ArticleUnited European gastroenterology journal2016
Interval cancers in a national colorectal cancer screening programme.
Article in United European gastroenterology journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sex variation in colorectal cancer mortality: trends and implications for screening.European journal of public health · 2023Article
- The Impact of a Six-Year Existing Screening Programme Using the Faecal Immunochemical Test in Flanders (Belgium) on Colorectal Cancer Incidence, Mortality and Survival: A Population-Based Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Faecal haemoglobin concentrations in women and men diagnosed with colorectal cancer in a national screening programme.Journal of medical screening · 2022Article
- Screen-detected and interval colorectal cancers in England: Associations with lifestyle and other factors in women in a large UK prospective cohort.International journal of cancer · 2019Article
- Interval cancers after negative immunochemical test compared to screen and non-responders' detected cancers in Slovenian colorectal cancer screening programme.Radiology and oncology · 2018Article
- Colorectal and interval cancers of the Colorectal Cancer Screening Program in the Basque Country (Spain).World journal of gastroenterology · 2017Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLittle is known about interval cancers (ICs) in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening.
objectiveThe purpose of this study was to identify IC characteristics and compare these with screen-detected cancers (SCs) and cancers in non-participants (NPCs) over the same time period.
designThis was an observational study done in the first round of the Scottish Bowel Screening Programme. All individuals (772,790), aged 50-74 years, invited to participate between 1 January 2007 and 31 May 2009 were studied by linking their screening records with confirmed CRC records in the Scottish Cancer Registry (SCR). Characteristics of SC, IC and NPC were determined.
resultsThere were 555 SCs, 502 ICs and 922 NPCs. SCs were at an earlier stage than ICs and NPCs (33.9% Dukes' A as against 18.7% in IC and 11.3% in NPC), screening preferentially detected cancers in males (64.7% as against 52.8% in IC and 59.7% in NPC): this was independent of a different cancer site distribution in males and females. SC in the colon were less advanced than IC, but not in the rectum.
conclusionICs account for 47.5% of the CRCs in the screened population, indicating approximately 50% screening test sensitivity: guaiac faecal occult blood testing (gFOBT) sensitivity is less for women than for men and gFOBT screening may not be effective for rectal cancer.
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.