BACKGROUND: Early detection and treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC) is crucial for improving patient survival rates. This study aims to identify signature molecules associated with CRC, which can serve as valuable indicators for clinical hematological screening.
METHODS: We have systematically searched the Human Protein Atlas database and the relevant literature for blood protein-coding genes. The CRC dataset from TCGA was used to compare the acquired genes and identify differentially expressed molecules (DEMs). Weighted Gene Co-expression Network Analysis (WGCNA) was employed to identify modules of co-expressed molecules and key molecules within the DEMs. Signature molecules of CRC were then identified from the key molecules using machine learning. These findings were further validated in clinical samples. Finally, Logistic regression was used to create a predictive model that calculated the likelihood of CRC in both healthy individuals and CRC patients. We evaluated the model\'s sensitivity and specificity using the ROC curve.
RESULTS: By utilizing the CRC dataset, WGCNA analysis, and machine learning, we successfully identified seven signature molecules associated with CRC from 1478 blood protein-coding genes. These markers include S100A11, INHBA, QSOX2, MET, TGFBI, VEGFA and CD44. Analyzing the CRC dataset showed its potential to effectively discriminate between CRC and normal individuals. The up-regulated expression of these markers suggests the existence of an immune evasion mechanism in CRC patients and is strongly correlated with poor prognosis.
CONCLUSIONS: The combined detection of the seven signature molecules in CRC can significantly enhance diagnostic efficiency and serve as a novel index for hematological screening of CRC.

BACKGROUND: At-home colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is an effective way to reduce CRC mortality, but screening rates in medically underserved groups are low. To plan the implementation of a pragmatic randomized trial comparing two population-based outreach approaches, we conducted qualitative research on current processes and barriers to at-home CRC screening in 10 community health centers (CHCs) that serve medically underserved groups, four each in Massachusetts and California, and two tribal facilities in South Dakota.
METHODS: We conducted 53 semi-structured interviews with clinical and administrative staff at the participating CHCs. Participants were asked about CRC screening processes, categorized into eight domains: patient identification, outreach, risk assessment, fecal immunochemical test (FIT) workflows, FIT-DNA (i.e., Cologuard) workflows, referral for a follow-up colonoscopy, patient navigation, and educational materials. Transcripts were analyzed using a Rapid Qualitative Analysis approach. A matrix was used to organize and summarize the data into four sub-themes: current process, barriers, facilitators, and solutions to adapt materials for the intervention.
RESULTS: Each site\'s process for stool-based CRC screening varied slightly. Interviewees identified the importance of offering educational materials in English and Spanish, using text messages to remind patients to return kits, adapting materials to address health literacy needs so patients can access instructions in writing, pictures, or video, creating mailed workflows integrated with a tracking system, and offering patient navigation to colonoscopy for patients with an abnormal result.
CONCLUSIONS: Proposed solutions across the three regions will inform a multilevel intervention in a pragmatic trial to increase CRC screening uptake in CHCs.

UNASSIGNED: Social inequalities in colorectal cancer screening participation are evident. Barriers to screening participation include discomfort from diagnostic modalities. We aimed to describe the discomfort experienced from colonoscopy and colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) and investigate the discrepancy between expected and experienced discomfort stratified by socioeconomic status.
UNASSIGNED: A randomised controlled trial was conducted offering half of the colorectal cancer screening invitees the choice between CCE and colonoscopy after a positive faecal immunochemical test. This paper includes those who elected to undergo CCE. A positive CCE elicited referral for a therapeutic colonoscopy. Participants reported their discomfort from CCE and from any following colonoscopies in electronically distributed questionnaires. Discomfort was measured using visual analogue scales and compared between socioeconomic subgroups determined by educational level and income.
UNASSIGNED: The experienced discomfort from CCE and colonoscopy differed significantly between educational levels but not income levels. The bowel preparation contributed the most to the experienced discomfort in both CCE and colonoscopy. The discrepancy between expected and experienced discomfort from colonoscopy increased with increasing educational and income levels. A similar trend was seen in CCE between educational levels but not income levels.
UNASSIGNED: None of the results indicated a higher discomfort in lower socioeconomic subgroups. Regardless of the investigation modality, the bowel preparation was the main contributor to experienced discomfort. The discrepancy between expected and experienced discomfort did not seem to be larger in lower socioeconomic subgroups, indicating that this is not a major barrier causing inequalities in screening uptake. This is the first study investigating individual discomfort discrepancy in both CCE and colonoscopy, while being able to stratify by socioeconomic status.

