Post on 07-Sep-2020
Enhancing Colorectal Cancer Awareness and Screening Rates
Jason P Crawford, MD, MPHSaturday, 3/8/16
3
Objectives Overview of colorectal cancer (CRC) and the latest
evidence behind the various CRC screening guidelines and modalities
Implementing a systems-based approach to enhancing CRC screening rates in your practice
To identify tactics essential to the success of a colon cancer screening system
To understand barriers and challenges in implementing and sustaining a colon cancer screening system
4
Colorectal Cancer (CRC)
3rd most common cancer and the 2nd deadliest 136,800 new cases expected More than 50,000 deaths
1.2 million Americans living with CRC Death rates have fallen steadily past 20 years
Trends in CRC incidence and mortality
Research suggests that observed declines in incidence and mortality are due in large part to: CRC treatment advances Screening detecting cancers at earlier, more
treatable stages Screening and polyp removal, preventing progression
of polyps to invasive cancers NEJM study Feb 2012 showed polyp removal associated
with 53% lower risk of CRC death
Risk Factors
Age: the most impactful risk factor
CRC usuallydevelops after
age 50.
The chances of getting it increases as you get older.
CRC screening should begin at age 50 formost people, earlier for those with a family history. 8
http://science.education.nih.gov/supplements/nih1/cancer/guide/pdfs/ACT3M.PDF.
Non-Modifiable Risk Factors
Age 90% of cases occur in people 50 and older
Gender slight male predominance, but common in both men
and women
Race/Ethnicity – higher rates among African Americans Native Americans (esp. Northern Plains Tribes) Alaska Natives Ashkenazi Jews
Modifiable risk factors
Lack of physical activity Less active raises risk
Overweight Obesity raises risk of having
and of dying from CRC
Smoking raises risk
Alcohol use raises risk
Type 2 diabetes raises risk
Risk factor - polyps
Different types of polyps:
Hyperplastic Low risk: very small
chance they’ll grow into cancer
Adenomas About 9 out of 10
colon and rectal cancers start as adenomas
Normal to Adenoma to Carcinoma
Human colon carcinogenesis progresses by the dysplasia/adenoma
to carcinoma pathway
Usually takes 10 or more years for polyp to become cancer
Screening Impact
Why Screen?
There are two aims of screening:
1. PreventionFind and remove polypsto prevent cancer
2. Early DetectionFind cancer in the early stages,when best chance for a cure
Impact of Screening
JAMA Surg. 2013
Benefits of Screening
Survival Rates by Disease Stage*90.3%
70.4%
12.5%
0102030405060708090
100
Local Regional Distant
Stage of Detect ion
5-yrSurvival
*1996 - 2003
Screening Rates
18
Who’s Not Screened?
UTD with CRC Screening (BRFSS 2012)
Nevada FOBT screening, BRFSS, 2012
Screening Tests
Tests That Detect Adenomatous Polyps and Cancer
Colonoscopy every 10 years, or
Flexible sigmoidoscopy (FSIG) every 5 years, or
Double contrast barium enema (DCBE) every 5 years, or
CT colonography (CTC) every 5 years
Tests That Primarily Detect Cancer
Guaiac-based fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) with high test sensitivity for cancer, or
Fecal immunochemical test (FIT) with high test sensitivity for cancer, or
Stool DNA test (sDNA), with high sensitivity for cancer
Options for Average risk adults age 50 and older:
23
Recommendation ACS/USMSTF/ACR USPSTF
Age to begin and end screening in average risk adults
Begin and age 50, and end screening at a point where curative therapy would not be offered due to life-limiting co-morbidity
Begin screening at age 50. Routine screening between ages 76-85 is not recommended. Screening after age 85 is not recommended.
Screening in high risk adults
Detailed recommendations based on personal risk and family history
No specific recommendations for age to begin testing or type of testing
Age to Begin and End Screening (ACS and USPSTF Comparison)
24
ACS and USPSTF Guidelines ComparisonRecommendation ACS/USMSTF/ACR USPSTF
Age to begin and end screening in average risk adults
Begin and age 50, and end screening at a point where curative therapy would not be offered due to life-limiting co-morbidity
Begin screening at age 50. Routine screening between ages 76-85 is not recommended. Screening after age 85 is not recommended.
Screening in high risk adults Detailed recommendations based on personal risk and family history
No specific recommendations for age to begin testing or type of testing
Prioritization of tests Tests are grouped into those that (1) primarily are effective at detecting cancer, and (2) those that are effective at detecting cancer and adenomatous polyps. Group 2 is preferred over group 1 due to the greater potential for prevention.
