NCT04490551

Brief Summary

Colorectal Carcinoma (CRC) is the third most frequent diagnosed cancer worldwide, with 1.4 million new cases every year. In an attempt to reduce this number many countries have implemented a nationwide screening programme targeted at detecting CRC in an early phase using fecal immunochemical tests (FITs). People with an elevated level of blood in their stool are offered a colonoscopy, an invasive medical procedure where CRCs and premalignant lesions (together also referred to as advanced neoplasia) can be detected accurately. However, the current screening method using FIT is not optimal. In FIT-based CRC screening studies, 1 in 4 participants with CRC and 2 in 3 participants with advanced neoplasia receive a negative FIT result. In contrast, an estimated 1 in 2 FIT-positives have advanced neoplasia at colonoscopy. Recent studies have demonstrated that a risk model that takes into account the FIT result and other risk factors for CRC could enhance the effectiveness of a FIT-based CRC screening programme. The objective of this study is to assess the yield of advanced neoplasia in the colon and rectum of a FIT-based risk model at colonoscopy, compared to that of a FIT-only CRC screening strategy. Our hypothesis is that a risk-based model yields significantly more advanced neoplasia at colonoscopy than the FIT by itself, and that it does not affect participation rate. To assess this hypothesis, the investigators have designed a clinical trial in which the investigators randomize 23,000 asymptomatic individuals between the age of 55 and 75 years old to either risk-based screening (intervention group) or FIT-only screening (control group). The intervention group will receive a questionnaire on risk factors of CRC (e.g. smoking, family history of CRC), and a FIT. The control group will only receive the FIT. The positivity threshold of the FIT in both groups will be set at 15 micrograms haemoglobin per gram faeces. The positivity threshold of the risk-based model in the intervention group will be set at 0.10 (out of a range of 0 to 1), a threshold that is calculated with a goal to match the positivity rate of the control group. Participants with a result that is above the thresholds of the FIT and/or the risk-based model will be invited to undergo a colonoscopy according protocol of the Dutch national screening program. After the study has ended, the investigators will compare both groups to assess our hypotheses.

Trial Health

87
On Track

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
6,753

participants targeted

Target at P75+ for not_applicable colorectal-cancer

Timeline
Completed

Started Dec 2019

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
completed

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

Study Start

First participant enrolled

December 5, 2019

Completed
7 months until next milestone

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

July 13, 2020

Completed
16 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

July 29, 2020

Completed
5 months until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

December 31, 2020

Completed
5 months until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

June 1, 2021

Completed
Last Updated

August 13, 2021

Status Verified

August 1, 2021

Enrollment Period

1.1 years

First QC Date

July 13, 2020

Last Update Submit

August 12, 2021

Conditions

Keywords

Colorectal CancerScreeningModelFaecal Immunochemic TestFITOccult BloodRisk FactorsLogistic RegressionAdvanced NeoplasiaAdvanced Adenoma

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • Yield of Advanced Neoplasia

    The primary outcome is the yield of advanced neoplasia, defined as the relative number of invitees in whom advanced neoplasia is detected at colonoscopy.

    10 weeks

Secondary Outcomes (4)

  • Standardized Screening Yield

    10 weeks

  • Participation Rate

    10 weeks

  • Yield of Advanced Neoplasia at Other Thresholds

    10 weeks

  • Yield of Proximally Located Advanced Neoplasia

    10 weeks

Study Arms (2)

Intervention group

EXPERIMENTAL

This group will be screened with the risk-based model. The input of the model will be gathered with the FIT, a validated questionnaire, and from data of the Dutch general population registry. The threshold of the model will be set at a calculated risk of 0.10. To comply with ethical guidelines, all participants in this group with a FIT result of \>=15 mcg Hb/g faeces and a calculated risk of \<0.10 will also be offered a colonoscopy.

Diagnostic Test: Risk-based logistic regression modelDiagnostic Test: FIT

Control group

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

This group will be screened with the FIT. The threshold of the FIT will be set at \>= 15 mcg Hb/g faeces.

Diagnostic Test: FIT

Interventions

The intervention will be a risk-based logistic regression model that takes multiple variables into account to calculate the risk of advanced neoplasia as an outcome.

