Colorectal cancer screening

Current Opinion in Oncology

Volumn 10, Issue 5, 1998, Pages 461-466

  Bond, John H ^a  

^a VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANCER RISK; CANCER SCREENING; COLON POLYP; COLORECTAL CANCER; HUMAN; OCCULT BLOOD TEST; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SIGMOIDOSCOPY;

EID: 0031760467     PISSN: 10408746     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00001622-199809000-00016     Document Type: Review

References (27)

1. Winawer SJ, Fletcher RH, Miller L, Godlee F, Stolar MH, Mulrow CD, et al.: Colorectal cancer screening: clinical guidelines and rationale. Gastroenterology 1997, 112:594-642. This very comprehensive evidence-based guideline for screening and surveillance for colorectal adenomas and cancer was prepared by an independent expert multidisciplinary panel with strong representation by primary clinicians. A menu of effective options is provided for each at-risk group.
2. Byers T, Levin B, Rothenberger D, Dodd GD, Smith RA: American Cancer Society guideline for screening and surveillance for colorectal polyps and cancers. CA Cancer J Clin 1997, 47:2-8. A major revision of an evidence-based guideline for screening and surveillance for colorectal neoplasia. This guideline provides specific recommendations for both average- and high-risk individuals.
3. Bond JH: Fecal occult blood testing for colorectal cancer: can we afford not to do this? Gastroenterol Clin North Am 1997, 26:57-70. A review of the advantages and limitations of FOBT screening for colorectal cancer, including considerations of cost and cost-effectiveness.
4. Mandel JS, Bond JH, Church TR, Snover DC, Bradley GM, Schuman LM, Ederer F: Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. N Engl J Med 1993, 328:1365-1371.
5. Lang CA, Ransohoff DF: Fecal occult blood screening for colorectal cancer: is mortality reduced by chance selection for screening colonoscopy? JAMA 1994, 271:1011-1013.
6. Ederer F, Church TR, Mandel JS: Fecal occult blood screening in the Minnesota study: role of chance detection of lesions. J Natl Cancer Inst 1997, 1423-1428. An analysis using the Lang-Ransohoff model, but employing actual data rather than assumptions. The findings indicate that only a small fraction of the mortality reduction in the Minnesota Trial was due to chance.
7. Church TR, Ederer F, Mandel JS: Fecal occult blood screening in the Minnesota study: sensitivity of the screening test. J Natl Cancer Inst 1997, 1440-1448. This analysis of data from the Minnesota Trial shows that both the one-time application of six rehydrated Hemoccult tests, and the program of annually repeated tests, had an average sensitivity for detecting colorectal cancer of about 90%.
8. Ahlquist DA, Wieand HS, Moertel CG, McGill DB, Loprinzi CL, O'Connell MJ, et al.: Accuracy of fecal occult blood screening for colorectal neoplasia. JAMA 1993, 269:1262-1267.
9. Levin B, Hess K, Johnson C: Screening for colorectal cancer: a comparison of 3 fecal occult blood tests. Arch Intern Med 1997, 157:970-976. A large-field comparison of the performance characteristics of three simultaneously performed methods of FOBT screening. The HemoccultSENSA test had high sensitivity for detecting cancer, with acceptable specificity.
10. Launoy G, Smith TC, Duffy SW, Bouvier VL: Colorectal cancer mass-screening: estimation of faecal occult blood test sensitivity taking into account cancer mean sojourn time. Int J Cancer 1997, 73:220-224.
11. Zappa M, Castiglione G, Grazzini G, Falini P, Giorgi D, Paci E, Ciatto S: Effect of faecal occult blood testing on colorectal mortality: results of a population-based case-control study in the district of Florence, Italy. Int J Cancer 1997, 73:208-210. This case-control study estimates a reduction in mortality of about 40% as the result of FOBT screening. The observed protective effect of screening suggests that biennial screening might be efficacious.
12. Myers R, Murray J, Wienberg D, McGrory G, Wolf T, Caveny J, et al.: Analysis of colorectal cancer stage among HMO members targeted for screening. Arch Intern Med 1997, 157:2001-2006.
