Adverse effects of colorectal cancer screening with fecal occult blood test: a population-based organized program Results – serious adverse effects Adverse.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
A guaiac- based faecal occult blood colorectal cancer screening program involving general practitioners is feasible and cost-effective for mass population.
Advertisements

Colon and Rectal Cancer Update
Organized colorectal cancer screening program with FOBT: participation and diagnostic yield deteriorate with time Results – yield Aim To assess the short.
Treatment of large and giant colorectal polyps in the real world Stéphanie HUSSON, Guy VENTRE, Frédéric VAGNE, Jean François VIES, Marjorie MUSSO, Jean.
Spotlight on Colorectal Cancer Screening 1 1. Home Screening for Colon Cancer
Complications after Colonoscopy and Risk Factors Xinliang “Albert” Liu, PhD Latarsha Chisholm, PhD Department of Health Management and Informatics University.
Assessment of pathologic interpretation of colorectal polyps by general pathologists in community practice Bernard DENIS, Carol PETERS, Catherine CHAPELAIN,
HOW STANDING ORDERS HELPED US IMPROVE CANCER SCREENING: REPORT FROM A NEW PPRNet MEMBER JULIO A SAVINON, MD RIO GRANDE MEDICINE INC. HARLINGEN, TX.
The primary care excellence model Increasing Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake with a Patient Navigator Dr. Brian Mitchell, Co-Investigator Northern Ontario.
CHARACTERISTICS OF PATIENTS WITH COLORECTAL CANCER IN NORTHWESTERN GREECE Dimitrios Christodoulou, Ioannis Mitselos, Chrisanthi Tzika, Epameinondas V.
Is upper endoscopy indicated in persons with a positive FOBT and a negative colonoscopy in a population-based colorectal cancer screening program ? Bernard.
Colon-Rectal Cancer Keith Bradley, MD National Alliance of Research Associates Programs NARAP.
Colorectal Cancer Screening John Pelzel MD Sleepy Eye Medical Center.
Clinical Practice Screening for Colorectal Cancer David A. Lieberman, M.D. N Engl J Med Volume 361(12): September 17, 2009.
Integrated Cancer Screening Colorectal Cancer Screening.
Update on Colorectal Cancer Screening Tests Source: Levin Bernard et al. Screening and Surveillance for the Early Detection of Colorectal Cancer and Adenomatous.
Sharp L, Tilson L, Whyte S, Ó Céilleachair A
Maureen Sayer Health Improvement Practitioner Cheshire and Merseyside Bowel Cancer Screening Programme.
Ian Arnott Consultant Gastroenterologist Western General Hospital Edinburgh The Use of Faecal Calprotectin in Primary Care.
Bowel Screening in Scotland – Current Challenges and Possible Solutions Prof. Bob Steele Ninewells Hospital, University of Dundee.
Ethical issues and cancer screening. Efficacy The extent to which a specific intervention, procedure, regimen, or service produces a beneficial result.
Stage-specific survival of screen-detected versus clinically diagnosed colorectal cancer - evidence from the FOBT screening trials- Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar.
What is a colonoscopy? Study of lining of colon and rectum by a gastoenterologist.
A CMH Community DocTalk with Robert Wayne, MD, FACS.
D. M. Kruss MD Kill the Cancer Do Screening now! Daniel M. Kruss, M.D. Kill the Cancer Do Screening now! Daniel M. Kruss, M.D.
Colorectal cancer screening by primary care physicians: a prospective chart audit Bernard DENIS, Guillaume SCHON, Marcel RUETSCH, Jean Christian GRALL,
TREATMENT OF LARGE AND GIANT COLORECTAL POLYPS IN THE REAL WORLD UEGW, PARIS, 2007 Association pour le Dépistage du Cancer colorectal dans le Haut-Rhin.
FIRST TWO AND HALF YEAR OF NATIONAL SCREENING PROGRAM FOR COLORECTAL CANCERS IN REPUBLIC CROATIA Miroslava Katicic 1, Milan Kujundzic 2, Davor Stimac 3,
Slides last updated: June 2015 CRC: CLINICAL FEATURES.
Results and cost of a population-based biennial faecal occult blood colorectal cancer screening program Bernard DENIS, Philippe PERRIN, Jean François VIES,
Population Screening for Colorectal Cancer - update of evidences
1 Colorectal Cancer # 2 Cancer Killer # 2 Cancer Killer SCREENING SAVES LIVES.
An Evidence Based Approach to Colorectal Cancer Screening J. C. Ryan, M.D. Associate Professor of Medicine UCSF and SF VAMC 9/22/2014.
