• N. Z. Med. J. · Jan 2007

    Review

    Systematic review of the effectiveness of population screening for colorectal cancer.

    • Jane Kerr, Peter Day, Marita Broadstock, Robert Weir, and Susan Bidwell.
    • New Zealand Health Technology Assessment, Department of Public Health and General Practice, University of Otago, Christchurch.
    • N. Z. Med. J. 2007 Jan 1;120(1258):U2629.

    AimTo estimate the effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening with faecal occult blood testing (FOBT), flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS), and combinations of FOBT and FS in preventing colorectal cancer (CRC) deaths.MethodA systematic review was conducted examining randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published between 1997 and 2004 inclusive. A systematic search of Medline, Embase, Current Contents, and the Cochrane Library was undertaken. Studies that evaluated screening with FOBT, FS or combinations of FOBT and FS, were appraised. A meta-analysis of population-based trials of FOBT was conducted.ResultsFour RCTs were identified that examined FOBT screening. The three trials that investigated guaiac-based FOBT found CRC mortality was reduced in the screening group. In the two population-based trials, the pooled relative risk was 0.86 (95%CI 0.79-0.93). A fourth RCT was identified, with shorter term follow-up, which considered FOBT screening combined with FS compared with FOBT alone. No significant reduction in CRC mortality was reported in this trial.ConclusionThere is high-quality evidence showing that guaiac-based FOBT screening reduces mortality from CRC. No such evidence exists for screening with FS either alone, or in combination with FOBT, but this should be re-evaluated once data become available from four large ongoing trials.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.