Impending or pending? The national bowel cancer screening programme.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Atkin WS
PROVIDER: S-EPMC1420723 | biostudies-literature | 2006 Apr
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Impending or pending? The national bowel cancer screening programme.
BMJ (Clinical research ed.) 20060322 7544
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7282551 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) in England does not involve general practitioners (GPs). Uptake is ∼58%. The Practice Endorsed Additional Reminder Letter (PEARL) study piloted a GP-endorsed reminder letter.MethodsGeneral practices in Wessex with uptake <55% (prevalent invitations) were invited to participate. Subjects who had been invited for screening, sent a standard 28-day BCSP reminder letter but had not returned a test kit within 30 days of the standard reminder were sent a second reminder letter bearing the GP's letterhead and signature. Uptake was compared between PEARL and non-PEARL practices by standardised uptake ratio (standardised for prior prevalent uptake and other confounders). In addition, 25 non-PEARL practices were matched with PEARL practices for prior prevalent uptake and number of invitees.ResultsTwenty-five practices agreed to participate. A total of 3149 GP-endorsed reminders were sent. Uptake in the PEARL practices was 54% compared with 51% in the matched-control practices. The adjusted RR for uptake was 1.08 (95% CI: 1.05, 1.11, P<0.001) for all invitees and 2.18 (1.79, 2.66, P<0.001) for invitees who had not returned a kit following the standard reminder.ConclusionsThe GP-endorsed reminder was associated with significantly increased uptake among subjects not responding to the standard reminder letter.
| S-EPMC5518858 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Most types of population-based cancer screening require repeat participation to be effective. This study investigated predictors of repeat participation in the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP).The BCSP in England offers biennial colorectal cancer screening using a guaiac fecal occult blood test (gFOBt) from age 60-74 years. This analysis included 62,081 individuals aged 60-64 years at the time of the first invitation (R1). The main outcome was repeat participation at their second (R2) or third (R3) invitation. Behavioural measures derived from screening records included late return of the gFOBt kit, compliance with follow-up investigations and previous screening participation. Other potential predictors of repeat participation included results of individual test kit analysis (normal, weak positive, strong positive, spoilt) and the definitive result of the gFOBt screening episode (normal or abnormal). Age, sex and socioeconomic deprivation were also recorded.Overall repeat uptake was 86.6% in R2 and 88.6% in R3. Late return of the test kit was consistently associated with lower uptake (R2: 82.3% vs 88.6%, P<0.001; R3: 84.5% vs 90.5%, P<0.001). A definitive abnormal gFOBt result in the previous screening episode was a negative predictor of repeat uptake (R2: 61.4% vs 86.8%, P<0.001; R3: 65.7% vs 88.8%, P<0.001). Weak positive (R2: 76.9% vs 86.8%, P<0.001; R3: 81.7% vs 88.8%, P<0.05) and spoilt test kits (R2: 79.0% vs 86.6%, NS; R3: 84.2% vs 92.2%, P<0.05) were associated with lower repeat uptake, but were not consistently independent predictors in all invitation rounds or subgroups. Among those with a definitive abnormal gFOBt result, noncompliance with follow-up in a previous screening episode was also associated with lower repeat uptake (R2: 24.3% vs 67.1%, P<0.001; R3: 43.2% vs 69.9%, P<0.001).Behavioural markers and test results from previous screening episodes have been implicated in subsequent gFOBt uptake.
