ArticleGastro hep advances2022
Impact of the Sessile Serrated Polyp Pathway on Predicted Colorectal Cancer Outcomes.
Article in Gastro hep advances, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Colonoscopy Quality Indicators in Transition: From Adenoma Detection Rate to Serrated Lesion Detection and Beyond.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Approximately 20%-30% of colorectal cancers (CRCs) arise from the serrated polyp pathway. CRC screening options have differential sensitivity to detect sessile serrated polyps (SSPs). We used the Colorectal Cancer and Adenoma Incidence and Mortality Microsimulation Model (CRC-AIM) to assess how the detection of SSPs impacts predicted life years gained (LYG), CRC incidence, and CRC mortality with multitarget stool DNA (mt-sDNA) or fecal immunochemical test (FIT) screening. Methods: A simulated cohort of average-risk US individuals underwent triennial mt-sDNA or annual FIT screening between ages 45-75 years. SSP-attributed CRCs were modeled at 0% (base case), 14.3%, 20%, and 30%, in combination with 4 adherence & attendance scenarios: S1: 100% stool-screening adherence/100% follow-up colonoscopy attendance after a positive stool test; S2: reported stool-screening adherence (mt-sDNA = 71%; FIT = 43%)/100% follow-up colonoscopy attendance; S3: reported stool-screening adherence/reported follow-up colonoscopy attendance (mt-sDNA = 72%; FIT = 47%); and S4: reported stool-screening adherence/72% follow-up colonoscopy attendance. Outcomes were per 1000 individuals. Sensitivity analyses used ranges of stool-screening adherence or follow-up attendance. Results: At S1, S2, S3, and S4, LYG with FIT at the base case (0% SSP-attributed CRC) was 346.7, 279.3, 126.6, and 196.1, respectively, and with mt-sDNA was 324.6, 311.8, 215.8, and 215.8, respectively. Among the 4 adherence/attendance scenarios, modeling SSP-attributed CRCs decreased LYG by 4.9-20.9 with FIT and 2.0-5.1 with mt-sDNA. At S3 and 30% SSP-attributable CRCs, mt-sDNA had 95.1 more LYG, 21.5% greater CRC incidence reduction, and 22.2% greater CRC mortality reduction than FIT. Conclusion: Incorporating SSPs and real-world adherence into the CRC-AIM modeling analyses yielded more practice-relevant estimates of CRC screening outcomes and should be applied in future studies to afford more appropriate assessment of comparative effectiveness estimates between guideline-endorsed screening options.
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.