Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology 11/2017

01-11-2017 | Original Article – Clinical Oncology

Clinical utility of a blood-based protein assay to increase screening of elevated-risk patients for colorectal cancer in the primary care setting

Authors: John Peabody, David Paculdo, Eric Swagel, Steven Fugaro, Mary Tran

Published in: Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology | Issue 11/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is effective in finding early stage CRC and dramatically improves survival rates. Despite this, the number of eligible patients who do not obtain CRC screening is unacceptably high.

Methods

We conducted a longitudinal, randomized controlled trial investigating the utility of a blood-based protein assay on the quality of care delivered by practicing PCPs in the United States. We used standardized simulated patients (CPVs), presenting with symptoms suggestive of a higher likelihood of CRC, to measure how frequently these PCPs ordered diagnostic colonoscopy. 190 PCPs cared for three patients at baseline and three patients post-intervention. The PCPs were randomized into one of two study arms: control and intervention. The intervention arm consisted of educational materials about the blood-based protein assay and positive test results. Each simulated patient in the intervention arm had a positive test result that was given to the doctor. The controls were given neither intervention materials nor blood-based protein assay results. Physician responses in both groups were scored against evidence-based criteria. Data were collected at baseline and post-intervention.

Results

At baseline, we found that 71% of physicians ordered diagnostic colonoscopy. In round 2, 23% of physicians in the intervention arm adopted the new blood-based protein assay. Ordering physicians were 3.88 (95% CI 1.67–9.03) times more likely to order a diagnostic colonoscopy. In percentage terms, those who ordered the assay were more likely to order colonoscopy (92%) than either intervention physicians who did not order the assay (77%) or control physicians (66%) (p < 0.001). A marginal effects estimation showed that use of the assay would increase ordering colonoscopy to nearly 95%.

