ArticleGastroenterology2019
Modifiable Failures in the Colorectal Cancer Screening Process and Their Association With Risk of Death.
Article in Gastroenterology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 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
61 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Yield of Surveillance Colonoscopy in Older Adults with a History of Polyps: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2022Pooled it
- An RCT of Fecal Immunochemical Test Colorectal Cancer Screening in Veterans Without Recent Primary Care.American journal of preventive medicine · 2020Trial
- Effect of Financial Incentives on Patient Use of Mailed Colorectal Cancer Screening Tests: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2019Trial
- Validation of a Digital Platform for Colorectal Cancer Risk Stratification and Personalized Screening Recommendations.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Article
- Article
- The Best Screening Test Is the One That Gets Followed-Up On.Gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Paid sick leave and cancer-related outcomes in the U.S. workforce: evidence from a scoping review.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2026Article
- Characterizing racial disparities in follow-up care after open-access colonoscopy.iGIE : innovation, investigation and insights · 2025Article
- From Early Detection To Advanced Therapies: How Circulating Tumor DNA Is Transforming the Care of Colorectal Cancer.Current oncology reports · 2025Review
- Fecal Occult Blood Tests for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Routine Medical Care: A Longitudinal Analysis From Germany.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2025Article
- Is a cell-free DNA blood-based test for colorectal cancer screening useful?Internal and emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Conventional screening measure does not accurately capture screening status in a minority of patients with colorectal cancer.Medicine · 2025Observational
- Article
- Fecal Immunochemical Testing for Colorectal Cancer Prevention in Two Public Hospitals.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2025Article
- Instagram Posts Promoting Colorectal Cancer Awareness: Content Analysis of Themes and Engagement During Colorectal Cancer Awareness Month.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Factors Influencing the Choice Between Multi-Target Stool DNA and Colonoscopy for Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Alaska Native Peoples.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Analysis of the burden of colorectal cancer attributable to high body mass index in 204 countries and regions worldwide from 1990 to 2021.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- Serum biomarkers REG1A and REG3A combined with the traditional CEA represent a novel nomogram for the screening and risk stratification of colorectal cancer.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025Article
- Closing the Gap: Approaches to Improving Colorectal Surgery Care for the Uninsured and Underinsured.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2025Review
- Examining Racial Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Screening and the Role of Online Medical Record Use: Findings From a Cross-Sectional Study of a National Survey.JMIR cancer · 2024Article
1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND &
aimsColorectal cancer (CRC) deaths occur when patients do not receive screening or have inadequate follow-up of abnormal results or when the screening test fails. We have few data on the contribution of each to CRC-associated deaths or factors associated with these events.
methodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study of patients in the Kaiser Permanente Northern and Southern California systems (55-90 years old) who died of CRC from 2006 through 2012 and had ≥5 years of enrollment before diagnosis. We compared data from patients with those from a matched cohort of cancer-free patients in the same system. Receipt, results, indications, and follow-up of CRC tests in the 10-year period before diagnosis were obtained from electronic databases and chart audits.
resultsOf 1750 CRC deaths, 75.9% (n = 1328) occurred in patients who were not up to date in screening and 24.1% (n = 422) occurred in patients who were up to date. Failure to screen was associated with fewer visits to primary care physicians. Of 3486 cancer-free patients, 44.6% were up to date in their screening. Patients who were up to date in their screening had a lower risk of CRC death (odds ratio, 0.38; 95% confidence interval, 0.33-0.44). Failure to screen, or failure to screen at appropriate intervals, occurred in a 67.8% of patients who died of CRC vs 53.2% of cancer-free patients; failure to follow-up on abnormal results occurred in 8.1% of patients who died of CRC vs 2.2% of cancer-free patients. CRC death was associated with higher odds of failure to screen or failure to screen at appropriate intervals (odds ratio, 2.40; 95% confidence interval, 2.07-2.77) and failure to follow-up on abnormal results (odds ratio, 7.26; 95% confidence interval, 5.26-10.03).
conclusionsBeing up to date on screening substantially decreases the risk of CRC death. In 2 health care systems with high rates of screening, most people who died of CRC had failures in the screening process that could be rectified, such as failure to follow-up on abnormal findings; these significantly increased the risk for CRC death.
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.