8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Global perspective on colonoscopy use for colorectal cancer screening: A multi-country survey of practicing colonoscopists

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives

          To examine colorectal cancer screening practices among colonoscopy specialists from 5 countries and inform public health needs in improvement of the ongoing global crisis in colorectal cancer.

          Methods

          An online survey among colonoscopy specialists was conducted in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Japan, and the United States. The survey covered topics on colonoscopy practices in the screening as well as in the treatment setting, as well as expected trends.

          Results

          Participating colonoscopy specialists included 114 physicians from the United States, 81 from France, 80 from Germany, 80 from the United Kingdom, and 156 from Japan. Survey results revealed that 59%–73% of colonoscopies were performed in patients aged 50–75 years old, with 15%–23% performed in patients <50 years old. The proportion of patients with age-based versus symptom-based first colorectal cancer screening varied by country and age. Sedation protocols varied by country; however, rate of incomplete colonoscopy was low in all countries. The proportion of negative first colonoscopies decreased with age in all countries.

          Conclusions

          This multi-country survey of real-world clinical practices suggests a need for improved participation in population age-based colorectal cancer screening and possibly younger age of screening initiation than currently recommended by guidelines. The variation among countries in the proportion of patients who received their first colonoscopy due to age-based colorectal cancer screening versus symptom-based initial colonoscopy indicates that population-based screening initiatives and improved health outcomes will benefit from public health awareness programs.

          Related collections

          Most cited references11

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Is it time to lower the recommended screening age for colorectal cancer?

          Overall, colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence in the US has decreased over the last 30 years, yet it has increased in patients younger than 50. Cancers in this population are more aggressive and advanced at diagnosis. Our goal was to determine if screening should begin at a younger age. To accomplish this, we analyzed the rates of change in CRC incidence, and compared the incidence with that of cervical cancer (CC), which is screened earlier. Locations of CRC were compared to determine the appropriate screening method.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Survival of patients with symptom- and screening-detected colorectal cancer

            Background An increasing proportion of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients are diagnosed by screening rather than symptoms. Aims We aimed to assess and compare prognosis of patients with screen-detected CRC and symptom-detected CRC. Methods Overall and CRC specific mortality over a median follow-up of 4.8 years was assessed according to mode of diagnosis (symptoms, screening colonoscopy, fecal occult blood test [FOBT], other) in a multi-center cohort of 2,450 CRC patients aged 50-79 years recruited in Germany in 2003-2010. Results 68%, 11% and 10% were detected by symptoms, screening colonoscopy and FOBT, respectively. The screen-detected cancers had a more favorable stage distribution than the symptom-detected cancers (68% versus 50% in stage I or II). Age- and sex adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) of total mortality with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) compared to symptom-detected cancers were 0.35 (0.24-0.50) and 0.36 (0.25-0.53) for screening colonoscopy and FOBT detected CRCs, respectively. HRs were only slightly attenuated and remained highly significant after adjustment for stage and multiple other covariates (0.50 (0.34-0.73) and 0.54 (0.37-0.80), respectively). Even stronger associations were seen for CRC specific mortality. Patients with screen-detected stage III CRC had as good CRC specific survival as patients with symptom-detected stage I or II CRC. Conclusions Patients with screen-detected CRC have a very good prognosis far beyond the level explained by their more favorable stage distribution. Mode of detection is an important, easy-to-obtain proxy indicator for favorable diagnosis beyond earlier stage at diagnosis and as such may be useful for risk stratification in treatment decisions.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              DNA from fecal immunochemical test can replace stool for detection of colonic lesions using a microbiota-based model

              Background There is a significant demand for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening methods that are noninvasive, inexpensive, and capable of accurately detecting early stage tumors. It has been shown that models based on the gut microbiota can complement the fecal occult blood test and fecal immunochemical test (FIT). However, a barrier to microbiota-based screening is the need to collect and store a patient’s stool sample. Results Using stool samples collected from 404 patients, we tested whether the residual buffer containing resuspended feces in FIT cartridges could be used in place of intact stool samples. We found that the bacterial DNA isolated from FIT cartridges largely recapitulated the community structure and membership of patients’ stool microbiota and that the abundance of bacteria associated with CRC were conserved. We also found that models for detecting CRC that were generated using bacterial abundances from FIT cartridges were equally predictive as models generated using bacterial abundances from stool. Conclusions These findings demonstrate the potential for using residual buffer from FIT cartridges in place of stool for microbiota-based screening for CRC. This may reduce the need to collect and process separate stool samples and may facilitate combining FIT and microbiota-based biomarkers into a single test. Additionally, FIT cartridges could constitute a novel data source for studying the role of the microbiome in cancer and other diseases.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Contemp Clin Trials Commun
                Contemp Clin Trials Commun
                Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications
                Elsevier
                2451-8654
                24 June 2017
                September 2017
                24 June 2017
                : 7
                : 116-121
                Affiliations
                [a ]Deerfield Institute, Epalinges, Switzerland
                [b ]Deerfield Institute, New York, NY, USA
                Author notes
                []Corresponding author. caudibert@ 123456deerfield.com
                Article
                S2451-8654(17)30023-6
                10.1016/j.conctc.2017.06.008
                5898517
                29696175
                3ff8e3e3-bd8a-4f2a-9212-d813531c5e09
                © 2017 The Authors

                This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

                History
                : 6 February 2017
                : 16 June 2017
                : 21 June 2017
                Categories
                Article

                colonoscopy,screening,colorectal cancer,european union,japan,united states

                Comments

                Comment on this article