Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Joeseph Selby, G. Friedman, C. Quesenberry, N. Weiss (1992)A case-control study of screening sigmoidoscopy and mortality from colorectal cancer.
The New England journal of medicine, 326 10
R. Greenlee, Taylor Murray, Sherry Bolden, P. Wingo (2000)Cancer statistics, 2000
CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 50
(2001)The digital object identifier for this article is: 10.1102/ 1470-7330
F-T FORKt, Dr Fork (1981)Double contrast enema and colonoscopy in polyp detection.
O. Jørgensen, O. Kronborg, C. Fenger (1993)The Funen Adenoma Follow-up Study. Incidence and death from colorectal carcinoma in an adenoma surveillance program.
Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology, 28 10
J. Mandel, J. Bond, T. Church, D. Snover, G. Bradley, L. Schuman, F. Ederer (1993)Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. Minnesota Colon Cancer Control Study.
The New England journal of medicine, 328 19
D. Ahlquist, H. Wieand, C. Moertel, D. McGill, C. Loprinzi, M. O’connell, J. Mailliard, J. Gerstner, K. Pandya, R. Ellefson (1993)Accuracy of fecal occult blood screening for colorectal neoplasia. A prospective study using Hemoccult and HemoQuant tests.
JAMA, 269 10
S. Winawer, A. Zauber, M. Ho, M. O'brien, L. Gottlieb, S. Sternberg, J. Waye, M. Schapiro, J. Bond, J. Panish (1993)Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup.
The New England Journal of Medicine, 329
J. Selby, G. Friedman, M. Collen (1988)Sigmoidoscopy and mortality from colorectal cancer: the Kaiser Permanente Multiphasic Evaluation Study.
Journal of clinical epidemiology, 41 5
O. Kronborg, C. Fenger, J. Olsen, O. Jørgensen, O. Søndergaard (1996)Randomised study of screening for colorectal cancer with faecal-occult-blood test
The Lancet, 348
J. Selby, Friedman Gd (1989)US Preventive Services Task Force. Sigmoidoscopy in the periodic health examination of asymptomatic adults.
JAMA, 261 4
Fred Ederer, Timothy Church, Jack Mandel (1997)Fecal occult blood screening in the Minnesota study: role of chance detection of lesions.
Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 89 19
C. Godreau (1992)Office-based colonoscopy in a family practice.
Family practice research journal, 12 3
O. Kronborg (1992)Screening guidelines for colorectal cancer.
Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology. Supplement, 192
E Jaramillo, P Slezak (1992)Comparison between double-contrast barium enema and colonoscopy to investigate lower gastrointestinal bleeding
Gastrointest Radiol, 17
M. Callstrom, C. Johnson, J. Fletcher, J. Reed, D. Ahlquist, W. Harmsen, Kevin Tait, L. Wilson, Kay Corcoran (2001)CT colonography without cathartic preparation: feasibility study.
Radiology, 219 3
A. Blakeborough, M. Sheridan, A. Chapman (1997)Complications of barium enema examinations: a survey of UK Consultant Radiologists 1992 to 1994.
Clinical radiology, 52 2
DM Eddy (1990)Screening for colorectal cancer
Ann Intern Med, 113
D. Rex, E. Rahmani, J. Haseman, Gregory Lemmel, S. Kaster, Joseph Buckley (1997)Relative sensitivity of colonoscopy and barium enema for detection of colorectal cancer in clinical practice.
Gastroenterology, 112 1
D Jentschura, M Raute, J Winter (1994)Complications in endoscopy of the lower gastrointestinal tract: therapy and prognosis
Surg Endosc, 8
G. Lemmel, J. Haseman, D. Rex, E. Rahmani (1995)Neoplasia distal to the splenic flexure in patients with proximal colon cancer.
Gastrointestinal endoscopy, 44 2
S. Vernon (1997)Participation in colorectal cancer screening: a review.
Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 89 19
S. Kadakia, Carl Wrobleski, Ami Kadakia, Nancy Meier (1996)Prevalence of proximal colonic polyps in average-risk asymptomatic patients with negative fecal occult blood tests and flexible sigmoidoscopy.
Gastrointestinal endoscopy, 44 2
H. Vasen, J. Wijnen, F. Menko, J. Kleibeuker, B. Taal, G. Griffioen, F. Nagengast, E. Meijers-Heijboer, L. Bertario, L. Varesco, M. Bisgaard, J. Mohr, R. Fodde, Khan Pm (1996)Cancer risk in families with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer diagnosed by mutation analysis.
