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
. 2015:2015:326728.
doi: 10.1155/2015/326728. Epub 2015 Oct 4.

Developments in Screening Tests and Strategies for Colorectal Cancer

Affiliations
Review

Developments in Screening Tests and Strategies for Colorectal Cancer

Justin L Sovich et al. Biomed Res Int. 2015.

Abstract

Background: Worldwide, colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer in men and second most common in women. It is the fourth most common cause of cancer mortality. In the United States, CRC is the third most common cause of cancer and second most common cause of cancer mortality. Incidence and mortality rates have steadily fallen, primarily due to widespread screening.

Methods: We conducted keyword searches on PubMed in four categories of CRC screening: stool, endoscopic, radiologic, and serum, as well as news searches in Medscape and Google News.

Results: Colonoscopy is the gold standard for CRC screening and the most common method in the United States. Technological improvements continue to be made, including the promising "third-eye retroscope." Fecal occult blood remains widely used, particularly outside the United States. The first at-home screen, a fecal DNA screen, has also recently been approved. Radiological methods are effective but seldom used due to cost and other factors. Serum tests are largely experimental, although at least one is moving closer to market.

Conclusions: Colonoscopy is likely to remain the most popular screening modality for the immediate future, although its shortcomings will continue to spur innovation in a variety of modalities.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Ferlay J., Shin H.-R., Bray F., Forman D., Mathers C., Parkin D. M. Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008. International Journal of Cancer. 2010;127(12):2893–2917. doi: 10.1002/ijc.25516. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Siegel R., Desantis C., Jemal A. Colorectal cancer statistics, 2014. CA: Cancer Journal for Clinicians. 2014;64(2):104–117. doi: 10.3322/caac.21220. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Honein-AbouHaidar G. N., Kastner M., Vuong V., et al. Benefits and barriers to participation in colorectal cancer screening: a protocol for a systematic review and synthesis of qualitative studies. BMJ Open. 2014;4(2) doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004508.e004508 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. SEER Stat Fact Sheets: Colon and Rectum Cancer, http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/colorect.html.
    1. Colorectal Cancer Alarm: Rates Rising in Young Adults, 2014, http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/834452.

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources