Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38300621›Full record

SynthesisJAMA network open2024

Colorectal Cancer Screening Programs in Latin America: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Eleazar E Montalvan-Sanchez, Dalton A Norwood, Michael Dougherty, Renato Beas, Maria Guranizo-Ortiz, Miriam Ramirez-Rojas, Douglas R Morgan, Thomas F Imperiale

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in JAMA network open, 2024. 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
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Emerging trends in the global burden of colorectal cancer.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2026
    Review
  2. Patterns ofJournal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Cancer mortality predictions for 2025 in Latin America with focus on prostate cancer.European journal of cancer prevention : the official journal of the European Cancer Prevention Organisation (ECP) · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Eleazar E Montalvan-SanchezDepartment of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis.
Dalton A NorwoodDivision of Preventive Medicine, The University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham.
Michael DoughertyDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.
Renato BeasDepartment of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis.
Maria Guranizo-OrtizDepartment of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis.
Miriam Ramirez-RojasDepartment of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis.
Douglas R MorganDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, The University of Alabama at Birmingham.
Thomas F ImperialeDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Indiana University, Indianapolis.
Indiana University School of MedicineUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham · USIndiana University Health · USIndiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

Tumor Immunology and Microenvironment Research ProgramP30CA068485 · NCI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI Ben Ho Park · 1995 to 2026
$172.8M
Project 3 - Molecular Signatures of Gastric Carcinogenesis in the Host Response to H. pyloriP01CA028842 · NCI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI WILSON, KEITH T. · 1985 to 2019
$15.8M
Targeted chemoprevention of gastric carcinogenesis in high risk populationsR01CA190612 · NCI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI MORGAN, DOUGLAS, WILSON, KEITH T. · 2014 to 2018
$3.0M
Gastric Cancer Epidemiology Initiative in Central AmericaK07CA125588 · NCI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI MORGAN, DOUGLAS · 2007 to 2011
$680k
NCI NIH HHS K07 CA125588NCI NIH HHS P01 CA028842NCI NIH HHS P30 CA068485NCI NIH HHS R01 CA190612
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality globally, with increasing incidence and mortality in Latin America. CRC screening programs can reduce disease burden, but information on screening programs in Latin America is limited. Objective: To describe characteristics (eg, type of program, uptake, neoplastic yield) of CRC screening programs in Latin America. Data Sources: PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection, LILACS, and SciELO were searched from inception to February 2023. Relevant references from bibliographies, conference proceedings, and gray literature were considered. The search strategy included English, Spanish, and Portuguese terms. Study Selection: Included were studies of CRC screening programs in Latin America using fecal immunochemical test (FIT) or colonoscopy as the primary screening method. Four reviewers independently assessed study eligibility based on titles, with review of abstracts and full texts as needed. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Guidelines from Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) were followed for data abstraction and quality assessment. Descriptive information was extracted, and data were pooled using a random-effects model. Main outcomes and Measures: Program performance indicators included rates of participation and FIT positivity, adenoma detection rate (ADR), advanced adenoma detection rate (AADR), CRC detection rate, and colonoscopy quality indicators. Results: There were 17 studies included from upper middle-income and high-income countries in Latin America with a total of 123 929 participants. Thirteen studies used FIT as the initial screening method, whereas 4 used screening colonoscopy. The participation rate in FIT-based programs was 85.8% (95% CI, 78.5%-91.4%). FIT positivity rates were 15.2% (95% CI, 9.6%-21.8%) for the 50-ng/mL threshold and 9.7% (95% CI, 6.8%-13.0%) for the 100-ng/mL threshold. For FIT-based studies, the pooled ADR was 39.0% (95% CI, 29.3%-49.2%) and CRC detection rate was 4.9% (95% CI, 2.6%-7.9%); for screening colonoscopy-based studies, the pooled ADR was 19.9% (95% CI, 15.5%-24.8%) and CRC detection rate was 0.4% (95% CI, 0.1%-0.8%). Conclusions and Relevance: This systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that CRC screening in upper middle-income countries in Latin America is feasible, detecting rates of neoplasia comparable with those of high-income regions. Population-based screening programs should be developed or enhanced in these settings. There is a knowledge gap regarding feasibility and yield of screening programs in lower middle-income countries.

Indexed as

AdenomaColorectal NeoplasmsColonoscopyEarly Detection of CancerHumansLatin America

Identifiers

PMID38300621
PMCPMC10835514
OpenAlexW4391430730

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.