Comparing the Cost-Effectiveness of Innovative Colorectal Cancer Screening Tests

Diagnostic Accuracy of an Add-On, Blood-Based Screening Test for Colorectal Cancer in Two Established Screening Programmes

BACKGROUND

CELTiC is a blood-based test consisting of a panel of four mRNAs (CEACAM6, LGALS4, TSPAN8 and COL1A2) associated with colorectal cancer (CRC). CELTiC has a high sensitivity (90%) for detecting advanced neoplasia (AN) when compared to faecal immunochemical test (FIT)-negative subjects.

AIMS

To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of CELTiC as an add-on test following a positive FIT in two existing CRC screening programmes.

METHODS

We designed a prospective study in FIT-positive screenees. Analyses were performed in two (partially overlapping) groups: participants with FIT ≥ 47 μg Hb/g faeces (group I) and FIT ≥ 20 μg Hb/g faeces (group II). We estimated CELTIC sensitivity and specificity in detecting AN at a pre-defined and a post hoc threshold (targeted sensitivity: 90%).

RESULTS

We included 809 participants (n = 567 in group I and n = 486 in group II). CELTiC did not reach a sensitivity of 90% at the pre-defined threshold (Group I 41%, group II 27%). At the post hoc thresholds for 90% sensitivity in detecting AN, CELTiC had a specificity of 14% (53/388; 95% CI: 10% to 17%) in group I and 12% (44/354; 95% CI: 9% to 16%) in group II.

CONCLUSIONS

In a FIT-positive population, CELTiC did not reach 90% sensitivity at the pre-defined threshold. At post hoc thresholds corresponding to 90% sensitivity, specificity was low. CELTiC cannot currently be recommended as an add-on test to detect AN in FIT-positive screenees in a CRC screening programme.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04980443, NCT05205967, NCT04369053.

CT Colonography versus Multitarget Stool DNA Test for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Background Colorectal cancer (CRC) is largely preventable or curable with effective screening. Purpose To compare both the clinical efficacy and cost effectiveness of CRC screening with CT colonography (CTC) with those of multitarget stool DNA (mt-sDNA) testing. Materials and Methods A state-transition Markov model was constructed using updated natural history evidence for colorectal polyps applied to a hypothetical 10 000-person cohort representative of the 45-year-old U.S. population. Three screening strategies were modeled with these data: mt-sDNA testing every 3 years, the conventional CTC (CTCconv) strategy of immediate polypectomy for all polyps measuring at least 6 mm every 5 years, and the surveillance CTC (CTCsurv) strategy of 3-year CTC follow-up for small polyps (6-9 mm) and polypectomy for large polyps (≥10 mm). Multifaceted model validation was performed to confirm robustness. A detailed sensitivity analysis was performed in addition to the base-case scenario. Results Without screening, the cumulative incidence of CRC was 7.5% (n = 752), which was reduced by 59% (n = 310) with mt-sDNA, 75% (n = 190) with CTCconv, and 70% (n = 223) with CTCsurv screening. The estimated programmatic costs per person for no screening, mt-sDNA, CTCconv, and CTCsurv were $4955, $6011, $4422, and $3913, respectively. The estimated cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained for mt-sDNA testing was $8878, whereas both CTC strategies resulted in cost savings. Accordingly, CTC strategies dominated over both mt-sDNA and no screening (ie, more clinically efficacious and more cost-effective [cost-saving]). However, the CTCconv strategy was not as cost-effective as the CTCsurv strategy, as costs related to more optical colonoscopies did not offset the corresponding small gains in QALYs. The results were similar when CRC screening began at 50 and 65 years of age. Conclusion Both CTC screening strategies dominated over mt-sDNA screening and no screening, yielding cost savings and increased clinical efficacy. The CTC strategy consisting of 3-year surveillance for small colorectal polyps and colonoscopy referral for large polyps achieved the best overall balance of cost and clinical efficacy. © RSNA, 2025 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Galgano and Smith in this issue.

Follow-up endoscopy rates as an indicator of effectiveness in colon capsule endoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) has emerged as a promising alternative for investigating lower gastrointestinal symptoms. However, its adoption has been limited due to concerns about cost-effectiveness, significantly influenced by follow-up endoscopy rates (FERs). Understanding CCE's FERs is crucial for its integration into routine clinical practice. We synthesised the evidence to evaluate the overall rate of further investigation in CCE.

DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, and PubMed were searched through 15 August 2024.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Studies included reporting FERs after CCE, including subsequent endoscopic procedures and radiological imaging. There were no language restrictions or limitations in CCE referral indications, patient recruitment criteria, or pathologies investigated.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

All studies were independently screened and extracted two times by four reviewers. A random-effects model was used for meta-analysis and meta-regression to identify key contributing factors.

RESULTS

2850 participants from 19 studies were included in the analysis. Compared with the key performance indicators for FERs in colonoscopy (0.10-0.15) and CT colonography (0.25), the pooled FER for CCE was found to be 0.42 (95% CI 0.34 to 0.50). The meta-regression analysis identified complete transit rates and adequate bowel cleansing quality as factors inversely associated with FERs. Furthermore, the CCE2 capsule demonstrated a higher reinvestigation risk than CCE1, likely due to its improved diagnostic accuracy. Although CCE indications were associated with lower FERs, subgroup analysis did not reach statistical significance with high heterogeneity.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights significant FERs for CCE and identifies key contributing factors, emphasising the importance of appropriate patient selection to reduce reinvestigation needs. Future research should focus on improving completion rates, bowel preparation protocols, and refining CCE indications. This will minimise environmental impact and enhance cost-effectiveness and patient satisfaction.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42024567959.

A Comparison of International Modeling Methods for Evaluating Health Economics of Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is an accepted approach to evaluate cancer screening programs. CEA estimates partially depend on modeling methods and assumptions used. Understanding common practice when modeling cancer relies on complete, accessible descriptions of prior work. This review's objective is to comprehensively examine published CEA modeling methods used to evaluate colorectal cancer (CRC) screening from an aspiring modeler's perspective. It compares existing models, highlighting the importance of precise modeling method descriptions and essential factors when modeling CRC progression.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus electronic databases were used. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards statement and data items from previous systematic reviews formed a template to extract relevant data. Specific focus included model type, natural history, appropriate data sources, and survival analysis.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight studies, with 52 unique models were found. Twelve previously published models were reported in 39 studies, with 39 newly developed models. CRC progression from the onset was commonly modeled, with only 6 models not including it as a model component.

CONCLUSIONS

Modeling methods needed to simulate CRC progression depend on the natural history structure and research requirements. For aspiring modelers, accompanying models with clear overviews and extensive modeling assumption descriptions are beneficial. Open-source modeling would also allow model replicability and result in appropriate decisions suggested for CRC screening programs.

The Cost-Effectiveness of a Multi-Target Stool DNA-Based Screening (COLOTECT), FIT, Colonoscopy and No Screening for Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Around 1.9 million new cases and 1 million deaths worldwide were attributed to colorectal cancer (CRC) in 2020.

AIMS

The aims of this study are to assess the cost-effectiveness of a multi-target stool DNA-based screening strategy, COLOTECT, compared to faecal immunochemical tests (FIT), colonoscopy, and no screening in the Asian population to inform more choices for policymakers in colorectal cancer screening.

METHOD AND RESULTS

We assume that 100,000 persons aged 50 undergo annual FIT, annual COLOTECT multi-target testing, or colonoscopies every 10 years until age 75. The data used in this study was retrieved from different sources including the Hong Kong Cancer Registry and previously published studies on the population aged 50 to 75 years old between 2010 and 2023. This study accessed the most cost-effective screening strategy available. If a positive result of FIT or COLOTECT were observed, the participants would undergo a colonoscopy. The participants who used the colonoscopy as the main screening method conducted colonoscopies every 3 years. The Markov models were utilized to compare the outcomes from different strategies including life-years saved, years of life lost, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (primary outcome). The highest ICER was observed in colonoscopy (USD 160808), followed by FIT (USD 108952), and COLOTECT (USD 82206). A higher detection rate of CRC (COLOTECT: 39.3% vs. FIT: 4.5%), more CRC cases prevented (1272 vs. 146), and life-years saved (2295 vs. 337) were observed in the COLOTECT strategy than in FIT. Additionally, a lower total cost per life-year saved of COLOTECT (USD 180097) was observed than colonoscopy (USD 238356), which identified the more affordable and cost-saving COLOTECT strategy.

CONCLUSION

This study highlighted the better performance of COLOTECT than FIT in detecting CRC. Additionally, given its lower cost and higher acceptance, the COLOTECT strategy might be more cost-effective than colonoscopy for massive CRC screening.

Cost Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening Strategies in Middle- and High-Income Countries: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a significant global health burden, and screening can greatly reduce CRC incidence and mortality. Previous studies investigated the economic effects of CRC screening. We performed a systematic review to provide the cost-effectiveness of CRC screening strategies across countries with different income levels.

