and colorectal cancer screening in rural and racially segregated communities. This study's findings can guide future research and interventions which integrate self-sampling screening into routine primary care practice.

Supply and quality of colonoscopy according to the characteristics of gastroenterologists in the French population-based colorectal-cancer screening program.

BACKGROUND: Since its complete roll-out in 2009, the French colorectal cancer screening program (CRCSP) experienced 3 major constraints [use of a less efficient Guaiac-test (gFOBT), stopping the supply of Fecal-Immunochemical-Test kits (FIT), and suspension of the program due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)] affecting its effectiveness. AIM: To describe the impact of the constraints in terms of changes in the quality of screening-colonoscopy (Quali-Colo). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included screening-colonoscopies performed by gastroenterologists between Jan-2010 and Dec-2020 in people aged 50-74 living in Ile-de-France (France). The changes in Quali-colo (Proportion of colonoscopies performed beyond 7 mo (Colo_7 mo), Frequency of serious adverse events (SAE) and Colonoscopy detection rate) were described in a cohort of Gastroenterologists who performed at least one colonoscopy over each of the four periods defined according to the chronology of the constraints [gFOBT: Normal progress of the CRCSP using gFOBT (2010-2014); FIT: Normal progress of the CRCSP using FIT (2015-2018); STOP-FIT: Year (2019) during which the CRCSP experienced the cessation of the supply of test kits; COVID: Program suspension due to the COVID-19 health crisis (2020)]. The link between each dependent variable (Colo_7 mo; SAE occurrence, neoplasm detection rate) and the predictive factors was analyzed in a two-level multivariate hierarchical model. RESULTS: The 533 gastroenterologists (cohort) achieved 21509 screening colonoscopies over gFOBT period, 38352 over FIT, 7342 over STOP-FIT and 7995 over COVID period. The frequency of SAE did not change between periods (gFOBT: 0.3%; FIT: 0.3%; STOP-FIT: 0.3%; and COVID: 0.2%; P = 0.10). The risk of Colo_7 mo doubled between FIT [adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.2 (1.1; 1.2)] and STOP-FIT [aOR: 2.4 (2.1; 2.6)]; then, decreased by 40% between STOP-FIT and COVID [aOR: 2.0 (1.8; 2.2)]. Regardless of the period, this Colo_7 mo's risk was twice as high for screening colonoscopy performed in a public hospital [aOR: 2.1 (1.3; 3.6)] compared to screening-colonoscopy performed in a private clinic. The neoplasm detection, which increased by 60% between gFOBT and FIT [aOR: 1.6 (1.5; 1.7)], decreased by 40% between FIT and COVID [aOR: 1.1 (1.0; 1.3)]. CONCLUSION: The constraints likely affected the time-to-colonoscopy as well as the colonoscopy detection rate without impacting the SAE's occurrence, highlighting the need for a respectable reference time-to-colonoscopy in CRCSP.

The Impact of SARS-COV-2 on two Colorectal Cancer screening centres.

BowelScreen paused activity in March 2020 to prioritise the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this study was to examine the impact of this delay. Cases affected by the pause and subsequently completed were compared to the same period in 2019. Endoscopy and histology data were obtained from the BowelScreen database and patient records. One-hundred and seven colonoscopies were performed during the study period. This compared with 224 colonoscopies during the same period in 2019. Median lead time to colonoscopy in 2020 was 74 days compared to 34 days in 2019. Adenoma detection rate was 59% for both periods. Advanced adenoma and cancer detection rates were similar in both periods. While there was a marked reduction in activity and significant delays for BowelScreen patients during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, this does not appear to have impacted on clinical outcomes for patients who attended for screening colonoscopy.

A modelled evaluation of the impact of COVID-19 on breast, bowel, and cervical cancer screening programmes in Australia.

