Joanne E. Schottinger

Fecal Immunochemical Test Program Performance Over 4 Rounds of Annual Screening: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Context The fecal immunochemical test is an effective way to screen for colorectal cancer, but we know more about how well it does the first time it is used and less about how well it does in later years with repeated testing. Contribution The researchers show that, after 4 years of repeated testing, patients continued to use the test and it continued to identify colorectal cancer. Caution This study did not measure whether identification of cancer changed outcomes. Implication The fecal immunochemical test is acceptable and effective for repeated testing. Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States (13), and screening with fecal occult blood tests (FOBTs) reduces CRC incidence and mortality (46). In randomized trials (711), annual or biennial guaiac-based FOBTs reduced CRC incidence by 17% to 20% and CRC mortality by 15% to 33%. Thus, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (4) and U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer (12) recommend annual FOBT as an option for CRC screening for average-risk patients, defined as those aged 50 to 75 years with no history of CRC or adenoma, with no first-degree relatives with CRC, and who are not up to date with CRC screening according to other methods (that is, sigmoidoscopy within 5 years or colonoscopy within 10 years). Annual highly sensitive FOBTs are believed to be as effective as screening colonoscopy performed every 10 years if levels of adherence are high (13), although colonoscopy is recommended for those with a family history of CRC. Fecal blood tests are noninvasive and can be delivered by mail (14). In contrast to guaiac-based stool tests, fecal immunochemical test (FIT) screening can be done without dietary or medication restrictions, which allows it to achieve higher patient acceptance in organized CRC screening programs (15). This test also has higher detection rates for CRC and advanced adenomas than guaiac-based stool tests (1517). In a recent meta-analysis (18), the sensitivity of a single FIT application was 79% for CRC diagnosed within 2 years of testing; however, little is known about performance characteristics over several rounds of annual screening, particularly in community practice. The present study was conducted to evaluate FIT sensitivity for CRC and other performance characteristics over 4 rounds of annual testing in a U.S. community-based CRC screening program. Methods Study Population This retrospective longitudinal study was performed in a fixed cohort of Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) and Southern California (KPSC) health plan members. These integrated health care delivery organizations serve approximately 7 million persons in urban, suburban, and semirural regions throughout California. Kaiser Permanente health plan membership in California is diverse and similar in socioeconomic characteristics to the regions census demographics (1921). Study Oversight The study was approved by the institutional review boards of KPNC and KPSC, both of which waived the requirement for informed consent. The listed authors had sole responsibility for the study design, data collection, decision to submit the manuscript for publication, and drafting of the manuscript. This study was conducted within the National Cancer Institutefunded Population-based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens (PROSPR) consortium, which conducts multisite, coordinated, transdisciplinary research to evaluate and improve cancer-screening processes. Organized CRC Screening Program The KPNC and KPSC initiated similar organized FIT screening programs between 2006 and 2008; the KPNC program has been described previously (14). Briefly, each year, the programs mail a FIT kit to eligible health plan members aged 50 to 75 years without a record of a colonoscopy within 10 years, sigmoidoscopy within 5 years, or fecal blood test within the prior year. The kit includes the FIT (OC FIT-CHEK; Polymedco), a standardized letter from the patients primary care provider, directions for completing and mailing the test, and a preprinted laboratory requisition order form. Outreach includes in-person, mail, secure e-mail, and telephone reminders as needed. The kits are returned by mail to regional laboratories and analyzed on or shortly after the return date using an OC-Sensor Diana automated system (Polymedco) with a cutoff level of 20 g of hemoglobin/g of buffer for a positive result. Patients with a positive FIT result are referred for follow-up colonoscopy. Study Eligibility Criteria and Participant Tracking The study cohort included CRC screening program participants aged 50 to 70 years on the date an initial kit was mailed to them in 2007 or 2008. Patients were excluded if they had been enrolled in the health plan for less than 1 year before the round 1 FIT mail date (to allow for the recording of prior out-of-system endoscopy procedures). They were also excluded if they were mailed a kit but subsequently had sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy, were diagnosed with CRC, died, or terminated membership in the health plan before returning the initial FIT or within 1 year after their round 1 mail date if no FIT was returned. A total of 670841 health plan members was mailed the initial kit in 2007 or 2008 and met the study eligibility criteria; 323349 (48.2%) returned a FIT within 1 year after the mail date (Figure). The analytic cohort comprised these round 1 participants who were tracked from their baseline mail date (cohort entry) through up to 4 rounds of testing for mail dates; result dates; results (positive or negative); whether follow-up colonoscopy was performed within 1 year after a positive FIT result; and diagnoses of adenoma, adenoma with advanced histology, and CRC. Cohort members were followed for CRC through the follow-up screening rounds, even if they subsequently became ineligible for screening because of sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy. Patients were censored at the time of CRC diagnosis, death, or termination of membership in the health plan if they did not rejoin. Figure. Study flow diagram.* The figure includes 1192 patients with CRC who were screened by FIT the year before diagnosis. Further, there were 118 additional patients with CRC diagnosed more than 1 y beyond the FIT screening date and 101 additional patients diagnosed with CRC who either crossed over to endoscopy in subsequent rounds or terminated health plan membership but then rejoined. CRC = colorectal cancer; FIT = fecal immunochemical test. * Shading indicates where patients were censored or became ineligible for subsequent FIT screening. Patients were eligible for the initial FIT mailing if they were aged 50 to 70 y and had 1 y of membership. See Methods section for exclusions. Number censored because of CRC and includes patients with CRC diagnosed within 1 y after their FIT result. Defining Annual Screening Episodes For each patient, the initial kit mail date in 2007 or 2008 was the anchor date for round 1 and for each subsequent round of testing. However, because subsequent mailing dates varied each round, mail dates within 3 months before to 12 months after each subsequent rounds anchor date were counted as having been distributed during that specific round. For example, a patient with a round 1 mail date of 15 March 2007 had subsequent anchor dates of 15 March for rounds 2 through 4 (2008, 2009, and 2010, respectively). If their next FIT was mailed on 15 January 2008, the test was considered to be distributed in round 2 because the second mail date occurred within 3 months of the round 2 anchor date. The FIT results recorded within 1 year of each mail date, and colonoscopies performed and adenomas or CRC diagnosed within 1 year after FIT results, were considered part of a single screening episode for the round when the FIT was distributed. Among round 1 participants, FITs with no recorded mail dates returned in rounds 2 through 4 were assumed to be distributed through in-reach methods (such as a clinic visit) and were counted in the follow-up round returned. In general, the first result per patient was counted in any given round. The earliest possible date of cohort entry (first mail date) was 1 January 2007, and the last possible date of follow-up was 31 December 2013 (12 months after the last possible FIT result date of 31 December 2012). Data Sources The FIT-related dates and results were obtained from the CRC screening program and laboratory databases for each region, respectively. Endoscopy procedures were identified using Current Procedural Terminology codes (22). Adenoma diagnoses used Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine codes. Prior validation studies have confirmed high levels of sensitivity and accuracy for capture of colonoscopy examinations and assignment of adenoma status (23). Colorectal adenocarcinomas and disease stage were obtained from the KPNC and KPSC cancer registries, which report to the SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results) registry. Cancer databases capture more than 98% of cancer diagnoses within the KPNC and KPSC populations. Advanced-stage cancer was defined as stage III (regional disease with spread to regional lymph nodes only) or stage IV (distant metastasis) according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system; for patients who did not have such staging, advanced-stage cancer was defined as code 3 (disease in the regional lymph nodes), code 4 (regional disease with direct extension and spread to regional lymph nodes), or code 7 (distant metastasis) according to the SEER Program Coding and Staging Manual 2013 (24). Data Analysis The following performance characteristics were calculated for each round of screening and overall: 1) participation (percentage of eligible patients who were distributed and completed a FIT within 1 year of their mailing date), 2) FIT positivity (percentage of participants who completed FITs and had positive results), 3) follow-up colonoscopy (per