Conclusion

Over one-third of adults in the United States do not follow the recommended screening guidelines for CRC. The introduction of a blood-based protein assay significantly increased the likelihood that physicians would order diagnostic colonoscopies in elevated-risk patients compared to those without access to the assay results. The overall change in clinical utility observed here has the potential to significantly improve clinical care.
Literature
go back to reference Center for Workforce Studies (2014) 2014 Physician Specialty Data Book. Association of American Medical Colleges, Washington, DC Center for Workforce Studies (2014) 2014 Physician Specialty Data Book. Association of American Medical Colleges, Washington, DC
go back to reference Cook DA, Hatala R, Bridges R et al (2011) Technology-enhanced simulation for health professions education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA 306(9):978–988CrossRefPubMed Cook DA, Hatala R, Bridges R et al (2011) Technology-enhanced simulation for health professions education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA 306(9):978–988CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Denberg T, Melhado T, Coombes J et al (2005) Predictors of nonadherence to screening colonoscopy. J Gen Intern Med 11:989–995CrossRef Denberg T, Melhado T, Coombes J et al (2005) Predictors of nonadherence to screening colonoscopy. J Gen Intern Med 11:989–995CrossRef
go back to reference Hamilton W, Lancashire R, Sharp D, Peters TJ, Cheng KK, Marshall T (2009) The risk of colorectal cancer with symptoms at different ages and between the sexes: a case-control study. BMC Med 7:17CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hamilton W, Lancashire R, Sharp D, Peters TJ, Cheng KK, Marshall T (2009) The risk of colorectal cancer with symptoms at different ages and between the sexes: a case-control study. BMC Med 7:17CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Jones R, Devers K, Kuzel A, Woolf SH (2010) Patient-reported barriers to colorectal cancer screening: a mixed-methods analysis. Am J Prev Med 38(5):508–516CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Jones R, Devers K, Kuzel A, Woolf SH (2010) Patient-reported barriers to colorectal cancer screening: a mixed-methods analysis. Am J Prev Med 38(5):508–516CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Peabody J, Luck J, Glassman P, Dresselhaus TR, Lee M (2000) Comparison of vignettes, standardized patients, and chart abstraction: a prospective validation study of 3 methods for measuring quality. JAMA 283(13):1715–1722CrossRefPubMed Peabody J, Luck J, Glassman P, Dresselhaus TR, Lee M (2000) Comparison of vignettes, standardized patients, and chart abstraction: a prospective validation study of 3 methods for measuring quality. JAMA 283(13):1715–1722CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Peabody JW, Luck J, Glassman P et al (2004) Measuring the quality of physician practice by using clinical vignettes: a prospective validation study. Ann Intern Med 141(10):771–780CrossRefPubMed Peabody JW, Luck J, Glassman P et al (2004) Measuring the quality of physician practice by using clinical vignettes: a prospective validation study. Ann Intern Med 141(10):771–780CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Peabody J, Salvidar J, Swagel E, Fugaro S, Paculdo D, Tran M (2017) Primary care variability in patients at higher risk for colorectal cancer: evaluation of screening and preventive care practices. (submitted) Peabody J, Salvidar J, Swagel E, Fugaro S, Paculdo D, Tran M (2017) Primary care variability in patients at higher risk for colorectal cancer: evaluation of screening and preventive care practices. (submitted)
go back to reference Qureshi Z, Lee MJ, Horner R, Bennett C (2015) Battling fear: a potential key to improving colorectal cancer screening. Value Health 18:A50CrossRef Qureshi Z, Lee MJ, Horner R, Bennett C (2015) Battling fear: a potential key to improving colorectal cancer screening. Value Health 18:A50CrossRef
go back to reference Sarfaty M, Wender R (2007) How to increase colorectal cancer screening rates in practice. CA Cancer J Clin 57:354–366CrossRefPubMed Sarfaty M, Wender R (2007) How to increase colorectal cancer screening rates in practice. CA Cancer J Clin 57:354–366CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Seeff L, Nadel MR, Klabunde CN, Thompson T, Shapiro JA, Vernon SW, Coates RJ (2004) Patterns and predictors of colorectal cancer test use in the adult U.S. population. Cancer 100(10):2093–2103CrossRefPubMed Seeff L, Nadel MR, Klabunde CN, Thompson T, Shapiro JA, Vernon SW, Coates RJ (2004) Patterns and predictors of colorectal cancer test use in the adult U.S. population. Cancer 100(10):2093–2103CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Sequist T, Zalavsy A, Marshal R, Fletcher R, Ayanian J (2009) Patient and physician reminders to promote colorectal cancer screening: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Intern Med 169(4):364–371CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Sequist T, Zalavsy A, Marshal R, Fletcher R, Ayanian J (2009) Patient and physician reminders to promote colorectal cancer screening: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Intern Med 169(4):364–371CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Siegel RL, Fedewa SA, Anderson WF et al (2017) Colorectal cancer incidence patterns in the United States, 1974–2013. J Natl Cancer Inst 109(8):djw322 Siegel RL, Fedewa SA, Anderson WF et al (2017) Colorectal cancer incidence patterns in the United States, 1974–2013. J Natl Cancer Inst 109(8):djw322
