基于预测风险的结直肠癌筛查:一项随机对照试验。

IF 8 1区 医学 Q1 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Ekaterina Plys, Jean-Luc Bulliard, Aziz Chaouch, Marie-Anne Durand, Luuk A van Duuren, Karen Braendle, Reto Auer, Florian Froehlich, Iris Lansdorp Vogelaar, Douglas A Corley, Kevin Selby
{"title":"基于预测风险的结直肠癌筛查:一项随机对照试验。","authors":"Ekaterina Plys, Jean-Luc Bulliard, Aziz Chaouch, Marie-Anne Durand, Luuk A van Duuren, Karen Braendle, Reto Auer, Florian Froehlich, Iris Lansdorp Vogelaar, Douglas A Corley, Kevin Selby","doi":"10.14309/ajg.0000000000003311","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening relies primarily on colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical testing (FIT). Aligning utilization of these options with individual CRC risk may optimize benefit with lower risks, individual burden, and societal costs. We studied the effect of communicating personalized CRC risk and corresponding screening recommendations on risk-appropriate screening uptake in an organized screening setting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Randomized controlled trial among residents aged 50-69 years not yet invited for screening in Vaud, Switzerland. The intervention was a mailed brochure communicating individual 15-year CRC risk and screening recommendation. The control group received a usual brochure comparing FIT and colonoscopy. The primary outcome was self-reported risk-appropriate screening (FIT if <3% risk, FIT or colonoscopy if ≥3% and <6%, colonoscopy if ≥6%) at 6 months. A secondary outcome was overall screening uptake.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 5396 invitations, 1059 people responded (19%), of whom 258 were randomized to intervention and 257 to control materials (average 15-year risk 1.4% (SD=0.5), age 52.2 years (SD=2.2), 51% women). Risk-appropriate screening completion was 37% in the intervention group and 23% in the control group (absolute difference 14%, 95%CI 6%-22%). Overall screening uptake was 50% in the intervention and 49% in the control group (absolute difference 1%, 95CI -7%-10%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In a population not known to be at elevated CRC risk, brochures providing personalized CRC risk and screening recommendations improved risk-appropriate screening without impacting overall screening uptake. This approach could be helpful for aligning screening methods, risks, and benefits with cancer risk and resource allocation.</p>","PeriodicalId":7608,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Gastroenterology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Colorectal cancer screening based on predicted risk: a randomized controlled trial.\",\"authors\":\"Ekaterina Plys, Jean-Luc Bulliard, Aziz Chaouch, Marie-Anne Durand, Luuk A van Duuren, Karen Braendle, Reto Auer, Florian Froehlich, Iris Lansdorp Vogelaar, Douglas A Corley, Kevin Selby\",\"doi\":\"10.14309/ajg.0000000000003311\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening relies primarily on colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical testing (FIT). Aligning utilization of these options with individual CRC risk may optimize benefit with lower risks, individual burden, and societal costs. We studied the effect of communicating personalized CRC risk and corresponding screening recommendations on risk-appropriate screening uptake in an organized screening setting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Randomized controlled trial among residents aged 50-69 years not yet invited for screening in Vaud, Switzerland. The intervention was a mailed brochure communicating individual 15-year CRC risk and screening recommendation. The control group received a usual brochure comparing FIT and colonoscopy. The primary outcome was self-reported risk-appropriate screening (FIT if <3% risk, FIT or colonoscopy if ≥3% and <6%, colonoscopy if ≥6%) at 6 months. A secondary outcome was overall screening uptake.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 5396 invitations, 1059 people responded (19%), of whom 258 were randomized to intervention and 257 to control materials (average 15-year risk 1.4% (SD=0.5), age 52.2 years (SD=2.2), 51% women). Risk-appropriate screening completion was 37% in the intervention group and 23% in the control group (absolute difference 14%, 95%CI 6%-22%). Overall screening uptake was 50% in the intervention and 49% in the control group (absolute difference 1%, 95CI -7%-10%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In a population not known to be at elevated CRC risk, brochures providing personalized CRC risk and screening recommendations improved risk-appropriate screening without impacting overall screening uptake. This approach could be helpful for aligning screening methods, risks, and benefits with cancer risk and resource allocation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7608,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Gastroenterology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Gastroenterology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14309/ajg.0000000000003311\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14309/ajg.0000000000003311","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

结直肠癌(CRC)筛查主要依靠结肠镜检查和粪便免疫化学测试(FIT)。将这些选择的使用与个体结直肠癌风险相结合,可以通过降低风险、个人负担和社会成本来优化获益。我们研究了在有组织的筛查环境中,沟通个性化CRC风险和相应的筛查建议对风险适当筛查的影响。方法:在瑞士沃州50-69岁尚未被邀请进行筛查的居民中进行随机对照试验。干预措施是邮寄宣传册,传达个人15年结直肠癌风险和筛查建议。对照组收到一本比较FIT和结肠镜检查的手册。结果:在5396份邀请中,1059人回应(19%),其中258人随机分为干预组,257人随机分为对照组(平均15年风险1.4% (SD=0.5),年龄52.2岁(SD=2.2), 51%为女性)。干预组的风险适宜筛查完成率为37%,对照组为23%(绝对差值为14%,95%CI为6%-22%)。干预组的总体筛查率为50%,对照组为49%(绝对差为1%,95CI -7%-10%)。结论:在未知的结直肠癌高风险人群中,提供个性化结直肠癌风险和筛查建议的小册子在不影响总体筛查的情况下改善了适合风险的筛查。这种方法有助于将筛查方法、风险和益处与癌症风险和资源分配相结合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Colorectal cancer screening based on predicted risk: a randomized controlled trial.

Introduction: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening relies primarily on colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical testing (FIT). Aligning utilization of these options with individual CRC risk may optimize benefit with lower risks, individual burden, and societal costs. We studied the effect of communicating personalized CRC risk and corresponding screening recommendations on risk-appropriate screening uptake in an organized screening setting.

Methods: Randomized controlled trial among residents aged 50-69 years not yet invited for screening in Vaud, Switzerland. The intervention was a mailed brochure communicating individual 15-year CRC risk and screening recommendation. The control group received a usual brochure comparing FIT and colonoscopy. The primary outcome was self-reported risk-appropriate screening (FIT if <3% risk, FIT or colonoscopy if ≥3% and <6%, colonoscopy if ≥6%) at 6 months. A secondary outcome was overall screening uptake.

Results: Of 5396 invitations, 1059 people responded (19%), of whom 258 were randomized to intervention and 257 to control materials (average 15-year risk 1.4% (SD=0.5), age 52.2 years (SD=2.2), 51% women). Risk-appropriate screening completion was 37% in the intervention group and 23% in the control group (absolute difference 14%, 95%CI 6%-22%). Overall screening uptake was 50% in the intervention and 49% in the control group (absolute difference 1%, 95CI -7%-10%).

Conclusions: In a population not known to be at elevated CRC risk, brochures providing personalized CRC risk and screening recommendations improved risk-appropriate screening without impacting overall screening uptake. This approach could be helpful for aligning screening methods, risks, and benefits with cancer risk and resource allocation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
American Journal of Gastroenterology
American Journal of Gastroenterology 医学-胃肠肝病学
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
5.10%
发文量
458
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: Published on behalf of the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG), The American Journal of Gastroenterology (AJG) stands as the foremost clinical journal in the fields of gastroenterology and hepatology. AJG offers practical and professional support to clinicians addressing the most prevalent gastroenterological disorders in patients.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信