No specific prioritization of tests, though recommendations acknowledge that direct visualization techniques offer substantial benefit over fecal tests
Stool Testing, Guaiac based FOBT (gFOBT) Annual screening with high sensitivity guaiac based tests
Annual screening with high sensitivity guaiac based tests
Stool Testing, Immunochemical-based FOBT (FIT)
Annual screening Annual screening
Stool Testing, Stool DNA (sDNA) Screening every 3 years Insufficient evidence to recommend for or against sDNA
Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening every 5 years. Screening every 5 years, with annual gFOBT or FIT is an option
Screening every 5 years, with gFOBT every 3 years
Colonoscopy Screening every 10 years Screening every 10 yearsCT Colonography Screening every 5 years Insufficient evidence to recommend for or
against CT colonography
Double Contrast Barium Enema (DCBE) Screening every 5 years Not addressed
Recommended Screening Tests ACS and USPSTF
Colonoscopy
High Sensitivity Fecal Occult Blood Testing
Guaiac
Immunochemical (FIT)
Flexible Sigmoidoscopy (FSIG)
Recent studies support efficacy
Availability extremely limited in U.S.
Colonoscopy• Allows direct
visualization of entire colon lumen
• Screening, diagnostic and therapeutic
• 10 yr interval
• The most common screening test in US (>80%)
Why Colonoscopy is NOT gold standard
Evidence does not support “best test” or “gold standard” Colonoscopy misses ~ 10% of significant lesions in
expert settings More costly on a one-time basis Higher potential for patient injury than other tests Measurable outcomes vary widely (i.e. test
performance is highly operator dependent)
Quality Issues with Colonoscopy
In the vast majority of endoscopy centers and hospitals in the US there are no requirements for reporting of endoscopic quality measures (this is gradually changing)
There is significant variation among endoscopists relative to tracking of key quality metrics including: adenoma detection rate withdrawal time quality of bowel prep cecal intubation rate
Adenoma Detection Rate (ADR)
ADR - detection of adenomatous polyps at least 25 percent of the time in men, and 15 percent of the time in women (20 percent composite)
In one large series, ADR varied from 7% - 52% ADR inversely associated with the interval cancer
rate ADR inversely associated with colorectal cancer
death
ADR and Risk of Interval Cancer
Kaminski; NEJM 2010: 362: 1795-803
Why Colonoscopy is NOT gold standard
Greater patient requirements for successful completion Requires a bowel prep and facility visit, and often a
pre-procedure specialty office visit
Access Limited by insurance status, local resources
Patient preference
Many individuals don’t want an invasive test or a test that requires a bowel prep
Patient Preferences
Inadomi, Arch Intern Med 2012
Trends in the Prevalence of Fecal Occult Blood Test* by Health Insurance Status, US, 2000-2010
Stool Tests
Look for hidden blood in stool
Two major types (but multiple brands)
Stool Test: Guaiac
Most common type in U.S. Solid evidence (3 RCT’s) 30 year f/u (NEJM Oct 2013) Need specimens from 3 bowel
movements Non-specific Results influenced by foods
and medications Better sensitivity with newer
versions (Hemoccult Sensa) Older forms (Hemoccult II) not
recommended!
Fecal Immunochemical Tests (FIT)
Specific for human bloodand for lower GI bleeding
Results not influenced by foods or medications
Some types require only 1 or 2 stool specimens
Higher sensitivity than older forms of guaiac-based FOBT
Costs more than guaiac tests (but higher reimbursement)
37
Stool Tests: Accuracy
38
NEJM 2014
40
Stool Tests: Efficacy
Annals IM,, 2008
Stool Testing Quality Issues
In-office FOBT is essentially worthless as a screening tool for CRC and should
never be used for this purpose.
FOBT Quality Issues
Sensitivity of Take Home vs. In-Office FOBT
Sensitivity
FOBT method
(Hemoccult II)All Advanced Lesions
Cancer
3 card, take-home 23.9 % 43.9 %
Single sample, in-office 4.9 % 9.5 %
Collins et al, Annals of Int Med Jan 2005
Stool Testing Quality Issues
In-office FOBT is essentially worthless as a screening tool for CRC and should never be used.
CRC screening by FOBT should be performed with high-sensitivity FOBT - either FIT or a highly sensitive gFOBT (such as Hemoccult SENSA). Older, less sensitive guiaic tests (such as
Hemoccult II) should not be used for CRC screening.
Annual testing All positive screening tests should be evaluated by
colonoscopy
Clinicians Reference: FOBTOne page document designed to educate clinicians about important elements of colorectal cancer screening using fecal occult blood tests (FOBT).
Provides state-of-the-science information about guaiac and immunochemical FOBT, test performance and characteristics of high quality screening programs.
Available at www.cancer.org/colonmd
High Quality Stool Testing
Stool DNA Test
Stool DNA Test (sDNA)
Fecal occult blood tests detect blood in the stool –which is intermittent and non-specific
Colon cells are shed continuously
Polyps and cancer cells contain abnormal DNA
Stool DNA tests look for abnormal DNA from cells that are passed in the stool*
*All positive tests should be followed with colonoscopy
NEJM 2014
NEJM 2014
Stool DNA - Sample Collection
Patient supplies whole stool sample;nodiet or medication restrictions
Patient seals sample in outer container and freezer pack
Patient seals container and ships back to designated lab (all packing materials and labels supplied)
Stool DNA Test
One test (Cologuard) currently available Combines an FIT with tests for stool DNA markers
asso w/ cancers and adenomas Every 3 year testing interval recommended by
manufacturer FDA has cleared it for marketing as CRC screening test CMS has agreed to cover Cologuard for Medicare
beneficiaries age 50 – 85 yrs Medicare will reimburse $502 q 3 yrs for the test Private insurance coverage – tbd
All positive tests should be evaluated by colonoscopy
• 80% by 2018• National coalition of public, private, and voluntary
organizations whose mission is to advance colorectal cancer control efforts by improving communication, coordination, and collaboration among health agencies, medical-professional organizations, and the public.
