Improving compliance to colorectal cancer screening using blood and stool based tests in patients refusing screening colonoscopy in Germany

Andreas Adler, Sebastian Geiger, Anne Keil, Harald Bias, Philipp Schatz, Theo deVos, Jens Dhein, Mathias Zimmermann, Rudolf Tauber, Bertram Wiedenmann, Andreas Adler, Sebastian Geiger, Anne Keil, Harald Bias, Philipp Schatz, Theo deVos, Jens Dhein, Mathias Zimmermann, Rudolf Tauber, Bertram Wiedenmann

Abstract

Background: Despite strong recommendations for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, participation rates are low. Understanding factors that affect screening choices is essential to developing future screening strategies. Therefore, this study assessed patient willingness to use non-invasive stool or blood based screening tests after refusing colonoscopy.

Methods: Participants were recruited during regular consultations. Demographic, health, psychological and socioeconomic factors were recorded. All subjects were advised to undergo screening by colonoscopy. Subjects who refused colonoscopy were offered a choice of non-invasive tests. Subjects who selected stool testing received a collection kit and instructions; subjects who selected plasma testing had a blood draw during the office visit. Stool samples were tested with the Hb/Hp Complex Elisa test, and blood samples were tested with the Epi proColon® 2.0 test. Patients who were positive for either were advised to have a diagnostic colonoscopy.

Results: 63 of 172 subjects were compliant to screening colonoscopy (37%). 106 of the 109 subjects who refused colonoscopy accepted an alternative non-invasive method (97%). 90 selected the Septin9 blood test (83%), 16 selected a stool test (15%) and 3 refused any test (3%). Reasons for blood test preference included convenience of an office draw, overall convenience and less time consuming procedure.

Conclusions: 97% of subjects refusing colonoscopy accepted a non-invasive screening test of which 83% chose the Septin9 blood test. The observation that participation can be increased by offering non-invasive tests, and that a blood test is the preferred option should be validated in a prospective trial in the screening setting.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart outline of the study design. The number of subjects enrolled, the number refusing colonoscopy, and the number choosing a blood test, stool test, or refusing any test are indicated.

