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
. 2023 Jul 16:35:102325.
doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2023.102325. eCollection 2023 Oct.

Personalised colorectal cancer screening strategies: Information needs of the target population

Esther Toes-Zoutendijk  1 , Lucie de Jonge  1 , Emilie C H Breekveldt  1   2 , Ida J Korfage  1 , Juliet A Usher-Smith  3 , Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar  1 , Rebecca A Dennison  3
Affiliations

Personalised colorectal cancer screening strategies: Information needs of the target population

Esther Toes-Zoutendijk et al. Prev Med Rep. .

Abstract

Prior faecal Hemoglobin (f-Hb) concentrations of a negative fecal immunochemical test (FIT) can be used for risk stratification in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Individuals with higher f-Hb concentrations may benefit from a shorter screening interval (1 year), whereas individuals with undetectable f-Hb concentrations could benefit from a longer screening interval (3 year). Individuals' views on personalised CRC screening and information needed to make a well-informed decision is unknown. We conducted three semi-structured focus groups among individuals eligible for CRC screening (i.e. men and women aged 55 to 75) in the Netherlands. Thematic analysis was used to analyse participants' information need on personalised CRC screening strategies. Fourteen individuals took part. The majority were positive about CRC screening and indicated that they would participate in personalised CRC screening. The rationale for a longer interval among those at lowest risk was, however, unclear for many. The preferred information on individual risk was variable: ranging from full information to only information on the personalised strategy without mentioning the risk. It was not possible to address everyone's need with a single approach. Additional communications, e.g. public media campaigns, billboards, videos on social media, were also suggested as necessary. This study showed that preferences on receiving information on individual CRC risk varied substantially and no consensus was reached. Introducing a personalised screening programme will require careful communication, particularly around the rationale for the strategy, and a layered approach to deliver information.

Keywords: Cancer risk; Colorectal cancer; Information need; Information provision; Participation; Personalised cancer screening.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Summary of main themes and sub-themes of the focus groups on information needs on personalised risk in CRC screening. Abbreviations: CRC, colorectal cancer; GP, general practitioner.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Braun V., Clare V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101.
    1. Breekveldt E.C.H., Toes-Zoutendijk E., Van de Schootbrugge-Vandermeer H.J., et al. Factors Associated With Interval Colorectal Cancer after Negative FIT: Results of Two Screening Rounds in the Dutch FIT-based CRC Screening Program. Int. J. Cancer. 2023;152(8):1536–1546. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Breekveldt E.C.H., Toes-Zoutendijk E., de Jonge L., et al. Personalized colorectal cancer screening: Study protocol of a mixed-method study on the effectiveness of tailored intervals based on prior f-Hb concentration in a FIT-based program. 2023;23(1):45. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cairns J.M., Greenley S., Bamidele O., Weller D. A scoping review of risk-stratified bowel screening: current evidence, future directions. Cancer Causes Control. 2022;33(5):653–685. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Degeling C., Barratt A., Aranda S., et al. Should women aged 70–74 be invited to participate in screening mammography? A report on two Australian community juries. BMJ Open. 2018;8 - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources