Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2005;35(2):104-40.

[Prevention of colorectal cancer]

[Article in Spanish]
Affiliations
  • PMID: 16127987
Review

[Prevention of colorectal cancer]

[Article in Spanish]
Ubaldo Alfredo Gualdrini et al. Acta Gastroenterol Latinoam. 2005.

Abstract

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer death in Argentina. The cumulative lifetime risk of developing CRC for both men and women is 4-6%. Despite advances in the management of this disease, the 5-year survival rate is about 60% because only 35% of patients are diagnosed when the disease is localized. Risk factors for CRC include age, diet and life style factors, personal or family history of adenomas or CRC and personal history of inflammatory bowel disease. Scientific evidence shows that primary and secondary prevention, through screening programs, permit to reduce incidence and mortality significantly. Chemopreventive agents, including nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, folate, and calcium, have been shown to have some preventive effect. Physical inactivity and excess body weight are consistent risk factors for CRC. Tobacco exposure, diet high in red meat and low in vegetables and alcohol consumption, probably in combination with a diet low in folate, appear to increase risk. The dietary fiber and risk of CRC has been studied but the results are still inconclusive. Screening for CRC is cost-effective compared with no screening, but a single optimal strategy cannot be determined from the currently available data. The advantages and disadvantages or limitations of screening modalities for CRC are analyzed. The literature and clinical practice guidelines are reviewed, with an emphasis on advances and evolving screening methods and recommendations for patients with average, moderate and high-risk CRC.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by