Australia introduced COVID-19 infection prevention and control measures in early 2020. To help prepare health services, the Australian Government Department of Health commissioned a modelled evaluation of the impact of disruptions to population breast, bowel, and cervical cancer screening programmes on cancer outcomes and cancer services. We used the Policy1 modelling platforms to predict outcomes for potential disruptions to cancer screening participation, covering periods of 3, 6, 9, and 12 mo. We estimated missed screens, clinical outcomes (cancer incidence, tumour staging), and various diagnostic service impacts. We found that a 12-mo screening disruption would reduce breast cancer diagnoses (9.3% population-level reduction over 2020-2021) and colorectal cancer (up to 12.1% reduction over 2020-21), and increase cervical cancer diagnoses (up to 3.6% over 2020-2022), with upstaging expected for these cancer types (2, 1.4, and 6.8% for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers, respectively). Findings for 6-12-mo disruption scenarios illustrate that maintaining screening participation is critical to preventing an increase in the burden of cancer at a population level. We provide programme-specific insights into which outcomes are expected to change, when changes are likely to become apparent, and likely downstream impacts. This evaluation provided evidence to guide decision-making for screening programmes and emphasises the ongoing benefits of maintaining screening in the face of potential future disruptions.

Inequalities in colorectal cancer screening uptake in Wales: an examination of the impact of the temporary suspension of the screening programme during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Response to the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in the temporary disruption of cancer screening in the UK, and strong public messaging to stay safe and to protect NHS capacity. Following reintroduction in services, we explored the impact on inequalities in uptake of the Bowel Screening Wales (BSW) programme to identify groups who may benefit from tailored interventions. METHODS: Records within the BSW were linked to electronic health records (EHR) and administrative data within the Secured Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank. Ethnic group was obtained from a linked data method available within SAIL. We examined uptake for the first 3 months of invitations (August to October) following the reintroduction of BSW programme in 2020, compared to the same period in the preceding 3 years. Uptake was measured across a 6 month follow-up period. Logistic models were conducted to analyse variations in uptake by sex, age group, income deprivation quintile, urban/rural location, ethnic group, and clinically extremely vulnerable (CEV) status in each period; and to compare uptake within sociodemographic groups between different periods. RESULTS: Uptake during August to October 2020 (period 2020/21; 60.4%) declined compared to the same period in 2019/20 (62.7%) but remained above the 60% Welsh standard. Variation by sex, age, income deprivation, and ethnic groups was observed in all periods studied. Compared to the pre-pandemic period in 2019/20, uptake declined for most demographic groups, except for older individuals (70-74 years) and those in the most income deprived group. Uptake continues to be lower in males, younger individuals, people living in the most income deprived areas and those of Asian and unknown ethnic backgrounds. CONCLUSION: Our findings are encouraging with overall uptake achieving the 60% Welsh standard during the first three months after the programme restarted in 2020 despite the disruption. Inequalities did not worsen after the programme resumed activities but variations in CRC screening in Wales associated with sex, age, deprivation and ethnic group remain. This needs to be considered in targeting strategies to improve uptake and informed choice in CRC screening to avoid exacerbating disparities in CRC outcomes as screening services recover from the pandemic.

Colorectal Cancer Screening During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Shared decision-making (SDM) can help patients make good decisions about preventive health interventions such as cancer screening. We illustrate the use of SDM in the case of a 53-year-old man who had a new patient visit with a primary care physician and had never been screened for colorectal cancer (CRC). The patient had recently recovered from a serious COVID-19 infection requiring weeks of mechanical ventilation. When the primary care physician initially offered a screening colonoscopy, the man expressed great reluctance to return to the hospital for the exam. The PCP then offered a stool test, which could be completed at home, but emphasized that if it were positive, a colonoscopy would be required. He agreed to complete the stool test, and unfortunately, it was positive. He then agreed to undergo colonoscopy, which uncovered a large rectal cancer. The carcinoma had invaded the mesorectal fat but there were no metastases. After undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by a low anterior resection of the tumor, he has no evidence of recurrence so far. Many clinicians favor colonoscopy for CRC screening, but evidence suggests that patients who are offered more than one reasonable option are more likely to undergo screening. If screening had been delayed in this patient until he was willing to accept a screening colonoscopy, there was the potential the cancer may have been more advanced when diagnosed, with a worse outcome. Shared decision-making was a key approach to understanding the patient's feelings related to this screening decision and making a decision consistent with his preferences.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Fecal Immunochemical Testing, Colonoscopy Services, and Colorectal Neoplasia Detection in a Large United States Community-based Population.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected clinical services globally, including colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and diagnostic testing. We investigated the pandemic's impact on fecal immunochemical test (FIT) screening, colonoscopy utilization, and colorectal neoplasia detection across 21 medical centers in a large integrated health care organization. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study in Kaiser Permanente Northern California patients ages 18 to 89 years in 2019 and 2020 and measured changes in the numbers of mailed, completed, and positive FITs; colonoscopies; and cases of colorectal neoplasia detected by colonoscopy in 2020 vs 2019. RESULTS: FIT kit mailings ceased in mid-March through April 2020 but then rebounded and there was an 8.7% increase in kits mailed compared with 2019. With the later mailing of FIT kits, there were 9.0% fewer FITs completed and 10.1% fewer positive tests in 2020 vs 2019. Colonoscopy volumes declined 79.4% in April 2020 compared with April 2019 but recovered to near pre-pandemic volumes in September through December, resulting in a 26.9% decline in total colonoscopies performed in 2020. The number of patients diagnosed by colonoscopy with CRC and advanced adenoma declined by 8.7% and 26.9%, respectively, in 2020 vs 2019. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic led to fewer FIT screenings and colonoscopies in 2020 vs 2019; however, after the lifting of shelter-in-place orders, FIT screenings exceeded, and colonoscopy volumes nearly reached numbers from those same months in 2019. Overall, there was an 8.7% reduction in CRC cases diagnosed by colonoscopy in 2020. These data may help inform the development of strategies for CRC screening and diagnostic testing during future national emergencies.