Gastroenterology, 110 4
A. Ekbom, H. Adami, C. Helmick, M. Zack (1990)Increased risk of large-bowel cancer in Crohn's disease with colonic involvement
The Lancet, 336
D. Rex, D. Vining, K. Kopecky (1999)An initial experience with screening for colon polyps using spiral CT with and without CT colography (virtual colonoscopy)
Gastrointestinal endoscopy, 50 3
(1983)Barium enema of carcinoma of the colon: sensitivity of double- and singlecontrast studies
F. Fork, C. Lindström, G. Ekelund (1983)Double Contrast Examination in Carcinoma of the Colon and Rectum
Acta Radiologica, 24
A. Muller, A. Sonnenberg (1995)Prevention of Colorectal Cancer by Flexible Endoscopy and Polypectomy: A Case-Control Study of 32 702 Veterans
Annals of Internal Medicine, 123
F. Eyben, C. Thordal (1997)Colorectal cancer screening: clinical guidelines and rationale.
Gastroenterology, 113 4
S Glick, JL Wagner, CD Johnson (1998)Cost-effectiveness of double-contrast barium enema in screening for colorectal cancer
Am J Radiol, 170
PA Newcomb, RG Norfleet, BE Storer (1992)Screening sigmoidoscopy and colorectal cancer mortality
J Natl Cancer Inst, 84
D. Whynes, AR Neilson, Arthur Walker, J.D Hardcastle (1998)Faecal occult blood screening for colorectal cancer: is it cost-effective?
Health economics, 7 1
J. Hardcastle, J. Chamberlain, M. Robinson, S. Moss, S. Amar, T. Balfour, P. James, C. Mangham (1989)Randomised controlled trial of faecal-occult-blood screening for colorectal cancer
The Lancet, 348
SJ Winawer, AG Zauber, MN Ho (1977)Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy
N Engl J Med, 329
D Gyrd-Hansen (1998)Fecal occult blood tests: a cost-effectiveness analysis
Int J Technol Asses Health Care, 14
J. Waye, B. Lewis, Siroun Yessayan (1992)Colonoscopy: a prospective report of complications.
Journal of clinical gastroenterology, 15 4
S. Steine, A. Stordahl, O. Lunde, Kirsti LφKEN, E. Laerum (1993)Double-contrast barium enema versus colonoscopy in the diagnosis of neoplastic disorders: aspects of decision-making in general practice.
Family practice, 10 3
SJ Winawer, ET Stewart, AG Zauber (2000)A comparison of colonoscopy and double-contrast barium enema for surveillance after polypectomy
N Engl J Med, 342
(1999)Screening for colorectal cancer--United States, 1997.
MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report, 48 6
S. Winawer, A. Zauber, H. Gerdes, M. O'brien, L. Gottlieb, S. Sternberg, J. Bond, J. Waye, M. Schapiro, J. Panish, R. Kurtz, M. Shike, F. Ackroyd, E. Stewart, M. Skolnick, D. Bishop (1996)Risk of colorectal cancer in the families of patients with adenomatous polyps. National Polyp Study Workgroup.
The New England journal of medicine, 334 2
ML Brown, L Fintor (1993)Cost-effectiveness of breast cancer screening: preliminary results of a systematic review of the literature
Breast Cancer Res Treat, 25
N. Brewster, D. Grieve, J. Saunders, Mr Brewster (1994)Double‐contrast barium enema and flexible sigmoidoscopy for routine colonic investigation
British Journal of Surgery, 81
C. Fuchs, E. Giovannucci, G. Colditz, D. Hunter, F. Speizer, W. Willett (1994)A prospective study of family history and the risk of colorectal cancer.
The New England journal of medicine, 331 25
JF Helm, RS Sandler (1999)Colorectal cancer screening
Med Clin N Am, 83
S. Glick, J. Wagner, C. Johnson (1998)Cost-effectiveness of double-contrast barium enema in screening for colorectal cancer.
AJR. American journal of roentgenology, 170 3
A. Garber, A. Garber, C. Phelps, C. Phelps (1997)Economic foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis.
Journal of health economics, 16 1
T. Imperiale, D. Wagner, Ching Lin, G. Larkin, J. Rogge, D. Ransohoff (2000)Risk of advanced proximal neoplasms in asymptomatic adults according to the distal colorectal findings.
The New England journal of medicine, 343 3
T. Zarchy, D. Ershoff (1996)Risk of colorectal cancer in families of patients with adenomatous polyps.
The New England journal of medicine, 334 20
D. Rex (1995)Colonoscopy: a review of its yield for cancers and adenomas by indication.
The American journal of gastroenterology, 90 3
T. Byers, B. Levin, D. Rothenberger, G. Dodd, Robert Smith (1997)American Cancer Society guidelines for screening and surveillance for early detection of colorectal polyps and cancer: Update 1997
CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 47
D. Lieberman, F. Smith (1991)Screening for colon malignancy with colonoscopy.
The American journal of gastroenterology, 86 8
A. Hara, C. Johnson, J. Reed, D. Ahlquist, Heidi Nelson, R. Maccarty, W. Harmsen, D. Ilstrup (1997)Detection of colorectal polyps with CT colography: initial assessment of sensitivity and specificity.