go back to reference Singh H, Petersen LA, Daci K, Collins C, Khan M, El-Serag HB (2010) Reducing referral delays in colorectal cancer diagnosis: is it about how you ask? Qual Saf Health Care 19(5):e27PubMed Singh H, Petersen LA, Daci K, Collins C, Khan M, El-Serag HB (2010) Reducing referral delays in colorectal cancer diagnosis: is it about how you ask? Qual Saf Health Care 19(5):e27PubMed
go back to reference Sriphanlop P, Hennely M, Sperling D, Villagra C, Jandorf L (2016) Increasing referral rate for screening colonoscopy through patient education and activation at a primary care clinic in New York City. Patient Educ Couns 99(8):1427–1431CrossRefPubMed Sriphanlop P, Hennely M, Sperling D, Villagra C, Jandorf L (2016) Increasing referral rate for screening colonoscopy through patient education and activation at a primary care clinic in New York City. Patient Educ Couns 99(8):1427–1431CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Stock D, Rabeneck L, Baxter N, Paszat L, Sutradhar R, Yun L, Tinmouth J (2017) A centrally generated primary care physician audit report does not improve colonoscopy uptake after a positive result on a fecal occult blood test in Ontario’s ColonCancerCheck program. Curr Oncol 24(1):47–51CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Stock D, Rabeneck L, Baxter N, Paszat L, Sutradhar R, Yun L, Tinmouth J (2017) A centrally generated primary care physician audit report does not improve colonoscopy uptake after a positive result on a fecal occult blood test in Ontario’s ColonCancerCheck program. Curr Oncol 24(1):47–51CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Taylor D, Cannon-Albright L, Sweeney C et al (2011) Comparison of compliance for colorectal cancer screening and surveillance by colonoscopy based on risk. Genet Med 13(8):737–743CrossRefPubMed Taylor D, Cannon-Albright L, Sweeney C et al (2011) Comparison of compliance for colorectal cancer screening and surveillance by colonoscopy based on risk. Genet Med 13(8):737–743CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference US Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration, National Center for Health Workforce Analysis (2016) National and Regional Projections of Supply and Demand for Primary Care Practitioners: 2013–2025, US Department of Health and Human Services, Rockville, Maryland US Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration, National Center for Health Workforce Analysis (2016) National and Regional Projections of Supply and Demand for Primary Care Practitioners: 2013–2025, US Department of Health and Human Services, Rockville, Maryland
go back to reference Vogelaar I, van Ballegooijen M, Schrag D et al (2006) How much can current interventions reduce colorectal cancer mortality in the U.S.? Mortality projections for scenarios of risk-factor modification, screening, and treatment. Cancer 107:1624–1633CrossRefPubMed Vogelaar I, van Ballegooijen M, Schrag D et al (2006) How much can current interventions reduce colorectal cancer mortality in the U.S.? Mortality projections for scenarios of risk-factor modification, screening, and treatment. Cancer 107:1624–1633CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Weitzman E, Zapka J, Estabrook B, Goins KV (2001) Risk and reluctance: understanding impediments to colorectal cancer screening. Prev Med 32:502–513CrossRefPubMed Weitzman E, Zapka J, Estabrook B, Goins KV (2001) Risk and reluctance: understanding impediments to colorectal cancer screening. Prev Med 32:502–513CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Wilcox B, Benz, R, Croner L et al (2016) The discovery and validation of blood plasma protein-based classifier panels for colorectal cancer and advanced adenoma using a combined mass spectrometry- and ELISA-based workflow in studies including 1,605 patient samples. Gastroenterology 150:S185CrossRef Wilcox B, Benz, R, Croner L et al (2016) The discovery and validation of blood plasma protein-based classifier panels for colorectal cancer and advanced adenoma using a combined mass spectrometry- and ELISA-based workflow in studies including 1,605 patient samples. Gastroenterology 150:S185CrossRef
go back to reference Zauber A, Knudsen A, Rutter CM, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Kuntz KM (2015) Evaluating the benefits and harms of colorectal cancer screening strategies: a collaborative modeling approach. AHRQ Publication No. 14-05203-EF-2. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Zauber A, Knudsen A, Rutter CM, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Kuntz KM (2015) Evaluating the benefits and harms of colorectal cancer screening strategies: a collaborative modeling approach. AHRQ Publication No. 14-05203-EF-2. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
go back to reference Ziegler M, Schubring-Giese B, Buhner M, Kolligs F (2010) Attitude to secondary prevention and concerns about colonoscopy are independent predictors of acceptance of screening colonoscopy. Digestion 2010(81):120–126CrossRef Ziegler M, Schubring-Giese B, Buhner M, Kolligs F (2010) Attitude to secondary prevention and concerns about colonoscopy are independent predictors of acceptance of screening colonoscopy. Digestion 2010(81):120–126CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Clinical utility of a blood-based protein assay to increase screening of elevated-risk patients for colorectal cancer in the primary care setting
Authors
John Peabody
David Paculdo
Eric Swagel
Steven Fugaro
Mary Tran
Publication date
01-11-2017
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology / Issue 11/2017
Print ISSN: 0171-5216
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1335
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-017-2469-4

Other articles of this Issue 11/2017

Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology 11/2017 Go to the issue
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.