References

    1. Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Ervik M, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M, Parkin DM, Forman D, Bray F: GLOBOCAN 2012 v1.0, Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: IARC CancerBase No. 11 [Internet]. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2013. Available from: [] accessed on 13/05/2014
    1. Ferlay J, Steliarova-Foucher E, Lortet-Tieulent J, Rosso S, Coebergh JW, Comber H, Forman D, Bray F. Cancer incidence and mortality patterns in Europe: estimates for 40 countries in 2012. Eur J Cancer. 2013;49(6):1374–1403. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2012.12.027.
    1. Kuipers EJ, Rosch T, Bretthauer M. Colorectal cancer screening – optimizing current strategies and new directions. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2013;10(3):130–142. doi: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2013.12.
    1. Brenner H, Chang-Claude J, Jansen L, Knebel P, Stock C, Hoffmeister M. Gastroenterology. 2013. Reduced risk of colorectal cancer up to 10 y after screening, surveillance, or diagnostic colonoscopy.
    1. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force: Screening for Colorectal Cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. AHRQ Publication 08–05124-EF-3, October 2008. []
    1. Joseph DA, King JB, Miller JW, Richardson LC. Prevalence of colorectal cancer screening among adults–behavioral risk factor surveillance system, United States, 2010. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2012;61(Suppl):51–56.
    1. OECD . Health at a Glance: Europe 2012. 2012. Screening, survival and mortality for colorectal cancer.
    1. Stock C, Ihle P, Brenner H. Colonoscopy and fecal occult blood test use in Germany: results from a large insurance-based cohort. Endoscopy. 2011;43:771–779. doi: 10.1055/s-0030-1256504.
    1. Adler A, Roll S, Marowski B, Drossel R, Rehs HU, Willich SN, Riese J, Wiedenmann B, Rösch T, Berlin Private-Practice Gastroenterology Working Group Appropriateness of colonoscopy in the era of colorectal cancer screening: a prospective, multicenter study in a private-practice setting (Berlin Colonoscopy Project 1, BECOP 1) Dis Colon Rectum. 2007;50:1628–1638. doi: 10.1007/s10350-007-9029-y.
    1. Adler A, Lieberman D, Aminalai A, Aschenbeck J, Drossel R, Mayr M, Mroß M, Scheel M, Schröder A, Keining C, Stange G, Wiedenmann B, Gauger U, Altenhofen L, Rösch T. Data quality of the German screening colonoscopy registry. Endoscopy. 2013;45(10):813–818. doi: 10.1055/s-0033-1344583.
    1. Adler A, Wegscheider K, Lieberman D, Aminalai A, Aschenbeck J, Drossel R, Mayr M, Mroß M, Scheel M, Schröder A, Gerber K, Stange G, Roll S, Gauger U, Wiedenmann B, Altenhofen L, Rosch T. Factors determining the quality of screening colonoscopy: a prospective study on adenoma detection rates, from 12,134 examinations (Berlin colonoscopy project 3, BECOP-3) Gut. 2013;62(2):236–241. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2011-300167.
    1. Gimeno García AZ. Factors influencing colorectal cancer screening participation. Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2012;2012:483417. doi: 10.1155/2012/483417.
    1. Inadomi J, Vijan S, Janz NK, Fagerlin A, Thomas JP, Lin YV, Munoz R, Lau C, Somsouk M, El-Nachef N, Hayward RA. Adherence to colorectal cancer screening: a randomized clinical trial of competing strategies. Arch Intern Med. 2012;172(7):575–582. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2012.332.
    1. Weiss G, Rösch T. Potential of a new blood test for colorectal cancer screening – the septin 9 gene biomarker. Eur Oncol. 2010;6(1):51–54.
    1. Payne S. From discovery to the clinic: the novel DNA methylation biomarker mSEPT9 for the detection of colorectal cancer in blood. Epigenomics. 2010;2(4):575–585. doi: 10.2217/epi.10.35.
    1. Warren JD, Xiong W, Bunker AM, Vaughn CP, Furtado LV, Roberts WL, Fang JC, Samowitz WS, Heichman KA. Septin 9 methylated DNA is a sensitive and specific blood test for colorectal cancer. BMC Med. 2011;9:133. doi: 10.1186/1741-7015-9-133.
    1. Tóth K, Sipos F, Kalmár A, Patai AV, Wichmann B, Stoehr R, Golcher H, Schellerer V, Tulassay Z, Molnár B. Detection of methylated SEPT9 in plasma is a reliable screening method for both left- and right-sided colon cancers. PLoS One. 2012;7(9):e46000. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0046000.
    1. German Census 2011 Data [] accessed Sept. 15th, 2014
    1. Schoppmeyer K, Spieker H, Mossner J. Failure of screening or failure to screen? Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2009;106(12):195–201.
    1. Ziegler M, Shubrin-Giese B, Buhner M. Attitude to secondary prevention and concerns about colonoscopy are independent predictors of acceptance of screening colonoscopy. Digestion. 2010;81:120–126. doi: 10.1159/000223448.
    1. Steckelberg A, Hulfenhaus C, Haastert B, Muhlhauser I. Effect of evidence based risk information on “informed choice” in colorectal cancer screening: randomized controlled trial. BMJ. 2011;342:d3193. doi: 10.1136/bmj.d3193.
    1. Moiel D, Thompson J. Early detection of colon cancer-the Kaiser Permanente northwest 30-year history: how do we measure success? Is it the test, the number of tests, the stage, or the percentage of screen-detected patients? Perm J. 2011;4:30–38. doi: 10.7812/TPP/11-128.
    1. Benning TM, Dellaert BGC, Dirksen CD, Severens JL. Acta Oncol. 2014. Preferences for potential innovations in non-invasive colorectal cancer screening: a labeled discrete choice experiment for a Dutch screening campaign.
Pre-publication history
    1. The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here:

Source: PubMed

Sponsors en medewerkers

Medische omstandigheden

Geneesmiddelinterventies

3
Abonneren