Latest & greatest articles for colon cancer screening

The Trip Database is a leading resource to help health professionals find trustworthy answers to their clinical questions. Users can access the latest research evidence and guidance to answer their clinical questions. We have a large collection of systematic reviews, clinical guidelines, regulatory guidance, clinical trials and many other forms of evidence. If you wanted the latest trusted evidence on colon cancer screening or other clinical topics then use Trip today.

This page lists the very latest high quality evidence on colon cancer screening and also the most popular articles. Popularity measured by the number of times the articles have been clicked on by fellow users in the last twelve months.

What is Trip?

Trip is a clinical search engine designed to allow users to quickly and easily find and use high-quality research evidence to support their practice and/or care.

Trip has been online since 1997 and in that time has developed into the internet’s premier source of evidence-based content. Our motto is ‘Find evidence fast’ and this is something we aim to deliver for every single search.

As well as research evidence we also allow clinicians to search across other content types including images, videos, patient information leaflets, educational courses and news.

For further information on Trip click on any of the questions/sections on the left-hand side of this page. But if you still have questions please contact us via jon.brassey@tripdatabase.com

Top results for colon cancer screening

61. Emerging stool-based and blood-based non-invasive DNA tests for colorectal cancer screening: The importance of cancer prevention in addition to cancer detection Full Text available with Trip Pro

Emerging stool-based and blood-based non-invasive DNA tests for colorectal cancer screening: The importance of cancer prevention in addition to cancer detection Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening can be undertaken utilizing a variety of distinct approaches, which provides both opportunities and confusion. Traditionally, there has often been a trade-off between the degree of invasiveness of a screening test and its ability to prevent cancer, with fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) and optical (...) colonoscopy (OC) at each end of the spectrum. CT colonography (CTC), although currently underutilized for CRC screening, represents an exception since it is only minimally invasive, yet provides accurate evaluation for advanced adenomas. More recently, the FDA approved a multi-target stool DNA test (Cologuard) and a blood-based test (Epi proColon) for average-risk CRC screening. This commentary will provide an overview of these two new non-invasive tests, including the clinical indications, mechanism

2016 Abdominal radiology (New York)

62. Screening for Colorectal Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. Full Text available with Trip Pro

Screening for Colorectal Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States. In 2016, an estimated 134,000 persons will be diagnosed with the disease, and about 49,000 will die from it. Colorectal cancer is most frequently diagnosed among adults aged 65 to 74 years; the median age at death from colorectal cancer is 68 years.To update the 2008 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF (...) ) recommendation on screening for colorectal cancer.The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on the effectiveness of screening with colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, computed tomography colonography, the guaiac-based fecal occult blood test, the fecal immunochemical test, the multitargeted stool DNA test, and the methylated SEPT9 DNA test in reducing the incidence of and mortality from colorectal cancer or all-cause mortality; the harms of these screening tests; and the test performance characteristics

2016 JAMA

63. Estimation of Benefits, Burden, and Harms of Colorectal Cancer Screening Strategies: Modeling Study for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Full Text available with Trip Pro

Estimation of Benefits, Burden, and Harms of Colorectal Cancer Screening Strategies: Modeling Study for the US Preventive Services Task Force. The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) is updating its 2008 colorectal cancer (CRC) screening recommendations.To inform the USPSTF by modeling the benefits, burden, and harms of CRC screening strategies; estimating the optimal ages to begin and end screening; and identifying a set of model-recommendable strategies that provide similar life-years (...) gained (LYG) and a comparable balance between LYG and screening burden.Comparative modeling with 3 microsimulation models of a hypothetical cohort of previously unscreened US 40-year-olds with no prior CRC diagnosis.Screening with sensitive guaiac-based fecal occult blood testing, fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), multitarget stool DNA testing, flexible sigmoidoscopy with or without stool testing, computed tomographic colonography (CTC), or colonoscopy starting at age 45, 50, or 55 years and ending