OBJECTIVE: Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) is a non-invasive screening test for colorectal cancer (CRC) with high sensitivity and low risk of complications. We used a nationally representative sample of screening-eligible adults to examine trends in and factors associated with CTC use.
METHODS: We examined CTC use among 58,058 adults in the National Health Interview Survey in 2010, 2015, 2018, 2019, and 2021. For each survey year, we estimated CTC use by sociodemographic and health factors. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify factors associated with CTC use.
RESULTS: A total of 1.7 % adults reported receiving CTC across all survey years. CTC use was similar in 2010 (1.3 %), 2015 (0.8 %), 2018 (1.4 %), and 2019 (1.4 %) but increased in 2021 (3.5 %, p < 0.05). In multivariable analysis, survey year 2021 [vs. 2010, odds ratio (OR) 2.51, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.83-3.43], Hispanic (OR 1.73, 95 % CI 1.34-2.23), non-Hispanic Black (OR 2.07, 95 % CI 1.67-2.57), and household income <200 % federal poverty level (vs. >400 %, OR 1.25, 95 % CI 1.01-1.57) was associated with CTC use. Further, adults with a history of diabetes (OR 1.20, 95 % CI 1.01-1.45), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR 1.58, 95 % CI 1.25-1.99), cancer (OR 1.29, 95 % CI 1.05-1.58), or past-year hospital admissions (OR 1.44, 95 % CI 1.18-1.78) were more likely to receive CTC.
CONCLUSIONS: CTC use remained low from 2010 to 2019 but increased in 2021. CTC use was more frequent among adults with chronic health conditions, minorities, and adults with lower income, and may help reduce disparities in CRC screening.

BACKGROUND: Mobile phone-based SMS text message reminders have the potential to improve colorectal cancer screening participation rates.
OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the effectiveness and acceptability of adding targeted SMS text message reminders to the standard procedure for those who picked up but did not return their screening kit at the pharmacy within 14 days in a colorectal cancer screening program in Catalonia, Spain.
METHODS: We performed a randomized control trial among individuals who picked up a fecal immunochemical test (FIT) kit for colorectal cancer screening at the pharmacy but did not return it within 14 days. The intervention group (n=4563) received an SMS text message reminder on the 14th day of kit pick up and the control group (n=4806) received no reminder. A 30-day reminder letter was sent to both groups if necessary. The main primary outcome was the FIT completion rate within 30, 60, and 126 days from FIT kit pick up (intention-to-treat analysis). A telephone survey assessed the acceptability and appropriateness of the intervention. The cost-effectiveness of adding an SMS text message reminder to FIT completion was also performed.
RESULTS: The intervention group had higher FIT completion rates than the control group at 30 (64.2% vs 53.7%; P<.001), 60 (78.6% vs 72.0%; P<.001), and 126 (82.6% vs 77.7%; P<.001) days. Participation rates were higher in the intervention arm independent of sex, age, socioeconomic level, and previous screening behavior. A total of 339 (89.2%) interviewees considered it important and useful to receive SMS text message reminders for FIT completion and 355 (93.4%) preferred SMS text messages to postal letters. We observed a reduction of US $2.4 per participant gained in the intervention arm for invitation costs compared to the control arm.
CONCLUSIONS: Adding an SMS text message reminder to the standard procedure significantly increased FIT kit return rates and was a cost-effective strategy. SMS text messages also proved to be an acceptable and appropriate communication channel for cancer screening programs.
BACKGROUND: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04343950; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04343950.
UNASSIGNED: RR2-10.1371/journal.pone.0245806.