Association Between Exposure to Topical Tacrolimus or Pimecrolimus and Cancers

Background: The Food and Drug Administration has issued a public health advisory regarding cancer risk from topical calcineurin inhibitors. Objective: To compare the rates of cancer among patients with common dermatologic conditions who were exposed or not exposed to topical calcineurin inhibitors. Methods: A retrospective cohort observational study used data from an integrated healthcare delivery system on 953,064 subjects with diagnoses of atopic dermatitis or eczema between 2001 and December 2004. The main endpoint was initial cancer diagnosis. Chart review was performed to confirm cancer diagnosis in the subjects exposed to topical calcineurin inhibitors when any particular cancer rate was at least 3 times higher than that in unexposed subjects. Data were analyzed using the Cox proportional hazards model. Results: Age- and sex-adjusted hazard ratios for all cancers were 0.93 (95% CI 0.81 to 1.07; p = 0.306) for tacrolimus-exposed versus -unexposed subjects and 1.15 (95% CI 0.99 to 1.31; p = 0.054) for pimecrolimus-exposed versus -unexposed subjects. T-cell lymphoma was the only cancer associated with a significantly increased risk among subjects exposed to tacrolimus (HR = 5.04, 95% CI 2.39 to 10.63; p < 0.001) or pimecrolimus (HR = 3.76, 95% CI 1.71 to 8.28; p = 0.010). Subsequent chart review of subjects in the exposed group with T-cell lymphoma found that 4 of 16 had skin lesions that were suspected to be the early lesions of T-cell lymphoma prior to exposure to tacrolimus or pimecrolimus. After these 4 cases were excluded, the age and sex hazard ratio for T-cell lymphoma was 5.44 (95% CI 2.51 to 11.79; p < 0.001) for tacrolimus and 2.32 (95% CI 0.89 to 6.07; p = 0.086) for pimecrolimus. There was no statistically significantly increased risk for other subgroups of cancer, including melanoma. Conclusions: Exposure to topical tacrolimus or pimecrolimus was not associated with an increase in the overall cancer rate. Use of topical tacrolimus may be associated with an increased risk of T-cell lymphoma.

