Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31152198›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2019

Screening flexible sigmoidoscopy versus colonoscopy for reduction of colorectal cancer mortality.

Cynthia W Ko, V Paul Doria-Rose, Michael J Barrett, Aruna Kamineni, Lindsey Enewold, Noel S Weiss

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Colorectal Cancer: Risk Factors, Novel Approaches in Molecular Screening and Treatment.International journal of molecular and cellular medicine · 2025
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Management of high and low risk malignant polyps: a population-wide analysis.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2023
    Article
  6. Nanotechnology for colorectal cancer detection and treatment.World journal of gastroenterology · 2022
    Review
  7. Optimal Strategies for Colorectal Cancer Screening.Current treatment options in oncology · 2022
    Review
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

6 authors.

Cynthia W KoDepartment of Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA. cwko@u.washington.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7107-3683
V Paul Doria-RoseNational Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Michael J BarrettInformation Management Services, Inc., Calverton, MD, USA.
Aruna KamineniKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA.
Lindsey EnewoldNational Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Noel S WeissDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Funding

Effectiveness of screening for colorectal cancer in average risk adults: Colonoscopy vs. FITR01CA213645 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI CORLEY, DOUGLAS ALLEN, DOUBENI, CHYKE ABADAMA · 2017 to 2021
$3.2M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA213645NIH HHS HHSN261201600596P
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeColonoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy are both recommended colorectal cancer (CRC) screening strategies, but their relative effectiveness is unclear. We sought to evaluate the ability of each of these two modalities to reduce CRC mortality.

methodsWe conducted a case-control study using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database. Cases were persons aged 70-85 years who died of CRC and were matched to up to three non-CRC controls. Receipt of endoscopy was ascertained from Medicare claims and endoscopy indication assigned using a validated algorithm. Conditional logistic regression models were developed to estimate the association between screening colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy and CRC mortality. We conducted secondary analyses by race, sex, and endoscopist characteristics, and with varying duration of the look-back period.

resultsIn the initial analysis using all available look-back years, screening flexible sigmoidoscopy was associated with a 35% reduction in CRC mortality (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.48, 0.89), while screening colonoscopy was associated with a 74% reduction (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.23, 0.30). Sigmoidoscopy was not associated with any reduction in proximal CRC mortality. The association between colonoscopy and reduced CRC mortality was stronger in the distal than the proximal colon. Results were similar in analyses using a 5-year look-back period.

conclusionsScreening colonoscopy was associated with greater reductions in CRC mortality than screening sigmoidoscopy, and with a greater reduction in the distal than the proximal colon. These results provide additional information on the relative benefits of screening for CRC with sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy.

Indexed as

SigmoidoscopyAgedAged, 80 and overColorectal NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMaleMass ScreeningMedicarePliabilitySEER ProgramUnited StatesCase-control studiesColonoscopyColorectal neoplasmMass screeningSigmoidoscopy

Identifiers

PMID31152198
PMCPMC7071949

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.