Carl Bonander, Marcus Westerberg, Gabriella Chauca Strand, Anna Forsberg, Ulf Strömberg
{"title":"采用粪便免疫化学检验或初级结肠镜检查进行结直肠癌筛查:诊断率的不平等。","authors":"Carl Bonander, Marcus Westerberg, Gabriella Chauca Strand, Anna Forsberg, Ulf Strömberg","doi":"10.1093/jncics/pkae043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Socioeconomic inequalities in the uptake of colorectal cancer screening are well documented, but the implications on inequities in health gain remain unclear.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Sixty-year-olds were randomly recruited from the Swedish population between March 2014 and March 2020 and invited to undergo either 2 rounds of fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) 2 years apart (n = 60 137) or primary colonoscopy just once (n = 30 400). By linkage to Statistics Sweden's registries, we obtained socioeconomic data. In each defined socioeconomic group, we estimated the cumulative yield of advanced neoplasia in each screening arm (intention-to-screen analysis). In the biennial FIT arm, we predicted the probability of exceeding the yield in the primary colonoscopy arm by linear extrapolation of the cumulative yield to (hypothetical) additional rounds of FIT.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the lowest income group, the yield of advanced neoplasia was 1.63% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.35% to 1.93%) after 2 rounds of FIT vs 1.93% (95% CI = 1.49% to 2.40%) in the primary colonoscopy arm. Extrapolation to a third round of FIT implied a 86% probability of exceeding the yield in the primary colonoscopy arm. In the highest income group, we found a more pronounced yield gap between the 2 screening strategies-2.32% (95% CI = 2.15% to 2.49%) vs 3.71% (95% CI = 3.41% to 4.02%)- implying a low (2%) predicted probability of exceeding yield after a third round of FIT.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Yield of advanced neoplasia from 2 rounds of FIT 2 years apart was poorer as compared with primary colonoscopy, but the difference was less in lower socioeconomic groups.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02078804.</p>","PeriodicalId":14681,"journal":{"name":"JNCI Cancer Spectrum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11187582/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Colorectal cancer screening with fecal immunochemical testing or primary colonoscopy: inequities in diagnostic yield.\",\"authors\":\"Carl Bonander, Marcus Westerberg, Gabriella Chauca Strand, Anna Forsberg, Ulf Strömberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jncics/pkae043\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Socioeconomic inequalities in the uptake of colorectal cancer screening are well documented, but the implications on inequities in health gain remain unclear.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Sixty-year-olds were randomly recruited from the Swedish population between March 2014 and March 2020 and invited to undergo either 2 rounds of fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) 2 years apart (n = 60 137) or primary colonoscopy just once (n = 30 400). By linkage to Statistics Sweden's registries, we obtained socioeconomic data. In each defined socioeconomic group, we estimated the cumulative yield of advanced neoplasia in each screening arm (intention-to-screen analysis). In the biennial FIT arm, we predicted the probability of exceeding the yield in the primary colonoscopy arm by linear extrapolation of the cumulative yield to (hypothetical) additional rounds of FIT.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the lowest income group, the yield of advanced neoplasia was 1.63% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.35% to 1.93%) after 2 rounds of FIT vs 1.93% (95% CI = 1.49% to 2.40%) in the primary colonoscopy arm. Extrapolation to a third round of FIT implied a 86% probability of exceeding the yield in the primary colonoscopy arm. In the highest income group, we found a more pronounced yield gap between the 2 screening strategies-2.32% (95% CI = 2.15% to 2.49%) vs 3.71% (95% CI = 3.41% to 4.02%)- implying a low (2%) predicted probability of exceeding yield after a third round of FIT.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Yield of advanced neoplasia from 2 rounds of FIT 2 years apart was poorer as compared with primary colonoscopy, but the difference was less in lower socioeconomic groups.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02078804.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14681,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JNCI Cancer Spectrum\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11187582/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JNCI Cancer Spectrum\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jncics/pkae043\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JNCI Cancer Spectrum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jncics/pkae043","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:在接受结直肠癌筛查方面存在的社会经济不平等已被充分记录在案,但其对健康不平等的影响仍不清楚:在 2014 年 3 月至 2020 年 3 月期间,我们从瑞典人口中随机招募了 60 岁的人,并邀请他们接受间隔 2 年的粪便免疫化学检测 (FIT)(n = 60,137 人)或仅一次的初级结肠镜检查 (PCOL;n = 30,400 人)。通过与瑞典统计局登记处的链接,我们获得了社会经济数据。在每个确定的社会经济组中,我们估算了每个筛查组的晚期肿瘤(AN)累积发病率(意向筛查分析)。我们预测了第三轮 FIT 后 PCOL 组超过筛查率的概率:Pr{AN_FIT3>AN_PCOL}:结果:在最低收入组中,两轮 FIT 后 AN 感染率为 1.63%(95% 置信区间 [CI] = 1.35% 至 1.93%),而 PCOL 组为 1.93%(95% 置信区间 [CI] = 1.49% 至 2.40%)。我们预测 Pr{AN_FIT3>AN_PCOL} = 0.86。在最高收入组中,我们发现两种筛查策略的收益差距更为明显,分别为 2.32% (95% CI = 2.15% to 2.49%) vs 3.71% (95% CI = 3.41% to 4.02%),且 Pr{AN_FIT3>AN_PCOL} 很低 (= 0.02)。(= 0.02):在社会经济地位较低的群体中,相隔 2 年的 FIT 和 PCOL 分别产生的 AN 值较低,但差异较小。这些结果对评估有组织的大肠癌筛查中的健康公平性很有价值:临床试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov 编号 NCT02078804。
Colorectal cancer screening with fecal immunochemical testing or primary colonoscopy: inequities in diagnostic yield.
Background: Socioeconomic inequalities in the uptake of colorectal cancer screening are well documented, but the implications on inequities in health gain remain unclear.
Methods: Sixty-year-olds were randomly recruited from the Swedish population between March 2014 and March 2020 and invited to undergo either 2 rounds of fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) 2 years apart (n = 60 137) or primary colonoscopy just once (n = 30 400). By linkage to Statistics Sweden's registries, we obtained socioeconomic data. In each defined socioeconomic group, we estimated the cumulative yield of advanced neoplasia in each screening arm (intention-to-screen analysis). In the biennial FIT arm, we predicted the probability of exceeding the yield in the primary colonoscopy arm by linear extrapolation of the cumulative yield to (hypothetical) additional rounds of FIT.
Results: In the lowest income group, the yield of advanced neoplasia was 1.63% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.35% to 1.93%) after 2 rounds of FIT vs 1.93% (95% CI = 1.49% to 2.40%) in the primary colonoscopy arm. Extrapolation to a third round of FIT implied a 86% probability of exceeding the yield in the primary colonoscopy arm. In the highest income group, we found a more pronounced yield gap between the 2 screening strategies-2.32% (95% CI = 2.15% to 2.49%) vs 3.71% (95% CI = 3.41% to 4.02%)- implying a low (2%) predicted probability of exceeding yield after a third round of FIT.
Conclusions: Yield of advanced neoplasia from 2 rounds of FIT 2 years apart was poorer as compared with primary colonoscopy, but the difference was less in lower socioeconomic groups.