Division of General Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Department of Health Management and Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2021 Sep;14(9):845-850. doi: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-21-0075. Epub 2021 May 21.
Colorectal cancer-screening models commonly assume 100% adherence, which is inconsistent with real-world experience. The influence of adherence to initial stool-based screening [fecal immunochemical test (FIT), multitarget stool DNA (mt-sDNA)] and follow-up colonoscopy (after a positive stool test) on colorectal cancer outcomes was modeled using the Colorectal Cancer and Adenoma Incidence and Mortality Microsimulation Model. Average-risk individuals without diagnosed colorectal cancer at age 40 undergoing annual FIT or triennial mt-sDNA screening from ages 50 to 75 were simulated. Primary analyses incorporated published mt-sDNA (71%) or FIT (43%) screening adherence, with follow-up colonoscopy adherence ranging from 40% to 100%. Secondary analyses simulated 100% adherence for stool-based screening and colonoscopy follow-up (S1), published adherence for stool-based screening with 100% adherence to colonoscopy follow-up (S2), and published adherence for both stool-based screening and colonoscopy follow-up after positive mt-sDNA (73%) or FIT (47%; S3). Outcomes were life-years gained (LYG) and colorectal cancer incidence and mortality reductions (per 1,000 individuals) versus no screening. Adherence to colonoscopy follow-up after FIT had to be 4%-13% higher than mt-sDNA to reach equivalent LYG. The theoretical S1 favored FIT versus mt-sDNA (LYG 316 vs. 297; colorectal cancer incidence reduction 68% vs. 64%; colorectal cancer mortality reduction 76% vs. 72%). The more realistic S2 and S3 favored mt-sDNA versus FIT (S2: LYG 284 vs. 245, colorectal cancer incidence reduction 61% vs. 50%, colorectal cancer mortality reduction 69% vs. 59%; S3: LYG 203 vs. 113, colorectal cancer incidence reduction 43% vs. 23%, colorectal cancer mortality reduction 49% vs. 27%, respectively). Incorporating realistic adherence rates for colorectal cancer screening influences modeled outcomes and should be considered when assessing comparative effectiveness. PREVENTION RELEVANCE: Adherence rates for initial colorectal cancer screening by FIT or mt-sDNA and for colonoscopy follow-up of a positive initial test influence the comparative effectiveness of these screening strategies. Using adherence rates based on published data for stool-based testing and colonoscopy follow-up yielded superior outcomes with an mt-sDNA versus FIT-screening strategy.
结直肠癌筛查模型通常假设 100%的依从性,但这与实际情况不符。使用结直肠癌和腺瘤发生率和死亡率的微观模拟模型来模拟初始基于粪便的筛查[粪便免疫化学试验(FIT)、多靶点粪便 DNA(mt-sDNA)]和后续结肠镜检查(在粪便检测阳性后)对结直肠癌结果的影响。对年龄在 40 岁时没有诊断出结直肠癌、50 岁至 75 岁期间每年接受 FIT 或每三年接受 mt-sDNA 筛查的无风险个体进行模拟。主要分析纳入了发表的 mt-sDNA(71%)或 FIT(43%)筛查依从性,结肠镜检查随访依从性从 40%到 100%不等。次要分析模拟了基于粪便的筛查和结肠镜检查随访的 100%依从性(S1)、基于粪便的筛查的发表依从性,结肠镜检查随访的 100%依从性(S2)以及 mt-sDNA 阳性后基于粪便的筛查和结肠镜检查随访的发表依从性(73%)或 FIT(47%;S3)。结果是每 1000 人获得的生命年(LYG)和结直肠癌发病率和死亡率降低(与不筛查相比)。要达到与 mt-sDNA 相当的 LYG,FIT 后结肠镜检查随访的依从性必须比 mt-sDNA 高 4%-13%。理论上的 S1 有利于 FIT 优于 mt-sDNA(LYG316 比 297;结直肠癌发病率降低 68%比 64%;结直肠癌死亡率降低 76%比 72%)。更现实的 S2 和 S3 有利于 mt-sDNA 优于 FIT(S2:LYG284 比 245,结直肠癌发病率降低 61%比 50%,结直肠癌死亡率降低 69%比 59%;S3:LYG203 比 113,结直肠癌发病率降低 43%比 23%,结直肠癌死亡率降低 49%比 27%)。纳入结直肠癌筛查的现实依从率会影响模型结果,在评估比较效果时应予以考虑。预防相关性:FIT 或 mt-sDNA 进行初始结直肠癌筛查以及阳性初始检测后的结肠镜检查随访的依从率会影响这些筛查策略的比较效果。使用基于发表数据的粪便检测和结肠镜检查随访的依从率,采用 mt-sDNA 筛查策略可获得优于 FIT 的结果。