Radiology, 205 1
H. Fenlon, D. Nunes, P. Schroy, M. Barish, P. Clarke, J. Ferrucci (1999)A comparison of virtual and conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps.
The New England journal of medicine, 341 20
D. Rex, G. Lehman, R. Hawes, T. Ulbright, Jennifer Smith (1991)Screening colonoscopy in asymptomatic average-risk persons with negative fecal occult blood tests.
Gastroenterology, 100 1
J. Allison, I. Tekawa, L. Ransom, A. Adrain (1996)A comparison of fecal occult-blood tests for colorectal-cancer screening.
The New England journal of medicine, 334 3
C. Kay, D. Kulling, R. Hawes, J. Young, P. Cotton (2000)Virtual endoscopy--comparison with colonoscopy in the detection of space-occupying lesions of the colon.
Endoscopy, 32 3
JH Bond (1999)Screening guidelines for colorectal cancer
Am J Med, 106
D. Redelmeier (1995)Screening for colorectal cancer.
The New England journal of medicine, 333 7
G. Spinzi, G. Minoli (2001)A comparison of colonoscopy and double-contrast barium enema for surveillance after polypectomy.
Gastrointestinal endoscopy, 54 3
H. Ahsan, A. Neugut, G. Garbowski, J. Jacobson, K. Forde, M. Treat, J. Waye (1998)Family History of Colorectal Adenomatous Polyps and Increased Risk for Colorectal Cancer
Annals of Internal Medicine, 128
FT Fork, C Lindstrom, G Ekelund (1983)Double contrast examination in carcinoma of the colon and rectum: a prospective clinical series
Acta Radiol, 24
J. Yee, G. Akerkar, R. Hung, A. Steinauer-Gebauer, S. Wall, K. Mcquaid (2001)Colorectal neoplasia: performance characteristics of CT colonography for detection in 300 patients.
Radiology, 219 3
T. Byers, B. Levin, D. Rothenberger, G. Dodd, R. Smith (1997)American Cancer Society guidelines for screening and surveillance for early detection of colorectal polyps and cancer: update 1997. American Cancer Society Detection and Treatment Advisory Group on Colorectal Cancer.
CA: a cancer journal for clinicians, 47 3
A. Garber, C. Phelps (1992)Economic Foundations of Cost Effective Analysis
A. Ekbom, C. Helmick, M. Zack, H. Adami (1990)Ulcerative colitis and colorectal cancer. A population-based study.
The New England journal of medicine, 323 18
J. Bloomfield (1981)RELIABILITY OF BARIUM ENEMA IN DETECTING COLONIC NEOPLASIA
Medical Journal of Australia, 1
10 Multidisciplinary Symposium — screening for cancer spiral computed tomography scanner. Br J Cancer 2001; 84:  Reeves AP, Kostis WJ. Computer-aided diagnosis of small 25. pulmonary nodules. Sem Ultrasound, CT & MRI 2000; 2:  ImPACT CT Scanner Comparison Report Issue 12 MDA/00/ The digital object identiﬁer for this article is: 10.1102/  Living with Radiation. NRPB 1998; ISBN 0-85951-419-6; 73: 1470-7330.2001.006 Jay P Heiken Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri, USA Colorectal cancer is a major health problem worldwide. Table 1 Recommended options for colorectal cancer Last year in the United States alone, more than 130 000 screening in asymptomatic, average-risk individuals* people were diagnosed with colorectal cancer and more  Starting at age 50 than 56 000 died of their disease . Fortunately, this Annual FOBT† neoplasm is highly suited to screening because of its long Flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5 years preclinical phase, during which it is detectable and Annual FOBT and sigmoidoscopy every 5 years  curable . Nevertheless, screening programs for colorec- Colonoscopy every 10 years tal cancer have been only partly successful, owing Double-contrast barium enema every 5–10 years largely to poor patient compliance with screening rec- [3,4] ommendations . A number of organizations including *Winawer SJ, Fletcher RH, Miller L et al. Colorectal cancer screening: clinical guidelines and rationale. Gastroenterology 1997; the World Health Organization (WHO), the American 112: 594–642. Cancer Society (ACS), the Agency for Health Care †The American Cancer Society does not recommend fecal occult Policy and Research (AHCPR), the US Preventive blood testing (FOBT) by itself. Service Task Force (USPSTF), and the American Gastroenterology Association (AGA) have issued or endorsed guidelines for colorectal cancer screening. This review summarizes the clinical evidence supporting Fecal occult blood testing colorectal cancer screening in the average-risk popula- Fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) is the safest and tion and in high-risk groups, discusses the advantages least expensive of the currently available screening and disadvantages of the available screening tests, and tests. Three prospective, randomized, controlled trials outlines the currently recommended guidelines for have demonstrated the eﬀectiveness of FOBT in screening based on risk category. [7–9] reducing colorectal cancer mortality by 15% to 33% . However, its beneﬁt in reducing colorectal mortality is attributed not only to early cancer detection but also to the incidental discovery and removal