Has the COVID-19 pandemic changed the clinical picture and tumour stage at the time of presentation of patients with colorectal cancer? A retrospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment of patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected the management of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). The aim of this study was to compare the diagnosis delay, symptoms, and stage of patients with CRC during the pandemic with a control cohort. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients referred to the CRC multidisciplinary team between September 2019 and January 2020 (cohort 1, control group) were compared with those who presented between September 2020 and March 2021 (cohort 2, pandemic group). RESULTS: 389 patients were included, 169 in cohort 1 and 220 in cohort 2. No differences were observed in the main characteristics of the patients. CRC screening and anaemia were the most common causes leading to the diagnosis of the tumour in cohort 1 and 2, respectively (p<0.001). Diagnostic and therapeutic delay was longer in cohort 2 [6.4 (95% CI 5.8-6.9) vs. 4.8 (95% CI 4.3-5.3) months, p<0.001]. More patients required non-elective treatment in the pandemic cohort (15.5% vs. 9.5%, p=0.080). The tumour stage was more advanced in patients in cohort 2 [positive nodes in 52.3% vs. 36.7% (p=0.002), and metastatic disease in 23.6% vs. 16.6% (p=0.087)]. CONCLUSION: CRC patients in the pandemic cohort had a longer diagnostic and therapeutic delay and less patients were diagnosed because of CRC screening. In addition, patients with CRC during the pandemic needed non-elective treatment more frequently than patients in the control cohort, and their tumour stage tended to be more advanced.

Rates of Follow-up Colonoscopy After a Positive Stool-Based Screening Test Result for Colorectal Cancer Among Health Care Organizations in the US, 2017-2020.

Importance: Noninvasive stool-based screening tests (SBTs) are effective alternatives to colonoscopy. However, a positive SBT result requires timely follow-up colonoscopy (FU-CY) to complete the colorectal cancer screening paradigm. Objectives: To evaluate FU-CY rates after a positive SBT result and to assess the association of the early COVID-19 pandemic with FU-CY rates. Design, Setting, and Participants: This mixed-methods cohort study included retrospective analysis of deidentified administrative claims and electronic health records data between June 1, 2015, and June 30, 2021, from the Optum Labs Data Warehouse and qualitative, semistructured interviews with clinicians from 5 health care organizations (HCOs). The study population included data from average-risk primary care patients aged 50 to 75 years with a positive SBT result between January 1, 2017, and June 30, 2020, at 39 HCOs. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the FU-CY rate within 1 year of a positive SBT result according to patient age, sex, race, ethnicity, insurance type, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), and prior SBT use. Results: This cohort study included 32 769 individuals (16 929 [51.7%] female; mean [SD] age, 63.1 [7.1] years; 2092 [6.4%] of Black and 28 832 [88.0%] of White race; and 825 [2.5%] of Hispanic ethnicity). The FU-CY rates were 43.3% within 90 days of the positive SBT result, 51.4% within 180 days, and 56.1% within 360 days (n = 32 769). In interviews, clinicians were uniformly surprised by the low FU-CY rates. Rates varied by race, ethnicity, insurance type, presence of comorbidities, and SBT used. In the Cox proportional hazards regression model, the strongest positive association was with multitarget stool DNA use (hazard ratio, 1.63 [95% CI, 1.57-1.68] relative to fecal immunochemical tests; P < .001), and the strongest negative association was with the presence of comorbidities (hazard ratio, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.59-0.71] for a CCI of >4 relative to 0; P < .001). The early COVID-19 pandemic was associated with lower FU-CY rates. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that FU-CY rates after a positive SBT result for colorectal cancer screening were low among an average-risk population, with the median HCO achieving a 53.4% FU-CY rate within 1 year. Socioeconomic factors and the COVID-19 pandemic were associated with lower FU-CY rates, presenting opportunities for targeted intervention by clinicians and health care systems.

Nationwide participation in FIT-based colorectal cancer screening in Denmark during the COVID-19 pandemic: An observational study.

Background: Worldwide, most colorectal cancer screening programmes were paused at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, while the Danish faecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based programme continued without pausing. We examined colorectal cancer screening participation and compliance with subsequent colonoscopy in Denmark throughout the pandemic. Methods: We used data from the Danish Colorectal Cancer Screening Database among individuals aged 50-74 years old invited to participate in colorectal cancer screening from 2018 to 2021 combined with population-wide registries. Using a generalised linear model, we estimated prevalence ratios (PRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of colorectal cancer screening participation within 90 days since invitation and compliance with colonoscopy within 60 days since a positive FIT test during the pandemic in comparison with the previous years adjusting for age, month and year of invitation. Results: Altogether, 3,133,947 invitations were sent out to 1,928,725 individuals and there were 94,373 positive FIT tests (in 92,848 individuals) during the study period. Before the pandemic, 60.7% participated in screening within 90 days. A minor reduction in participation was observed at the start of the pandemic (PR = 0.95; 95% CI: 0.94-0.96 in pre-lockdown and PR = 0.85; 95% CI: 0.85-0.86 in first lockdown) corresponding to a participation rate of 54.9% during pre-lockdown and 53.0% during first lockdown. This was followed by a 5-10% increased participation in screening corresponding to a participation rate of up to 64.9%. The largest increase in participation was observed among 55-59 years old and among immigrants. The compliance with colonoscopy within 60 days was 89.9% before the pandemic. A slight reduction was observed during first lockdown (PR = 0.96; 95% CI: 0.93-0.98), where after it resumed to normal levels. Conclusions: Participation in the Danish FIT-based colorectal cancer screening programme and subsequent compliance to colonoscopy after a positive FIT result was only slightly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Funding: The study was funded by the Danish Cancer Society Scientific Committee (Grant number R321-A17417) and the Danish regions.

A Follow-up Report on the Diagnosis of Gastrointestinal Cancer during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Akita Prefecture, Japan in 2021.

We recently reported the decrease in the number of gastrointestinal (GI) cancer diagnoses in 2020 due to disturbance of the healthcare system by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, using a hospital-based cancer registration system in Akita prefecture, Japan. In this study, we extended the research by showing the latest data (2021) on the number of cancers and examinations. Information on the occurrence and stage of esophageal, gastric, and colorectal cancers was collected from the same database. The number of GI examinations (cancer screening procedures and endoscopic examinations) was also investigated. Following the immediate decrease in the numbers of both GI examinations and GI cancer diagnoses in 2020, a rebound increase in the numbers of GI cancer diagnoses-especially colorectal cancers-was observed in 2021, resulting from an increased number of GI examinations i.e., the total number of colorectal cancers in 2021 increased by 9.0% and 6.8% in comparison to 2020 and pre-pandemic era, respectively. However, the rebound increase in 2021 was largely due to an increase in early-stage cancers, and there was no apparent trend toward the increased predominance of more advanced cancers. It therefore seems that we managed to escape from the worst-case scenario of disturbance of the healthcare system due to pandemic (i.e., an increase in the number of more advanced cancers due to delayed diagnoses). We need to continue to watch the trends in Akita prefecture, which has the highest rate of mortality from the 3 major GI cancers in Japan.