• Co-Founded by ACS and CDC in 1997
• Goal: increase the use of recommended colorectal cancer screening tests in at-risk populations
www.nccrt.org
National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable80% by 2018 campaign
http://nccrt.org/tools/80-percent-by-2018/
Web resources ColonMD:
http://www.cancer.org/healthy/informationforhealthcareprofessionals/colonmdclinicansinformationsource/index
CDC Colorectal Cancer Awareness Month: http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/dcpc/resources/features/colorectalawareness/
Clinician’s reference and toolkit: http://www.cancer.org/healthy/informationforhealthcareprofessionals/colonmdclinicansinformationsource/foryourclinicalpractice/index
“Action Plan” Toolkit Version
Eight page guide introduces clinicians and staff to concepts and tools provided in the full Toolkit
Contains links to the full Toolkit, tools and resources
Not colorectal-specific; practical, action-oriented assistance that can be used in the office to improve screening rates for multiple cancer sites (colorectal, breast and cervical)
Available at http://nccrt.org/about/provider-education/crc-clinician-guide/
Staff Involvement
Key Point…..the clinicians cannot do it all!
Time that patients spend with non-clinician staff is underutilized
Standing orders can empower nurses, intake staff, etc. to distribute educational materials, schedule appointments, etc.
Involve staff in meetings to discuss progress in achieving office goals for improving the delivery of preventive services
A+ Tactic #1: Identify a motivated “champion”
Find a champion within the clinic
Educate your team on the system and make sure it’s easy to follow
59
Communication
Why patients aren’t getting screened(according to Physicians)
Cancer Causes Control.,2011
Why patients aren’t getting screened(according to Patients)
“My doctor never talked to me about it!”
A+ Tactic #2: Clinical Decision Support Tools
Videos or demonstrations of FIT kit usage
Decision aid tools and visual aids
Ensure language sensitivity
66
A+ Tactic #2: Access to FIT Tests
Seek out opportunities to secure free or discounted FIT kits
Deliver the FIT kit at the time of care, rather than sending patients to a lab
69
A+ Tactic #3: Hire a Screening Care Coordinator
The care coordinator is the organizational, clerical and customer service provider for the program
Educates patients on FIT test usage, serves as a sort of “health coach”
Follows up with patients to ensure screening compliance through phone calls, mail, etc.
72
A+ Tactic #4: Use Electronic Health Records
Activate tracking capacities within the system
Add patient flags and reminders for physicians
Use templates to standardize your practice across the organization
Run reports to assist with program evaluation
73
74
A+ Tactic #4: Use Electronic Health Records
75
PDSA cycles
A+ Tactic #5: Leverage data to your advantage
“Unblinded” data
Allows for continuous quality improvement
Track program success by clinic and by physician or team, and use benchmarks to reach and exceed goals
Move beyond MARCH!
Foster the team-based approach
78
Increasing Cancer Screening and Linkages in a Community
Clinic Setting Project Federally Qualified Health Center with 5 clinic locations,
20 medical providers, serving approximately 27,000 patients in the Reno/Sparks area
Grant project in conjunction with Nevada Cancer Coalition, January 2015 – July 2015
79
Project work plan
1. Established a baseline of patients up to date with screening
2. Identified targeted population to be screened
3. Created policy/procedures and system
4. Hired a care coordinator
5. Educated providers and staff
6. Created internal data tracking and incentive program
7. Used electronic health records to flag eligible patients and track compliance
8. Quarterly data reporting
80
2015 Pilot Project - Results
1. 2013 baseline of patients up to date with screening = 6.36%
2. 1st quarter, 2015: overall 5-fold increase in patients up to date with screening = 32.15%
3. 1st quarter, 2015: 300% increase in screening incidence rate compared to 1st quarter, 2014
4. Still low…there’s work to be done
81
82
What We’ve Learned
1. Some tactics are more valuable and effective than others
2. There will always be challenges
3. Partnerships are key
4. You HAVE to have a champion
83
Challenge: Ancillary Staff
Budgetary constraints to hire care coordinator staff; look for grants to support the program
Finding and keeping qualified personnel can be difficult
84
Challenge: Patient Compliance
Try to follow the 80/20 rule: not every patient will comply, no matter how much you educate them; strive for that 80% that will
Don’t get discouraged. Use motivational interviewing techniques and remind patients at each visit.
85
Challenge: Provider Compliance
Emphasize the importance of preventive care to busy providers
Seek to schedule dedicated preventive care visits when patients are in clinic for emergent care, thus allowing providers an appointment slot to focus on screening opportunities
86
Other Positive Outcomes
Cost Effective
Serves as a foundation and model for other screening programs including cervical and breast cancer screening
Scalable and Sustainable
87