Intervention group
FITDIAGNOSTIC_TEST

FIT is a stool-based test that detects human blood in faeces.

Also known as: Faecal Immunochemic Test
Control groupIntervention group

Eligibility Criteria

Age55 Years - 75 Years
Sexall(Gender-based eligibility)
Gender Eligibility DetailsMale and Females
Healthy VolunteersYes
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

  • In order to be eligible to participate in this study, a screening invitee must meet the following criteria:
  • The screening invitee must be at least 55 years old, and no older than 75 years old, at the day of invitation by the Foundation of Population Screening Mid-West
  • The screening invitee must be eligible for participation in the second round of the Dutch CRC Population Screening Programme
  • The screening invitee must return a signed informed consent form

You may not qualify if:

  • A potential screening invitee who meets any of the following criteria will be excluded from participation in this study:
  • if he or she receives active treatment for CRC and/or AN, including palliative care.
  • if he or she fails to return a sample that is adequate for FIT testing.

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

Amsterdam UMC, locatie Academisch Medisch Centrum

Amsterdam, North Holland, 1105 AZ, Netherlands

Location

Related Publications (38)

  • Arnold M, Sierra MS, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, Bray F. Global patterns and trends in colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. Gut. 2017 Apr;66(4):683-691. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2015-310912. Epub 2016 Jan 27.

    PMID: 26818619BACKGROUND
  • Winawer S, Fletcher R, Rex D, Bond J, Burt R, Ferrucci J, Ganiats T, Levin T, Woolf S, Johnson D, Kirk L, Litin S, Simmang C; Gastrointestinal Consortium Panel. Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance: clinical guidelines and rationale-Update based on new evidence. Gastroenterology. 2003 Feb;124(2):544-60. doi: 10.1053/gast.2003.50044.

    PMID: 12557158BACKGROUND
  • Mandel JS, Bond JH, Church TR, Snover DC, Bradley GM, Schuman LM, Ederer F. Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. Minnesota Colon Cancer Control Study. N Engl J Med. 1993 May 13;328(19):1365-71. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199305133281901.

    PMID: 8474513BACKGROUND
  • Hardcastle JD, Chamberlain JO, Robinson MH, Moss SM, Amar SS, Balfour TW, James PD, Mangham CM. Randomised controlled trial of faecal-occult-blood screening for colorectal cancer. Lancet. 1996 Nov 30;348(9040):1472-7. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(96)03386-7.

    PMID: 8942775BACKGROUND
  • Kronborg O, Fenger C, Olsen J, Jorgensen OD, Sondergaard O. Randomised study of screening for colorectal cancer with faecal-occult-blood test. Lancet. 1996 Nov 30;348(9040):1467-71. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(96)03430-7.

    PMID: 8942774BACKGROUND
  • Hewitson P, Glasziou P, Watson E, Towler B, Irwig L. Cochrane systematic review of colorectal cancer screening using the fecal occult blood test (hemoccult): an update. Am J Gastroenterol. 2008 Jun;103(6):1541-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2008.01875.x. Epub 2008 May 13.

    PMID: 18479499BACKGROUND
  • Hewitson P, Glasziou P, Irwig L, Towler B, Watson E. Screening for colorectal cancer using the faecal occult blood test, Hemoccult. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Jan 24;2007(1):CD001216. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001216.pub2.

    PMID: 17253456BACKGROUND
  • Allison JE, Sakoda LC, Levin TR, Tucker JP, Tekawa IS, Cuff T, Pauly MP, Shlager L, Palitz AM, Zhao WK, Schwartz JS, Ransohoff DF, Selby JV. Screening for colorectal neoplasms with new fecal occult blood tests: update on performance characteristics. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007 Oct 3;99(19):1462-70. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djm150. Epub 2007 Sep 25.

    PMID: 17895475BACKGROUND
  • van Rossum LG, van Rijn AF, Laheij RJ, van Oijen MG, Fockens P, van Krieken HH, Verbeek AL, Jansen JB, Dekker E. Random comparison of guaiac and immunochemical fecal occult blood tests for colorectal cancer in a screening population. Gastroenterology. 2008 Jul;135(1):82-90. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2008.03.040. Epub 2008 Mar 25.