of adenomatous Average-risk population polyps at subsequent colonoscopy. Such chance discov- Average-risk patients are asymptomatic individuals aged ery of adenomatous polyps and non-bleeding cancers by 50 years of age or older who have no personal or family colonoscopy has been estimated to account for 16–25% history of colorectal cancer or adenomatous polyps and of the colorectal cancer deaths prevented by the use of  no history of inﬂammatory bowel disease. The two most FOBT . Limitations of FOBT include its relatively recently published screening recommendations, those of low sensitivity for detecting cancers and its inability to    the ACS and AHCPR , present guidelines for screen- detect the vast majority of adenomas . Because colo- ing average-risk patients in the form of lists of options rectal cancers bleed intermittently, 50% or more of (Table 1). The options include annual fecal occult blood patients with colorectal cancer may have a negative [11,12] test (not included as a stand alone test in the ACS test result . Thus, to be eﬀective, FOBT must be guidelines), ﬂexible sigmoidoscopy every 5 years, annual administered annually or biennially, which makes fecal occult blood test plus ﬂexible sigmoidoscopy every patient compliance a problem. Furthermore, the positive 5 years, double-contrast barium enema every 5 to 10 predictive value of FOBT is only approximately [11,12] years, and colonoscopy every 10 years. 10% . Multidisciplinary Symposium — screening for cancer 11 Flexible sigmoidoscopy Barium enema examination Because of its higher sensitivity than single contrast Data from two case–control studies support the eﬀec- barium enema, double-contrast barium enema is consid- tiveness of ﬂexible sigmoidoscopy in reducing colorectal [13,14] ered the current radiologic alternative to colonoscopy cancer mortality . Individuals in these studies who for colorectal cancer detection. Similar to colonoscopy, had undergone at least one screening sigmoidoscopy barium enema examination is a test that allows evalu- during the previous 10 years had only a 21% to 30% risk ation of the entire colon in approximately 90–95% of of developing fatal colorectal cancer as control subjects. [29–31] patients . No data are available on the sensitivity of Compared with colonoscopy, ﬂexible sigmoidoscopy double-contrast barium enema in a screening popula- is less expensive and has a lower complication rate tion. In patients undergoing diagnostic examinations, (approximately one to two perforations per 10 000 ex- [6,15] the reported sensitivity of this test for the detection of aminations) . In addition, it requires a less rigorous [32–34] cancer is 85–90% , and the sensitivity for adenomas bowel preparation and does not require sedation. The [35,36] larger than 1 cm is 75–90% . However, recently major disadvantage of ﬂexible sigmoidoscopy, however, published data from the National Polyp Study in the is that it examines only a portion of the colon, thereby United States demonstrated a sensitivity for double- enabling detection of only approximately 50% of colonic [16,17] contrast barium enema of only approximately 50% for lesions . If a polyp is detected by sigmoidoscopy, polyps 1 cm or larger in patients undergoing surveillance colonoscopy is still needed to evaluate the entire colon.  after removal of adenomatous polyps . Advantages of double-contrast barium enema compared with colon- oscopy are that it is safer (approximately one perfora- Fecal occult blood testing combined with  tion in 25 000 procedures) , less expensive, and does ﬂexible sigmoidoscopy not require sedation. Its major disadvantages are its The rationale for combining FOBT with ﬂexible sig- lower sensitivity and the inability to remove polyps, thus moidoscopy is two-fold: (1) approximately half of the requiring colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy after positive cancers missed by FOBT would be detected at sig- examinations. moidoscopy, and (2) FOBT is insensitive for detecting adenomas, many of which would be detected at sig- moidoscopy. Nevertheless, there is little direct evidence Computed tomography (CT) colonography to support such a combined approach. Furthermore, a CT colonography (also known as ‘virtual colonoscopy’) large number of colonic adenomas and carcinomas are is a relatively new radiologic procedure that holds not within reach of the sigmoidoscope. Although some promise as a colorectal cancer-screening test, but of these lesions would be detected when a positive requires further evaluation. In this study a helically sigmoidoscopy leads to a follow-up colonoscopy or acquired volumetric data set of the abdomen and pelvis barium enema, many of them would be missed, as up to is obtained after insuﬄation of the colon with air or 50% of proximal colonic cancers are not associated with [18–22] carbon dioxide. The colon can then be viewed with a distal adenoma . either 2-dimensional or 3-dimensional techniques. The 3-dimensional visualization technique provides a per- spective that simulates colonoscopic navigation of the Colonoscopy colonic lumen. Prospective studies performed in selected Colonoscopy is the only colorectal cancer screening test groups of high-risk patients have reported sensitivities that allows evaluation of the entire colon and provides with CT colonography of 50% to 91% for polyps 1 cm or the opportunity to remove polyps and small polypoid [39–43] larger . It is important to note, however, that the cancers at the same time. Although there are no con- results of such studies cannot be generalized to a screen- trolled trials demonstrating that screening colonoscopy ing population of average-risk individuals. One potential reduces colorectal cancer incidence or mortality in advantage of CT colonography is the possibility of those at average risk for the disease, indirect evidence avoiding rigorous bowel preparation through the use of for the eﬀectiveness of colonoscopy comes from one barium stool tagging and electronic subtraction of stool  case–control study and uncontrolled observational from the colon prior to diagnostic evaluation of the [23–25] studies . The case–control study showed a 40% to  images . Whether CT colonography will become a 50% reduction in colorectal cancer incidence in individ- viable alternative to colonoscopy for colorectal cancer uals who had undergone colonoscopy or polypec- screening remains to be seen.  tomy . A limitation of colonoscopy is that it is [18,19,26] incomplete in 5–15% of patients . In addition, colonoscopy is associated with the highest risk of com- Cost-eﬀectiveness plications of all screening tests. Perforation occurs in approximately 1 in 1000 colonoscopies, major bleeding Most studies of the cost-eﬀectiveness of FOBT (every 1 occurs in approximately 3 per 1000, and one to three to 2 years), ﬂexible sigmoidoscopy (every 5 years), patients undergoing colonoscopy die of complications colonoscopy (every 10 years) and double-contrast [6,19,26–28] from the procedure . barium enema examination (every 5 to 10 years) have 12 Multidisciplinary Symposium — screening for cancer Table 2 Recommendations for colorectal cancer screening in individuals at increased risk* First-degree relative with colorectal cancer or adenomatous polyp(s): same as for average risk individual, but begin at age 40 Family history of FAP Genetic counseling (consider genetic testing) Annual ﬂexible sigmoidoscopy beginning at puberty if gene carrier or indeterminate Family history of HNPCC Genetic counseling (consider genetic testing) Colonoscopy every 1–2 years beginning at age 20–30, annually beginning at age 40 History of inﬂammatory bowel disease Consider colonoscopy surveillance for dysplasia every 1–2 years beginning after 8 years of disease for pancolitis and after 15 years of disease for left-sided colitis *Winawer SJ, Fletcher RH, Miller L et al. Colorectal cancer screening: clinical guidelines and rationale. Gastroenterology 1997; 112: 594–642. FAP, familial adenomatous polyposis; HNPCC, hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. shown costs per life-year saved ranging from approxi- colitis are also at increased risk for colorectal cancer, but mately $2000 to $15 000 for FOBT up to $22 000 for the risk is lower than that associated with ulcerative [45–48]  colonoscopy . These ﬁgures compare favorably with colitis . Familial adenomatous polyposis coli (FAP) is estimates of cost per life-year saved for breast cancer, a disease that results from inherited or acquired defects cervical cancer and hypertension screening programs, in the APC gene located on the ﬁfth chromosome. [49–50] which range from approximately $9000 to $50 000 . Patients with this disease develop numerous polyps throughout the colon, which results in a 100% risk of colorectal cancer if the colon is not removed. Hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) is an auto- Screening recommendations (Table 1) somal dominant disorder that results in a familial pre- Recommended options for colorectal cancer screening disposition to multiple cancers. The colon cancers of asymptomatic individuals of average risk include the typically occur at a young age, are often located in the following (beginning at age 50): annual FOBT (if right colon, and may be associated with extracolonic  positive, examine entire colon with colonoscopy or neoplasms . double-contrast barium enema examination), ﬂexible sigmoidoscopy every 5 years (followed by colonoscopy if adenomatous polyp or cancer found), annual FOBT and Screening recommendations (Table 2) sigmoidoscopy every 5 years, colonoscopy every 10 For individuals with ﬁrst-degree relatives with colo- years, or double-contrast barium enema examination rectal cancer or an adenomatous polyp, the screening every 5–10 years. It should be noted that the American recommendations are the