Advertisement

Screening for Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Published:March 31, 2016DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clcc.2016.03.003

      Abstract

      To evaluate the effectiveness of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in asymptomatic adults. A search was conducted of the Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases. A targeted search of PubMed was conducted for on-topic randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Meta-analysis across 4 RCTs for guaiac fecal occult blood testing (gFOBT) and flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening showed a reduction of 18% (risk ratio [RR], 0.82; 95% CI [CI], 0.73-0.92) and 26% (RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.67-0.83) in CRC mortality for the screening group compared to controls, respectively. The number needed to screen (NNS) were 377 (95% CI, 249-887) and 864 (95% CI, 672-1266) for gFOBT and FS screening, respectively. A reduction of 8% and 27% in incidence of late-stage CRC was also observed for gFOBT and FS screening, respectively, but both had no significant effect on all-cause mortality. A single RCT found that screening with immunochemical fecal occult blood test (iFOBT) had no significant impact on CRC mortality (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.72-1.07). Screening with FS has potential harms such as perforation, major and minor bleeding, and death from the procedure or from follow-up colonoscopy. gFOBT and FS screening reduce CRC mortality and incidence of late-stage disease. The absolute effect and NNS were much more favorable for older adults (≥ 60 years), suggesting that a targeted screening approach may avoid exposing younger adults to the harms of CRC screening, from which they are unlikely to derive any significant benefit. Although there is insufficient RCT evidence on the impact of iFOBT on mortality outcomes. compared to gFOBT, this test showed higher sensitivity and comparable specificity, indicating the need to update and reevaluate the evidence in light of future high-quality research. The protocol for this systematic review have been published with PROSPERO 2014: CRD42014009777.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Clinical Colorectal Cancer
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

      1. World Health Organization. Cancer. Fact sheet 297. February 2015. Available at: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs297/en/. Accessed: April 18, 2016.

      2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; National Cancer Institute. United States Cancer Statistics 1999-2012 cancer incidence and mortality data. Available at: https://nccd.cdc.gov/uscs/. Accessed: April 18, 2016.

        • Pignone M.
        • Rich M.
        • Teutsch S.M.
        • et al.
        Screening for colorectal cancer in adults at average risk: a summary of the evidence for the US Preventive Services Task Force.
        Ann Intern Med. 2002; 137: 132-141
        • Peirson L.
        • Fitzpatrick-Lewis D.
        • Morrison K.
        • et al.
        Prevention of overweight and obesity in children and youth: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        CMAJ Open. 2015; 3: E23-E33
        • Peirson L.
        • Fitzpatrick-Lewis D.
        • Morrison K.
        • et al.
        Treatment of overweight and obesity in children and youth: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        CMAJ Open. 2015; 3: E35-E46
        • Peirson L.
        • Douketis J.
        • Ciliska D.
        • et al.
        Prevention of overweight and obesity in adult populations: a systematic review.
        CMAJ Open. 2014; 2: E268-E272
        • Calonge N.
        • Petitti D.B.
        • DeWitt T.G.
        • et al.
        Screening for colorectal cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.
        Ann Intern Med. 2008; 149: 627-637
      3. Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Sterne JAC, The Cochrane Statistical Methods Group, The Cochrane Bias Methods Group. Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins J.P.T., Green S., editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 510 [updated March 2011]: The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011.

