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.
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.
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
80 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 129 citations in OpenAlex.
- The multifaceted impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on colorectal cancer care: a systematic review of management disruptions, stage migration, and survival outcomes.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Physical and mental health outcomes of COVID-19 induced delay in oncological care: A systematic review.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Pooled it
- Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Colorectal Cancer Screening: a Systematic Review.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2022Pooled it
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of colon capsule endoscopy accuracy for colorectal cancer screening. An alternative during the Covid-19 pandemic?Journal of medical screening · 2022Pooled it
- Systematic review: non-endoscopic surveillance for colorectal neoplasia in individuals with Lynch syndrome.Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2022Pooled it
- Faecal immunochemical test to triage patients with possible colorectal cancer symptoms: meta-analysis.The British journal of surgery · 2022Pooled it
- Long-Term Health and Economic Impacts of COVID-19 Disruptions on Bowel Cancer Inequalities in Victoria, Australia: A Modelling Study.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- The impact of extended invitation intervals on stage distribution of screen-detected and interval cancer within the Dutch colorectal cancer screening program.International journal of cancer · 2025Article
- A prospective analysis of lymph node retrieval in colorectal cancer: discrepancies, neoadjuvant impact, and practical implications.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Estimating the impact of missed colorectal cancer diagnoses on life expectancy in Minamisoma City following the 2011 triple disaster.PloS one · 2025Article
- Evidence-informed decision-making in public health in Canada: a qualitative exploration.JBI evidence implementation · 2025Article
- Article
- Impact of SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic on the Diagnosis of Cervical Cancer and Precursor Lesions-A Single-Center Retrospective Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
- Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Health Check-ups in 2021 and 2022: A Nationwide Follow-up Survey of Healthcare Facilities in Japan Society of Ningen Dock.JMA journal · 2024Article
- Screening for Colorectal Cancer: The Role of Clinical Laboratories.Clinical chemistry · 2024Article
- Article
- Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on bladder cancer patients: a multicenter real-world study.The Journal of international medical research · 2023Article
- Canadian Landscape Assessment of Colorectal Cancer Screening during the COVID-19 Pandemic.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
20 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
14 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.