same as for the average risk Cancer Society does not endorse the option of FOBT by population, except that screening should begin at age 40. itself because of the relatively low mortality reductions  (Patients with a personal history of colorectal cancer or that have been associated with its use . adenomatous polyp are not included in this discussion, as they fall under the category of surveillance rather than screening.) The recommendation for patients with High-risk population FAP is to receive genetic counseling (and possibly Individuals at increased risk for colorectal cancer are genetic testing to determine if the patient is a gene those with: (1) a personal or family (ﬁrst degree relative) carrier) and to undergo ﬂexible sigmoidoscopy annually history of colorectal cancer or adenoma; (2) longstand- beginning at puberty. The recommendation for patients ing ulcerative or Crohn’s colitis; or (3) a genetic predis- with HNPCC is to receive genetic counseling (and position to a hereditary polyposis or nonpolyposis possibly genetic testing) and to undergo colonoscopy syndrome. Individuals with a single ﬁrst-degree relative every 1–2 years beginning at age 20–30, with annual with colorectal cancer have a risk of developing colo- colonoscopies beginning at age 40. The recommendation rectal cancer approximately 1.7 times that of the general for patients with longstanding ulcerative colitis is to  population . In addition, cancers tend to occur at an undergo colonoscopy with biopsies looking for dysplasia earlier age in this population. First-degree relatives of every 1–2 years beginning 8 years after diagnosis for patients with adenomas have a similar increased risk pancolitis and beginning 15 years after diagnosis for [52,53] of colorectal cancer . Patients with long-standing left-sided disease. However, there is no direct evidence ulcerative colitis are at increased risk for colorectal that this practice reduces colorectal cancer mortality in cancer, particularly those with pancolitis and early age these patients and none that it is more eﬀective than   of onset of their disease . Colorectal cancer in this colectomy based on extent and duration of disease . group of patients is thought to develop in areas of Surveillance for colorectal cancer is not currently  mucosal dysplasia. Patients with longstanding Crohn’s recommended for patients with Crohn’s colitis . Multidisciplinary Symposium — screening for cancer 13  Jøgensen OD, Kronborg O, Fenger C. The Funen adenoma References follow-up study: Incidence and death from colorectal  Greenlee RT, Murray P, Bolden S, Wingo PA. Cancer carcinoma in an adenoma surveillance program. Scand J statistics: 2000. CA Cancer J Clin 2000; 50: 7–33. Gastroenterol 1993; 28: 869–74.  Bond JH. Screening guidelines for colorectal cancer. Am J  Rex DK. Colonoscopy: a review of its yield for cancer and Med 1999; 106(1A) 7S-10S: 75–105. adenomas by indication. Am J Gastroenterol 1995; 3: 353–65.  Vernon SW. Participation in colorectal cancer screening: a  Godreau CJ. Oﬃce-based colonoscopy in a family practice. review. J Natl Cancer Inst 1997; 89: 1406–23. Fam Pract Res J 1992; 12: 313–20.  Centers for Disease Control. Screening for colorectal  Jentschura D, Raute M, Winter J et al. Complications in cancer — United States, 1997. MMWR 1999; 48: 116–121. endoscopy of the lower gastrointestinal tract: therapy and  Byers T, Levin B, Rothenberger D. American Cancer Society prognosis. Surg Endosc 1994; 8: 672–6. guidelines for screening and surveillance for early detection  Waye JD, Lewis BS, Yessayan S. Colonoscopy: a prospective of colorectal polyps and cancer: update 1997. American report of complications. J Clin Gastroenterol 1992; 15: 347–51. Cancer Society Detection and Treatment Advisory Group on  Bloomﬁeld JA. Reliability of barium enema in detecting Colorectal Cancer. CA Cancer J Clin 1997; 47: 154–60. colonic neoplasia. Med J Austr 1981; 1: 631–3.  Winawer SJ, Fletcher RH, Miller L et al. Colorectal cancer  Jaramillo E, Slezak P. Comparison between double-contrast screening: clinical guidelines and rationale. Gastroenterology barium enema and colonoscopy to investigate lower gastroin- 1997; 112: 594–642. testinal bleeding. Gastrointest Radiol 1992; 17: 81–3.  Mandel JS, Bond JH, Church TR et al. Reducing mortality  Brewster NT, Grieve DC, Saunders JH. Double-contrast from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. barium enema and ﬂexible sigmoidoscopy for routine colonic Minnesota Colon Cancer Control Study. N Engl J Med 1993; investigation. Br J Surg 1994; 8: 445–7. 328: 1365–71.  Rex DK, Rahmani EY, Haseman JH et al. Relative sensitivity  Kronborg O, Fenger C, Olsen J et al. Randomized study of of colonoscopy and barium enema for detection of colorectal screening for colorectal cancer with faecal-occult-blood test. cancer in clinical practice. Gastroenterology 1997; 112: 17–23. Lancet 1996; 348: 1467–71.  