UNASSIGNED: We sought to examine the influence of social needs on the relationship between cancer history and colorectal cancer (CRC) screening utilization among adults in the United States.
UNASSIGNED: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis using data from the 2022 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Our outcome of interest was utilization of guideline-concordant CRC screening and exposures of interest were cancer history/levels of social needs. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to examine the association.
UNASSIGNED: Among 74,743 eligible adults, a majority did not have a personal history of cancer (87.9 %), had at least one social need (58.4 %), and had undergone CRC screening (72.2 %). In multivariable analysis, a history of cancer was positively associated with use of CRC screening (OR = 1.59, 95 %CI, 1.35 - 1.87). Having at least one social need was associated with lower likelihood of being screened (one social need: OR = 0.85 95 %CI, 0.76 - 0.95; two + social needs: OR = 0.77, 95 % CI, 0.69 - 0.87). When exploring the effects of social needs, adults without a history of cancer who reported at least one need were 12-20 % less likely to be screened for CRC.
UNASSIGNED: A personal history of cancer was associated with greater utilization of CRC screening, whilst having at least one social need had lower screening use. Having social needs plays an important role in reducing screening uptake among adults without a history of cancer. Integrated care that considers both cancer history and social needs may have implications for improved adherence of CRC screening recommendations.

UNASSIGNED: Colorectal cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States. Despite the Healthy People 2030 goal of 70.5%, colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates in Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) are suboptimal at about 40%. The Colorectal Cancer Awareness, Research, Education and Screening-Rural Expansion, Access, and Capacity for Health (CARES-REACH) study seeks to address this disparity and accelerate the adoption and utilization of effective, evidence-based CRC screening practices. This paper describes the CARES-REACH study design and implementation methods.
UNASSIGNED: Informed by a community-based participatory research (CBPR) framework and enriched by implementation science approaches, CARES-REACH features a stepped wedge design with extension for maintenance to support an implementation strategy focused on multiple levels: organizational, provider, and patient levels that entail processes to boost initial and repeat screening among average risk and age-eligible adults. This multilevel study entails the implementation of a core set of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) that include low literacy patient education (English, Spanish, and Haitian Creole language); provider education, system-wide electronic medical record (EMR) tools including provider prompts and patient reminders, FIT (fecal immunochemical test) kit distribution, plus an organization-wide cancer control champion who motivates providers, coaches and navigates patients, and monitors system-wide CRC screening activities.
UNASSIGNED: NCT04464668.

OBJECTIVE: The adenoma detection rate (ADR), recognized as a surrogate marker for colorectal cancer incidence and mortality reduction, is closely linked to the efficacy of bowel cleansing. However, there is a dearth of evidence examining the impact on ADR when employing two distinct very low-dose bowel cleansing products. This study sought to compare ADR in a fecal immunochemical occult blood testing (iFOBT) based organized screening program by utilizing 1L polyethylene glycol plus ascorbate (1L-PEGA) versus magnesium citrate plus picosulphate (SPMC), both administered in a split-dose regimen.
METHODS: We conducted a comparative, parallel, randomized, noninferiority, and low-intervention clinical trial, the study targeted individuals from a population colorectal cancer screening program aged 50-69 with a positive iFOBT result scheduled for a work-up colonoscopy in the morning. Participants were randomized to either 1L-PEGA or SPMC for bowel cleansing. Main outcome was ADR. Secondary outcomes were bowel preparation quality, individuals\' safety, tolerability and satisfaction.
RESULTS: A total of 1,002 subjects were included, 501 in each group. There were no differences between groups with respect to pooled ADR (SPMC, 56.5% [52.1-60.8]; 1L-PEGA, 53.7% [49.3-58.0]; RR 0.95 [0.85-1.06]); therefore, SPMC demonstrated noninferiority in ADR compared to 1L-PEGA (difference, 2.8%; 2-sided 95% lower confidence limit (LCL), -3.4). In addition, there were no significant differences in mean lesions regardless of size and location between arms. Bowel preparation favored 1L-PEGA (96.2% vs. 89.2%; p<0.001) whereas SPMC exhibited significantly higher safety and tolerability, as evidenced by fewer non-serious treatment-emergent adverse events CONCLUSIONS: SPMC emerged as a noninferior laxative compared to 1L-PEGA concerning ADR. Despite the superior bowel preparation quality associated with 1L-PEGA, the safety, tolerability and overall satisfaction of participants were higher with SPMC. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (EudraCT: 2019-003186-18) on March 18, 2019.