        • Brozek J.
        • Oxman A.
        • Schünemann H.
        GRADEpro version 3.2 for Windows [Computer program].
        McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario2008
        • DerSimonian R.
        • Laird N.
        Meta-analysis in clinical trials.
        Control Clin Trials. 1986; 7: 177-188
        • Schünemann H.J.
        • Oxman A.D.
        • Vist G.E.
        • et al.
        Interpreting results and drawing conclusions. Expressing absolute risk reductions.
        in: Higgins J.P.T. Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 510 [Updated March 2011]. Cochrane Collaboration, London2011
        • Wallis S.
        Binomial confidence intervals and contingency tests: mathematical fundamentals and the evaluation of alternative methods.
        JQL. 2013; 20: 178-208
        • Howlader N.
        • Noone A.
        • Krapcho M.
        • et al.
        SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2012.
        National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD2015
        • Kelley G.A.
        • Kelley K.S.
        Statistical models for meta-analysis: a brief tutorial.
        World J Methodol. 2012; 2: 27
      4. Identifying and measuring heterogeneity.
        in: Higgins J.P.T. Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 510 [Updated March 2011]. Cochrane Collaboration, London2011
      5. GRADEpro [Computer program]. Version 2015. McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario2015 (Available at:) (Accessed: April 19, 2016)
        • Kronborg O.
        • Jorgensen O.D.
        • Fenger C.
        • et al.
        Randomized study of biennial screening with a faecal occult blood test: results after nine screening rounds.
        Scand J Gastroenterol. 2004; 39: 846-851
        • Lindholm E.
        • Brevinge H.
        • Haglind E.
        Survival benefit in a randomized clinical trial of faecal occult blood screening for colorectal cancer.
        Br J Surg. 2008; 95: 1029-1036
        • Scholefield J.H.
        • Moss S.M.
        • Mangham C.M.
        • et al.
        Nottingham trial of faecal occult blood testing for colorectal cancer: a 20-year follow-up.
        Gut. 2012; 61: 1036-1040
        • Shaukat A.
        • Mongin S.J.
        • Geisser M.S.
        • et al.
        Long-term mortality after screening for colorectal cancer.
        N Engl J Med. 2013; 369: 1106-1114
        • Zheng S.
        • Chen K.
        • Liu X.
        • et al.
        Cluster randomization trial of sequence mass screening for colorectal cancer.
        Dis Colon Rectum. 2003; 46: 51-58
        • Atkin W.S.
        • Edwards R.
        • Kralj-Hans I.
        • et al.
        Once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy screening in prevention of colorectal cancer: a multicentre randomised controlled trial.
        Lancet. 2010; 375: 1624-1633
        • Holme Ø.
        • Løberg M.
        • Kalager M.
        • et al.
        Effect of flexible sigmoidoscopy screening on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality: a randomized clinical trial.
        JAMA. 2014; 312 ([Erratum appears in JAMA 2014; 312:964]): 606-615
        • Schoen R.E.
        • Pinsky P.F.
        • Weissfeld J.L.
        • et al.
        Colorectal-cancer incidence and mortality with screening flexible sigmoidoscopy.
        N Engl J Med. 2012; 366: 2345-2357
        • Segnan N.
        • Armaroli P.
        • Bonelli L.
        • et al.
        Once-only sigmoidoscopy in colorectal cancer screening: follow-up findings of the Italian Randomized Controlled Trial–SCORE.
        J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011; 103: 1310-1322
        • Rutter C.M.
        • Johnson E.
        • Miglioretti D.L.
        • et al.
        Adverse events after screening and follow-up colonoscopy.
        Cancer Causes Control. 2012; 23: 289-296
        • Arroja B.
        • Cremers I.
        • Ramos R.
        • et al.
        Acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding management in Portugal: a multicentric prospective 1-year survey.
        Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011; 23: 317-322
        • Nelson D.B.
        • McQuaid K.R.
        • Bond J.H.
        • et al.
        Procedural success and complications of large-scale screening colonoscopy.
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2002; 55: 307-314
        • Steele R.J.C.
        • McClements P.L.
        • Libby G.
        • et al.
        Results from the first three rounds of the Scottish demonstration pilot of FOBT screening for colorectal cancer.
        Gut. 2009; 58: 530-535
        • Denis B.
        • Ruetsch M.
        • Strentz P.
        • et al.