Fork FT, Lindstrom C, Ekelund G. Double contrast  Hardcastle JD, Chamberlain JO, Robinson MHE et al. examination in carcinoma of the colon and rectum: a Randomized controlled trial of faecal-occult-blood screening prospective clinical series. Acta Radiol 1983; 24: 177–88. for colorectal cancer. Lancet 1996; 348: 1472–7.  Johnson DC, Carlson HC, Taylor WE et al. Barium enema of  Ederer F, Church TR, Mandel JS. Fecal occult blood screen- carcinoma of the colon: sensitivity of double- and single- ing in the Minnesota study: role of chance detection of lesions. contrast studies. Am J Radiol 1983; 140: 1143–9. J Natl Cancer Inst 1997; 89: 1423–8.  Fork FT. Double contrast enema and colonoscopy in polyp  Ahlquist DA, Wieand HS, Moertel CG et al. Accuracy of detection. Gut 1981; 22: 971–7. fecal occult blood screening for colorectal neoplasia: a  Steine S, Stordahl A, Lunde OC et al. Double-contrast barium prospective study using Hemoccult and HemoQuant tests. enema versus colonoscopy in the diagnosis of neoplastic JAMA 1993; 269: 1262–7. disorders: aspects of decision-making in general practice. Fam  Allison JE, Tekawa IS, Ransom LJ et al. A comparison of Pract 1993; 10: 288–91. fecal occult-blood tests for colorectal-cancer screening. N Engl  Winawer SJ, Stewart ET, Zauber AG et al. A comparison J Med 1996; 334: 155–9. of colonoscopy and double-contrast barium enema for  Selby JV, Friedman GD, Quesenberry CPJ et al. A case- surveillance after polypectomy. N Engl J Med 2000; 342: control study of screening sigmoidoscopy and mortality from 1766–72. colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 1992; 326: 653–7.  Blakeborough A, Sheridan MB, Chapman AH. Complica-  Newcomb PA, Norﬂeet RG, Storer BE et al. Screening tions of barium enema examinations: a survey of UK consult- sigmoidoscopy and colorectal cancer mortality. J Natl Cancer ant radiologists 1992–1994. Clin Radiol 1992; 52: 142–8. Inst 1992; 84: 1572–5.  Hara AJ, Johnson CD, Reed JE et al. Detection of colorectal  Muller AD, Sonnenberg A. Prevention of colorectal cancer by polyps with CT colography: initial assessment of sensitivity ﬂexible endoscopy and polypectomy: a case-control study of and speciﬁcity. Radiology 1997; 205: 59–65. 32 702 veterans. Ann Intern Med 1995; 123: 904–10.  Fenlon HM, Nunes DP, Schroy PC et al. A comparison of  Selby JV, Friedman GD. US preventative task force. virtual and conventional colonoscopy for the detection of Sigmoidoscopy in the periodic health examination of colorectal polyps. N Engl J Med 1999; 341: 1496–503. asymptomatic adults. JAMA 1989; 261: 594–601.  Kay CL, Kulling D, Hawes HR, Young JWR, Cotton PB.  Selby JV, Friedman GD, Collen MF. Sigmoidoscopy and Virtual endoscopy — comparison with colonoscopy in the mortality from colorectal cancer: the Kaiser Permanente detection of space-occupying lesions of the colon. Endoscopy Multiplastic Evaluation study. J Clin Epidemiol 1988; 41: 2000; 32: 226–32. 427–34.  Rex DK, Vining D, Kopecky KK. An initial experience with  Lieberman DA, Smith FW. Screening for colon malignancy screening for colon polyps using spiral CT with and without with colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 1991; 86: 1775–80. CT colography (virtual colonoscopy). Gastrointest Endosc  Rex DK, Lehman GA, Hawes RH et al. Screening colonos- 1999; 50: 309–13. copy in symptomatic average-risk persons with negative fecal  Yee J, Akerkar GA, Hung RK et al. Colorectal neoplasia: occult blood tests. Gastroenterology 1991; 100: 64–7. performance characteristics of CT colonography for detection  Kadakia SC, Wrobleski CS, Kadakia AS et al. Prevalence or in 300 patients. Radiology 2001; 219: 685–92. proximal colonic polyps in average-risk asymptomatic  Callstrom MR, Johnson CD, Fletcher JG et al.CT patients with negative fecal occult blood test and ﬂexible colonography without cathartic preparation: feasibility study. sigmoidoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 1996; 44: 112–7. Radiology 2001; 219: 693–8.  Eddy DM. Screening for colorectal cancer. Ann Intern Med  Lemmel TG, Haseman JH, Rex DK et al. Neoplasia distal to 1990; 113: 373–84. the splenic ﬂexure in patients with proximal colon cancer. Gastrointest Endosc 1996; 44: 109–11.  Glick S, Wagner JL, Johnson CD. Cost-eﬀectiveness of  Imperiale TF, Wagner DR, Ching YL, Larkin GN, Rogge JD, double-contrast barium enema in screening for colorectal Ransohoﬀ DF. Risk of advanced proximal neoplasms in cancer. Am J Radiol 1998; 170: 629–36. asymptomatic adults according to the distal colorectal  Gyrd-Hansen D. Fecal occult blood tests: a cost-eﬀectiveness ﬁndings. N Engl J Med 2000; 343: 169–74. analysis. Int J Technol Asses Health Care 1998; 14: 290–301.  Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN et al. Prevention of  Whynes DK, Nielson AR, Walker AR et al. Fecal occult colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. N Engl J Med blood screening for colorectal cancer: is it cost-eﬀective? 