METHODS

We searched relevant scientific databases (PubMed, Embase, Ovid, Web of Science, Scopus) from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2023. We selected English-language studies related to model-based economic evaluations of CRC screening strategies. Information such as the characters of screening tests, model characteristics, and key cost-effectiveness findings were collected. The net monetary benefit approach was used to compare the outcomes of various strategies.

RESULTS

A total of 56 studies were identified, including 46 from high-income countries (HICs), 6 from upper-middle-income countries (UMICs), and 4 from lower-middle-income countries (LMICs). Most annual fecal occult blood tests and fecal immunochemical tests were cost-saving, and colonoscopy every 10 years was cost-saving. Other strategies involving multitarget fecal FIT-DNA detection, computed tomography colonography, and flexible sigmoidoscopy were cost-effective compared with no screening. Newer strategies such as magnetic resonance colonography every 5 years, annual urine metabolomic tests, and fecal bacterial biomarkers were cost-effective compared with no screening.

CONCLUSION

In our updated review, we found that common CRC screening strategies and magnetic resonance colonography continued to be cost-effective compared with no screening. Areas for further development include accurately modeling the natural history of colorectal cancer and obtaining more evidence from UMICs and LMICs.

Diagnostic accuracy of methylated SEPT9 for primary liver cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Primary live cancer (PLC), including hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC). This meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of blood methylated septin 9 gene (mSEPT9) for PLC and to analyze its performance across various subgroups.

Methods

We conducted a comprehensive search across PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), covering research up to May 10, 2024. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratios, and area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (AUC) were calculated for the diagnostic performance of mSEPT9 for PLC. The quality of the studies was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool, and the meta-analysis was performed using Stata16.0 software.

Results

Ten articles with 2,182 participants were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity of mSEPT9 for detecting primary liver cancer was 0.51 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.37-0.65), and the pooled specificity was 0.93 (95% CI: 0.78-0.98). The pooled diagnostic odds ratio was 13 (95% CI: -58), and the area under the Summary Receiver Operator Characteristic Curve was 0.75 (95% CI: 0.71-0.79). Subgroup analyses showed that ICC, case-control studies, qPCR and Asian populations had higher specificities (0.99 [95% CI: 0.97-1.00], 0.93 [95% CI: 0.91-0.95], 0.90 [95% CI: 0.88-0.92] and 0.94 [95% CI: 0.92-0.96], respectively) and diagnostic odds ratios (62.04 [95% CI: 6.53-589.53], 17.62 [95% CI: 4.03-76.99], 13.03 [95% CI: 2.01-84.63] and 14.19 [95% CI: 2.42-83.11], respectively) compared to hepatocellular carcinoma, cohort Study, and Euramerican populations.

Conclusions

This study confirmed that mSEPT9 in blood has high specificity and moderate sensitivity for detecting primary liver cancer. The diagnostic performance of mSEPT9 varied across different subgroups, limiting its use as an independent screening tool and necessitating its use in conjunction with other methods for confirmatory diagnostics.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42024549669.

Health Economic Evaluations of Circulating Tumor DNA Testing for Cancer Screening: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Cancer detection remains a significant global healthcare challenge, and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is a biomarker for noninvasive cancer screening.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aimed to describe health economic evaluations of ctDNA for cancer screening.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed (following PRISMA guidelines) across MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and the Center for Review and Dissemination. The review included full-scale health economic analyses such as cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, cost-benefit, and cost-consequence analyses. The quality of the included reports was assessed using CHEERS 2022 standards, and each report was categorized as excellent, very good, good, or insufficient.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies were selected, including four ctDNA tests (EBV-DNA, cf-DNA, mSEPT9, and mt-sDNA) for three types of cancer screening: nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) (2; 11.11%), breast cancer (BC) (1; 5.56%), and colorectal cancer (CRC) (15; 83.33%). Five studies (27.78%) found ctDNA cost-effective for CRC screening (mt-sDNA (with higher uptake than conventional tests) versus fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) or colonoscopy (n = 4); mSEPT9 versus computed tomography colonoscopy (CTC) (n = 1)). Thirteen studies (72.22%) found ctDNA not cost-effective for NPC (EBV-DNA versus no screening (n = 2)); BC (cf-DNA versus conventional testing (n = 1)); CRC (mSEPT9 versus FIT or colonoscopy (n = 2)); mt-sDNA versus FIT or colonoscopy (n = 5); mSEPT9 or mt-sDNA versus conventional tests (n = 3)). The CHEERS assessment found all reports in the "very good" category.

CONCLUSION

All ctDNA tests were generally not cost-effective comparing to conventional screening methods, except when the mt-sDNA uptake was higher than the comparators or when mSEPT9 was compared with CTC.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

CRD42023477732.

Cost-Effectiveness of Noninvasive Colorectal Cancer Screening in Community Clinics

Importance

Several noninvasive tests for colorectal cancer screening are available, but their effectiveness in settings with low adherence to screening and follow-up colonoscopy is not well documented.

Objective

To assess the cost-effectiveness of and outcomes associated with noninvasive colorectal cancer screening strategies, including new blood-based tests, in a population with low adherence to screening and ongoing surveillance colonoscopy.

Design, Setting, and Participants

The validated microsimulation model used for the decision analytical modeling study projected screening outcomes from 2025 to 2124 for a simulated cohort of 10 million individuals aged 50 years in 2025 and representative of a predominantly Hispanic or Latino patient population served by a Federally Qualified Health Center in Southern California. The simulated population had low adherence to first-step noninvasive testing (45%), second-step follow-up colonoscopy after an abnormal noninvasive test result (40%), and ongoing surveillance colonoscopy among patients with high-risk findings at follow-up colonoscopy (80%).

Exposures

Colorectal cancer screening strategies included no screening, an annual or biennial fecal immunochemical test, a triennial multitarget stool DNA test, and a triennial blood-based test. Using a blood-based test was assumed to increase first-step adherence by 17.5 percentage points.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Outcomes included colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, life-years gained and quality-adjusted life-years gained relative to no screening, costs, and net monetary benefit assuming a willingness to pay of $100 000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained.

Results

Under realistic adherence assumptions, a program of annual fecal immunochemical testing was the most effective and cost-effective strategy, yielding 121 life-years gained per 1000 screened individuals and a net monetary benefit of $5883 per person. Triennial blood testing was the least effective, yielding 23 life-years gained per 1000, and was not cost-effective, with a negative net monetary benefit. Annual fecal immunochemical testing with 45% first-step adherence and 80% adherence to follow-up and surveillance colonoscopy yielded greater benefit than triennial blood testing with perfect adherence (88 vs 77 life-years gained per 1000).

Conclusions and Relevance

This study suggests that in a federally qualified health care setting, prioritizing the convenience of blood tests over less costly and more effective existing stool-based tests could result in higher costs and worse population-level outcomes. Novel screening modalities should be carefully evaluated for performance in community settings before widespread adoption.

Optimal Stopping Ages for Colorectal Cancer Screening

Importance

Prior studies have shown that the benefits, harms, and costs of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening at older ages are associated with a patient's sex, health, and screening history. However, these studies were hypothetical exercises and not directly informed by data on CRC risk.

Objective

To identify the optimal stopping ages for CRC screening by sex, comorbidity, and screening history from a cost-effectiveness perspective.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This economic evaluation first validated the MISCAN-Colon (Microsimulation Screening Analysis-Colon) model against community-based CRC incidence and mortality rates for 2 subcohorts of the PRECISE (Optimizing Colorectal Cancer Screening Precision and Outcomes in Community-Based Populations) cohort. Subsequently, different CRC screening scenarios were simulated in older individuals. Cohorts of US adults aged 76 to 90 years varied by sex and comorbidity status (none, low, moderate, or severe). Statistical and sensitivity analyses were performed from March 2023 to May 2024.

Exposures

CRC screening histories including fecal immunochemical test (FIT) or colonoscopy, such as a negative colonoscopy result from 10, 15, 20, 25, or 30 years before the index age; 1 to 5 negative FIT results within 5 years of the index age, with different patterns of recency; or a combination of negative colonoscopy and negative FIT results.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcomes included estimated lifetime clinical outcomes, incremental costs, and quality-adjusted life-years gained (QALYG) associated with 1 additional FIT or colonoscopy. Optimal stopping age for screening, defined as the oldest age for which the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was still below the willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALYG, was evaluated.

Results

The first of the 2 PRECISE subcohorts used in validating the simulation model included 25 974 adults (15 060 females [58.0%]; 54.7% aged 76 to 80 years) with a negative colonoscopy result 10 years before the index date. The second subcohort consisted of 118 269 adults (67 058 females [56.7%]; 90.5% aged 76 to 80 years) with a negative FIT result 1 year before the index date. Older age, male sex, higher comorbidity levels, and recent CRC screenings were associated with reduced incremental benefit and cost-effectiveness of additional screening. For the reference cohort of 76-year-old females without comorbidities and a negative colonoscopy result 10 years before the index age, 1 additional colonoscopy cost $38 226 per QALYG. For cohorts with otherwise equivalent characteristics, associated costs increased to $1 689 945 per QALYG for females at age 90 years without comorbidities and a negative colonoscopy results 10 years before the index age, $51 604 per QALYG for males at age 76 years without comorbidities and a negative colonoscopy result 10 years before the index age, and $108 480 per QALYG for females at age 76 years with severe comorbidities and a negative colonoscopy result 10 years before the index age and decreased to $16 870 per QALYG for females without comorbidities and a negative colonoscopy result 30 years before the index age. The optimal stopping ages across different cohorts ranged from younger than 76 to 86 years for colonoscopy and younger than 76 to 88 years for FIT.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this economic evaluation, age, sex, screening history, comorbidity, and future screening modality were associated with the clinical outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and optimal stopping age for CRC screening. These results can inform guideline development and patient-directed informed decision-making.

Stool and blood biomarkers for colorectal cancer management: an update on screening and disease monitoring

BACKGROUND

Biomarkers have revolutionized the management of colorectal cancer (CRC), facilitating early detection, prevention, personalized treatment, and minimal residual disease (MRD) monitoring. This review explores current CRC screening strategies and emerging biomarker applications.

MAIN BODY

We summarize the landscape of non-invasive CRC screening and MRD detection strategies, discuss the limitations of the current approaches, and highlight the promising potential of novel biomarker solutions. The fecal immunochemical test remained the cornerstone of CRC screening, but its sensitivity has been improved by assays that combined its performance with other stool analytes. However, their sensitivity for advanced adenomas and the patient compliance both remain suboptimal. Blood-based tests promise to increase compliance but require further refinement to compete with stool-based biomarker tests. The ideal scenario involves leveraging blood tests to increase screening participation, and simultaneously promote stool- and endoscopy-based screening among those who are compliant. Once solely reliant on upfront surgery followed by stage and pathology-driven adjuvant chemotherapy, the treatment of stage II and III colon cancer has undergone a revolutionary transformation with the advent of MRD testing after surgery. A decade ago, the concept of using a post-surgical test instead of stage and pathology to determine the need for adjuvant chemotherapy was disruptive. Today, a blood test may be more informative of the need for chemotherapy than the stage at diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

Biomarker research is not just improving, but bringing a transformative change to CRC clinical management. Early detection is not just getting better, but improving thanks to a multi-modality approach, and personalized treatment plans are not just becoming a reality, but a promising future with MRD testing.

Multi-faceted strategies to advance health equity in colorectal cancer screening in primary care setting: quality improvement project

BACKGROUND

The aim of this quality improvement (QI) project was to increase Colorectal Cancer (CRC) screening in patients ages 50-75 years from a baseline of 27-40% within 12 months in a primary care clinic in limited resource communities.

METHODS

The multidisciplinary QI-team applied the Plan-Do-Study-Act method and developed stakeholder analysis, an Ishikawa fish bone diagram, a process flow map, and a driver diagram. Major barriers to suboptimal CRC screening included limited health literacy, language preferences, absence of stool test options, and knowledge gaps among patients and providers. The outcome measure was CRC screening rates, while stool test and colonoscopy completion rates served as process measures. Major interventions included the use of a patient-navigator, leveraging digital health technology to create a novel CRC screening data dashboard, educating patients and providers, patient centered-shared decision making, and creating messages and educational videos in patient's preferred languages. We used monthly run charts and statistical process control charts (SPC) for data analysis.

RESULTS

We observed a sustainable, steady increase in CRC screening rates from baseline rates of 27.0-40.0% (n = 1304/3271) during the study period and 45.6% (n = 1493/3,271) six months post-study, with median rates of 34.0% in the run chart and mean rates of 43.0% in the SPC chart. Furthermore, we observed an increase in colonoscopy completion rates during the study and six months post-study to 65.0% (n = 411/631) and 72.9% (n = 461/631) respectively, from a baseline rate of 25.0%, with a median of 63.0% in the monthly run chart.

CONCLUSION

The increase in CRC screening rates highlights the effectiveness of addressing barriers such as health literacy, language preferences, and knowledge gaps. This underscores the value of a multifaceted approach and the role of a patient navigator in enhancing preventive, patient-centered care. This project focused on population health and addressing social determinants of health to overcome disparities and improve CRC screening in a primary care setting. Continued emphasis on these strategies is likely to further advance colorectal cancer screening efforts.

Use of stool DNA for colorectal cancer screening: a meta-analysis and systematic review

Colorectal cancer is the third most common malignancy in the USA and accounts for more than 1 million deaths worldwide with screening shown to reduce CRC mortality. This meta-analysis analyzed the use of stool DNA for screening average risk, asymptomatic subjects for colorectal cancer and advanced precancerous lesions and compared sDNA to FOBT tests (gFOBT and FIT). Eight studies were included from four different countries with a total of 39 665 subjects. Pooled sensitivity and specificity for sDNA for detecting CRC was 83.3% (95% CI: 60.8-94.2) and 92.4% (95% CI: 90.1-94.1), respectively, compared with FOBT, which had a lower sensitivity at 70.2% (95% CI: 45.5-86.9) but higher specificity 95.7% (95% CI: 95.1-96.2). Further analysis showed improved sensitivity of sDNA to 92.6% when only the studies employing sDNA tests that incorporate hemoglobin immunochemical test were used. Both sDNA and FOBT tests had low sensitivity for detecting advanced precancerous lesions. sDNA tests are sensitive and specific for the detection of CRC but show low sensitivity compared with colonoscopy for the detection of advanced precancerous lesions.

Characteristics of a cost-effective blood test for colorectal cancer screening

BACKGROUND

Blood-based biomarker tests can potentially change the landscape of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. We characterize the conditions under which blood test screening would be as effective and cost-effective as annual fecal immunochemical testing or decennial colonoscopy.

METHODS

We used the 3 Cancer Information and Surveillance Modeling Network-Colon models to compare scenarios of no screening, annual fecal immunochemical testing, decennial colonoscopy, and a blood test meeting Centers for Medicare & Medicaid (CMS) coverage criteria (74% CRC sensitivity and 90% specificity). We varied the sensitivity to detect CRC (74%-92%), advanced adenomas (10%-50%), screening interval (1-3 years), and test cost ($25-$500). Primary outcomes included quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) gained from screening and costs for a US average-risk cohort of individuals aged 45 years.

RESULTS

Annual fecal immunochemical testing yielded 125-163 QALY gained per 1000 at a cost of $3811-$5384 per person, whereas colonoscopy yielded 132-177 QALY gained at a cost of $5375-$7031 per person. A blood test with 92% CRC sensitivity and 50% advanced adenoma sensitivity yielded 117-162 QALY gained if used every 3 years and 133-173 QALY gained if used every year but would not be cost-effective if priced above $125 per test. If used every 3 years, a $500 blood test only meeting CMS coverage criteria yielded 83-116 QALY gained at a cost of $8559-$9413 per person.

CONCLUSION

Blood tests that only meet CMS coverage requirements should not be recommended to patients who would otherwise undergo screening by colonoscopy or fecal immunochemical testing because of lower benefit. Blood tests need higher advanced adenoma sensitivity (above 40%) and lower costs (below $125) to be cost-effective.

Evaluation of long-term benefits and cost-effectiveness of nation-wide colorectal cancer screening strategies in China in 2020-2060: a modelling analysis

Background

Evidence on the long-term benefits and cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening strategies in China remains limited. This modelling study aims to address this issue for various CRC screening strategies in China between 2020 and 2060.

Methods

Using a previously developed microsimulation model (MIMIC-CRC) with Chinese epidemiological data, we evaluated four CRC screening strategies targeting population aged 45-74 years: no screening, colonoscopy every 10 years, biennial faecal immunochemical testing (FIT), and a roll-out FIT screening strategy. Screening coverage (invitation) rates from 5% to 100% were analysed. Single-cohort analysis of 100,000 individuals was conducted to estimate the relative cost-effectiveness of each strategy. A multiple-cohort analysis of 100,000 people aged 40+ over 2020-2060 was conducted to project nation-wide long-term benefits and cost-effectiveness.

Findings

In single-cohort analysis, all strategies yielded reductions in CRC incidence and mortality compared to no screening, with colonoscopy outperforming FIT-based strategies at the same invitation rates. In multiple-cohort analysis, among people over 40 years of age in China over 2020-2060, compared to no screening, at invitation rate of 5%, screening by colonoscopy, biennial FIT and roll-out FIT-based approach were estimated to avert 1.2, 0.4, and 0.3 million incident CRCs and 0.2, 0.1, and 0.1 million CRC-related deaths, respectively, compared to no screening (25.4 million incident CRCs and 4.4 million CRC-related deaths), and this preventive effect enlarged as the screening coverage rate increased. At full coverage, colonoscopy achieved the largest reductions (38.2% lower incidence and 43.2% lower mortality) but required the most resources. Biennial FIT and roll-out FIT-based approach screening was slightly less effective but had significant reduced colonoscopy needs (reduction of 83.8% and 85.2%, respectively) and overall cost (reduction of 23.4% and 37.8%, respectively) compared to colonoscopy screening.

Interpretation

Nation-wide implementation of screening would be effective in reducing the burden of CRC in China. Biennial FIT and roll-out FIT-based screening strategies could prevent incident CRC cases and CRC-related deaths with considerably fewer resources than colonoscopy screening. Efforts should be made to increase the screening coverage in China.

Funding

Chinese Academy of Medical Science Innovation Fund for Medical Science (2022-I2M-1-0031); National Natural Science Foundation of China (82173606; 82273726); Beijing Nova Program of Science and Technology (20230484397).

Comparative effectiveness of two interventions to increase colorectal cancer screening among females living in the rural Midwest

PURPOSE

To assess the comparative effectiveness of a tailored, interactive digital video disc (DVD) intervention versus DVD plus patient navigation (PN) intervention versus usual care (UC) on the uptake of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among females living in Midwest rural areas.

METHODS

As part of a larger study, 663 females (ages 50-74) living in rural Indiana and Ohio and not up-to-date (UTD) with CRC screening at baseline were randomized to one of three study groups. Demographics , health status/history, and beliefs and attitudes about CRC screening were measured at baseline. CRC screening was assessed at baseline and 12 months from medical records and self-report. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine whether females in each group were UTD for screening and which test they completed.

RESULTS

Adjusted for covariates, females in the DVD plus PN group were 3.5× more likely to complete CRC screening than those in the UC group (odds ratio [OR] 3.62; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.09, 6.47) and baseline intention to receive CRC screening (OR 3.45, CI: 2.21,5.42) at baseline. Adjusting for covariates, there was no difference by study arm whether females who became UTD for CRC screening chose to complete a colonoscopy or fecal occult blood test/fecal immunochemical test.

CONCLUSIONS

Many females living in the rural Midwest are not UTD for CRC screening. A tailored intervention that included an educational DVD and PN improved knowledge, addressed screening barriers, provided information about screening test options, and provided support was more effective than UC and DVD-only to increase adherence to recommended CRC screening.

New paradigms to break barriers in early cancer detection for improved prognosis and treatment outcomes

The uncontrolled growth and spread of cancerous cells beyond their usual boundaries into surrounding tissues characterizes cancer. In developed countries, cancer is the leading cause of death, while in underdeveloped nations, it ranks second. Using existing cancer diagnostic tools has increased early detection rates, which is crucial for effective cancer treatment. In recent decades, there has been significant progress in cancer-specific survival rates owing to advances in cancer detection and treatment. The ability to accurately identify precursor lesions is a crucial aspect of effective cancer screening programs, as it enables early treatment initiation, leading to lower long-term incidence of invasive cancer and improved overall prognosis. However, these diagnostic methods have limitations, such as high costs and technical challenges, which can make accurate diagnosis of certain deep-seated tumors difficult. To achieve accurate cancer diagnosis and prognosis, it is essential to continue developing cutting-edge technologies in molecular biology and cancer imaging.

Protocol paper for an implementation science approach to promoting colorectal cancer screening in Federally Qualified Health Center clinics: A stepped-wedge, multilevel intervention trial

Background

Colorectal cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States. Despite the Healthy People 2030 goal of 70.5%, colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates in Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) are suboptimal at about 40%. The Colorectal Cancer Awareness, Research, Education and Screening-Rural Expansion, Access, and Capacity for Health (CARES-REACH) study seeks to address this disparity and accelerate the adoption and utilization of effective, evidence-based CRC screening practices. This paper describes the CARES-REACH study design and implementation methods.

Methods

Informed by a community-based participatory research (CBPR) framework and enriched by implementation science approaches, CARES-REACH features a stepped wedge design with extension for maintenance to support an implementation strategy focused on multiple levels: organizational, provider, and patient levels that entail processes to boost initial and repeat screening among average risk and age-eligible adults. This multilevel study entails the implementation of a core set of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) that include low literacy patient education (English, Spanish, and Haitian Creole language); provider education, system-wide electronic medical record (EMR) tools including provider prompts and patient reminders, FIT (fecal immunochemical test) kit distribution, plus an organization-wide cancer control champion who motivates providers, coaches and navigates patients, and monitors system-wide CRC screening activities.

Trial registration

NCT04464668.

Advancing Colorectal Cancer Detection With Blood-Based Tests: Qualitative Study and Discrete Choice Experiment to Elicit Population Preferences

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most deadly form of cancer, inducing an estimated 1.9 million incidence cases and 0.9 million deaths worldwide in 2020. Despite the availability of screening tests, their uptake remains suboptimal. However, blood-based tests that look for signs of cancer-specific markers in the body are increasingly available as an alternative for more invasive tests for cancer. Compared with existing tests, the benefits of blood-based tests for CRC include not needing pretest preparation, stool handling, and dietary or medication restrictions.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to explore the population's preferences for CRC screening tests, with a focus on blood-based tests, and investigate the factors influencing test uptake.

METHODS

We used a mixed methods approach, combining semistructured interviews and a discrete choice experiment (DCE) survey. Interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis to identify salient attributes for CRC screening tests. These attributes informed the design of the DCE survey. The DCE data were analyzed using mixed logit and mixed-mixed multinomial logit models.

RESULTS

Qualitative findings from 30 participants revealed that participants preferred blood-based tests due to their perceived low risk, minimal pain, and ease of sample collection. However, concerns about the test's lower accuracy were also expressed. The DCE survey was completed by 1189 participants. In the mixed logit model, participants demonstrated a stronger preference for blood-based tests over a 2-day stool-based test. The mixed-mixed multinomial logit model identified 2 classes, strong supporters and weak supporters, for CRC screening. Weak supporters, but not strong supporters, had a higher preference for blood-based tests. Women, ethnic Chinese, and people aged 40 to 60 years were more likely to be weak supporters. Both models highlighted the high influence of cost and test sensitivity on participants' preferences. Transitioning from a 2-day stool-based test to a blood-based test, assuming a national screening program at a base price of Singapore $5 (US $3.75), was estimated to have the potential to increase the relative uptake by 5.9% (95% CI 3.6%-8.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings contribute to our understanding of CRC screening preferences and provide insights into the factors driving test uptake. This study highlights the perceived advantages of blood-based tests and identifies areas of concern regarding their accuracy. Further research is needed to determine the actual increase in uptake rate when blood-based tests are made available.

Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening With a Blood Test That Meets the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Coverage Decision

BACKGROUND & AIMS

A blood-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening test may increase screening participation. However, blood tests may be less effective than current guideline-endorsed options. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) covers blood tests with sensitivity of at least 74% for detection of CRC and specificity of at least 90%. In this study, we investigate whether a blood test that meets these criteria is cost-effective.

METHODS

Three microsimulation models for CRC (MISCAN-Colon, CRC-SPIN, and SimCRC) were used to estimate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of triennial blood-based screening (from ages 45 to 75 years) compared to no screening, annual fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), triennial stool DNA testing combined with an FIT assay, and colonoscopy screening every 10 years. The CMS coverage criteria were used as performance characteristics of the hypothetical blood test. We varied screening ages, test performance characteristics, and screening uptake in a sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

Without screening, the models predicted 77-88 CRC cases and 32-36 CRC deaths per 1000 individuals, costing $5.3-$5.8 million. Compared to no screening, blood-based screening was cost-effective, with an additional cost of $25,600-$43,700 per quality-adjusted life-year gained (QALYG). However, compared to FIT, triennial stool DNA testing combined with FIT, and colonoscopy, blood-based screening was not cost-effective, with both a decrease in QALYG and an increase in costs. FIT remained more effective (+5-24 QALYG) and less costly (-$3.2 to -$3.5 million) than blood-based screening even when uptake of blood-based screening was 20 percentage points higher than uptake of FIT.

CONCLUSION

Even with higher screening uptake, triennial blood-based screening, with the CMS-specified minimum performance sensitivity of 74% and specificity of 90%, was not projected to be cost-effective compared with established strategies for colorectal cancer screening.

Screening for liver fibrosis: lessons from colorectal and lung cancer screening

Many countries have incorporated population screening programmes for cancer, such as colorectal and lung cancer, into their health-care systems. Cirrhosis is more prevalent than colorectal cancer and has a comparable age-standardized mortality rate to lung cancer. Despite this fact, there are no screening programmes in place for early detection of liver fibrosis, the precursor of cirrhosis. In this Perspective, we use insights from colorectal and lung cancer screening to explore the benefits, challenges, implementation strategies and pathways for future liver fibrosis screening initiatives. Several non-invasive methods and referral pathways for early identification of liver fibrosis exist, but in addition to accurate detection, screening programmes must also be cost-effective and demonstrate benefit through a reduction in liver-related mortality. Randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm this. Future randomized screening trials should evaluate not only the screening tests, but also interventions used to halt disease progression in individuals identified through screening.

