Cargando…

Colorectal cancer screening: the time to act is now

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer and the fourth most common cause of cancer deaths globally. However, there is overwhelming evidence that a large proportion of CRC cases and deaths could be prevented by screening. Nevertheless, CRC screening programmes are offered...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Brenner, Hermann, Stock, Christian, Hoffmeister, Michael
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4603638/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26459270
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0498-x
_version_ 1782394929231691776
author Brenner, Hermann
Stock, Christian
Hoffmeister, Michael
author_facet Brenner, Hermann
Stock, Christian
Hoffmeister, Michael
author_sort Brenner, Hermann
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer and the fourth most common cause of cancer deaths globally. However, there is overwhelming evidence that a large proportion of CRC cases and deaths could be prevented by screening. Nevertheless, CRC screening programmes are offered in a minority of countries only and often suffer from low adherence. DISCUSSION: Factors potentially accounting for hesitant implementation of and low adherence to CRC screening may include a lower attention in the public and the media than for other cancers and the fairly long follow-up time needed to fully disclose screening effects on CRC incidence and mortality. The latter results from the very slow development of most CRCs through the adenoma-carcinoma sequence, and it challenges the predominant or even exclusive reliance on evidence from randomized controlled trials in policy decisions on screening offers. Additional key elements of future research should include (1) studies evaluating diagnostic performance of novel biomarkers for non-invasive or minimally invasive CRC screening in true screening settings, (2) modelling studies evaluating expected short- and long-term impact, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of various screening options, and (3) timely and close monitoring of process quality and outcomes of existing and planned CRC screening programmes. Most importantly, however, translation of the vast existing evidence on CRC screening into actual screening programmes with the best possible levels of adherence needs to be fostered. This can be best achieved in the context of organized programmes. Depending on available infrastructure and resources, epidemiological patterns, population preferences, and costs, different screening offers might be preferred. According to current evidence, colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and faecal occult blood tests (preferably faecal immunochemical tests) are prime candidates for effective and cost-effective screening options, and microsimulation models should help to tailor their implementation. SUMMARY: The strong evidence for the large potential of CRC screening in reducing the burden of CRC calls for timely implementation of organized screening programmes where they are not in place yet, and for continuous improvement of existing ones. This should be considered an obligation that is not to be postponed: the time to act is now.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4603638
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46036382015-10-14 Colorectal cancer screening: the time to act is now Brenner, Hermann Stock, Christian Hoffmeister, Michael BMC Med Opinion BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer and the fourth most common cause of cancer deaths globally. However, there is overwhelming evidence that a large proportion of CRC cases and deaths could be prevented by screening. Nevertheless, CRC screening programmes are offered in a minority of countries only and often suffer from low adherence. DISCUSSION: Factors potentially accounting for hesitant implementation of and low adherence to CRC screening may include a lower attention in the public and the media than for other cancers and the fairly long follow-up time needed to fully disclose screening effects on CRC incidence and mortality. The latter results from the very slow development of most CRCs through the adenoma-carcinoma sequence, and it challenges the predominant or even exclusive reliance on evidence from randomized controlled trials in policy decisions on screening offers. Additional key elements of future research should include (1) studies evaluating diagnostic performance of novel biomarkers for non-invasive or minimally invasive CRC screening in true screening settings, (2) modelling studies evaluating expected short- and long-term impact, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of various screening options, and (3) timely and close monitoring of process quality and outcomes of existing and planned CRC screening programmes. Most importantly, however, translation of the vast existing evidence on CRC screening into actual screening programmes with the best possible levels of adherence needs to be fostered. This can be best achieved in the context of organized programmes. Depending on available infrastructure and resources, epidemiological patterns, population preferences, and costs, different screening offers might be preferred. According to current evidence, colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and faecal occult blood tests (preferably faecal immunochemical tests) are prime candidates for effective and cost-effective screening options, and microsimulation models should help to tailor their implementation. SUMMARY: The strong evidence for the large potential of CRC screening in reducing the burden of CRC calls for timely implementation of organized screening programmes where they are not in place yet, and for continuous improvement of existing ones. This should be considered an obligation that is not to be postponed: the time to act is now. BioMed Central 2015-10-13 /pmc/articles/PMC4603638/ /pubmed/26459270 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0498-x Text en © Brenner et al. 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Opinion
Brenner, Hermann
Stock, Christian
Hoffmeister, Michael
Colorectal cancer screening: the time to act is now
title Colorectal cancer screening: the time to act is now
title_full Colorectal cancer screening: the time to act is now
title_fullStr Colorectal cancer screening: the time to act is now
title_full_unstemmed Colorectal cancer screening: the time to act is now
title_short Colorectal cancer screening: the time to act is now
title_sort colorectal cancer screening: the time to act is now
topic Opinion
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4603638/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26459270
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0498-x
work_keys_str_mv AT brennerhermann colorectalcancerscreeningthetimetoactisnow
AT stockchristian colorectalcancerscreeningthetimetoactisnow
AT hoffmeistermichael colorectalcancerscreeningthetimetoactisnow