Colorectal cancer screening with the addition of flexible sigmoidoscopy to guaiac-based fecal occult blood testing: a population-based controlled trial.
1 Colorectal Cancer # 2 Cancer Killer # 2 Cancer Killer SCREENING SAVES LIVES.
Direct Access Flexible Sigmoidoscopy
Better Health. No Hassles. Colorectal Cancer Facts – The 2 nd leading cause cancer-related deaths in the Nation – Highly preventable – Caused 49,920 deaths.
Perspectives from the Waitemata Bowel Screening Pilot team -The Endoscopic view Paul Frankish Lead Endoscopist.
Organized Diagnostic Assessment Demonstration Projects Organized Diagnostic Assessment Demonstration Projects Streamlined Centre for Out-Patient Endoscopy.
Colorectal Cancer Proposal of a Screening Program for Developing Countries with Emphasis on Costs.
Screening for Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Nov, 2007 A Aljebreen, FRCPC Division of Gastroenterology KKUH, Riyadh.
American College of Radiology Imaging Network ACRIN 6664 ACRIN 6664 – Protocol Review The National CT Colonography Trial Name(s) of presenters.
Assessing Colorectal Cancer Screening in Appalachia PA William Curry, MD, MS Mark Dignan, PhD Gene Lengerich, VMD Alan Adelman, MD, MS.
Cheshire & Merseyside Bowel Cancer Screening Programme April 2008.
Colorectal Cancer Screening Colorectal Cancer Screening VT SGNA Conference VT SGNA Conference October 24, 2015 October 24, 2015 Lynn Butterly, MD Lynn.
Yield of colonoscopy for advanced neoplasia in a population-based setting Bernard DENIS, Jacques PICOT, Jean François VIES, Marjorie MUSSO, Paul François.
Do all colorectal polyps require pathological examination? Aim To assess whether it is possible to omit the pathological examination of some polyps without.
Cheshire & Merseyside Bowel Cancer Screening Programme April 2008.
Colorectal Cancer Screening Implementation of a public health programme An Expert Group on Colorectal Cancer Screening Cancer Society of Finland, Finnish.
First results of a pilot population-based faecal occult blood colorectal cancer screening program B. DENIS, P. PERRIN, J.F. EBELIN, P. WEBER, E. KALTENBACH,
Update The 2 week rule for colorectal cancer Mr Iain Jourdan MS FRCS Director of Surgery Royal Surrey County Hospital.
Insert name of presentation on Master Slide Bowel Screening in Welsh Prisons Hayley Heard Head of Programme.
March 2010 Having a Bowel Test Professional Pack.
What you need to know about the Fecal Occult Blood Test
27th Annual Winter CME Conference
Cancer Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment
Bowel cancer screening update GP education event 28 Nov 2017
Colorectal Cancer Screening
Module 4: Colorectal Cancer
Volume 147, Issue 5, Pages e1 (November 2014)
Common indicators related to organization and invitation
Douglas K. Rex, Emely Eid  Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 
Bowel Screening in Wales
Volume 147, Issue 5, Pages e1 (November 2014)
Barts Health Trust 2WW Colorectal Workshop Dr Angela Wong,
BOWEL CANCER SCREENING IN LEWISHAM
ESTIMATING THE EFFICIENCY OF THREE NATIONAL CANCER SCREENING PROGRAMMES USING THE POPULATION-BASED CANCER REGISTRY DATA IN SLOVENIA Vesna ZADNIK MD,
Colorectal 2 week wait pathways and “Getting FIT”
Faecal Immunochemistry Test - qFIT
Presentation transcript:

Adverse effects of colorectal cancer screening with fecal occult blood test: a population-based organized program Results – serious adverse effects Adverse effects (AE) of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening have not yet been assessed as thoroughly as those of mammography screening. Aim: to assess 1) AE of a CRC screening program with guaiac-based fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) and 2) the optimal method for their routine detection. Methods: Identification of AE of the organized CRC screening program with biennial gFOBT in progress in the Haut-Rhin since 2003 through 1) voluntary reporting by gastroenterologists, 2) AE report forms by general practitioners (GPs), 3) retrospective questionnaire mailed to GPs and 4) retrospective questionnaire mailed to persons explored by colonoscopy. Results: 114,137 persons completed 173,352 gFOBTs in 4 years of 3810 colonoscopic procedures displayed no neoplasia that is a 57.6% false positive rate. Overall, 17 (4.5/1000) serious AE were recorded: 4 (1.0/1000) perforations, 8 (2.1/1000) bleeding, 3 postpolypectomy syndromes and 2 major anxiety attacks. They resulted in 15 hospitalizations, 6 colonoscopic procedures, 5 surgical operations and 3 blood transfusions. 