Conventional screening measure does not accurately capture screening status in a minority of patients with colorectal cancer
- PMID: 40696574
- PMCID: PMC12282814
- DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000043593
Conventional screening measure does not accurately capture screening status in a minority of patients with colorectal cancer
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening uptake in the Veterans Health Administration (VA) has been reported to be higher than the US general population, but CRC remains a prevalent cancer within the VA system. To examine CRC predictors and the extent to which the conventional definition of up-to-date screening applies to the population, we conducted a case-control study using VA data from 2012 to 2018. We classified patients into 5 categories: up-to-date or not up-to-date average-risk patients aged 50 to 75 (Categories 1 and 2), up-to-date or not up-to-date average-risk patients aged <50 or >75 (Categories 3 and 4), and high-risk patients (Category 5). Each CRC case was matched by age, sex, and facility with 4 controls. We performed multivariable conditional logistic regression, adjusting for race and ethnicity, diabetes, obesity, and alcohol use. Among 3714 CRC cases identified, Category 4 (odds ratio [OR] 1.40, 95% CI 1.11-1.78) and Category 5 (OR 6.23, 95% CI 5.06-7.66) patients had a higher risk of CRC compared to Category 1 patients. Compared with White patients, Black patients had a higher risk (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.37-1.73). Diabetes (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.51-1.81) and alcohol use disorder (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.35-1.73) were also associated with CRC. Most CRC cases occurred in individuals aged 50 to 75, but 12.5% occurred in persons who were outside of this age range or had high-risk personal or family history. The conventional measure of CRC screening, focused on average-risk individuals aged 50 to 75, does not reflect screening status in an important minority of CRC patients.
Keywords: Veteran; colorectal cancer; screening.
Copyright © 2025 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.
Similar articles
-
Chemoprevention of colorectal cancer: systematic review and economic evaluation.Health Technol Assess. 2010 Jun;14(32):1-206. doi: 10.3310/hta14320. Health Technol Assess. 2010. PMID: 20594533
-
Housing Status and Cancer Screening in US Veterans.J Gen Intern Med. 2025 May;40(6):1297-1305. doi: 10.1007/s11606-024-09098-7. Epub 2025 Feb 26. J Gen Intern Med. 2025. PMID: 40011415
-
Masculinity and colorectal cancer screening: a cross-sectional study of men attending state fairs in Minnesota and Wisconsin.Ann Behav Med. 2025 Jan 4;59(1):kaaf040. doi: 10.1093/abm/kaaf040. Ann Behav Med. 2025. PMID: 40448935
-
Disparities in Uptake of the 2021 US Preventive Services Task Force Colorectal Cancer Screening Recommendations Among Adults Aged 45 to 49 Years.Dis Colon Rectum. 2025 Aug 1;68(8):1010-1016. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000003789. Epub 2025 Apr 29. Dis Colon Rectum. 2025. PMID: 40300645
-
Falls prevention interventions for community-dwelling older adults: systematic review and meta-analysis of benefits, harms, and patient values and preferences.Syst Rev. 2024 Nov 26;13(1):289. doi: 10.1186/s13643-024-02681-3. Syst Rev. 2024. PMID: 39593159 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Use of colorectal cancer screening tests | CDC. 2023. https://gis.cdc.gov/Cancer/USCS/#/screening-and-risk-factors/cancer-scre....
-
- VHA reports and measures portal (RAMP). VHA national colorectal cancer screening ages 50-75, FY 2004-2017. 2018. http://vharamp.vssc.med.va.gov/Pages/results.aspx?k=eprp.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical