Tracking and tracing of participants in two large cancer screening trials

Comparing methods of performing geographically targeted rural health surveillance

Background

Worsening socioeconomic conditions in rural America have been fueling increases in chronic disease and poor health. The goal of this study was to identify cost-effective methods of deploying geographically targeted health surveys in rural areas, which often have limited resources. These health surveys were administered in New York’s rural Sullivan County, which has some of the poorest health outcomes in the entire state.

Methods

Comparisons were made for response rates, estimated costs, respondent demographics, and prevalence estimates of a brief health survey delivered by mail and phone using address-based sampling, and in-person using convenience sampling at a sub-county level in New York’s rural Sullivan County during 2017.

Results

Overall response rates were 27.0% by mail, 8.2% by phone, and 71.4% for convenience in-person surveys. Costs to perform phone surveys were substantially higher than mailed or convenience in-person surveys. All modalities had lower proportions of Hispanic respondents compared to Census estimates. Unadjusted and age-adjusted prevalence estimates were similar between mailed and in-person surveys, but not for phone surveys.

Conclusions

These findings are consistent with declining response rates of phone surveys, which obtained an inadequate sample of rural residents. Though in-person surveys had higher response rates, convenience sampling failed to obtain a geographically distributed sample of rural residents. Of modalities tested, mailed surveys provided the best opportunity to perform geographically targeted rural health surveillance.

Hormone Replacement Therapy and Colorectal Cancer Incidence and Mortality in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial

INTRODUCTION

Hormone replacement therapy has been shown to reduce colorectal cancer incidence, but its effect on colorectal cancer mortality is controversial. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of hormone replacement therapy on survival from colorectal cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed a secondary analysis of data from the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial, a large multicenter randomized trial run from 1993 to 2001, with follow-up data recently becoming mature. Participants were women aged 55 to 74 years, without recent colonoscopy. Data from the trial were analyzed to evaluate colorectal cancer incidence, disease-specific mortality, and all-cause mortality based on subjects' use of hormone replacement therapy at the time of randomization: never, current, or former users.

RESULTS

A total of 75,587 women with 912 (1.21%) incident colorectal cancers and 239 associated deaths were analyzed, with median follow-up of 11.9 years. Overall, 88.6% were non-Hispanic white, and < 10% had not completed high school. The never-user group was slightly older than the current or former user groups (average, 63.8 vs. 61.4 vs. 63.3 years; P < .001). Almost one-half (47.1%) of the current users had undergone hysterectomy, compared with 21.6% of never-users and 34.0% of former users (P < .001). Adjusted colorectal cancer incidence in current users compared to never-users was lower (hazard ratio [HR], 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69-0.94; P = .005), as was death from colorectal cancer (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.47-0.85; P = .002) and all-cause mortality (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.72-0.80; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Hormone replacement therapy is associated with a reduced risk of colorectal cancer incidence and improved colorectal cancer-specific survival, as well as all-cause mortality.