Artificial intelligence in colonoscopy: from detection to diagnosis

This study reviews the recent progress of artificial intelligence for colonoscopy from detection to diagnosis. The source of data was 27 original studies in PubMed. The search terms were "colonoscopy" (title) and "deep learning" (abstract). The eligibility criteria were: (1) the dependent variable of gastrointestinal disease; (2) the interventions of deep learning for classification, detection and/or segmentation for colonoscopy; (3) the outcomes of accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, area under the curve (AUC), precision, F1, intersection of union (IOU), Dice and/or inference frames per second (FPS); (3) the publication year of 2021 or later; (4) the publication language of English. Based on the results of this study, different deep learning methods would be appropriate for different tasks for colonoscopy, e.g., Efficientnet with neural architecture search (AUC 99.8%) in the case of classification, You Only Look Once with the instance tracking head (F1 96.3%) in the case of detection, and Unet with dense-dilation-residual blocks (Dice 97.3%) in the case of segmentation. Their performance measures reported varied within 74.0-95.0% for accuracy, 60.0-93.0% for sensitivity, 60.0-100.0% for specificity, 71.0-99.8% for the AUC, 70.1-93.3% for precision, 81.0-96.3% for F1, 57.2-89.5% for the IOU, 75.1-97.3% for Dice and 66-182 for FPS. In conclusion, artificial intelligence provides an effective, non-invasive decision support system for colonoscopy from detection to diagnosis.

Colorectal cancer screening: A review of current knowledge and progress in research

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most prevalent malignancies worldwide, being the third most commonly diagnosed malignancy and the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths globally. Despite the progress in screening, early diagnosis, and treatment, approximately 20%-25% of CRC patients still present with metastatic disease at the time of their initial diagnosis. Furthermore, the burden of disease is still expected to increase, especially in individuals younger than 50 years old, among whom early-onset CRC incidence has been increasing. Screening and early detection are pivotal to improve CRC-related outcomes. It is well established that CRC screening not only reduces incidence, but also decreases deaths from CRC. Diverse screening strategies have proven effective in decreasing both CRC incidence and mortality, though variations in efficacy have been reported across the literature. However, uncertainties persist regarding the optimal screening method, age intervals and periodicity. Moreover, adherence to CRC screening remains globally low. In recent years, emerging technologies, notably artificial intelligence, and non-invasive biomarkers, have been developed to overcome these barriers. However, controversy exists over the actual impact of some of the new discoveries on CRC-related outcomes and how to effectively integrate them into daily practice. In this review, we aim to cover the current evidence surrounding CRC screening. We will further critically assess novel approaches under investigation, in an effort to differentiate promising innovations from mere novelties.

Screening for Colorectal Cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer death. Screening has been proven to reduce both cancer incidence and cancer-related mortality. Various screening tests are available, each with their own advantages and disadvantages and varying levels of evidence to support their use. Clinicians should offer CRC screening to average-risk persons aged 50 to 75 years; starting screening at age 45 years remains controversial. Screening may be beneficial in select persons aged 76 to 85 years, based on their overall health and screening history. Offering a choice of screening tests or sequentially offering an alternate test for those who do not complete screening can significantly increase participation.

Validation of a Model Estimating the Budget Impact of Video Capsule Endoscopy for Surveillance of Crohn's Disease in an Italian Center

Background: Crohn's disease is a chronic ailment affecting the gastrointestinal tract. Mucosal healing, a marker of reduced disease activity, is currently assessed in the colonic sections using ileocolonoscopy and magnetic resonance enteroscopy. Video capsule endoscopy (VCE) offers visualization of the entire GI mucosae. Objective: To validate a Crohn's disease model estimating the budget impact of VCE compared with the standard of care (SOC) in Italy. Methods: A patient-level, discrete-event simulation was developed to estimate the budget impact of VCE compared with SOC for Crohn's disease surveillance over 5 years in the Italian setting. Input data were sourced from a physician-initiated study from Sant'Orsola-Malpighi Hospital in Bologna, Italy, and the literature. The care pathway followed hospital clinical practice. Comparators were the current SOC (ileocolonoscopy, with or without magnetic resonance enteroscopy) and VCE. Sensitivity analysis was performed using 500-patient bootstraps. A comparative analysis regarding clinical outcomes (biologics use, surgical interventions, symptom remission) was performed to explore the validity of the model compared with real-world data. Cumulative event incidences were compared annually and semi-annually. Bayesian statistical analysis further validated the model. Results: Implementing VCE yielded an estimated €67 savings per patient per year, with savings in over 55% of patients, compared with SOC. While annual costs are higher up to the second year, VCE becomes cost saving from the third year onward. The real-world validation analysis proved a good agreement between the model and real-world patient records. The highest agreement was found for biologics, where Bayesian analysis estimated an 80.4% probability (95% CI: 72.2%-87.5%) that a decision maker would accept the result as an actual reflection of real-world data. Even where trend data diverged (eg, for surgery [43.1% likelihood of acceptance, 95% CI: 33.7%-52.8%]), the cumulative surgery count over 5 years was within the margin of error of the real-world data. Conclusions: Implementing VCE in the surveillance of patients with Crohn's disease and small bowel involvement may be cost saving in Italy. The congruence between model predictions and real-world patient records supports using this discrete-event simulation to inform healthcare decisions.

Accuracy of the Discriminatory Ability of Combined Fecal Microbiota Panel in the Early Detection of Patients with Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and detecting it at an early stage is an effective way to decrease mortality from CRC. Colonoscopy, considered the gold standard (GS) for diagnosing the disease in many countries, has several limitations. Therefore, the main focus of this literature is to investigate the ability of combining candidate gut microbiota for early diagnosis of CRC, both in the presence and absence of GS test outcomes.

METHODS

We analyzed the data derived from a case-control study, including 83 screening colonoscopies conducted on subjects aged 18-92 years in Tehran, Iran. The candidate gut microbiota including, ETBF, Enterococcus faecalis, and Porphyromonas gingivalis were quantified in samples using absolute qRT PCR. The Bayesian latent class model (LCM) was employed to combine the values from the multiple bacterial markers in order to optimize the discriminatory ability compared with a single marker.

RESULTS

Based on Bayesian logistic regression, we discovered that family history of CRC, physical activity, cigarette smoking, and food diet were all significantly associated with an increased risk of CRC. When comparing ETBF and E. faecalis to P. gingivalis, we have observed that P. gingivalis exhibited greater predictive power in detecting high-risk individuals with CRC. As such, the sensitivity, specificity, and the area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve of combining ETBF, E. faecalis, and P. gingivalis were 98%, 96%, and 0.97, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that the combined use of the three markers markedly improves classification performance compared to pairwise combinations, as well as individual markers, both with and without GS test outcomes. Noticeably, the triple composition of the fecal markers may serve as a reliable non-invasive indicator for the early prediction of CRC.

Reduction in colorectal cancer incidence by screening endoscopy

Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence rates decreased by up to 50% in older age groups in the USA in the era of the widespread uptake of screening colonoscopy, despite adverse trends in CRC risk factors and increasing CRC incidence at younger ages. However, reported first results from a randomized trial, the NordICC study, suggested rather modest effects of screening colonoscopy. As outlined in this Perspective, the apparent discrepancy between real-world and trial evidence could be explained by strong attenuation of effect estimates from screening endoscopy trials by several factors, including limited screening adherence, widespread uptake of colonoscopy outside the screening offers and the inclusion of prevalent, non-preventable CRC cases in reported numbers of incident cases. Alternative interpretations of screening endoscopy trial results accounting for prevalence bias are in line with trends in CRC incidence reduction in countries offering CRC screening, and should encourage more widespread implementation and uptake of effective CRC screening.

A qualitative interview study on colorectal cancer screening in China

Background

The effectiveness of triage screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) is not fully achieved in Chinese populations, mainly due to low compliance to colonoscopy follow-up. This study aimed to collect viewpoints of experts in China on ongoing screening programs and emerging screening tests for CRC, which may help to improve effectiveness of CRC screening in the country.

Methods

We conducted 15 semi-structured interviews with experts involving CRC screening in China during October to November of 2020. Interview topics included personal characteristics, work context, opinions on ongoing screening programs, challenges and opportunities in optimization of screening strategies, and prospects for CRC screening in near future. To analyze the data, we used a generic qualitative research approach inspired by grounded theory, including open, axial, and selective coding.