        Short term outcomes of the first round of a pilot colorectal cancer screening programme with guaiac based faecal occult blood test.
        Gut. 2007; 56: 1579-1584
        • Atkin W.S.
        • Cook C.F.
        • Cuzick J.
        • et al.
        Single flexible sigmoidoscopy screening to prevent colorectal cancer: baseline findings of a UK multicentre randomised trial.
        Lancet. 2002; 359: 1291-1300
        • Logan R.F.A.
        • Patnick J.
        • Nickerson C.
        • et al.
        Outcomes of the Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) in England after the first 1 million tests.
        Gut. 2012; 61: 1439-1446
        • Cotterill M.E.
        • Gasparelli R.
        • Kirby E.
        Colorectal cancer detection in a rural community. Development of a colonoscopy screening program.
        Can Fam Phys. 2005; 51: 1224-1228
        • Matarese V.G.
        • Feo C.V.
        • Pezzoli A.
        • et al.
        Colonoscopy surveillance in asymptomatic subjects with increased risk for colorectal cancer: clinical evaluation and cost analysis of an Italian experience.
        Eur J Cancer Prev. 2007; 16: 292-297
        • Soon M.S.
        • Kozarek R.A.
        • Ayub K.
        • et al.
        Screening colonoscopy in Chinese and Western patients: a comparative study.
        Am J Gastroenterol. 2005; 100: 2749-2755
        • Stock C.
        • Ihle P.
        • Sieg A.
        • et al.
        Adverse events requiring hospitalization within 30 days after outpatient screening and nonscreening colonoscopies.
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2013; 77: 419-429
        • Sung J.J.Y.
        • Chan F.K.L.
        • Leung W.K.
        • et al.
        Screening for colorectal cancer in Chinese: comparison of fecal occult blood test, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and colonoscopy.
        Gastroenterology. 2003; 124: 608-614
        • Faivre J.
        • Dancourt V.
        • Lejeune C.
        • et al.
        Reduction in colorectal cancer mortality by fecal occult blood screening in a French controlled study.
        Gastroenterology. 2004; 126: 1674-1680
        • Denis B.
        • Gendre I.
        • Sauleau E.A.
        • et al.
        Harms of colonoscopy in a colorectal cancer screening programme with faecal occult blood test: a population-based cohort study.
        Dig Liver Dis. 2013; 45: 474-480
        • Lukin D.J.
        • Jandorf L.H.
        • Dhulkifl R.J.
        • et al.
        Effect of comorbid conditions on adherence to colorectal cancer screening.
        J Cancer Educ. 2012; 27: 269-276
        • Chiu H.
        • Lee Y.
        • Tu C.
        • et al.
        Association between early stage colon neoplasms and false-negative results from the fecal immunochemical test.
        Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013; 11: 832-838
        • Steele R.J.C.
        Results of the first round of a demonstration pilot of screening for colorectal cancer in the United Kingdom.
        Br Med J. 2004; 329: 133-135
        • Dancourt V.
        • Lejeune C.
        • Lepage C.
        • et al.
        Immunochemical faecal occult blood tests are superior to guaiac-based tests for the detection of colorectal neoplasms.
        Eur J Cancer. 2008; 44: 2254-2258
        • Etzioni D.A.
        • Ponce N.A.
        • Babey S.H.
        • et al.
        A population-based study of colorectal cancer test use: results from the 2001 California Health Interview Survey.
        Cancer. 2004; 101: 2523-2532
        • Segnan N.
        • Senore C.
        • Andreoni B.
        • et al.
        Baseline findings of the Italian multicenter randomized controlled trial of “once-only sigmoidoscopy”–SCORE.
        J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002; 94: 1763-1772
        • Denters M.J.
        • Deutekom M.
        • Bossuyt P.M.
        • et al.
        Lower risk of advanced neoplasia among patients with a previous negative result from a fecal test for colorectal cancer.
        Gasteroenterology. 2012; 142: 497-504
        • Kim D.H.
        • Pickhardt P.J.
        • Hanson M.E.
        • et al.
        CT colonography: performance and program outcome measures in an older screening population.
        Radiology. 2010; 254: 493-500
        • Jain A.
        • Falzarano J.
        • Jain A.
        • et al.
        Outcome of 5,000 flexible sigmoidoscopies done by nurse endoscopists for colorectal screening in asymptomatic patients.
        Hawaii Med J. 2002; 61: 118-120
        • Viiala C.H.
        • Olynyk J.K.
        Outcomes after 10 years of a community-based flexible sigmoidoscopy screening program for colorectal carcinoma.
        Med J Aust. 2007; 187: 274-277
        • Lee J.K.
