Singal Amit G, Gupta Samir, Skinner Celette Sugg, Ahn Chul, Santini Noel O, Agrawal Deepak, Mayorga Christian A, Murphy Caitlin, Tiro Jasmin A, McCallister Katharine, Sanders Joanne M, Bishop Wendy Pechero, Loewen Adam C, Halm Ethan A
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas.
Parkland Health and Hospital System, Dallas, Texas.
JAMA. 2017 Sep 5;318(9):806-815. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.11389.
Mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach is more effective than colonoscopy outreach for increasing 1-time colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, but long-term effectiveness may need repeat testing and timely follow-up for abnormal results.
Compare the effectiveness of FIT outreach and colonoscopy outreach to increase completion of the CRC screening process (screening initiation and follow-up) within 3 years.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Pragmatic randomized clinical trial from March 2013 to July 2016 among 5999 participants aged 50 to 64 years who were receiving primary care in Parkland Health and Hospital System and were not up to date with CRC screenings.
Random assignment to mailed FIT outreach (n = 2400), mailed colonoscopy outreach (n = 2400), or usual care with clinic-based screening (n = 1199). Outreach included processes to promote repeat annual testing for individuals in the FIT outreach group with normal results and completion of diagnostic and screening colonoscopy for those with an abnormal FIT result or assigned to colonoscopy outreach.
Primary outcome was screening process completion, defined as adherence to colonoscopy completion, annual testing for a normal FIT result, diagnostic colonoscopy for an abnormal FIT result, or treatment evaluation if CRC was detected. Secondary outcomes included detection of any adenoma or advanced neoplasia (including CRC) and screening-related harms (including bleeding or perforation).
All 5999 participants (median age, 56 years; women, 61.9%) were included in the intention-to-screen analyses. Screening process completion was 38.4% in the colonoscopy outreach group, 28.0% in the FIT outreach group, and 10.7% in the usual care group. Compared with the usual care group, between-group differences for completion were higher for both outreach groups (27.7% [95% CI, 25.1% to 30.4%] for the colonoscopy outreach group; 17.3% [95% CI, 14.8% to 19.8%] for FIT outreach group), and highest in the colonoscopy outreach group (10.4% [95% CI, 7.8% to 13.1%] for the colonoscopy outreach group vs FIT outreach group; P < .001 for all comparisons). Compared with usual care, the between-group differences in adenoma and advanced neoplasia detection rates were higher for both outreach groups (colonoscopy outreach group: 10.3% [95% CI, 9.5% to 12.1%] for adenoma and 3.1% [95% CI, 2.0% to 4.1%] for advanced neoplasia, P < .001 for both comparisons; FIT outreach group: 1.3% [95% CI, -0.1% to 2.8%] for adenoma and 0.7% [95% CI, -0.2% to 1.6%] for advanced neoplasia, P < .08 and P < .13, respectively), and highest in the colonoscopy outreach group (colonoscopy outreach group vs FIT outreach group: 9.0% [95% CI, 7.3% to 10.7%] for adenoma and 2.4% [95% CI, 1.3% to 3.3%] for advanced neoplasia, P < .001 for both comparisons). There were no screening-related harms in any groups.
Among persons aged 50 to 64 years receiving primary care at a safety-net institution, mailed outreach invitations offering FIT or colonoscopy compared with usual care increased the proportion completing CRC screening process within 3 years. The rate of screening process completion was higher with colonoscopy than FIT outreach.
clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01710215.
对于增加一次性结直肠癌(CRC)筛查,邮寄粪便免疫化学检测(FIT)推广比结肠镜检查推广更有效,但长期有效性可能需要重复检测以及对异常结果进行及时随访。
比较FIT推广和结肠镜检查推广在3年内提高CRC筛查流程(筛查启动和随访)完成率的有效性。
设计、设置和参与者:2013年3月至2016年7月在帕克兰健康与医院系统接受初级保健且未进行最新CRC筛查的5999名50至64岁参与者中进行的实用随机临床试验。
随机分配至邮寄FIT推广组(n = 2400)、邮寄结肠镜检查推广组(n = 2400)或基于诊所筛查的常规护理组(n = 1199)。推广包括促进FIT推广组中结果正常的个体每年重复检测,以及对FIT结果异常或分配至结肠镜检查推广组的个体完成诊断性和筛查性结肠镜检查的流程。
主要结局是筛查流程完成,定义为坚持完成结肠镜检查、FIT结果正常时每年检测、FIT结果异常时进行诊断性结肠镜检查或检测到CRC时进行治疗评估。次要结局包括任何腺瘤或高级别瘤变(包括CRC)的检测以及筛查相关危害(包括出血或穿孔)。
所有5999名参与者(中位年龄56岁;女性占61.9%)均纳入意向性筛查分析。结肠镜检查推广组的筛查流程完成率为38.4%,FIT推广组为28.0%,常规护理组为10.7%。与常规护理组相比,两个推广组在完成率方面的组间差异均更高(结肠镜检查推广组为27.7%[95%CI,25.1%至30.4%];FIT推广组为17.3%[95%CI,14.8%至19.8%]),且结肠镜检查推广组最高(结肠镜检查推广组与FIT推广组相比为10.4%[95%CI,7.8%至13.1%];所有比较P <.001)。与常规护理相比,两个推广组在腺瘤和高级别瘤变检测率方面的组间差异也更高(结肠镜检查推广组:腺瘤为10.3%[95%CI,9.5%至12.1%],高级别瘤变为3.1%[95%CI,2.0%至4.1%],两项比较P <.001;FIT推广组:腺瘤为1.3%[95%CI, -0.1%至2.8%],高级别瘤变为0.7%[95%CI, -0.2%至1.6%],P分别<0.08和<0.13),且结肠镜检查推广组最高(结肠镜检查推广组与FIT推广组相比:腺瘤为9.0%[95%CI,7.3%至10.7%],高级别瘤变为2.4%[95%CI,1.3%至3.3%],两项比较P <.001)。任何组均未出现筛查相关危害。
在安全网机构接受初级保健的50至64岁人群中,与常规护理相比邮寄提供FIT或结肠镜检查的推广邀请增加了3年内完成CRC筛查流程的比例。结肠镜检查推广的筛查流程完成率高于FIT推广。
clinicaltrials.gov标识符:NCT01710215。