Results

This analysis revealed a total of 83 initial categories, 37 subcategories and 10 main categories, which included 4 core categories of current modality for CRC screening, factors influencing screening effectiveness, optimization of CRC screening modality, and prospects for development of CRC screening. The results provide insight into the factors underlying the challenges of the ongoing CRC screening programs in China: the most important concern is the low compliance to colonoscopy, followed by the low specificity of the currently-used initial tests. The experts proposed to use quantitative instead of qualitative fecal immunochemical test (FIT), and optimize risk assessment tools to improve specificity of initial tests. Regarding the emerging screening tests, 9 of 15 experts did not think that the novel techniques are good enough to replace the current tests, but can be used complementarily in opportunistic screening for CRC.

Conclusion

The viewpoints of Chinese experts suggested that use quantitative FIT or optimize risk assessment tools may help to identify high-risk individuals of CRC more accurately, improve adherence to colonoscopy, and thus fully achieve the effectiveness of screening.

Population health outcomes of blood-based screening for colorectal cancer in comparison to current screening modalities: insights from a discrete-event simulation model incorporating longitudinal adherence

AIM

Insufficient adherence to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening impedes individual and population health benefits, with about one-third of individuals non-adherent to available screening options. The impact of poor adherence is inadequately considered in most health economics models, limiting the evaluation of real-world population-level screening outcomes. This study introduces the CAN-SCREEN (Colorectal cANcer SCReening Economics and adherENce) model, utilizing real-world adherence scenarios to assess the effectiveness of a blood-based test (BBT) compared to existing strategies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The CAN-SCREEN model evaluates various CRC screening strategies per 1,000 screened individuals for ages 45-75. Adherence is modeled in two ways: (1) full adherence and (2) longitudinally declining adherence. BBT performance is based on recent pivotal trial data while existing strategies are informed using literature. The full adherence model is calibrated using previously published Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) models. Outcomes, including life-years gained (LYG), CRC cases averted, CRC deaths averted, and colonoscopies, are compared to no screening.

RESULTS

Longitudinal adherence modeling reveals differences in the relative ordering of health outcomes and resource utilization, as measured by the number of colonoscopies performed per 1,000, between screening modalities. BBT outperforms the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and the multitarget stool DNA (mtsDNA) test with more CRC deaths averted (13) compared to FIT and mtsDNA (7, 11), more CRC cases averted (27 vs. 16, 22) and higher LYG (214 vs. 157, 199). BBT yields fewer CRC deaths averted compared to colonoscopy (13, 15) but requires fewer colonoscopies (1,053 vs. 1,928).

LIMITATIONS

Due to limited data, the CAN-SCREEN model with longitudinal adherence leverages evidence-informed assumptions for the natural history and real-world longitudinal adherence to screening.

CONCLUSIONS

The CAN-SCREEN model demonstrates that amongst non-invasive CRC screening strategies, those with higher adherence yield more favorable health outcomes as measured by CRC deaths averted, CRC cases averted, and LYG.

Differential impact of test performance characteristics on burden-to-benefit tradeoffs for blood-based colorectal cancer screening: A microsimulation analysis

OBJECTIVES

To inform the development and evaluation of new blood-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tests satisfying minimum United States (US) coverage criteria, we estimated the impact of the different test performance characteristics on long-term testing benefits and burdens.

METHODS

A novel CRC-Microsimulation of Adenoma Progression and Screening (CRC-MAPS) model was developed, validated, then used to assess different screening tests for CRC. We compared multiple, hypothetical blood-based CRC screening tests satisfying minimum coverage criteria of 74% CRC sensitivity and 90% specificity, to measure how changes in a test's CRC sensitivity, specificity, and adenoma sensitivity (sizes 1-5 mm, 6-9 mm, ≥10 mm) affect total number of colonoscopies (COL), CRC incidence reduction (IR), CRC mortality reduction (MR), and burden-to-benefit ratios (incremental COLs per percentage-point increase in IR or MR).

RESULTS

A blood test meeting minimum US coverage criteria for performance characteristics resulted in 1576 lifetime COLs per 1000 individuals, 46.7% IR and 59.2% MR compared to no screening. Tests with increased CRC sensitivity of 99% ( + 25%) vs. increased ≥10 mm adenoma sensitivity of 13.6% ( + 3.6%) both yielded the same MR, 62.7%. Test benefits improved the most with increases in all-size adenoma sensitivity, then size-specific adenoma sensitivities, then specificity and CRC sensitivity, while increases in specificity or ≥10 mm adenoma sensitivity resulted in the most favorable burden-to-benefit tradeoffs (ratios <11.5).

CONCLUSIONS

Burden-to-benefit ratios for blood-based CRC screening tests differ by performance characteristic, with the most favorable tradeoffs resulting from improvements in specificity and ≥10 mm adenoma sensitivity.

Risk-Stratified Screening for Colorectal Cancer Using Genetic and Environmental Risk Factors: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Based on Real-World Data

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Previous studies on the cost-effectiveness of personalized colorectal cancer (CRC) screening were based on hypothetical performance of CRC risk prediction and did not consider the association with competing causes of death. In this study, we estimated the cost-effectiveness of risk-stratified screening using real-world data for CRC risk and competing causes of death.

METHODS

Risk predictions for CRC and competing causes of death from a large community-based cohort were used to stratify individuals into risk groups. A microsimulation model was used to optimize colonoscopy screening for each risk group by varying the start age (40-60 years), end age (70-85 years), and screening interval (5-15 years). The outcomes included personalized screening ages and intervals and cost-effectiveness compared with uniform colonoscopy screening (ages 45-75, every 10 years). Key assumptions were varied in sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Risk-stratified screening resulted in substantially different screening recommendations, ranging from a one-time colonoscopy at age 60 for low-risk individuals to a colonoscopy every 5 years from ages 40 to 85 for high-risk individuals. Nevertheless, on a population level, risk-stratified screening would increase net quality-adjusted life years gained (QALYG) by only 0.7% at equal costs to uniform screening or reduce average costs by 1.2% for equal QALYG. The benefit of risk-stratified screening improved when it was assumed to increase participation or costs less per genetic test.

CONCLUSIONS

Personalized screening for CRC, accounting for competing causes of death risk, could result in highly tailored individual screening programs. However, average improvements across the population in QALYG and cost-effectiveness compared with uniform screening are small.

Health Economic Evidence and Modeling Challenges for Liquid Biopsy Assays in Cancer Management: A Systematic Literature Review

BACKGROUND

Cancer-derived material circulating in the bloodstream and other bodily fluids, referred to as liquid biopsies (LBs), has become an appealing adjunct or alternative to tissue biopsies, showing vital promise in several clinical applications.

PURPOSE

A systematic literature review was conducted to (1) summarize the current health economic evidence for LB assays and (2) identify and analyze the studies addressed or reported on the challenges of health economic modeling in precision medicine.

METHODS

Relevant studies were identified in the EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EconLit, and the University of Melbourne Full Text Journal databases from 1 January 2013 to 16 September 2022. Included papers were selected if they were economic evaluations and/or budget impact analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 24 studies were included and analyzed, with the majority being full economic evaluations (n = 19, 79.2%). Four studies (16.7%) were health and budget impact analyses, and one study (4.1%) incorporated both an economic evaluation and a budget impact analysis. Cohort-level modeling techniques were the most common approach (n = 16; 80%). LB technologies were cost-effective in 15 studies (75%) considering different biomarkers, cancer types and stages, and economic analyses. These studies evaluated LBs for screening and early detection (66.7%), treatment selection (26.7%), and monitoring treatment response (6.6%). Budget impact analysis results were varied among included studies, with the majority of studies (n = 4; 80%) reporting either cost savings, minimal, or modest budget impact, while one study (20%) reported LBs as an efficient strategy. The reviewed studies often inadequately reported or addressed modeling challenges, such as patient-level processes, the combination of tests and treatments, preferences, and uncertainty.

CONCLUSION

LBs could provide a cost-effective approach for treatment selection in lung cancer and aid in the screening and early detection of other cancers, including colorectal, gastric, breast, and brain cancers. This is in comparison with various alternatives, such as the standard of care (SOC) and no screening scenario. However, it is important to mention that in some comparisons, LBs were used in combination with SOC instead of replacing it. Importantly, few studies have pointed toward LBs' cost-effectiveness for monitoring treatment response. Most health and budget impact analyses, especially those focused on lung cancer, suggest potential cost savings or a minimal-to-moderate budget impact. Nevertheless, additional research is needed to ascertain their effectiveness across various stages of lung and colorectal cancer, as well as to address potential modeling challenges.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42022307939.

Development and validation of a web-based predictive model for preoperative diagnosis of localized colorectal cancer and colorectal adenoma

Background

Localized colorectal cancer (LCC) has obscure clinical signs, which are difficult to distinguish from colorectal adenoma (CA). This study aimed to develop and validate a web-based predictive model for preoperative diagnosis of LCC and CA.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study that included data from 500 patients with LCC and 980 patients with CA who were admitted to Dongyang People's Hospital between November 2012 and June 2022. Patients were randomly divided into the training (n=1036) and validation (n=444) cohorts. Univariate logistic regression, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression, and multivariate logistic regression were used to select the variables for predictive models. The area under the curve (AUC), calibration curve, decision curve analysis (DCA), and clinical impact curve (CIC) were used to evaluate the performance of the model.