        • Groessl E.J.
        • Ganiats T.G.
        • et al.
        Cost-effectiveness of a mailed educational reminder to increase colorectal cancer screening.
        BMC Gastroenterol. 2011; 11: 93
        • Levin T.R.
        • Conell C.
        • Shapiro J.A.
        • et al.
        Complications of screening flexible sigmoidoscopy.
        Gastroenterology. 2002; 123: 1786-1792
        • Pickhardt P.J.
        Incidence of colonic perforation at CT colonography: review of existing data and implications for screening of asymptomatic adults.
        Radiology. 2006; 239: 313-316
        • Gondal G.
        • Grotmol T.
        • Hofstad B.
        • et al.
        The Norwegian Colorectal Cancer Prevention (NORCCAP) screening study: baseline findings and implementations for clinical work-up in age groups 50-64 years.
        Scand J Gastroenterol. 2003; 38: 635-642
        • Segnan N.
        • Senore C.
        • Andreoni B.
        • et al.
        Randomized trial of different screening strategies for colorectal cancer: patient response and detection rates.
        J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005; 97: 347-357
        • Lisi D.
        • Hassan C.
        • Crespi M.
        • et al.
        Participation in colorectal cancer screening with FOBT and colonoscopy: an Italian, multicentre, randomized population study.
        Dig Liver Dis. 2010; 42: 371-376
        • Hughes K.
        • Leggett B.
        • Del M.C.
        • et al.
        Guaiac versus immunochemical tests: faecal occult blood test screening for colorectal cancer in a rural community.
        Aust N Z J Public Health. 2005; 29: 358-364
        • Chen L.S.
        • Liao C.S.
        • Chang S.H.
        • et al.
        Cost-effectiveness analysis for determining optimal cut-off of immunochemical faecal occult blood test for population-based colorectal cancer screening (KCIS 16).
        J Med Screen. 2007; 14: 191-199
        • Levi Z.
        • Birkenfeld S.
        • Vilkin A.
        • et al.
        A higher detection rate for colorectal cancer and advanced adenomatous polyp for screening with immunochemical fecal occult blood test than guaiac fecal occult blood test, despite lower compliance rate. A prospective, controlled, feasibility study.
        Int J Cancer. 2011; 128: 2415-2424
        • Park D.I.
        • Ryu S.
        • Kim Y.H.
        • et al.
        Comparison of guaiac-based and quantitative immunochemical fecal occult blood testing in a population at average risk undergoing colorectal cancer screening.
        Am J Gastroenterol. 2010; 105: 2017-2025
        • Raginel T.
        • Puvinel J.
        • Ferrand O.
        • et al.
        A population-based comparison of immunochemical fecal occult blood tests for colorectal cancer screening.
        Gastroenterology. 2013; 144: 918-925
        • Kelley L.
        • Swan N.
        • Hughes D.J.
        An analysis of the duplicate testing strategy of an Irish immunochemical faecal occult blood test colorectal cancer screening programme.
        Colorectal Dis. 2013; 15: e512-e521
        • Kristinsson J.
        • Nygaard K.
        • Aadland E.
        • et al.
        Screening of first degree relatives of patients operated for colorectal cancer: evaluation of fecal calprotectin vs. Hemoccult II.
        Digestion. 2001; 64: 104-110
        • Burch J.A.
        • Soares-Weiser K.
        • St John D.J.B.
        • et al.
        Diagnostic accuracy of faecal occult blood tests used in screening for colorectal cancer: a systematic review.
        J Med Screen. 2007; 14: 132-137
        • Whitlock E.P.
        • Lin J.S.
        • Liles E.
        • et al.
        Screening for colorectal cancer: a targeted, updated systematic review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.
        Ann Intern Med. 2008; 149: 638-658
        • Lee J.K.
        • Liles E.G.
        • Bent S.
        • et al.
        Accuracy of fecal immunochemical tests for colorectal cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis.
        Ann Intern Med. 2014; 160: 171
        • Telford J.J.
        • Levy A.R.
        • Sambrook J.C.
        • et al.
        The cost-effectiveness of screening for colorectal cancer.
        CMAJ. 2010; 182: 1307-1313
        • Zauber A.G.
        • Lansdorp-Vogelaar I.
        • Knudsen A.B.
        • et al.
        Evaluating Test Strategies for Colorectal Cancer Screening—Age to Begin, Age to Stop, and Timing of Screening Intervals: A Decision Analysis of Colorectal Cancer Screening for the US Preventive Services Task Force from the Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET).
        Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD2009 (Available at:) (Accessed: April 18, 2016)