Risk factors and clinical consequences of interval cancers arising within faecal immunochemical testing-based colorectal cancer screening programme
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes aim to detect early, asymptomatic cancers and improve survival. This study aimed to establish the proportion of interval cancers, and the consequences with regard to stage, clinical outcome, and overall survival. Risk factors associated with interval CRCs were investigated. METHODS: The Scottish Bowel Screening Programme uses faecal immunochemical testing at a threshold of 80 µg haemoglobin per g as a positive trigger for investigation. Screening was offered to all eligible individuals in one region, from November 2017 to October 2021. Cancer registries were cross-checked to ensure complete capture of all cancers including interval CRCs. The primary outcome was rate of interval CRCs among participants with follow-up of 24 months, and its relationship to faecal immunochemical testing results, clinical variables, stage, time to diagnosis, and survival. The secondary outcome was identification of risk factors associated with interval CRCs. RESULTS: The Scottish Bowel Screening Programme generated 316 583 tests during the study period. Participation was 71.0% of the eligible population (212 664 patients); it was greater among women (71.9 versus 70.0%; P < 0.001) and in higher socioeconomic areas (76.9 versus 58.6%; P < 0.001). In the screened population, 546 CRCs were diagnosed within 2 years of screening. Some 289 of these patients (52.9%) had positive bowel screening. There were 257 patients with interval CRCs, who waited a median of 13 (interquartile range 7-20) months for diagnosis. Of CRCs diagnosed, 24.9% had screening faecal immunochemical test results of < 10 µg haemoglobin per g. The interval CRC rate was greater in women, older patients, and among the least socioeconomically deprived. Interval CRCs were associated with worse 2-year all-cause mortality than screen-detected CRCs (23.0 versus 10.8%; P < 0.001). Importantly, 121 of the 257 interval CRCs (47.1%) had detectable faecal immunochemical test results at 10-79 µg haemoglobin per g. CONCLUSION: Patients with interval CRCs and a detectable faecal immunochemical test result below the predetermined threshold appear to be significantly disadvantaged with respect to stage at presentation and survival. Almost half of interval CRCs diagnosed within 2 years had detectable haemoglobin on screening faecal immunochemical test and would be a target for lower positivity thresholds.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".