Results

The web-based predictive model was developed, including nine independent risk factors: age, sex, drinking history, white blood cell count, lymphocyte count, red blood cell distribution width, albumin, carcinoembryonic antigen, and fecal occult blood test. The AUC of the prediction model in the training and validation cohorts was 0.910 (0.892-0.929) and 0.894 (0.862-0.925), respectively. The calibration curve showed good consistency between the outcome predicted by the model and the actual diagnosis. DCA and CIC showed that the predictive model had a good clinical application value.

Conclusion

This study first developed a web-based preoperative prediction model, which can discriminate LCC from CA and can be used to quantitatively assess the risks and benefits in clinical practice.

Colorectal cancer screening: The role of MT-sDNA testing

ABSTRACT

Because an estimated 10.5% of new colorectal cancer (CRC) cases occur in patients under age 50 years, the US Preventive Services Task Force in 2021 recommended CRC screening for adults ages 45 to 49 years. The prevalence of up-to-date CRC screening with any recommended test among patients age 45 years and older in the United States is only 59% in 2023, indicating that existing screening practices are ineffective. Screening options now include invasive and noninvasive measures. Multi-target stool DNA (MT-sDNA) testing is a simple, low-risk, noninvasive test that provides excellent sensitivity and specificity, is cost-effective, and may increase patient screening rates. CRC screening guideline recommendations and alternative screening methods may help improve patient outcomes and reduce morbidity and mortality. This article describes MT-sDNA testing, its effectiveness, recommended use, and potential expanding role as a screening option.

Progress in the field of noninvasive diagnostics for colorectal cancer: a systematic review for the accuracy of blood-based biomarkers for detection of advanced pre-cancerous lesions

BACKGROUND

Early detection of pre-cancerous adenomas through screening can reduce colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence. Fecal immunochemical tests are commonly used, but have limited sensitivity for pre-cancerous lesions. Blood-based screening may improve test sensitivity. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the accuracy of blood-based biomarkers for detection of advanced pre-cancerous lesions.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We present the accuracy of blood-based biomarkers for the detection of advanced pre-cancerous lesions. EMBASE, Web of Science and PubMed databases were searched, with study populations limited to adults diagnosed with advanced pre-cancerous lesions at colonoscopy, who had a blood-based biomarker test analyzed with reports of sensitivity and specificity.

RESULTS

69 studies were identified, which assessed 133 unique biomarkers sets. The best performing test was a panel of 6 miRNAs, with a sensitivity of 95% and specificity of 90% for advanced pre-cancerous lesions. Only 6 biomarkers demonstrated sensitivity ≥ 50% and specificity ≥ 90% for the detection of advanced pre-cancerous lesions.

CONCLUSION

Many different blood-based biomarkers have been assessed for detection of advanced pre-cancerous lesions, but few have progressed beyond the discovery stage. While some biomarkers have reported high sensitivity and specificity, larger prospective studies in unbiased intended-use screening populations are required for validation.

Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening on All-Cause and CRC-Specific Mortality Reduction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

(1) Background: The aim of this study was to pool and compare all-cause and colorectal cancer (CRC) specific mortality reduction of CRC screening in randomized control trials (RCTs) and simulation models, and to determine factors that influence screening effectiveness. (2) Methods: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane library were searched for eligible studies. Multi-use simulation models or RCTs that compared the mortality of CRC screening with no screening in general population were included. CRC-specific and all-cause mortality rate ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated by a bivariate random model. (3) Results: 10 RCTs and 47 model studies were retrieved. The pooled CRC-specific mortality rate ratios in RCTs were 0.88 (0.80, 0.96) and 0.76 (0.68, 0.84) for guaiac-based fecal occult blood tests (gFOBT) and single flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening, respectively. For the model studies, the rate ratios were 0.45 (0.39, 0.51) for biennial fecal immunochemical tests (FIT), 0.31 (0.28, 0.34) for biennial gFOBT, 0.61 (0.53, 0.72) for single FS, 0.27 (0.21, 0.35) for 10-yearly colonoscopy, and 0.35 (0.29, 0.42) for 5-yearly FS. The CRC-specific mortality reduction of gFOBT increased with higher adherence in both studies (RCT: 0.78 (0.68, 0.89) vs. 0.92 (0.87, 0.98), model: 0.30 (0.28, 0.33) vs. 0.92 (0.51, 1.63)). Model studies showed a 0.62-1.1% all-cause mortality reduction with single FS screening. (4) Conclusions: Based on RCTs and model studies, biennial FIT/gFOBT, single and 5-yearly FS, and 10-yearly colonoscopy screening significantly reduces CRC-specific mortality. The model estimates are much higher than in RCTs, because the simulated biennial gFOBT assumes higher adherence. The effectiveness of screening increases at younger screening initiation ages and higher adherences.

Change in onset age of first primary colorectal cancer in the USA

PURPOSE

Identifying the onset age of cancer is essential for its early intervention. The aim of this study was to characterize the features and investigate the variation tendency of first primary colorectal cancer (CRC) onset age in the USA.

METHODS

For this retrospective population-based cohort analysis, data on patients diagnosed with first primary CRC (n = 330,977) between 1992 and 2017 were obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results dataset. Annual percent changes (APC) and average APCs were calculated to examine the changes in average age at CRC diagnosis using the Joinpoint Regression Program.

RESULTS

From 1992 to 2017, the average age at CRC diagnosis decreased from 67.0 to 61.2 years, declining by 0.22% and 0.45% annually before and after 2000. The age at diagnosis was lower in the distal than in the proximal CRC cases and the age has the downward trends in all subgroups of sex, race, and stage. Over one-fifth of CRC patients were initially diagnosed with distantly metastatic CRC, with the age lower than that in localized CRC cases (63.5 vs 64.8 years).

CONCLUSIONS

The first primary CRC onset age has decreased significantly in the USA over the last 25 years and the modern lifestyle may be responsible for the decline. Specifically, the age of proximal CRC is invariably higher than that of distal CRC. Moreover, the age of advanced stage is lower than that of the early stage. Clinicians should adopt earlier screening age and more effective screening techniques for CRC.

The Use of a Non-Invasive Biomarker for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Comparative Cost-Effectiveness Modeling Study

This study aimed to examine the cost-effectiveness of fecal biomarker M3 panel compared to fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and colonoscopy in an Asian population. In a hypothetical population of 100,000 persons aged 50 years who received FIT yearly, M3 biomarker yearly, or colonoscopy every 10 years until the age of 75 years. Participants with positive FOBT or a result of "high risk" identified using the M3 biomarker are offered colonoscopy. We assumed surveillance colonoscopy is repeated every 3 years, and examined the treatment cost. A comparison of various outcome measures was conducted using Markov modelling. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of FIT, M3 biomarker, and colonoscopy was USD108,176, USD133,485 and USD159,596, respectively. Comparing with FIT, the use of M3 biomarker could lead to significantly smaller total loss of cancer-related life-years (2783 vs. 5279); a higher number of CRC cases prevented (1622 vs. 146), a higher proportion of CRC cases prevented (50.2% vs. 4.5%), more life-years saved (2852 vs. 339), and cheaper total costs per life-year saved (USD212,553 vs. 773,894). The total costs per life-year saved is more affordable than that achieved by colonoscopy as a primary screening tool (USD212,553 vs. USD236,909). The findings show that M3 biomarkers may be more cost-effective than colonoscopy.

Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Surveillance in Hodgkin Lymphoma Survivors Treated with Procarbazine and/or Infradiaphragmatic Radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

Hodgkin lymphoma survivors treated with infradiaphragmatic radiotherapy (IRT) and/or procarbazine have an increased risk of developing colorectal cancer. We investigated the cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer surveillance in Dutch Hodgkin lymphoma survivors to determine the optimal surveillance strategy for different Hodgkin lymphoma subgroups.

METHODS

The Microsimulation Screening Analysis-Colon model was adjusted to reflect colorectal cancer and other-cause mortality risk in Hodgkin lymphoma survivors. Ninety colorectal cancer surveillance strategies were evaluated varying in starting and stopping age, interval, and modality [colonoscopy, fecal immunochemical test (FIT, OC-Sensor; cutoffs: 10/20/47 μg Hb/g feces), and multi-target stool DNA test (Cologuard)]. Analyses were also stratified per primary treatment (IRT and procarbazine or procarbazine without IRT). Colorectal cancer deaths averted (compared with no surveillance) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were primary outcomes. The optimal surveillance strategy was identified assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of €20,000 per life-years gained (LYG).

