Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Colorectal cancer screening within colonoscopy capacity constraints: can FIT-based programmes save more lives by trading-off more sensitive test cut-offs against longer screening intervals?

View ORCID ProfileEthna McFerran, View ORCID ProfileJames F. O’Mahony, View ORCID ProfileSteffie Naber, View ORCID ProfileLinda Sharp, View ORCID ProfileAnn G. Zauber, View ORCID ProfileIris Lansdorp-Vogelaar, View ORCID ProfileFrank Kee
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.17.20242107
Ethna McFerran
1Queen’s University Belfast, Centre for Public Health, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Royal Victoria Hospital, Grosvenor Road, Belfast, BT12 6BA, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Ethna McFerran
  • For correspondence: e.mcferran@qub.ac.uk
James F. O’Mahony
2Centre for Health Policy and Management, Trinity College Dublin, The University of Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for James F. O’Mahony
Steffie Naber
3Statistics Netherlands, NL
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Steffie Naber
Linda Sharp
4Newcastle University, Newcastle, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Linda Sharp
Ann G. Zauber
5Department of Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Ann G. Zauber
Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
6Department of Public Health of Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, NL
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
Frank Kee
7Centre for Public Health, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Frank Kee
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

Introduction Colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention programmes using faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) as the primary screen typically rely on colonoscopy for secondary and surveillance testing. Colonoscopy capacity is an important constraint, limiting the number of primary tests offered. Many European programmes lack sufficient colonoscopy capacity to provide optimal screening intensity regarding screening age ranges, intervals and FIT cut-offs. It is currently unclear how to optimise programmes within colonoscopy capacity constraints.

Design The MISCAN-Colon microsimulation model was used to determine if more effective CRC screening programmes can be identified within existing colonoscopy capacity. The model assessed 525 strategies of varying screening intervals, age ranges and FIT cut-offs, including previously unevaluated 4 and 5 year screening intervals. These strategies were compared with policy decisions taken in Ireland to provide CRC screening within available colonoscopy capacity. Outcomes estimated net costs, quality-adjusted-life-years and required colonoscopy numbers. The optimal strategies within finite colonoscopy capacity constraints were identified.

Results Combining a reduced FIT cut-off of 10 µg Hb/g, an extended screening interval of 4 years and an age range of 60-72 years requires 6% fewer colonoscopies, reduces net costs by 23% while preventing 15% more CRC deaths and saving 16% more QALYs relative to current policy.

Conclusion Previously overlooked longer screening intervals may balance optimal cancer prevention with finite colonoscopy capacity constraints. Simple changes to screening configurations could save lives, reduce costs, and relieve colonoscopy capacity pressures. These findings are directly relevant to CRC screening programmes across Europe that employ FIT-based testing and face colonoscopy capacity constraints.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

EMF reports Health and Social Care Northern Ireland and National Cancer Institute Health Economics Fellowship (grant CDV-4980-14) AGZ reports National Institutes of Health - National Cancer Institute Cancer Center support grant P30 CA008748 and from Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET), U01 CA199335 (EMF, AGZ, ILV, SN). JFOM is supported by the Health Research Board of Ireland under an Emerging Investigator Award EIA-2017-054. The funding agreements ensured the authors' independence in designing the study, interpreting the data, writing, and publishing the report.

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

This study is IRB exempt.

All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Data Availability

All data generated by this research has been provided, for further enquiries please contact the corresponding author.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted December 19, 2020.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Colorectal cancer screening within colonoscopy capacity constraints: can FIT-based programmes save more lives by trading-off more sensitive test cut-offs against longer screening intervals?
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Colorectal cancer screening within colonoscopy capacity constraints: can FIT-based programmes save more lives by trading-off more sensitive test cut-offs against longer screening intervals?
Ethna McFerran, James F. O’Mahony, Steffie Naber, Linda Sharp, Ann G. Zauber, Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Frank Kee
medRxiv 2020.12.17.20242107; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.17.20242107
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Colorectal cancer screening within colonoscopy capacity constraints: can FIT-based programmes save more lives by trading-off more sensitive test cut-offs against longer screening intervals?
Ethna McFerran, James F. O’Mahony, Steffie Naber, Linda Sharp, Ann G. Zauber, Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Frank Kee
medRxiv 2020.12.17.20242107; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.17.20242107

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Health Economics
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (62)
  • Allergy and Immunology (142)
  • Anesthesia (44)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (408)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (67)
  • Dermatology (47)
  • Emergency Medicine (141)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (171)
  • Epidemiology (4815)
  • Forensic Medicine (3)
  • Gastroenterology (177)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (671)
  • Geriatric Medicine (70)
  • Health Economics (187)
  • Health Informatics (621)
  • Health Policy (314)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (200)
  • Hematology (85)
  • HIV/AIDS (155)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (5282)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (326)
  • Medical Education (91)
  • Medical Ethics (24)
  • Nephrology (73)
  • Neurology (677)
  • Nursing (41)
  • Nutrition (111)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (124)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (203)
  • Oncology (438)
  • Ophthalmology (138)
  • Orthopedics (36)
  • Otolaryngology (88)
  • Pain Medicine (35)
  • Palliative Medicine (15)
  • Pathology (128)
  • Pediatrics (193)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (129)
  • Primary Care Research (84)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (769)
  • Public and Global Health (1799)
  • Radiology and Imaging (321)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (138)
  • Respiratory Medicine (255)
  • Rheumatology (86)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (69)
  • Sports Medicine (61)
  • Surgery (100)
  • Toxicology (23)
  • Transplantation (28)
  • Urology (37)