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
Observational Study
. 2024 Apr 1;7(4):e245295.
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.5295.

Colorectal Cancer Screening After Sequential Outreach Components in a Demographically Diverse Cohort

Affiliations
Observational Study

Colorectal Cancer Screening After Sequential Outreach Components in a Demographically Diverse Cohort

Clara Podmore et al. JAMA Netw Open. .

Abstract

Importance: Organized screening outreach can reduce differences in colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality between demographic subgroups. Outcomes associated with additional outreach, beyond universal outreach, are not well known.

Objective: To compare CRC screening completion by race and ethnicity, age, and sex after universal automated outreach and additional personalized outreach.

Design, setting, and participants: This observational cohort study included screening-eligible individuals aged 50 to 75 years assessed during 2019 in a community-based organized CRC screening program within the Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) integrated health care delivery setting. For KPNC members who are not up to date with screening by colonoscopy, each year the program first uses automated outreach (mailed prescreening notification postcards and fecal immunochemical test [FIT] kits, automated telephone calls, and postcard reminders), followed by personalized components for nonresponders (telephone calls, electronic messaging, and screening offers during office visits). Data analyses were performed between November 2021 and February 2023 and completed on February 5, 2023.

Exposures: Completed CRC screening via colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, or FIT.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of participants completing an FIT or colonoscopy after each component of the screening process. Differences across subgroups were assessed using the χ2 test.

Results: This study included 1 046 745 KPNC members. Their mean (SD) age was 61.1 (6.9) years, and more than half (53.2%) were women. A total of 0.4% of members were American Indian or Alaska Native, 18.5% were Asian, 7.2% were Black, 16.2% were Hispanic, 0.8% were Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and 56.5% were White. Automated outreach significantly increased screening participation by 31.1%, 38.1%, 29.5%, 31.9%, 31.8%, and 34.5% among these groups, respectively; follow-up personalized outreach further significantly increased participation by absolute additional increases of 12.5%, 12.4%, 13.3%, 14.4%, 14.7%, and 11.2%, respectively (all differences P < .05 compared with White members). Overall screening coverage at the end of the yearly program differed significantly among members who were American Indian or Alaska Native (74.1%), Asian (83.5%), Black (77.7%), Hispanic (76.4%), or Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander (74.4%) compared with White members (82.2%) (all differences P < .05 compared with White members). Screening completion was similar by sex; older members were substantially more likely to be up to date with CRC screening both before and at the end of the screening process.

Conclusions and relevance: In this cohort study of a CRC screening program, sequential automated and personalized strategies each contributed to substantial increases in screening completion in all demographic groups. These findings suggest that such programs may potentially reduce differences in CRC screening completion across demographic groups.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Selby reported receiving grants from the Swiss Cancer Research Foundation and the Foundation Leenaards during the conduct of the study. Dr Levin reported receiving grants from the National Cancer Institute (NCI) during the conduct of the study and other research support from Freenome Inc outside the submitted work. Dr Schottinger reported receiving grants from the NCI Population-Based Research to Optimize the Screening Process (PROSPR) consortium during the conduct of the study. Dr Doubeni reported receiving grants from the National Institutes of Health and NCI and royalties from UpToDate for author topics on colorectal cancer outside the submitted work. Dr Corley reported receiving grants from the NCI during the conduct of the study. No other disclosures were reported.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. Kaiser Permanente Northern California Colorectal Cancer Screening Program Process via Automated and Personalized Components and Corresponding Measures of Screening Completion
FIT indicates fecal immunochemical test.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.. Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening Completion via Automated and Personalized Components by Race and Ethnicity Among Kaiser Permanente Northern California Members in 2019
Up to date indicates the proportion of members not eligible for a fecal immunochemical test (FIT) that year because, as of January 1, they had completed a colonoscopy within the last 9 years or sigmoidoscopy within the last 5 years. Automated indicates the proportion of members who completed a FIT within 56 days of FIT kit mailing; they received a prescreening notification postcard by mail (7 days prior), FIT kit by mail, robocall (28 days after kit mailing), and postcard reminder (42 days after kit mailing). Personalized indicates the proportion of members who completed a FIT, colonoscopy, or sigmoidoscopy outside of the 56-day window after FIT kit mailing, presumably linked to a telephone call, electronic message, in-clinic reminder, or contact with a health care professional.

Comment in

References

    1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Goding Sauer A, et al. . Colorectal cancer statistics, 2020. CA Cancer J Clin. 2020;70(3):145-164. doi:10.3322/caac.21601 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Doubeni CA, Corley DA, Zhao W, Lau Y, Jensen CD, Levin TR. Association between improved colorectal screening and racial disparities. N Engl J Med. 2022;386(8):796-798. doi:10.1056/NEJMc2112409 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Dougherty MK, Brenner AT, Crockett SD, et al. . Evaluation of interventions intended to increase colorectal cancer screening rates in the United States: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Intern Med. 2018;178(12):1645-1658. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.4637 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rice K, Sharma K, Li C, Butterly L, Gersten J, DeGroff A. Cost-effectiveness of a patient navigation intervention to increase colonoscopy screening among low-income adults in New Hampshire. Cancer. 2019;125(4):601-609. doi:10.1002/cncr.31864 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Meenan RT, Coronado GD, Petrik A, Green BB. A cost-effectiveness analysis of a colorectal cancer screening program in safety net clinics. Prev Med. 2019;120:119-125. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2019.01.014 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources