Effect of Behavioral Interventions on the Uptake of Colonoscopy for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Screening decreases colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, but uptake in the United States remains suboptimal. Prior studies have investigated the effect of various interventions on overall colorectal cancer screening and stool-based testing, but the effect on colonoscopy-the predominant screening test in the United States-has not been fully examined. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effect of behavioral interventions on screening colonoscopy uptake. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases through January 2022 for controlled trials that assessed the effect of behavioral interventions on screening colonoscopy uptake. All titles, abstracts, and articles were screened by at least 2 independent reviewers. Odds ratios were extracted from the original article or calculated from the raw data. The primary outcome was the relative increase in screening colonoscopy completion with any behavioral intervention. We performed random-effects meta-analysis, with subgroup analysis by type of intervention. RESULTS: A total of 25 studies with 30 behavioral interventions were analyzed. The most common interventions were patient navigation (n = 11) and multicomponent interventions (n = 6). Overall, behavioral interventions increased colonoscopy completion by 54% compared with controls (odds ratio [OR] 1.54, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.26-1.88). Patient navigation (OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.35-2.34) and multicomponent interventions (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.17-2.89) had the strongest effect on colonoscopy completion among interventions examined in multiple studies. Significant heterogeneity was observed both overall and by intervention type. There was no evidence of publication bias. DISCUSSION: Behavioral interventions increase screening colonoscopy completion and should be adopted in clinical practice. In particular, patient navigation and multicomponent interventions are the best-studied and most effective interventions.

A Practical Overview of the Stool DNA Test for Colorectal Cancer Screening.

The multitarget stool DNA test with fecal immunochemical test (sDNA-FIT) is recommended by all major US guidelines as an option for colorectal cancer screening. It is approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in average-risk individuals aged 45 years and older. The sDNA-FIT tests for 11 biomarkers, including point mutations in KRAS, aberrant methylation in NDRG4 and BMP3, and human hemoglobin. Patients collect a stool sample at home, send it to the manufacturer's laboratory within 1 day, and the result is reported in approximately 2 weeks. Compared with FIT, sDNA-FIT has higher sensitivity but lower specificity for colorectal cancer, which translates to a higher false-positive rate. A unique feature of sDNA-FIT is the manufacturer's comprehensive patient navigation system, which operates 24 hours a day and provides active outreach for patient education and reminders in the first month after a test is ordered. Retesting is recommended every 1-3 years, although the optimal testing interval has not yet been determined empirically. The cost of sDNA-FIT is $681 without insurance, but Medicare and most private insurers cover it with no copay or deductible.

Low Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake and Persistent Disparities in an Underserved Urban Population.

Colorectal cancer screening has increased substantially in New York City in recent years. However, screening uptake measured by telephone surveys may not fully capture rates among underserved populations. We measured screening completion within 1 year of a primary care visit among previously unscreened patients in a large urban safety-net hospital and identified sociodemographic and health-related predictors of screening.We identified 21,256 patients ages 50 to 75 who were seen by primary care providers (PCP) in 2014, of whom 14,425 (67.9%) were not up-to-date with screening. Because PCPs facilitate the majority of screening, we compared patients who received screening within 1 year of an initial PCP visit to those who remained unscreened using multivariable logistic regression.Among patients not up-to-date with screening at study outset, 11.5% (1,658 patients) completed screening within 1 year of a PCP visit. Asian race, more PCP visits, and higher area-level income were associated with higher screening completion. Factors associated with remaining unscreened included morbid obesity, ever smoking, Elixhauser comorbidity index of 0, and having Medicaid/Medicare insurance. Age, sex, language, and travel time to the hospital were not associated with screening status. Overall, 39.9% of patients were up-to-date with screening by 2015.In an underserved urban population, colorectal cancer screening disparities remain, and overall screening uptake was low. Because more PCP visits were associated with modestly higher screening completion at 1 year, additional community-level education and outreach may be crucial to increase colorectal cancer screening in underserved populations.

Risk Factors Associated With Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) is increasing in individuals younger than 50 years, who do not usually undergo screening if they are of average risk. We sought to identify risk factors for CRC in this population. METHODS: We compared sociodemographic and medical characteristics of patients who received a diagnosis of CRC at an age of 18-49 years (early-onset) with patients who received a diagnosis of CRC at an age of 50 years or older (late-onset) and with age-matched, cancer-free individuals (controls) at a tertiary academic hospital. We collected data from all adult patients with a diagnosis of CRC from January 1, 2011 through April 3, 2017 from electronic health records. Associations with risk factors were assessed using univariable and multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: We identified 269 patients with early-onset CRC, 2802 with late-onset CRC, and 1122 controls. Compared with controls, patients with early-onset CRC were more likely to be male (odds ratio [OR], 1.87; 95% CI, 1.39-2.51), have inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) (3% vs 0.4% for controls; univariable P < .01), and have a family history of CRC (OR, 8.61; CI, 4.83-15.75). Prevalence values of well-established modifiable CRC risk factors, including obesity, smoking, and diabetes, were similar. Compared to patients with late-onset CRC, patients with early-onset CRC were more likely to be male (OR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.11-1.87), black (OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.08-2.65) or Asian (OR, 2.60; 95% CI, 1.57-4.15), and have IBD (OR, 2.97; 95% CI, 1.16-6.63) or a family history of CRC (OR, 2.87; 95% CI, 1.89-4.25). Sensitivity analyses excluding IBD and family history of CRC showed comparable results. Early-onset CRC was more likely than late-onset disease to be detected in the left colon or rectum (75% vs 59%, P = .02) and at a late stage of tumor development (77% vs 62%, P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: In a retrospective study of patients with early-onset CRC vs late-onset CRC or no cancer, we identified non-modifiable risk factors, including sex, race, IBD, and family history of CRC, to be associated with early-onset CRC.

Personalized Circulating Tumor DNA Biomarkers Dynamically Predict Treatment Response and Survival In Gynecologic Cancers.

BACKGROUND: High-grade serous ovarian and endometrial cancers are the most lethal female reproductive tract malignancies worldwide. In part, failure to treat these two aggressive cancers successfully centers on the fact that while the majority of patients are diagnosed based on current surveillance strategies as having a complete clinical response to their primary therapy, nearly half will develop disease recurrence within 18 months and the majority will die from disease recurrence within 5 years. Moreover, no currently used biomarkers or imaging studies can predict outcome following initial treatment. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) represents a theoretically powerful biomarker for detecting otherwise occult disease. We therefore explored the use of personalized ctDNA markers as both a surveillance and prognostic biomarker in gynecologic cancers and compared this to current FDA-approved surveillance tools. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Tumor and serum samples were collected at time of surgery and then throughout treatment course for 44 patients with gynecologic cancers, representing 22 ovarian cancer cases, 17 uterine cancer cases, one peritoneal, three fallopian tube, and one patient with synchronous fallopian tube and uterine cancer. Patient/tumor-specific mutations were identified using whole-exome and targeted gene sequencing and ctDNA levels quantified using droplet digital PCR. CtDNA was detected in 93.8% of patients for whom probes were designed and levels were highly correlated with CA-125 serum and computed tomography (CT) scanning results. In six patients, ctDNA detected the presence of cancer even when CT scanning was negative and, on average, had a predictive lead time of seven months over CT imaging. Most notably, undetectable levels of ctDNA at six months following initial treatment was associated with markedly improved progression free and overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: Detection of residual disease in gynecologic, and indeed all cancers, represents a diagnostic dilemma and a potential critical inflection point in precision medicine. This study suggests that the use of personalized ctDNA biomarkers in gynecologic cancers can identify the presence of residual tumor while also more dynamically predicting response to treatment relative to currently used serum and imaging studies. Of particular interest, ctDNA was an independent predictor of survival in patients with ovarian and endometrial cancers. Earlier recognition of disease persistence and/or recurrence and the ability to stratify into better and worse outcome groups through ctDNA surveillance may open the window for improved survival and quality and life in these cancers.