Han Chunyang, Wu Fan, Xu Jian
Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China.
Front Oncol. 2024 Mar 14;14:1364923. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1364923. eCollection 2024.
OBJECTIVES: We conducted a comprehensive analysis to compare colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy with standard care or fecal immunochemistry regarding colorectal cancer incidence and mortality risk. METHODS: Until August 2023, literature from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane was systematically reviewed. We examined the impact of colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy versus standard care on colorectal cancer outcomes, including incidence, cancer-specific mortality, and overall mortality. RESULTS: Among 4,265 screened articles, data from seven randomized controlled trials (involving 663,319 participants) were analyzed. The intervention group (colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy) consisted of 258,938 participants, while the control group received standard care or fecal immunochemical testing, totaling 404,381 participants, with both groups having average colorectal cancer risk, without confounders. Pooled analyses indicated a 20% reduction in colorectal cancer incidence (RR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.77-0.83) and a 26% decrease in colorectal cancer mortality (RR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.69-0.80) in the intervention group compared to standard care. All-cause mortality remained unchanged (RR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.99-1.07). Subgroup analysis favored sigmoidoscopy in reducing colorectal cancer morbidity and mortality. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials underscores the effectiveness of colonoscopy and, notably, sigmoidoscopy in reducing colorectal cancer incidence and mortality among average-risk populations. In comparison to fecal immunochemical testing, both colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy did not significantly impact colorectal cancer incidence and mortality in this population. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42023460007.
目的:我们进行了一项综合分析,以比较结肠镜检查和乙状结肠镜检查与标准护理或粪便免疫化学检测在结直肠癌发病率和死亡风险方面的差异。 方法:截至2023年8月,系统回顾了来自PubMed、Embase、Web of Science和Cochrane的文献。我们研究了结肠镜检查或乙状结肠镜检查与标准护理相比对结直肠癌结局的影响,包括发病率、癌症特异性死亡率和总死亡率。 结果:在4265篇筛选出的文章中,分析了7项随机对照试验(涉及663319名参与者)的数据。干预组(结肠镜检查或乙状结肠镜检查)有258938名参与者,而对照组接受标准护理或粪便免疫化学检测,共有404381名参与者,两组的结直肠癌风险平均,且无混杂因素。汇总分析表明,与标准护理相比,干预组的结直肠癌发病率降低了20%(RR:0.80,95%CI:0.77 - 0.83),结直肠癌死亡率降低了26%(RR:0.74,95%CI:0.69 - 0.80)。全因死亡率保持不变(RR:1.03,95%CI:0.99 - 1.07)。亚组分析显示乙状结肠镜检查在降低结直肠癌发病率和死亡率方面更具优势。 结论:这项对随机对照试验的荟萃分析强调了结肠镜检查,尤其是乙状结肠镜检查在降低平均风险人群结直肠癌发病率和死亡率方面的有效性。与粪便免疫化学检测相比,结肠镜检查和乙状结肠镜检查在该人群中对结直肠癌发病率和死亡率均无显著影响。 系统评价注册:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/,标识符CRD42023460007。
Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2009
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-2-1
Clin Colorectal Cancer. 2017-4-4
Explor Target Antitumor Ther. 2025-6-27
Endosc Int Open. 2024-11-18
Cent Eur J Public Health. 2023-3
N Engl J Med. 2022-10-27
Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022-8
Expert Rev Mol Diagn. 2022-4
Ann Intern Med. 2022-1