2016 JAMA

64. Colonoscopy versus Fecal Immunochemical Testing in Colorectal-Cancer Screening. Full Text available with Trip Pro

Colonoscopy versus Fecal Immunochemical Testing in Colorectal-Cancer Screening. 27168447 2016 05 16 2016 05 12 1533-4406 374 19 2016 May 12 The New England journal of medicine N. Engl. J. Med. Colonoscopy versus Fecal Immunochemical Testing in Colorectal-Cancer Screening. 1898 10.1056/NEJMx150040 eng Published Erratum United States N Engl J Med 0255562 0028-4793 N Engl J Med. 2012 Feb 23;366(8):697-706 22356323 2016 5 12 6 0 2016 5 12 6 0 2016 5 12 6 1 ppublish 27168447 10.1056/NEJMx150040

2016 NEJM

65. Colorectal Cancer on the Decline - Why Screening Can't Explain It All. (Abstract)

Colorectal Cancer on the Decline - Why Screening Can't Explain It All. 27119236 2016 05 05 2016 08 25 1533-4406 374 17 2016 Apr 28 The New England journal of medicine N. Engl. J. Med. Colorectal Cancer on the Decline--Why Screening Can't Explain It All. 1605-7 10.1056/NEJMp1600448 Welch H Gilbert HG From the VA Outcomes Group, Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, White River Junction, VT; and the Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine (...) , Lebanon, NH. Robertson Douglas J DJ From the VA Outcomes Group, Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, White River Junction, VT; and the Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine, Lebanon, NH. eng Journal Article United States N Engl J Med 0255562 0028-4793 AIM IM N Engl J Med. 2016 Aug 25;375(8):804 27557317 N Engl J Med. 2016 Aug 25;375(8):804 27557319 N Engl J Med. 2016 Aug 25;375(8):803 27557318 Aged Colorectal Neoplasms diagnosis epidemiology

2016 NEJM

66. Association Between Socioeconomic Status and Participation in Colonoscopy Screening Program in First Degree Relatives of Colorectal Cancer Patients Full Text available with Trip Pro

Association Between Socioeconomic Status and Participation in Colonoscopy Screening Program in First Degree Relatives of Colorectal Cancer Patients Approximately 15% to 25% of colorectal cancer (CRC) cases have positive family history for disease. Colonoscopy screening test is the best way for prevention and early diagnosis. Studies have found that first degree relatives (FDRs) with low socioeconomic status are less likely to participate in colonoscopy screening program.The aim of this study (...) is to determine the association between socioeconomic status and participation in colonoscopy screening program in FDRs.This descriptive cross-sectional, study has been conducted on 200 FDRs who were consulted for undergoing colonoscopy screening program between 2007 and 2013 in research institute for gastroenterology and liver disease of Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. They were interviewed via phone by a valid questionnaire about socioeconomic status. For data analysis, chi

2016 Iranian journal of cancer prevention

67. A Risk-Scoring System Combined With a Fecal Immunochemical Test Is Effective in Screening High-Risk Subjects for Early Colonoscopy to Detect Advanced Colorectal Neoplasms Full Text available with Trip Pro

A Risk-Scoring System Combined With a Fecal Immunochemical Test Is Effective in Screening High-Risk Subjects for Early Colonoscopy to Detect Advanced Colorectal Neoplasms Age, sex, smoking, and family history are risk factors for colorectal cancer in Asia. The Asia-Pacific Colorectal Screening (APCS) scoring system was developed to identify subjects with a high risk for advanced neoplasm (AN). We tested an algorithm that combined APCS scores with fecal immunochemical test (FIT) in colorectal (...) with LR group, MR and HR subjects had a 3.4-fold increase and a 7.8-fold increase in risk for AN, respectively. A total of 70.6% subjects with AN (95% confidence interval: 65.6%-75.1%) and 95.1% subjects with invasive cancers (95% confidence interval: 82.2%-99.2%) were correctly instructed to undergo early colonoscopy examination.The APCS scoring system, which is based on age, sex, family history, and smoking, is a useful tool for determining risk for colorectal cancer and advanced adenoma