BACKGROUND: Concordance between a person\'s values and the test or treatment they ultimately receive is widely considered to be an essential outcome for good decision quality. There is little research, however, on why patients receive \"discordant\" care. A large, randomized trial of decision aids for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening provided an opportunity to assess why some patients received a different test than the one they preferred at an earlier time point.
METHODS: Of 688 patients who participated in the trial, 43 received a different CRC screening test than the one they selected after viewing a decision aid 6 mo prior. These patients answered 2 brief, open-ended questions about the reasons for this discordance. The research team analyzed their answers using qualitative description.
RESULTS: Patient responses reflected 6 major categories: barriers or risks of initially favored test, benefits of alternative test, costs or health insurance coverage, discussion with family or friends, provider factors or recommendation, and health issues.
CONCLUSIONS: Some of the patients\' explanations fit well with the informed concordance approach, which infers poor decision quality from the existence of discordant care, since in these cases it appears that the patient\'s values and preferences were not adequately respected. Other statements suggest that the patient had an informed rationale for changing their mind about which test to undergo. These cases may reflect high-quality decision making, despite the existence of discordance as measured in the trial. This analysis highlights a major challenge to a popular approach for assessing decision quality, the difficulty of normatively assessing the quality of decision making when apparent discordant care has been provided, and the need to assess patient values and preference over time.
CONCLUSIONS: Value-choice concordance is an accepted measure for assessing decision quality in decision aid trials, but greater exploration of apparently discordant care challenges key assumptions of this method; this study provides evidence that discordance as typically measured may not always reflect low-quality patient decision making.Researchers evaluating decision aids and assessing decision quality should consider the use of qualitative methods to supplement measures of decision quality and consider assessing patient preferences at multiple time points.

UNASSIGNED: Screening programs are important for the early detection of colorectal cancer, which is one of the causes of high morbidity and mortality. In this study, we investigated the colonoscopy results, the incidence of adenoma and cancer, and the relationship between test results and cancer in individuals with a positive fecal occult blood test for colorectal cancer screening.
UNASSIGNED: Within the scope of the colorectal cancer screening program, colonoscopy was requested for individuals aged 50-70 years who applied to our outpatient clinic with a positive fecal occult blood test. The results were collected and analyzed.
UNASSIGNED: The results of the colonoscopy could be obtained in only 237 (56.43%) of the 420 patients who were referred for a colonoscopy because of a positive fecal occult blood test. Colonoscopy results were normal in 15 (6.33%), benign anal disease in 64 (27%), benign colonic disease in 12 (5.06%) and polyp + adenocarcinoma in 146 (61.61%). Pathology results were benign polyp in 37 (15.61%), adenomatous polyp in 86 (36.29%) and adenocarcinoma in 23 (9.71%). Quantitative test results were higher in the adenomatous polyp + adenocarcinoma group and statistically significant (p= 0.03).
UNASSIGNED: Individuals with positive fecal occult blood tests, especially those with high quantitative test results, should be encouraged to have a colonoscopy, and they should be warned about the high probability of adenomatous polyps and colorectal cancer.