Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29752577›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of epidemiology2018

Flexible sigmoidoscopy in colorectal cancer screening: implications of different colonoscopy referral strategies.

Tobias Niedermaier, Korbinian Weigl, Michael Hoffmeister, Hermann Brenner

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of epidemiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Observational
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Heparan Sulfate Proteoglycans in Human Colorectal Cancer.Analytical cellular pathology (Amsterdam) · 2018
    Review
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Tobias NiedermaierDivision of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Im Neuenheimer Feld 581, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Korbinian WeiglDivision of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Im Neuenheimer Feld 581, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Michael HoffmeisterDivision of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Im Neuenheimer Feld 581, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Hermann BrennerDivision of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Im Neuenheimer Feld 581, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. h.brenner@dkfz.de.
Heidelberg University · DEGerman Cancer Research Center · DE

Funding

Central Research Institute of Ambulatory Health Care in Germany 108230Central Research Institute of Ambulatory Health Care in Germany 110553German Federal Ministry of Education and Research 01GL 1712
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening reduces colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. Its potential to detect proximal neoplasms depends on colonoscopy referral. We estimated diagnostic performance of sigmoidoscopy using 12 different referral criteria in detecting colorectal cancer and advanced adenomas. Colonoscopy results from 14,947 participants of screening colonoscopy in Germany were used to derive sensitivity of sigmoidoscopy for colorectal cancer, advanced adenomas (AAs), and any advanced neoplasms in the proximal colon. It was assumed that FS detects the same neoplasms as colonoscopy within its reach and that distal neoplasms would be followed by colonoscopy. In addition, numbers of colonoscopies needed (NCN) to detect one proximal advanced neoplasm were calculated. The most advanced findings during colonoscopy were colorectal cancer in 213 subjects (1.4%), AA in 1539 subjects (10.2%) and non-advanced adenomas in 2988 subjects (19.8%). Without colonoscopy referral, overall sensitivities for any colorectal cancer, advanced adenoma and any advanced neoplasm (proximal or distal) would be 79, 65 and 66%, respectively. These sensitivities could be increased to up to 86, 83 and 84% by the referral strategies investigated. Compared to referral due to advanced adenomas, referral due to non-advanced adenomas would substantially increase the NCN at a modest gain in sensitivity. Sensitivities were higher and NCNs were lower in men than in women for every strategy. In conclusion, colonoscopy referral can substantially increase sensitivity of sigmoidoscopy-based screening, but the gain by referral due to non-advanced adenomas substantially increases NCN compared to referral due to advanced neoplasms only. Major sex differences may call for sex-specific referral strategies.

Indexed as

AgedColonoscopyColorectal NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerFemaleGermanyHumansIncidenceMaleMiddle AgedReferral and ConsultationReproducibility of ResultsSigmoidoscopyColonoscopy referralColorectal neoplasiaDetectionScreening

Identifiers

PMID29752577
PMCPMC5968045
OpenAlexW2799307716

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.