2016 EvidenceUpdates

68. Screening colonoscopy intervals in familial colorectal cancer Full Text available with Trip Pro

Screening colonoscopy intervals in familial colorectal cancer 28138582 2018 11 13 2415-1289 1 2016 Translational gastroenterology and hepatology Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol Screening colonoscopy intervals in familial colorectal cancer. 15 10.21037/tgh.2016.03.06 Kalady Matthew F MF Department of Colorectal Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. eng Journal Article Comment 2016 03 16 China Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol 101683450 2415-1289 J Clin Oncol. 2015 Dec 10;33(35):4188-93 26527788

2016 Translational gastroenterology and hepatology

69. Recommendations on screening for colorectal cancer in primary care

of colorectal cancer in 2015 (incidence 49 per 100 000 population) and that 9300 will die from the disease (mortality 17 per 100 000). 1 The incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer are low until middle age and rise rapidly there- after (Figure 1). 1,4 Most colorectal cancers appear to arise from colonic polyps that develop slowly and some- times transform to cancers. 5 This is the ration ale for screening programs that aim to reduce deaths due to colorectal cancer by detecting and remov- ing polyps (...) as a screening test for colorectal cancer. (Weak recommendation; low-quality evidence) These recommendations apply to adults aged 50 years and older who are not at high risk for colorectal cancer. They do not apply to those with previous colorectal cancer or polyps, inflammatory bowel disease, signs or symptoms of colorectal cancer, history of colorectal cancer in one or more first-degree relatives, or adults with hereditary syndromes predisposing to colorectal cancer (e.g., familial adenomatous polyposis

2016 CPG Infobase

70. Cost Effectiveness of Universal Hepatitis B Virus Screening in Patients Beginning Chemotherapy for Sarcomas or GI Stromal Tumors Full Text available with Trip Pro

Cost Effectiveness of Universal Hepatitis B Virus Screening in Patients Beginning Chemotherapy for Sarcomas or GI Stromal Tumors The value of screening for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection before chemotherapy for nonhematopoietic solid tumors remains unsettled. We evaluated the cost effectiveness of universal screening before systemic therapy for sarcomas, including GI stromal tumors (GISTs).Drawing from the National Cancer Centre Singapore database of 1,039 patients with sarcomas, we analyzed (...) the clinical records of 485 patients who received systemic therapy. Using a Markov model, we compared the cost effectiveness of a screen-all versus screen-none strategy in this population.A total of 237 patients were screened for HBV infection. No patients developed HBV reactivation during chemotherapy. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) of offering HBV screening to all patients with sarcomas and patients with GISTs exceeded the cost-effectiveness threshold of SG

2016 Journal of global oncology

71. Screening for Colorectal Cancer*

be substantial. As such, the benefit of early detection of and intervention for colorectal cancer in adults 86 years and older is at most small. To date, no method of screening for colorectal cancer has been shown to reduce all-cause mortality in any age group. Harms CTFPHC (2016) False-positive and false-negative results were the only direct harms reported for gFOBT and FIT in the included studies. Harms following FS were rare (intestinal perforation occurred in 0.001% of patients, minor bleeding in 0.05 (...) Screening for Colorectal Cancer* Screening for Colorectal Cancer | National Guideline Clearinghouse success fail JUL Aug 12 2018 2019 30 Jan 2017 - 14 Jul 2018 COLLECTED BY Organization: Formed in 2009, the Archive Team (not to be confused with the archive.org Archive-It Team) is a rogue archivist collective dedicated to saving copies of rapidly dying or deleted websites for the sake of history and digital heritage. The group is 100% composed of volunteers and interested parties, and has

2016 National Guideline Clearinghouse (partial archive)

72. Blood and stool biomarker for colorectal cancer screening

screening in Australia, however, due to the rapidly evolving evidence base around a number of these tests, HealthPACT recommended that this technology be reassessed in 24 months. Description of the technology Bowel cancer, which includes cancers of the colon, recto-sigmoid junction and rectum, is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in Australia. Although colonoscopy is the gold standard for the detection of colorectal cancer (CRC), it is expensive, and by virtue of its invasive nature, associated (...) generation FOBT - an automated immunochemical faecal occult blood test (iFOBT). 4 Faecal occult blood testing looks for minute traces of haemoglobin in stool samples, which may be a result of upper or lower gastrointestinal bleeding potentially caused by not only benign or malignant growths or polyps of the colon, but many conditions including: inflammatory bowel disease, haemorrhoids, ulcerative colitis or Crohn’s disease. The gFOBT uses hydrogen peroxide, which in the presence of blood results