| S-EPMC4453613 | biostudies-other
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC527686 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe impact of multiple health conditions on bowel cancer screening is currently unknown. We explored the impact of multiple health conditions on bowel cancer screening perceptions, experience and clinical management decisions following a positive stool test.MethodsSemi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted remotely with Bowel Screening Wales staff (n = 16) stratified by regional location and role and with screening participants (n = 19) stratified by age, gender and comorbidity. Interview topics were guided by the Common-Sense Model.ResultsScreening participants, regardless of comorbidity status, placed great emphasis on the importance of early detection of cancer and completing the bowel screening process. Screening staff emphasised comorbidities in the clinical decision-making process; however, screening participants had low awareness of the impact that comorbidities can have on bowel screening. Participants describe how the presence of multiple health conditions can mask potential bowel symptoms and influence beliefs about follow-up.ConclusionBowel screening staff try to individualise the service to meet participant needs. The potential mismatch in screening staff and participant awareness and expectations of the bowel screening and diagnostic process needs to be addressed. Clearer and more regular communication with screening participants could support the screening process, particularly for those with significant coexisting health conditions or facing time delays. The possible masking effects and misattribution of symptoms because of comorbidities highlight an opportunity for education and raising awareness for screening participants and a potential area of focus for discussions in clinical consultations and staff training.Patient and public contributionProject funding included costs for patients and public contributors to be compensated for their contributions to the project, in line with current standards. A patient and public contributor was involved in the design of the study, including protocol development, and the interpretation of key findings and implications for patients, which are subsequently reflected within the manuscript.
| S-EPMC11217598 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo estimate the impact of various expansion scenarios of the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) on the number of bowel cancer deaths prevented; and to investigate the impact of the expansion scenarios on colonoscopy demand.DesignMISCAN-Colon, a well established, validated computer simulation model for bowel cancer screening, was adjusted to reflect the Australian situation. In July 2013, we simulated the effects of screening over a 50-year period, starting in 2006. The model parameters included rates of participation in screening and follow-up, rates of identification of cancerous and precancerous lesions, bowel cancer incidence, mortality and the outcomes of the NBCSP. Five implementation scenarios, based on biennial screening using an immunochemical faecal occult blood test, were developed and modelled. A sensitivity analysis that increased screening participation to 60% was also conducted.ParticipantsAustralian residents aged 50 to 74 years.Main outcome measuresComparison of the impact of five implementation scenarios on the number of bowel cancer deaths prevented and demand for colonoscopy.ResultsMISCAN-Colon calculated that in its current state, the NBCSP should prevent 35 169 bowel cancer deaths in the coming 40 years. Accelerating the expansion of the program to achieve biennial screening by 2020 would prevent more than 70 000 deaths. If complete implementation of biennial screening results in a corresponding increase in participation to 60%, the number of deaths prevented will increase across all scenarios.ConclusionsThe findings strongly support the need for rapid implementation of the NBCSP. Compared with the current situation, achieving biennial screening by 2020 could result in 100% more bowel cancer deaths (about 35 000) being prevented in the coming 40 years.
| S-EPMC4412258 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: Although gastric cancer screening is common among countries with a high prevalence of gastric cancer, there is little data to support the effectiveness of this screening. This study was designed to determine the differences in stage at diagnosis of gastric cancer according to the screening history and screening method (upper gastrointestinal series (UGIS) vs endoscopy). METHODS: The study population was derived from the National Cancer Screening Programme (NCSP), a nationwide organised screening programme in Korea. The study cohort consisted of 19 168 gastric cancer patients who had been diagnosed in 2007 and who were invited to undergo gastric cancer screening via the NCSP between 2002 and 2007. RESULTS: Compared with never-screened patients, the odds ratios for being diagnosed with localised gastric cancer in endoscopy-screened patients and UGIS-screened patients were 2.10 (95% CI=1.90-2.33) and 1.24 (95% CI=1.13-1.36), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Screening by endoscopy was more strongly associated with a diagnosis of localised stage gastric cancer compared with screening by UGIS.