RESULTS

Overall, the optimal surveillance strategy was annual FIT (47 μg) from age 45 to 70 years, which might avert 70% of colorectal cancer deaths in Hodgkin lymphoma survivors (compared with no surveillance; ICER:€18,000/LYG). The optimal surveillance strategy in Hodgkin lymphoma survivors treated with procarbazine without IRT was biennial FIT (47 μg) from age 45 to 70 years (colorectal cancer mortality averted 56%; ICER:€15,000/LYG), and when treated with IRT and procarbazine, annual FIT (47 μg) surveillance from age 40 to 70 was most cost-effective (colorectal cancer mortality averted 75%; ICER:€13,000/LYG).

CONCLUSIONS

Colorectal cancer surveillance in Hodgkin lymphoma survivors is cost-effective and should commence earlier than screening occurs in population screening programs. For all subgroups, FIT surveillance was the most cost-effective strategy.

IMPACT

Colorectal cancer surveillance should be implemented in Hodgkin lymphoma survivors.

The Association between Hypertriglyceridemia and Colorectal Cancer: A Long-Term Community Cohort Study in Taiwan

(1) Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common malignancy and the second leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide. It often diagnosed at advanced stages, and with increasing incidence at younger generation. CRC poses a heavy financial burden and a huge public health challenge nowadays. Lipoproteins and serum lipids may have an influence on carcinogenesis by making oxidative stress, inflammation, and insulin resistance. Dyslipidemia plays a potential role in the risk of CRC. The purpose of this study is to use nationally representative samples to determine epidemiologic characteristics of CRC in the Taiwanese population, and to evaluate the associations between baseline levels of lipid profile and their effect on risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) comprehensively and quantitatively. The control of dyslipidemia in primary and secondary prevention may reduce the disease burden of CRC. (2) Methods: This is a nationwide long-term community-based prospective cohort study. Data were retrieved from the nationwide population-based Taiwanese Survey on Hypertension, Hyperglycemia and Hyperlipidemia (TwSHHH). Variables were estimated by the Cox proportional hazards model which was then further adjusted for age. We also calculated the relative ratios (RRs) of CRC for joint categories of serum cholesterol, triglyceride (TG), low-density lipoproteins cholesterol (LDL-C), and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) level, and to examine their combined effect and statistical interactions. (3) Results: Male, age, waist circumference, diabetes mellitus (DM), high TG, high cholesterol level, smoking history, and metabolic syndrome were proved to increase the risk of CRC. In addition, DM patients with a TG level ≥150 mg/dL and cholesterol ≥180 mg/dL had a 4.118-fold higher risk of CRC as compared with a TG level <150 mg/dL and cholesterol level <180 mg/dL, which was a significant difference (95% CI, 1.061−15.975; p = 0.0407). (4) Conclusions: Patients with DM should control TG and cholesterol level through diet, exercise, or taking medications more aggressively, not only for preventing cardiovascular disease, but also for first prevention of CRC. The study can be valuable for the clinicians and policy makers to implement more precisely goals about dyslipidemia management.

Cost-Effectiveness of Outreach Strategies for Stool-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening in a Medicaid Population

Outreach, including patient navigation, has been shown to increase the uptake of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in underserved populations. This analysis evaluates the cost-effectiveness of triennial multi-target stool DNA (mt-sDNA) versus outreach, with or without a mailed annual fecal immunochemical test (FIT), in a Medicaid population. A microsimulation model estimated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio using quality-adjusted life years (QALY), direct costs, and clinical outcomes in a cohort of Medicaid beneficiaries aged 50-64 years, over a lifetime time horizon. The base case model explored scenarios of either 100% adherence or real-world reported adherence (51.3% for mt-sDNA, 21.1% for outreach with FIT and 12.3% for outreach without FIT) with or without real-world adherence for follow-up colonoscopy (66.7% for all). Costs and outcomes were discounted at 3.0%. At 100% adherence to both screening tests and follow-up colonoscopy, mt-sDNA costed more and was less effective compared with outreach with or without FIT. When real-world adherence rates were considered for screening strategies (with 100% adherence for follow-up colonoscopy), mt-sDNA resulted in the greatest reduction in incidence and mortality from CRC (41.5% and 45.8%, respectively) compared with outreach with or without FIT; mt-sDNA also was cost-effective versus outreach with and without FIT ($32,150/QALY and $22,707/QALY, respectively). mt-sDNA remained cost-effective versus FIT, with or without outreach, under real-world adherence rates for follow-up colonoscopy. Outreach or navigation interventions, with associated real-world adherence rates to screening tests, should be considered when evaluating the cost-effectiveness of CRC screening strategies in underserved populations.

Screening for Colorectal Cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second-leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Screening reduces CRC incidence and mortality. 2021 US Preventive Service Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines and available evidence support routine screening from ages 45 to 75, and individualized consideration of screening ages 76 to 85. USPSTF guidelines recommend annual guaiac fecal occult blood testing, annual fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), annual to every 3-year multitarget stool DNA-FIT, every 5-year sigmoidoscopy, every 10-year sigmoidoscopy with annual FIT, every 5-year computed tomographic colonography, and every 10-year colonoscopy as options for screening. The "best test is the one that gets done."

Advances in tests for colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths globally. Nonetheless, with early detection of CRC or its precancerous lesions, mortality, and CRC incidence can be reduced. Although colonoscopy is currently the gold standard for CRC screening and diagnosis, its invasive nature, and troublesome bowel preparation deter patient participation. Therefore, there is a need to expand the use of noninvasive or minimally invasive methods to increase patient compliance.

AREAS COVERED

This review summarizes advances in different methods for CRC screening, including stool bacterial and metagenomic markers, fecal proteins, genetic and epigenetic markers in blood and stools, and imaging modalities. The cost-effectiveness of these methods is also discussed. FIT is more cost-effective compared to virtual colonoscopy, mSEPT9 test, and Multitarget Stool DNA test, while the cost-effectiveness of other noninvasive methods requires further evaluation.

EXPERT OPINION

Recent evidence has well demonstrated the usefulness of gut microbiome and certain fecal bacterial markers in the noninvasive diagnosis of CRC and its precancerous lesions. Many of the fecal biomarkers, from host cells or the gut environment, show better diagnostic sensitivity than FIT. New screening tests based on these fecal biomarkers can be expected to replace FIT with higher cost-effectiveness in the near future.

Effectiveness and Harms of Colorectal Cancer Screening Strategies

Colorectal cancer screening incorporates various testing modalities. Factors including effectiveness, harms, cost, screening interval, patient preferences, and test availability should be considered when determining which test to use. Fecal occult blood testing and endoscopic screening have the most robust evidence, while newer blood- and imaging-based techniques require further evaluation. In this review, we compare the effectiveness, harms, and costs of the various screening strategies.

A Practical Overview of the Stool DNA Test for Colorectal Cancer Screening

The multitarget stool DNA test with fecal immunochemical test (sDNA-FIT) is recommended by all major US guidelines as an option for colorectal cancer screening. It is approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in average-risk individuals aged 45 years and older. The sDNA-FIT tests for 11 biomarkers, including point mutations in KRAS, aberrant methylation in NDRG4 and BMP3, and human hemoglobin. Patients collect a stool sample at home, send it to the manufacturer's laboratory within 1 day, and the result is reported in approximately 2 weeks. Compared with FIT, sDNA-FIT has higher sensitivity but lower specificity for colorectal cancer, which translates to a higher false-positive rate. A unique feature of sDNA-FIT is the manufacturer's comprehensive patient navigation system, which operates 24 hours a day and provides active outreach for patient education and reminders in the first month after a test is ordered. Retesting is recommended every 1-3 years, although the optimal testing interval has not yet been determined empirically. The cost of sDNA-FIT is $681 without insurance, but Medicare and most private insurers cover it with no copay or deductible.

Optimal Strategies for Colorectal Cancer Screening

OPINION STATEMENT

Colorectal cancer (CRC) imposes significant morbidity and mortality, yet it is also largely preventable with evidence-based screening strategies. In May 2021, the US Preventive Services Task Force updated guidance, recommending screening begin at age 45 for average-risk individuals to reduce CRC incidence and mortality in the United States (US). The Task Force recommends screening with one of several screening strategies: high-sensitivity guaiac fecal occult blood test (HSgFOBT), fecal immunochemical test (FIT), multi-target stool DNA (mt-sDNA) test, computed tomographic (CT) colonography (virtual colonoscopy), flexible sigmoidoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy with FIT, or traditional colonoscopy. In addition to these recommended options, there are several emerging and novel CRC screening modalities that are not yet approved for first-line screening in average-risk individuals. These include blood-based screening or "liquid biopsy," colon capsule endoscopy, urinary metabolomics, and stool-based microbiome testing for the detection of colorectal polyps and/or CRC. In order to maximize CRC screening uptake in the US, patients and providers should engage in informed decision-making about the benefits and limitations of recommended screening options to determine the most appropriate screening test. Factors to consider include the invasiveness of the test, test performance, screening interval, accessibility, and cost. In addition, health systems should have a programmatic approach to CRC screening, which may include evidence-based strategies such as patient education, provider education, mailed screening outreach, and/or patient navigation, to maximize screening participation.