2016 COAG Health Council - Horizon Scanning Technology Briefs

73. Cost-effectiveness study: Colorectal cancer screening is cost-effective in the elderly who have had less intense prior screening, high baseline risk of colorectal cancer and less comorbidities

screening for elderly individuals based on screening history, cancer risk, and comorbidity status could increase cost effectiveness . . Context Eligibility for colorectal cancer screening programmes is usually age-based from 50 to 74 years; the sector of the population in which most disease occurs and, on average, the sector standing to gain most from prevention/early detection. However, given colorectal cancer risk is affected by many factors, a wide spectrum of colorectal cancer risk exists meaning (...) Cost-effectiveness study: Colorectal cancer screening is cost-effective in the elderly who have had less intense prior screening, high baseline risk of colorectal cancer and less comorbidities Colorectal cancer screening is cost-effective in the elderly who have had less intense prior screening, high baseline risk of colorectal cancer and less comorbidities | BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine We use cookies to improve our service and to tailor our content and advertising to you. You can manage your

2016 Evidence-Based Medicine

74. Randomised controlled trial: The addition of abdomen and pelvis CT to limited cancer screening does not increase diagnosis of cancer in patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism Full Text available with Trip Pro

Randomised controlled trial: The addition of abdomen and pelvis CT to limited cancer screening does not increase diagnosis of cancer in patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism The addition of abdomen and pelvis CT to limited cancer screening does not increase diagnosis of cancer in patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism | BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine We use cookies to improve our service and to tailor our content and advertising to you. You can manage your cookie settings via (...) cancer screening does not increase diagnosis of cancer in patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism Article Text Therapeutics/Prevention Randomised controlled trial The addition of abdomen and pelvis CT to limited cancer screening does not increase diagnosis of cancer in patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism Matthew T Rondina , Kencee Kay Graves Statistics from Altmetric.com Commentary on : Carrier M , Lazo-Langner A , Shivakumar S , et al. , SOME Investigators. Screening for occult

2016 Evidence-Based Medicine

75. Invitation and decision aid for bowel cancer screening

Invitation and decision aid for bowel cancer screening Einladungsschreiben und Entscheidungshilfen zum Darmkrebs-Screening; Abschlussbericht; Auftrag P15-01 [Invitation and decision aid for bowel cancer screening] Einladungsschreiben und Entscheidungshilfen zum Darmkrebs-Screening; Abschlussbericht; Auftrag P15-01 [Invitation and decision aid for bowel cancer screening] Institut für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen Record Status This is a bibliographic record of a published (...) health technology assessment from a member of INAHTA. No evaluation of the quality of this assessment has been made for the HTA database. Citation Institut für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen. Einladungsschreiben und Entscheidungshilfen zum Darmkrebs-Screening; Abschlussbericht; Auftrag P15-01. [Invitation and decision aid for bowel cancer screening] Cologne: Institut fuer Qualitaet und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen (IQWiG). IQWiG-Berichte 451. 2016 Final publication URL

2016 Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Database.

76. Colorectal Cancer: Screening

excision or simple polypectomy for tumors limited to the colonic mucosa or surgical resection (via laparoscopy or open approach) with anastomosis for larger, localized lesions. Other Approaches to Prevention The USPSTF has made a recommendation on aspirin use for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and colorectal cancer in average-risk adults ( ). Implementation Colorectal cancer causes substantial morbidity and mortality, and the evidence is convincing that screening for colorectal cancer (...) and older. Treatment and Interventions Treatment of early-stage colorectal cancer generally consists of local excision or simple polypectomy for tumors limited to the colonic mucosa or surgical resection (via laparoscopy or open approach) with anastomosis for larger, localized lesions. Balance of Benefits and Harms The USPSTF concludes with high certainty that the net benefit of screening for colorectal cancer is substantial. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that the net benefit of screening