    PMID: 18482589BACKGROUND
  • Zorzi M, Fedeli U, Schievano E, Bovo E, Guzzinati S, Baracco S, Fedato C, Saugo M, Dei Tos AP. Impact on colorectal cancer mortality of screening programmes based on the faecal immunochemical test. Gut. 2015 May;64(5):784-90. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2014-307508. Epub 2014 Sep 1.

    PMID: 25179811BACKGROUND
  • Bevolkingsonderzoek Darmkanker Monitor 2017. Erasmus MC en NKI / AvL; 2017

    BACKGROUND
  • de Wijkerslooth TR, Stoop EM, Bossuyt PM, Meijer GA, van Ballegooijen M, van Roon AH, Stegeman I, Kraaijenhagen RA, Fockens P, van Leerdam ME, Dekker E, Kuipers EJ. Immunochemical fecal occult blood testing is equally sensitive for proximal and distal advanced neoplasia. Am J Gastroenterol. 2012 Oct;107(10):1570-8. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2012.249. Epub 2012 Jul 31.

    PMID: 22850431BACKGROUND
  • Cubiella J, Castro I, Hernandez V, Gonzalez-Mao C, Rivera C, Iglesias F, Cid L, Soto S, de-Castro L, Vega P, Hermo JA, Macenlle R, Martinez A, Martinez-Ares D, Estevez P, Cid E, Herreros-Villanueva M, Portillo I, Bujanda L, Fernandez-Seara J; COLONPREV study investigators. Characteristics of adenomas detected by fecal immunochemical test in colorectal cancer screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2014 Sep;23(9):1884-92. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-13-1346. Epub 2014 Jun 24.

    PMID: 24962836BACKGROUND
  • Wong MC, Ching JY, Chan VC, Lam TY, Shum JP, Luk AK, Wong SS, Ng SC, Ng SS, Wu JC, Chan FK, Sung JJ. Diagnostic Accuracy of a Qualitative Fecal Immunochemical Test Varies With Location of Neoplasia But Not Number of Specimens. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015 Aug;13(8):1472-9. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2015.02.021. Epub 2015 Feb 24.

    PMID: 25724708BACKGROUND
  • Dekker N, van Rossum LG, Van Vugt-van Pinxteren M, van Stiphout SH, Hermens RP, van Zelst-Stams WA, van Oijen MG, Laheij RJ, Jansen JB, Hoogerbrugge N. Adding familial risk assessment to faecal occult blood test can increase the effectiveness of population-based colorectal cancer screening. Eur J Cancer. 2011 Jul;47(10):1571-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2011.01.022. Epub 2011 Feb 28.

    PMID: 21367600BACKGROUND
  • Cha JM, Lee JI, Joo KR, Shin HP, Park JJ, Jeun JW, Lim JU. First-degree relatives of colorectal cancer patients are likely to show advanced colorectal neoplasia despite a negative fecal immunochemical test. Digestion. 2012;86(4):283-7. doi: 10.1159/000341738. Epub 2012 Oct 9.

    PMID: 23051697BACKGROUND
  • de Jong AE, Vasen HF. The frequency of a positive family history for colorectal cancer: a population-based study in the Netherlands. Neth J Med. 2006 Nov;64(10):367-70.

    PMID: 17122453BACKGROUND
  • Lynch HT, de la Chapelle A. Hereditary colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003 Mar 6;348(10):919-32. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra012242. No abstract available.

    PMID: 12621137BACKGROUND
  • Worthley DL, Smith A, Bampton PA, Cole SR, Young GP. Many participants in fecal occult blood test population screening have a higher-than-average risk for colorectal cancer. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006 Oct;18(10):1079-83. doi: 10.1097/01.meg.0000231754.35340.fa.

    PMID: 16957514BACKGROUND
  • Regula J, Rupinski M, Kraszewska E, Polkowski M, Pachlewski J, Orlowska J, Nowacki MP, Butruk E. Colonoscopy in colorectal-cancer screening for detection of advanced neoplasia. N Engl J Med. 2006 Nov 2;355(18):1863-72. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa054967.

