ArticleInternational journal of cancer2025
Potential for enhancing efficacy of screening colonoscopy by lowering starting ages and extending screening intervals: A modelling study for Germany.
Article in International journal of cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Choosing a sensible contrast makes "prevalence bias" irrelevant in screening colonoscopy trials.European journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
- Potential for enhancing efficacy of screening colonoscopy by lowering starting ages and extending screening intervals: A modelling study for Germany.International journal of cancer · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Studies aimed to evaluate the expected impact of alternative screening strategies are essential for optimizing colorectal cancer (CRC) screening offers, but such studies are lacking in Germany, where two screening colonoscopies (CS) 10 years apart are offered for men from age 50 and women from age 55. Our aim was to explore whether and to what extent the efficacy of utilizing two CS could be enhanced by alternative starting ages and screening intervals. We modeled the expected numbers of CRC cases, CRC deaths, years of potential life lost (YPLL), and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) due to CRC in hypothetical cohorts of 100,000 men and women aged 45-85 using COSIMO, a validated Markov-based multi-state simulation model. Modeled strategies included combinations of starting ages (45/50/55/60) and CS (10/15/20 years). For men, CRC deaths could be slightly reduced by extending the interval to 15 years, with a second CS at 65. YPLL and DALYs would be reduced by decreasing starting age to 45 when combined with a 15-year screening interval. For women, use of two CS at ages 50 and 65 would reduce all CRC burden parameters compared to the current earliest-use offer at 55 and 65 years. Our results suggest that lowering the starting age of screening colonoscopy to 45 for men and 50 for women, combined with extending the CS screening interval to 15 years would have the potential to enable significant reductions in years of potential life lost, and disability-adjusted life years compared to current screening offers in Germany.
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.