2016 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force

77. Cancer Screening: Multicomponent Interventions—Colorectal Cancer

neoplasms/ or uterine cervical neoplasms/ or carcinoma, ductal, breast/ or "hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome"/ or inflammatory breast neoplasms/ or colonic neoplasms/ or rectal neoplasms/) and (di or pc).fs. ((adenoma* or neoplasia or cancer* or neoplasm* or tumo?r* or carcinoma* or adenocarcinoma*) and (breast or cervical or cervix or colon or colorectal or crc)).ti,ab. 2 or 3 1 and 4 colonography, computed tomographic/ or colonoscopy/ or endoscopy, gastrointestinal/ or sigmoidoscopy (...) , or colorectal cancer screening in high-income countries: PubMED Medline PsycINFO Embase CINAHL Cochrane Chronic Disease Prevention Web of Science Search strategies were adjusted to each database, based on controlled and uncontrolled vocabularies and search software. Following are the search strategies used in Medline. Databases : Medline mass screening/ or multiphasic screening/ or (screen or screened or screening).ti,ab. or "early detection of cancer"/ (neoplasms/ or breast neoplasms/ or colorectal

2016 Community Preventive Services Task Force

78. Population Screening Act: risk stratification based on familial risk of bowel cancer

is to explore the possibility of risk stratification on the basis of an increased familial risk within the existing population screening programme for bowel cancer. About 6,000 people who receive an invitation for colorectal cancer screening in the Amsterdam region in 2015 and 2016 will be invited. In a prior advisory report from the Health Council in 2009, the importance of further research on risk stratification within the population screening programme was already endorsed. The Committee notes (...) publication URL Indexing Status Subject indexing assigned by CRD MeSH Colorectal Neoplasms; Genetic Predisposition to Disease; Mass Screenings; Occult Blood; Population Surveillance; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors Language Published English Country of organisation Netherlands English summary An English language summary is available. Address for correspondence Postbus 16052, 2500 BB Den Haag, The Netherlands. Tel: +31 70 340 7520;Fax: +31 70 340 7523 Email: info@gr.nl AccessionNumber 32015001017 Date

2015 Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Database.

79. Population Screening Act: study of faecal tests within the population based screening programme for colorectal cancer

Medical Centre in Amsterdam for a study within the regular population based screening programme for colorectal cancer. The study aims to study if the faecal test FOB-Gold is not inferior to the faecal test OC-Sensor and is therefore safe to use in the national population based screening programme for colorectal cancer in the Netherlands. Final publication URL PubMedID Indexing Status Subject indexing assigned by NLM MeSH Adult; Aged; Colorectal Neoplasms /diagnosis; Feces /chemistry; Hemoglobins (...) Population Screening Act: study of faecal tests within the population based screening programme for colorectal cancer Population Screening Act: study of faecal tests within the population based screening programme for colorectal cancer Population Screening Act: study of faecal tests within the population based screening programme for colorectal cancer Health Council of the Netherlands Record Status This is a bibliographic record of a published health technology assessment. No evaluation

2015 Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Database.

80. Variation in Adenoma Detection Rate and the Lifetime Benefits and Cost of Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Microsimulation Model. Full Text available with Trip Pro

Variation in Adenoma Detection Rate and the Lifetime Benefits and Cost of Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Microsimulation Model. Colonoscopy is the most commonly used colorectal cancer screening test in the United States. Its quality, as measured by adenoma detection rates (ADRs), varies widely among physicians, with unknown consequences for the cost and benefits of screening programs.To estimate the lifetime benefits, complications, and costs of an initial colonoscopy screening program (...) of patients with adenoma.Estimated lifetime colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, number of colonoscopies, complications, and costs per 1000 patients, all discounted at 3% per year and including 95% confidence intervals from multiway probabilistic sensitivity analysis.In simulation modeling, among unscreened patients the lifetime risk of colorectal cancer incidence was 34.2 per 1000 (95% CI, 25.9-43.6) and risk of mortality was 13.4 per 1000 (95% CI, 10.0-17.6). Among screened patients, simulated

2015 JAMA