| S-EPMC4453643 | biostudies-other
Project description:BACKGROUND: The NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) offers biennial faecal occult blood testing (FOBt) followed by colonoscopy after positive results. Colorectal cancers (CRCs) registered with the Northern Colorectal Cancer Audit Group database were cross-referenced with the BCSP database to analyse their screening history. METHODS: The CRCs in the screening population between April 2007 and March 2010 were identified and classified into four groups: control (diagnosed before first screening invite), screen-detected, interval (diagnosed between screening rounds after a negative FOBt), and non-uptake (declined screening). Patient demographics, tumour characteristics and survival were compared between groups. RESULTS: In all, 511 out of 1336 (38.2%) CRCs were controls; 825 (61.8%) were in individuals invited for screening of which 322 (39.0%) were screen detected, 311 (37.7%) were in the non-uptake group, and 192 (23.3%) were interval cancers. Compared with the control and interval cancer group, the screen-detected group had a higher proportion of men (P=0.002, P=0.003 respectively), left colon tumours (P=0.007, P=0.003), and superior survival (both P<0.001). There was no difference in demographics, tumour location/stage, or survival between control and interval groups. CONCLUSION: The FOBt is better at detecting cancers in the left colon and in men. The significant numbers of interval cancers weren't found to have an improved outcome compared with the non-screened population.
| S-EPMC3405230 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundThe aim was to evaluate whether this gastric cancer-screening programme was effective in reducing oesophageal cancer mortality.MethodsA population-based retrospective cohort study was conducted using the Korean National Cancer Screening Programme (NCSP) database. The study cohort comprised 16,969 oesophageal cancer patients who had been diagnosed in 2007-2014. We analysed the association between the history of NSCP for gastric cancer and oesophageal cancer mortality.ResultsCompared with never-screened subjects, ever-screened subjects had an overall HR for oesophageal cancer mortality of 0.647 (95% CI, 0.617-0.679). According to the time interval since screening, the HRs of death were 0.731 (95% CI, 0.667-0.801) for 6-11 months, 0.635 (95% CI, 0.594-0.679) for 12-23 months, 0.564 (95% CI, 0.522-0.610) for 24-35 months and 0.742 (95% CI, 0.679-0.810) for ≥36 months. According to the last screening modality, the HRs of death were 0.497 (95% CI, 0.464-0.531) for upper endoscopy, and 0.792 (95% CI, 0.749-0.838) for UGIS. Upper endoscopy reduced the mortality consistently in all age groups over 50 years, whereas UGIS could not.ConclusionThe NCSP for gastric cancer was effective in reducing the mortality of oesophageal cancer, and upper endoscopy was superior to UGIS.
| S-EPMC7403142 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThere is potential for fecal microbiome profiling to improve colorectal cancer screening. This has been demonstrated by research studies, but it has not been quantified at scale using samples collected and processed routinely by a national screening program.Experimental designBetween 2016 and 2019, the largest of the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme hubs prospectively collected processed guaiac fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) samples with subsequent colonoscopy outcomes: blood-negative [n = 491 (22%)]; colorectal cancer [n = 430 (19%)]; adenoma [n = 665 (30%)]; colonoscopy-normal [n = 300 (13%)]; nonneoplastic [n = 366 (16%)]. Samples were transported and stored at room temperature. DNA underwent 16S rRNA gene V4 amplicon sequencing. Taxonomic profiling was performed to provide features for classification via random forests (RF).ResultsSamples provided 16S amplicon-based microbial profiles, which confirmed previously described colorectal cancer-microbiome associations. Microbiome-based RF models showed potential as a first-tier screen, distinguishing colorectal cancer or neoplasm (colorectal cancer or adenoma) from blood-negative with AUC 0.86 (0.82-0.89) and AUC 0.78 (0.74-0.82), respectively. Microbiome-based models also showed potential as a second-tier screen, distinguishing from among gFOBT blood-positive samples, colorectal cancer or neoplasm from colonoscopy-normal with AUC 0.79 (0.74-0.83) and AUC 0.73 (0.68-0.77), respectively. Models remained robust when restricted to 15 taxa, and performed similarly during external validation with metagenomic datasets.ConclusionsMicrobiome features can be assessed using gFOBT samples collected and processed routinely by a national colorectal cancer screening program to improve accuracy as a first- or second-tier screen. The models required as few as 15 taxa, raising the potential of an inexpensive qPCR test. This could reduce the number of colonoscopies in countries that use fecal occult blood test screening.
| S-EPMC7610626 | biostudies-literature