Choice of colon capsule or colonoscopy versus default colonoscopy in FIT positive patients in the Danish screening programme: a parallel group randomised controlled trial

结肠镜检查 医学 结直肠癌 胶囊内镜 内科学 随机对照试验 丹麦语 胃肠病学 结直肠癌筛查 内窥镜检查 癌症 语言学 哲学
作者
Gunnar Baatrup,Thomas Bjørsum‐Meyer,Lasse Kaalby,Benedicte Schelde‐Olesen,Morten Kobæk-Larsen,Anastasios Koulaouzidis,Rasmus Krøijer,Issam Al‐Najami,Niels Buch,Anders Høgh,Niels Qvist,Marianne Kirstine Thygesen,Ulrik Deding
出处
期刊:Gut [BMJ]
卷期号:: gutjnl-333687
标识
DOI:10.1136/gutjnl-2024-333687
摘要

Background Colonoscopy is among the standard tests for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. However, uptake varies, and alternatives such as colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) are available. The uptake and detection rate of clinically significant neoplasia with CCE, compared with colonoscopy, remain unclear in this setting. Objective The primary objective of this study was to compare the detection rates of advanced neoplasia between CCE and colonoscopy, using a pathway in which the study group could choose between the two procedures, while the control group was offered only colonoscopy. Design A randomised, intention-to-treat trial was conducted among Danish CRC screening participants who tested positive with a faecal immunochemical test (FIT). The trial compared the detection rate of advanced neoplasia (primary outcome) and the uptake rate of both approaches between the two arms. Results A total of 473 684 invitations were sent to 396 676 individuals, with 62.6% returning the test. Among them, 11 075 tests were positive (4.5%), with no significant differences between the two study groups. Among FIT-positive cases, the uptake for colonoscopy was 91.1% in the control arm and 91.7% in the study arm, where participants had a choice of methods. In the study arm, 45.8% preferred CCE, 11.4% preferred colonoscopy and 42.8% had no preference and underwent colonoscopy. Ultimately, 69.9% of patients who initially opted for CCE were later referred for colonoscopy. The rate of advanced neoplasia detection was similar between the groups: 0.67% in the study arm versus 0.64% in the control arm. Conclusion Offering CCE as an alternative to colonoscopy did not significantly alter the detection rate of advanced neoplasia, nor did it increase uptake in a screening programme with high adherence to colonoscopy following a positive FIT test. Instead, it led to a very high rate of secondary colonoscopies. Therefore, CCE cannot be recommended in this setting. Trial registration number NCT04049357 (ClinicalTrials.gov)

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
科研通AI5应助小ZZ采纳,获得10
1秒前
4秒前
香蕉觅云应助hyg采纳,获得10
7秒前
塔吉普雷克矛盾体完成签到,获得积分10
8秒前
田様应助给好评采纳,获得10
8秒前
lbt发布了新的文献求助30
8秒前
8秒前
9秒前
9秒前
维恰完成签到 ,获得积分10
12秒前
maodianandme发布了新的文献求助10
12秒前
香蕉醉柳发布了新的文献求助10
13秒前
zln发布了新的文献求助10
14秒前
melenda发布了新的文献求助10
14秒前
15秒前
hyg完成签到,获得积分20
18秒前
hyg发布了新的文献求助10
20秒前
安详的断缘完成签到,获得积分10
22秒前
24秒前
香蕉醉柳完成签到,获得积分10
27秒前
27秒前
melody发布了新的文献求助10
29秒前
烟花应助时光采纳,获得10
31秒前
给好评发布了新的文献求助10
32秒前
隐形曼青应助暴躁的香氛采纳,获得10
32秒前
李健应助失眠的耳机采纳,获得10
32秒前
科研通AI5应助zln采纳,获得10
34秒前
38秒前
41秒前
自然书桃发布了新的文献求助10
43秒前
今天学习了吗完成签到 ,获得积分10
45秒前
小马甲应助waa采纳,获得10
45秒前
46秒前
46秒前
maodianandme发布了新的文献求助10
48秒前
失眠的耳机完成签到,获得积分10
51秒前
时光发布了新的文献求助10
52秒前
科研通AI2S应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
53秒前
上官若男应助科研通管家采纳,获得30
53秒前
科研通AI5应助科研通管家采纳,获得30
53秒前
高分求助中
【此为提示信息,请勿应助】请按要求发布求助,避免被关 20000
ISCN 2024 – An International System for Human Cytogenomic Nomenclature (2024) 3000
Continuum Thermodynamics and Material Modelling 2000
Encyclopedia of Geology (2nd Edition) 2000
105th Edition CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics 1600
Maneuvering of a Damaged Navy Combatant 650
the MD Anderson Surgical Oncology Manual, Seventh Edition 300
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 工程类 有机化学 物理 生物化学 纳米技术 计算机科学 化学工程 内科学 复合材料 物理化学 电极 遗传学 量子力学 基因 冶金 催化作用
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 3777469
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 3322795
关于积分的说明 10211853
捐赠科研通 3038215
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 1667163
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 797990
科研通“疑难数据库(出版商)”最低求助积分说明 758133