Time to colonoscopy after positive fecal blood test in four U.S. health care systems

Background: To reduce colorectal cancer mortality, positive fecal blood tests must be followed by colonoscopy. Methods: We identified 62,384 individuals ages 50 to 89 years with a positive fecal blood test between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2012 in four health care systems within the Population-Based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens (PROSPR) consortium. We estimated the probability of follow-up colonoscopy and 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the Kaplan–Meier method. Overall differences in cumulative incidence of follow-up across health care systems were assessed with the log-rank test. HRs and 95% CIs were estimated from multivariate Cox proportional hazards models. Results: Most patients who received a colonoscopy did so within 6 months of their positive fecal blood test, although follow-up rates varied across health care systems (P <0.001). Median days to colonoscopy ranged from 41 (95% CI, 40–41) to 174 (95% CI, 123–343); percent followed-up by 12 months ranged from 58.1% (95% CI, 51.6%–63.7%) to 83.8% (95% CI, 83.4%–84.3%) and differences across health care systems were also observed at 1, 2, 3, and 6 months. Increasing age and comorbidity score were associated with lower follow-up rates. Conclusion: Individual characteristics and health care system were associated with colonoscopy after positive fecal blood tests. Patterns were consistent across health care systems, but proportions of patients receiving follow-up varied. These findings suggest that there is room to improve follow-up of positive colorectal cancer screening tests. Impact: Understanding the timing of colonoscopy after positive fecal blood tests and characteristics associated with lack of follow-up may inform future efforts to improve follow-up. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 25(2); 344–50. ©2016 AACR.

Variation in Adenoma Detection Rate and the Lifetime Benefits and Cost of Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Microsimulation Model.

IMPORTANCE Colonoscopy is the most commonly used colorectal cancer screening test in the United States. Its quality, as measured by adenoma detection rates (ADRs), varies widely among physicians, with unknown consequences for the cost and benefits of screening programs. OBJECTIVE To estimate the lifetime benefits, complications, and costs of an initial colonoscopy screening program at different levels of adenoma detection. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Microsimulation modeling with data from a community-based health care system on ADR variation and cancer risk among 57,588 patients examined by 136 physicians from 1998 through 2010. EXPOSURES Using modeling, no screening was compared with screening initiation with colonoscopy according to ADR quintiles (averages 15.3%, quintile 1; 21.3%, quintile 2; 25.6%, quintile 3; 30.9%, quintile 4; and 38.7%, quintile 5) at ages 50, 60, and 70 years with appropriate surveillance of patients with adenoma. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Estimated lifetime colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, number of colonoscopies, complications, and costs per 1000 patients, all discounted at 3% per year and including 95% confidence intervals from multiway probabilistic sensitivity analysis. RESULTS In simulation modeling, among unscreened patients the lifetime risk of colorectal cancer incidence was 34.2 per 1000 (95% CI, 25.9-43.6) and risk of mortality was 13.4 per 1000 (95% CI, 10.0-17.6). Among screened patients, simulated lifetime incidence decreased with lower to higher ADRs (26.6; 95% CI, 20.0-34.3 for quintile 1 vs 12.5; 95% CI, 9.3-16.5 for quintile 5) as did mortality (5.7; 95% CI, 4.2-7.7 for quintile 1 vs 2.3; 95% CI, 1.7-3.1 for quintile 5). Compared with quintile 1, simulated lifetime incidence was on average 11.4% (95% CI, 10.3%-11.9%) lower for every 5 percentage-point increase of ADRs and for mortality, 12.8% (95% CI, 11.1%-13.7%) lower. Complications increased from 6.0 (95% CI, 4.0-8.5) of 2777 colonoscopies (95% CI, 2626-2943) in quintile 1 to 8.9 (95% CI, 6.1-12.0) complications of 3376 (95% CI, 3081-3681) colonoscopies in quintile 5. Estimated net screening costs were lower from quintile 1 (US

Identifying primary and recurrent cancers using a SAS-based natural language processing algorithm

2.1 million, 95% CI,

Tamoxifen and Antidepressant Drug Interaction in a Cohort of 16,887 Breast Cancer Survivors.

1.8-

Association Between Time to Colonoscopy After a Positive Fecal Test Result and Risk of Colorectal Cancer and Cancer Stage at Diagnosis

2.4 million) to quintile 5 (US

Metformin and breast and gynecological cancer risk among women with diabetes

1.8 million, 95% CI,

Cardiovascular Disease After Aromatase Inhibitor Use.

1.3-

Effectiveness of aromatase inhibitors and tamoxifen in reducing subsequent breast cancer

2.3 million) due to averted cancer treatment costs. Results were stable across sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this microsimulation modeling study, higher adenoma detection rates in screening colonoscopy were associated with lower lifetime risks of colorectal cancer and colorectal cancer mortality without being associated with higher overall costs. Future research is needed to assess whether increasing adenoma detection would be associated with improved patient outcomes.