ReviewThe British journal of radiology2016
CT colonography for population screening of colorectal cancer: hints from European trials.
Review in The British journal of radiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Imaging alternatives to colonoscopy: CT colonography and colon capsule. European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) Guideline - Update 2020.European radiology · 2021Guideline
- Patients' experience of screening CT colonography with reduced and full bowel preparation in a randomised trial.European radiology · 2019Trial
- Bowel Preparation Burden, Rectal Pain and Abdominal Discomfort: Perspective of Participants Undergoing CT Colonography and Colonoscopy.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2024Article
- Social Determinants of Health in Imaging-based Cancer Screening: A Case-based Primer with Strategies for Care Improvement.Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc · 2023Article
- CT colonography: can we achieve an adequate bowel preparation without diet restriction?European radiology · 2023Article
- The role of deep learning in diagnosing colorectal cancer.Przeglad gastroenterologiczny · 2023Review
- Colorectal Cancer Screening with Computed Tomography Colonography: Single Region Experience in Kazakhstan.Clinical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Computed tomography colonography and radiation risk: How low can we go?World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2021Review
- Cost analysis of colorectal cancer screening with CT colonography in Italy.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2018Article
- Review of radiological screening programmes for breast, lung and pancreatic malignancy.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2018Review
- Colorectal Cancer Screening: The Role of Psychological, Social and Background Factors in Decision-making Process.Clinical practice and epidemiology in mental health : CP & EMH · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
CT colonography (CTC) is a minimally invasive radiological investigation of the colon. Robust evidence indicates that CTC is safe, well tolerated and highly accurate for the detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) and large polyps, which are the targets of screening. Randomized controlled trials were carried out in Europe to evaluate CTC as the primary test for population screening of CRC in comparison with faecal immunochemical test (FIT), sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy. Main outcomes were participation rate and detection rate. Participation rate for screening CTC was in the range of 25-34%, whereas the detection rate of CTC for CRC and advanced adenoma was in the range of 5.1-6.1%. Participation for CTC screening was lower than that for FIT, similar to that for sigmoidoscopy and higher than that for colonoscopy. The detection rate of CTC was higher than that of one FIT round, similar to that of sigmoidoscopy and lower than that of colonoscopy. However, owing to the higher participation rate in CTC screening with respect to colonoscopy screening, the detection rates per invitee of CTC and colonoscopy would be comparable. These results justify consideration of CTC in organized screening programmes for CRC. However, assessment of other factors such as polyp size threshold for colonoscopy referral, management of extracolonic findings and, most importantly, the forthcoming results of cost-effectiveness analyses are crucial to define the role of CTC in primary screening.
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.