ReviewCancer2016
Understanding the contribution of family history to colorectal cancer risk and its clinical implications: A state-of-the-science review.
Review in Cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT06242197 (Comparing the Effectiveness of Written Advice VS. Standard Verbal Advice in Transferring Knowledge to First Degree Relatives of Colorectal Cancer Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 96 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Comparing the Effectiveness of Written Advice VS. Standard Verbal Advice in Transferring Knowledge to First Degree Relatives of Colorectal Cancer Patients
Who cites it
96 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Updated European guidelines for clinical management of familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), MUTYH-associated polyposis (MAP), gastric adenocarcinoma, proximal polyposis of the stomach (GAPPS) and other rare adenomatous polyposis syndromes: a joint EHTG-ESCP revision.The British journal of surgery · 2024Guideline
- Mapping psychosocial interventions in familial colorectal cancer: a rapid systematic review.BMC cancer · 2022Pooled it
- Systematic review with meta-analysis: the effects of family history on the risk of Barrett's oesophagus and oesophageal adenocarcinoma.Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2021Pooled it
- Colorectal neoplasms in melanosis coli: a survey in Japan and a worldwide meta-analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2021Pooled it
- Early-Age Onset Colorectal Neoplasia in Average-Risk Individuals Undergoing Screening Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Gastroenterology · 2021Pooled it
- Colorectal cancer screening for patients with a family history of colorectal cancer or adenomas.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2019Pooled it
- Colorectal Cancer Screening: Recommendations for Physicians and Patients from the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2017Guideline
- Trial
- Invitation to Screening Colonoscopy in the Population at Familial Risk for Colorectal Cancer.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2018Trial
- Evaluation of an online family history tool for identifying hereditary and familial colorectal cancer.Familial cancer · 2018Trial
- Leveraging Minimal Variables for Maximal Screening Yield: A Global Equity Perspective on Colorectal Cancer Risk Stratification.International journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Developing and Calibrating a Colorectal Cancer Microsimulation Model for Northern Ireland.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Article
- Awareness and knowledge of colon cancer risk factors and preventive behaviors: A cross-sectional study.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2025Article
- Actual and Perceived Risk of Colorectal Neoplasia in First-Degree Relatives of Patients with Colorectal Cancer.Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Screening the Siblings: Advancing Colon Cancer Prevention by Identifying Advanced Polyps.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2025Article
- Novel colorectal cancer screening methods - opportunities and challenges.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2025Review
- Phenome-wide association study identifies multiple traits associated with a polygenic risk score for colorectal cancer.Human genomics · 2025Article
- Observational
- Prevalence of Screening Colonoscopy among the First-Degree Relatives of Patients with Colorectal Cancer and Related Factors.Middle East journal of digestive diseases · 2025Article
- The Impact of Age on Preferences for Colorectal Cancer Surveillance Strategies: Are Fecal Immunochemical Tests FIT for Surveillance?Cancer medicine · 2025Article
36 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Erratum issuedErratum.2017
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Persons with a family history (FH) of colorectal cancer (CRC) or adenomas that are not due to known hereditary syndromes have an increased risk for CRC. An understanding of these risks, screening recommendations, and screening behaviors can inform strategies for reducing the CRC burden in these families. A comprehensive review of the literature published within the past 10 years has been performed to assess what is known about cancer risk, screening guidelines, adherence and barriers to screening, and effective interventions in persons with an FH of CRC and to identify FH tools used to identify these individuals and inform care. Existing data show that having 1 affected first-degree relative (FDR) increases the CRC risk 2-fold, and the risk increases with multiple affected FDRs and a younger age at diagnosis. There is variability in screening recommendations across consensus guidelines. Screening adherence is <50% and is lower in persons under the age of 50 years. A provider's recommendation, multiple affected relatives, and family encouragement facilitate screening; insufficient collection of FH, low knowledge of guidelines, and poor family communication are important barriers. Effective interventions incorporate strategies for overcoming barriers, but these have not been broadly tested in clinical settings. Four strategies for reducing CRC in persons with familial risk are suggested: 1) improving the collection and utilization of the FH of cancer, 2) establishing a consensus for screening guidelines by FH, 3) enhancing provider-patient knowledge of guidelines and communication about CRC risk, and 4) encouraging survivors to promote screening within their families and partnering with existing screening programs to expand their reach to high-risk groups. Cancer 2016. © 2016 American Cancer Society. Cancer 2016;122:2633-2645. © 2016 American Cancer Society.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.