MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3190466620 · doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2025.103445

The descriptive epidemiology of age at colorectal cancer diagnosis in Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W3190466620 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Nicholas Matovu, Helen G. Coleman, Ines Mesa‐Eguiagaray, Evropi Τheodoratou, Charlene M. McShane

Bibliographic record

VenueEClinicalMedicine · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCentre for Public Health, Queen's University BelfastQueen's UniversityQueen's University BelfastDepartment for the Economy
KeywordsMeta-analysisColorectal cancerEpidemiologyDescriptive statisticsMedicineCancerOncologyInternal medicineStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The optimal age for introducing colorectal cancer (CRC) screening remains controversial especially in low-and middle-income countries, where evidence is limited, and the CRC incidence appears to be gradually increasing. In this systematic review, we aimed to summarise the age profile of CRC cases at diagnosis on the African continent to inform the most appropriate age for CRC screening initiation. Methods: Four electronic databases: MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science were searched using relevant subject headings and keywords from 1 January 2012 to 22 September 2023. The third volume of the African Cancer Registry Network (AFCRN) report was also included. Studies of African populations reporting the age profiles of representative CRC patient populations were eligible for inclusion. Random effects meta-analysis was used to pool mean age at CRC diagnosis, and the proportions of early-onset CRC (EOCRC); <40 and <50 years old. Age-specific incidence rates and proportions of EOCRC were calculated from the AFCRN report. The study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020187538. Findings: Eighty-seven (87) studies reporting on 72,204 CRC cases from 24 African countries were included. The pooled mean age at CRC diagnosis was 53.5 years, with significant regional variations observed. The pooled proportion of EOCRC cases diagnosed <40 years old was 21% (95% confidence interval (CI): 18%-25%; n = 44 studies) and 38% for those <50 years old (95% CI 35%-41%; n = 41 studies). Estimated proportions of EOCRC from published studies and the AFCRN report were comparable. Interpretation: Whereas the incidence of CRC is still low in Africa, there is younger age at diagnosis and an overall high proportion of EOCRC. Future CRC screening programs on the continent may need to consider a lower CRC screening age compared to that used in Western countries where EOCRC appears to be less common. Funding: This work was funded by the Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences (FMHLS), Queen's University Belfast and the Department for the Economy, Northern Ireland in support of the doctoral degree of N.M.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.741
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.264
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.192 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEClinicalMedicineSame topicColorectal Cancer Screening and DetectionFrench-language works237,207