Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33548185›Full record

ArticleThe lancet. Gastroenterology & hepatology2021

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on faecal immunochemical test-based colorectal cancer screening programmes in Australia, Canada, and the Netherlands: a comparative modelling study.

Lucie de Jonge, Joachim Worthington, Francine van Wifferen, Nicolas Iragorri, Elisabeth F P Peterse, Jie-Bin Lew, Marjolein J E Greuter, Heather A Smith, Eleonora Feletto, Jean H E Yong and 4 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in The lancet. Gastroenterology & hepatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 80 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
80citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
10.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

80 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 129 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

20 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Lucie de JongeDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands. Electronic address: l.dejonge.3@erasmusmc.nl.
Joachim WorthingtonCancer Research Division, Cancer Council NSW, Woolloomooloo, NSW, Australia; School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Francine van WifferenDepartment of Epidemiology and Data Science, Decision Modelling Center, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Nicolas IragorriCanadian Partnership against Cancer, Toronto, ON, Canada; Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Elisabeth F P PeterseDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Jie-Bin LewCancer Research Division, Cancer Council NSW, Woolloomooloo, NSW, Australia; School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Marjolein J E GreuterDepartment of Epidemiology and Data Science, Decision Modelling Center, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Heather A SmithTelfer School of Management, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Eleonora FelettoCancer Research Division, Cancer Council NSW, Woolloomooloo, NSW, Australia; School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Jean H E YongCanadian Partnership against Cancer, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Karen CanfellCancer Research Division, Cancer Council NSW, Woolloomooloo, NSW, Australia; School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia; University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Veerle M H CoupéDepartment of Epidemiology and Data Science, Decision Modelling Center, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Iris Lansdorp-VogelaarDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
COVID-19 and Cancer Global Modelling Consortium working group 2
Amsterdam University Medical Centers · NLErasmus MC · NLCanadian Partnership Against Cancer · CACancer Council NSW · AUUniversity of Sydney · AUUniversity of Ottawa · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundColorectal cancer screening programmes worldwide have been disrupted during the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to estimate the impact of hypothetical disruptions to organised faecal immunochemical test-based colorectal cancer screening programmes on short-term and long-term colorectal cancer incidence and mortality in three countries using microsimulation modelling.

methodsIn this modelling study, we used four country-specific colorectal cancer microsimulation models-Policy1-Bowel (Australia), OncoSim (Canada), and ASCCA and MISCAN-Colon (the Netherlands)-to estimate the potential impact of COVID-19-related disruptions to screening on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality in Australia, Canada, and the Netherlands annually for the period 2020-24 and cumulatively for the period 2020-50. Modelled scenarios varied by duration of disruption (3, 6, and 12 months), decreases in screening participation after the period of disruption (0%, 25%, or 50% reduction), and catch-up screening strategies (within 6 months after the disruption period or all screening delayed by 6 months).

findingsWithout catch-up screening, our analysis predicted that colorectal cancer deaths among individuals aged 50 years and older, a 3-month disruption would result in 414-902 additional new colorectal cancer diagnoses (relative increase 0·1-0·2%) and 324-440 additional deaths (relative increase 0·2-0·3%) in the Netherlands, 1672 additional diagnoses (relative increase 0·3%) and 979 additional deaths (relative increase 0·5%) in Australia, and 1671 additional diagnoses (relative increase 0·2%) and 799 additional deaths (relative increase 0·3%) in Canada between 2020 and 2050, compared with undisrupted screening. A 6-month disruption would result in 803-1803 additional diagnoses (relative increase 0·2-0·4%) and 678-881 additional deaths (relative increase 0·4-0·6%) in the Netherlands, 3552 additional diagnoses (relative increase 0·6%) and 1961 additional deaths (relative increase 1·0%) in Australia, and 2844 additional diagnoses (relative increase 0·3%) and 1319 additional deaths (relative increase 0·4%) in Canada between 2020 and 2050, compared with undisrupted screening. A 12-month disruption would result in 1619-3615 additional diagnoses (relative increase 0·4-0·9%) and 1360-1762 additional deaths (relative increase 0·8-1·2%) in the Netherlands, 7140 additional diagnoses (relative increase 1·2%) and 3968 additional deaths (relative increase 2·0%) in Australia, and 5212 additional diagnoses (relative increase 0·6%) and 2366 additional deaths (relative increase 0·8%) in Canada between 2020 and 2050, compared with undisrupted screening. Providing immediate catch-up screening could minimise the impact of the disruption, restricting the relative increase in colorectal cancer incidence and deaths between 2020 and 2050 to less than 0·1% in all countries. A post-disruption decrease in participation could increase colorectal cancer incidence by 0·2-0·9% and deaths by 0·6-1·6% between 2020 and 2050, compared with undisrupted screening.

interpretationAlthough the projected effect of short-term disruption to colorectal cancer screening is modest, such disruption will have a marked impact on colorectal cancer incidence and deaths between 2020 and 2050 attributable to missed screening. Thus, it is crucial that, if disrupted, screening programmes ensure participation rates return to previously observed rates and provide catch-up screening wherever possible, since this could mitigate the impact on colorectal cancer deaths.

fundingCancer Council New South Wales, Health Canada, and Dutch National Institute for Public Health and Environment.

Indexed as

COVID-19Early Detection of CancerOccult BloodAgedAustraliaCanadaColorectal NeoplasmsHumansIncidenceMiddle AgedNetherlands

Identifiers

PMID33548185
PMCPMC9767453
OpenAlexW3126319313

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.