13. Brill JR, Baumgardner DJ: Establishing proficiency in flexible sigmoidoscopy in a family practice residency program. Fam Med 1997, 29:580-583.
14. Geul KW, Bosman R, Van Blankenstein M, Grobbee DE, Wilson JH: Prevention of colorectal cancer: costs and effectiveness of sigmoidoscopy. Scand J Gastroenterol 1997, 223:79-87.
15. Colombo L, Corti G, Magri F, Marocchi A, Brambilla P, Crespi M, et al.: Results of a pilot study of endoscopie screening of first degree relatives of colorectal cancer patients in Italy. J Epidemiol Community Health 1997, 51:453-458.
16. Sciallero S, Costantini M, Bertinelli E, Castiglione G, Onofri P, Aste H, et al.: Distal hyperplastic polyps do not predict proximal adenomas: results from a multicentric study of colorectal adenomas. Gastrointest Endosc 1997, 46:124-130. This large study of 3086 patients in four centers found that distal hyperplastic polyps did not predict an increased prevalence of proximal colorectal adenomas. A hyperplastic polyp found on screening flexible sigmoidoscopy, therefore, is not an indication for colonoscopy.
17. Croizet O, Moreau J, Arany Y, Delvaux M, Rumeau JL, Escourrou J: Followup of patients with hyperplastic polyps of the large bowel. Gastrointest Endosc 1997, 46:119-123.
18. Lindholm E, Berglund B, Kewenter J, Haglind E: Worry associated with screening for colorectal carcinomas. Scand J Gastroenterol 1997, 32:238-245. This carefully performed questionnaire and telephone survey of a large group of individuals assesses the anxiety induced by an invitation to be screened for colorectal cancer, and of having a positive screening test. The average level of worry created should not appreciably reduce compliance with screening.
19. Vernon SW: Participation in colorectal cancer screening: a review. J Natl Cancer Inst 1997, 89:1406-1422. This review of the published literature on adherence to colorectal cancer screening recommendations indicates relatively poor compliance for screening, especially for rescreening. Knowledge of factors that influence compliance is very incomplete.
20. Leard LE, Savides TJ, Ganiats TG: Patient preferences for colorectal cancer screening. J Fam Pract 1997, 45:211-218.
21. Herbert C, Launoy G, Gignoux M: Factors affecting compliance with colorectal cancer screening in France: differences between intention to participate and actual participation. Eur J Cancer Prev 1997, 6:44-52.
22. Herold AH, Riker AI, Warner EA, Woodard LJ, Brownlee HJ, Pencev D, et al.: Evidence of gender bias in patients undergoing flexible sigmoidoscopy. Cancer Detect Prev 1997, 21:142-147. Analysis of a large flexible sigmoidoscopy screening experience indicated substantial gender bias, with fewer women undergoing screening and diagnostic studies. Such biases, perhaps resulting from the misconception that colorectal cancer affects mainly men, may increase mortality in women from the disease.
23. Cooper GS, Yuan Z, Rimm AA: Racial disparity in the incidence and case-fatality of colorectal cancer: analysis of 329 United States counties. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1997, 6:283-285. This study using a large Medicare database indicates that American blacks have higher case-fatality rates from colorectal cancer. Factors appear to be differences at the county level in screening and treatment for the disease, plus reduced access to and quality of care for blacks.
24. Lieberman D: Endoscopie screening for colorectal cancer. Gastroenterol Clin North Am 1997, 26:71-83. A thoughtful review and analysis of colorectal cancer screening either with flexible sigmoidoscopy or direct screening colonoscopy.
25. Rex D, Vining D, Kopecky K: Screening for colon polyps: using spiral CT with and without virtual colonoscopy [abstract]. Gastrointest Endosc 1997, 45:116.
26. Dachman AH, Lieberman J, Osnis RB, Chen S-YJ, Hoffmann KR, Chen C-T, et al.: Small simulated polyps in pig colon: sensitivity of CT virtual colography. Radiology 1997, 203:427-430.
27. Schoenenberger AW, Bauerfeind P, Krestin GP, Debatin JF: Virtual colonoscopy with magnetic resonance imaging: in vitro evaluation of a new concept. Gastroenterology 1997, 112:1863-1870.