1977; 329: 1977–81. Health Econ 1998; 7: 21–9. 14 Multidisciplinary Symposium — screening for cancer  Garber AM, Phelps CE. Economic foundation of cost-  Ekbom A, Helmick C, Zack M et al. Ulcerative colitis and eﬀectiveness analysis. J Health Econ 1997; 16: 1–31. colorectal cancer. A population-based study. N Engl J Med  Brown ML, Fintor L. Cost-eﬀectiveness of breast cancer 1990; 323: 1228–33. screening: preliminary results of a systematic review of the  Ekbom A, Helmick C, Zack M et al. Increased risk of literature. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1993; 25: 113–8. large-bowel cancer in Crohn’s disease with colonic  Fuchs CS, Giovannucci EL, Colditz G. A prospective study of involvement. Lancet 1990; 336: 357–9. family history and the risk of colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med  Vasen HF, Wijnen JT, Menko FH et al. Cancer risk in 1994: 331: 1669–74. families with hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer diag-  Ahsan H, Neugut AI, Garbowski CG et al. Family history nosed by mutation analysis. Gastroenterology 1996; 110: of colorectal adenomatous polyps and increased risk for 1020–7. colorectal cancer. Ann Intern Med 1998; 128: 900–5.  Helm JF, Sandler RS. Colorectal cancer screening. Med Clin  Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Gerdes H et al. Risk of colorectal N Am 1999; 83: 1403–22. cancer in the families of patients with adenomatous polyps. The digital object identiﬁer for this article is: 10.1102/ National Polyp Study Workgroup. N Engl J Med 1996; 334: 82–7. 1470-7330.2001.008 Ovarian cancer screening B Rufford, U Menon and I Jacobs Gynaecology Cancer Research Unit, St Bartholomew’s and the Royal London Medical and Dental School, London, UK Introduction What to screen for A screening programme should ideally be based on the Ovarian cancer is the most common gynaecological detection of a pre-malignant condition in order to lower malignancy in the developed world. It also carries the disease incidence and maximize mortality reduction, as worst prognosis with an overall 5-year survival of 30%. is the case with the cervical screening programme. This is likely to be due to the disease frequently present- Although it is suggested that inclusion cysts and benign ing late, the ovary position within the peritoneal cavity and borderline ovarian tumours may be pre-malignant, resulting in minimal local irritation, or interference with this remains speculative. Crayford et al. recently ana- vital structures until ovarian enlargement is consider- lysed follow-up data from an ovarian cancer screening able, or metastasis occurs. Seventy per cent of women trial to assess whether removal of persistent ovarian are diagnosed with stage III or IV disease, with 5-year cysts was associated with a reduction in mortality from  survivals of 15–20% and less than 5%, respectively .  ovarian cancer . No such reduction was found relative Despite an increase in understanding of the molecular to other cancers, although it is diﬃcult to interpret the events underlying malignancy, and advances in both ﬁndings in the absence of a control group, and incidence surgery and chemotherapy, the overall prognosis of may have been a more appropriate end-point than ovarian cancer has changed little over the last 30 years. mortality. In the absence of conﬁrmed pre-malignant However, women who are diagnosed at an early stage do change, screening for ovarian cancer is directed at have a signiﬁcantly improved prognosis, with survival of present to the detection of pre-clinical disease. above 80% in stage I disease, and above 90% in those  diagnosed at stage Ia . The best way of improving outcome may be, therefore, to detect the condition at an What is required from a screening test early stage, when the prognosis remains relatively good, via a screening programme. This is an exciting prospect A suitable screening test requires both high sensitivity and screening trials have shown some encouraging and speciﬁcity. Women who have a positive screen results. However, as yet screening has not been shown require further investigation, often in the form of ex- conclusively to reduce mortality from ovarian cancer. In ploratory surgery. It is therefore imperative to maximize addition, our lack of knowledge about disease progres- speciﬁcity in order to obtain a high positive predictive sion and of primary peritoneal cancer, as well as the value, and decrease the number of false-positive screens. possible surgical and psychological morbidity that may In the general population, a speciﬁcity of 99.6% is result from screening, should be considered. There are required to achieve a positive predictive value of  also, of course, cost implications. 10% , i.e. to limit the number of unnecessary surgical
Cancer Imaging – Springer Journals
Published: May 5, 2015
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.