10 (58.8%) were voluntarily reported by gastroenterologists, 8 (47.1%) were notified by GPs answering the questionnaire and 1 through the AE report form and 7 (41.2%) by patients via the questionnaire. 4 undue surgical operations were recorded, 1 due to an erroneous CT diagnosis of CRC and 3 to an erroneous pathologic overdiagnosis of T1 malignant polyp. 50 colonoscopic procedures were repeated within 6 months without justification (61.6%) persons explored by colonoscopy answered the questionnaire and reported 252 (11.1%) minor AE such as abdominal pain after the procedure (50 cases), change in bowel habits (59 cases), bloating (62 cases), nausea/vomiting (16 cases) and fever (11 cases). 494 (21.6%) reported stress when receiving the mail announcing the positive result, 397 (17.4%) judged the bowel preparation awful and 86 (3.8%) experienced pain during colonoscopy. 16 complained about the waiting period before the colonoscopy appointment. 305 GPs (51.4%) answered the questionnaire concerning 1877 patients and notified 80 AE (4.3%). Only 6 AE were reported with the AE report forms. Conclusion: Provided they are actively sought, AE of CRC screening with gFOBT are more frequent than previously reported. Though most of them are minor, the invited population should be informed. The detection of AE must rely on several sources of information. Voluntary reporting by gastroenterologists detects only the half of serious AE. The patient's questionnaire is the most sensitive method for the detection of minor AE and should be routinely proposed to persons screened by colonoscopy. Aim to assess 1)AE of a CRC screening program with guaiac-based fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) and 2) the optimal method for their routine detection - setting: a French administrative district: Haut-Rhin million inhabitants. All residents aged invited since 2003 to participate in an organized CRC screening program with biennial gFOBT - identification of AE from September 2003 to July 2007 through 1) voluntary reporting by gastroenterologists, 2) AE report forms by general practitioners (GPs), 3) retrospective questionnaire mailed to GPs and 4) retrospective questionnaire mailed to persons explored by colonoscopy Conclusions - Adverse Effects (AE) of CRC screening with gFOBT are more frequent than previously reported, provided they are actively sought - Though most of them are minor, the invited population should be informed - The detection of AE must rely on several sources of information:. Voluntary reporting by gastroenterologists detects only the half of serious AE.. The patient's questionnaire is the most sensitive method for the detection of minor AE and should be routinely proposed to persons screened by colonoscopy. Digestive Disease Week, San Diego, 21 May 2008 Background Association pour le Dépistage du Cancer colorectal en Alsace (ADECA Alsace), Colmar, FRANCE Abstract Results Methods Overall results Joël LACROUTE, Isabelle GENDRE, Jean Marc BOYAVAL, Philippe PERRIN, Bernard DENIS - Adverse effects (AE) of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening have not yet been assessed as thoroughly as those of mammography screening. Funen trial ? (Kronborg, Lancet 1996). Burgundy trial 0 serious AE /1691 colonoscopic procedures (Faivre, Gy 2004). Nottingham trial 0.5% serious AE (Hardcastle, Lancet 1996). Haut-Rhin pilot program 0.2% serious AE (Denis, Gut 2007) - When actively sought, AE are more frequent than usually reported (Zubarik GIE 1999, Bini GIE 2003, Denis GCB 2004) - 114,137 persons completed 173,352 gFOBTs in 4 years gFOBT positive colonoscopic procedures registered colonoscopic procedures displayed no neoplasia that is a 57.6% false positive rate Adverse effectsnumberrateliterature serious170.45%0.4 – 0.5% 1 minor %13.7 – 15% 2 1. Dafnis GIE 2001, Hardcastle Lancet 1996, 2. Zubarik GIE 1999, Bini GIE 2003 Serious adverse effectsnumberrateliterature perforation40.1%0.016% % delayed bleeding80.2%0.07% - 1.6% post-polypectomy Sd30.08%- deep vein thrombosis20.05%- Results – minor adverse effects They resulted in - no death - 15 hospitalizations (130 days) - 8 colonoscopic procedures - 5 surgical operations - 3 blood transfusions Minor adverse effectsnumberrate Abdominal pain during procedure943.1% Abdominal pain after procedure501.6% Bloating632.1% Change in bowel habits602.0% Minor bleeding270.9% Nausea/vomiting150.5% Anxiety602.0% Fever110.4% Vasovagal episode20.07% Positive FOBT result very distressing % Bowel prep very distressing % Response rates AE form GPs’ questionnaire Patients’ questionnaire Gastroenterologist report AE form GPs’ questionnaire Patients’ questionnaire Gastroenterologist report Yield of information sources