Author Interviews, BMJ, Cancer Research, Colon Cancer, Psychological Science / 09.03.2016
Screening For Colorectal Cancer Not Linked To Psychological Harm
[caption id="attachment_22507" align="alignleft" width="164"]
Benedicte Kirkøen[/caption]
MedicalResearch.com Interview with:
Benedicte Kirkøen, PhD candidate
Bowel Cancer Screening in Norway – a pilot study
Cancer Registry of Norway (Kreftregisteret)
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study?
Response: Randomised controlled trials have demonstrated that screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) can reduce CRC related mortality, but the total benefit and harm of national cancer screening programmes are under debate. Saving relatively few lives requires a large number of people to be screened. Most people who attend screening will never develop cancer, but may be exposed to potential psychological stress by participation. Cancer is one of the largest threats to peoples’ health, and participating in screening for cancer might therefore cause anxiety.
In Norway, colorectal cancer incidence has nearly tripled since the 1950s, and currently a large randomised pilot study of a national screening programme (Bowel Cancer Screening in Norway) is investigating the effect of screening on reduction in CRC incidence and mortality. As part of an evaluation of the benefits and harms of the pilot, we investigated the psychological effect of screening participation in a large group of participants. Of particular interest to us were participants who received a positive screening result and were referred to colonoscopy.
Benedicte Kirkøen[/caption]
MedicalResearch.com Interview with:
Benedicte Kirkøen, PhD candidate
Bowel Cancer Screening in Norway – a pilot study
Cancer Registry of Norway (Kreftregisteret)
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study?
Response: Randomised controlled trials have demonstrated that screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) can reduce CRC related mortality, but the total benefit and harm of national cancer screening programmes are under debate. Saving relatively few lives requires a large number of people to be screened. Most people who attend screening will never develop cancer, but may be exposed to potential psychological stress by participation. Cancer is one of the largest threats to peoples’ health, and participating in screening for cancer might therefore cause anxiety.
In Norway, colorectal cancer incidence has nearly tripled since the 1950s, and currently a large randomised pilot study of a national screening programme (Bowel Cancer Screening in Norway) is investigating the effect of screening on reduction in CRC incidence and mortality. As part of an evaluation of the benefits and harms of the pilot, we investigated the psychological effect of screening participation in a large group of participants. Of particular interest to us were participants who received a positive screening result and were referred to colonoscopy.




Dr. NaNa Keum[/caption]
Dr. Veenstra[/caption]
MedicalResearch.com Interview with:
Christine Veenstra MD
Clinical Lecturer, Internal Medicine
Medical Oncology
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5343
MedicalResearch: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings?
Dr. Veenstra: Patients with cancer face many costs and incur financial burden as they go through diagnosis and treatment. For working patients, cancer diagnosis and treatment may come with the additional burden of time away from work, lost income, and even long-term job loss. Although 40% of US workers do not have access to paid sick leave, we hypothesized that availability of paid sick leave could reduce the need to take unpaid time away from work during cancer treatment and might therefore be associated with job retention and reduced personal financial burden.
In a survey of over 1300 patients with Stage III colorectal cancer, we found that only 55% of those who were employed at the time of their cancer diagnosis retained their jobs. Working patients with paid sick leave were nearly twice as likely to retain their jobs compared with working patients who did not have paid sick leave. This held true even when controlling for income, education and health insurance. Furthermore, working patients without paid sick reported significantly higher personal financial burden than those who had paid sick leave available.
Dr. Franco Radaelli[/caption]
MedicalResearch.com Interview with:
Dr Franco Radaelli
Division of Digestive Endoscopy and Gastroenterology
Valduce Hospital
Como, Italy
Medical Research: What is the background for this study?
Dr. Radaelli: Split regimens of bowel preparation are strongly recommended by European and American Guidelines as they have been associated with a higher level of colon cleansing. However, there is still uncertainty on whether the higher level of cleansing associated with a split regimen also results in a higher proportion of subjects with at least one adenoma (adenoma detection rate, ADR), that represents by far a more relevant quality indicator than the level of cleansing itself.
On this background, we designed a randomized investigator-blinded controlled trial to evaluate whether a “split regimen” of low-volume 2-L PEG-ascorbate solution was superior to the traditional “full dose, the day before regimen” in terms of ADR. Differently from other studies on bowel preparation, we considered adenoma detection rate instead of the level of colon cleansing, the primary study end-point, and we designed the sample size accordingly. A precise estimation of the sample size was facilitated by including an homogeneous population of asymptomatic subjects undergoing first colonoscopy after positive-FIT within CRC organized screening program. Besides, ADR represents a very solid end-point due to the very low inter-pathology variability in the differential diagnosis between neoplastic and non-neoplastic lesions, while the assessment of the level of cleansing is hampered by unavoidable degree of subjectivity and higher degree of inter-operator variability.
Dr. Grovaert[/caption]
MedicalResearch.com Interview with:
Johannes Govaert MD
Department of Surgery
Leiden University Medical Center
Leiden, The Netherlands
Medical Research: What is the background for this study?
Dr. Govaert: The Value Based Health Care agenda ofPprof. Porter (Harvard Business School) suggests that focus in healthcare should shift from reducing costs to improving quality: where quality of healthcare improves, cost reduction will follow. One of the cornerstones of potential cost reduction, as mentioned by Porter, could be availability of key clinical data on processes and outcomes of care. Despite the important societal and economical role the healthcare system fulfils, it still lags behind when it comes to standardised reporting processes. With the introduction of the Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit (DSCA) in 2009, robust quality information became available enabling monitoring, evaluation and improvement of surgical colorectal cancer care in the Netherlands. Since the introduction of the DSCA postoperative morbidity and mortality declined.
Primary aim of this study was to investigate whether improving quality of surgical colorectal cancer care, by using a national quality improvement initiative, leads to a reduction of hospital costs. Detailed clinical data was obtained from the 2010-2012 population-based Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit. Costs at patient-level were measured uniformly in all 29 participating hospitals and based on Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing.
Medical Research: What are the main findings?
Dr. Govaert: Over three consecutive years (2010-2012) severe complications and mortality after colorectal cancer surgery respectively declined with 20% and 29%. Simultaneously, costs during primary admission decreased with 9% without increase in costs within the first 90 days after discharge. Moreover, an inverse relationship (at hospital level) between severe complication rate and hospital costs was identified among the 29 participating hospitals. Hospitals with increasing severe complication rates (between 2010 and 2012) were associated with increasing costs whereas hospitals with declining severe complication rates were associated with cost reduction.
Dr. Weir[/caption]
MedicalResearch.com Interview with:
Hannah K. Weir, PhD, MSc
Senior Epidemiologist
CDC
Medical Research: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings?
Dr. Weir: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the leading causes of cancer related deaths in the United States.
We know that the risk of dying from colorectal cancer is not the same across all communities – people living in poorer communities have a higher risk of dying from 