    PMID: 17079760BACKGROUND
  • Chang LC, Wu MS, Tu CH, Lee YC, Shun CT, Chiu HM. Metabolic syndrome and smoking may justify earlier colorectal cancer screening in men. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014 Jun;79(6):961-9. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2013.11.035. Epub 2014 Jan 25.

    PMID: 24472766BACKGROUND
  • Betes M, Munoz-Navas MA, Duque JM, Angos R, Macias E, Subtil JC, Herraiz M, De La Riva S, Delgado-Rodriguez M, Martinez-Gonzalez MA. Use of colonoscopy as a primary screening test for colorectal cancer in average risk people. Am J Gastroenterol. 2003 Dec;98(12):2648-54. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2003.08771.x.

    PMID: 14687811BACKGROUND
  • Nguyen SP, Bent S, Chen YH, Terdiman JP. Gender as a risk factor for advanced neoplasia and colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009 Jun;7(6):676-81.e1-3. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2009.01.008.

    PMID: 19514116BACKGROUND
  • Stegeman I, de Wijkerslooth TR, Stoop EM, van Leerdam ME, Dekker E, van Ballegooijen M, Kuipers EJ, Fockens P, Kraaijenhagen RA, Bossuyt PM. Colorectal cancer risk factors in the detection of advanced adenoma and colorectal cancer. Cancer Epidemiol. 2013 Jun;37(3):278-83. doi: 10.1016/j.canep.2013.02.004. Epub 2013 Mar 9.

    PMID: 23491770BACKGROUND
  • Yeoh KG, Ho KY, Chiu HM, Zhu F, Ching JY, Wu DC, Matsuda T, Byeon JS, Lee SK, Goh KL, Sollano J, Rerknimitr R, Leong R, Tsoi K, Lin JT, Sung JJ; Asia-Pacific Working Group on Colorectal Cancer. The Asia-Pacific Colorectal Screening score: a validated tool that stratifies risk for colorectal advanced neoplasia in asymptomatic Asian subjects. Gut. 2011 Sep;60(9):1236-41. doi: 10.1136/gut.2010.221168. Epub 2011 Mar 14.

    PMID: 21402615BACKGROUND
  • Ma GK, Ladabaum U. Personalizing colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review of models to predict risk of colorectal neoplasia. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014 Oct;12(10):1624-34.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2014.01.042. Epub 2014 Feb 15.

    PMID: 24534546BACKGROUND
  • Aniwan S, Rerknimitr R, Kongkam P, Wisedopas N, Ponuthai Y, Chaithongrat S, Kullavanijaya P. A combination of clinical risk stratification and fecal immunochemical test results to prioritize colonoscopy screening in asymptomatic participants. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 Mar;81(3):719-27. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.11.035.

    PMID: 25708760BACKGROUND
  • Robertson DJ, Imperiale TF. Stool Testing for Colorectal Cancer Screening. Gastroenterology. 2015 Oct;149(5):1286-93. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2015.05.045. Epub 2015 May 30.

    PMID: 26033632BACKGROUND
  • Stegeman I, de Wijkerslooth TR, Stoop EM, van Leerdam ME, Dekker E, van Ballegooijen M, Kuipers EJ, Fockens P, Kraaijenhagen RA, Bossuyt PM. Combining risk factors with faecal immunochemical test outcome for selecting CRC screenees for colonoscopy. Gut. 2014 Mar;63(3):466-71. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2013-305013. Epub 2013 Aug 20.

    PMID: 23964098BACKGROUND
  • Altman DG, Bland JM. Statistics notes. Treatment allocation in controlled trials: why randomise? BMJ. 1999 May 1;318(7192):1209. doi: 10.1136/bmj.318.7192.1209. No abstract available.

    PMID: 10221955BACKGROUND
  • Colkesen EB, Ferket BS, Tijssen JG, Kraaijenhagen RA, van Kalken CK, Peters RJ. Effects on cardiovascular disease risk of a web-based health risk assessment with tailored health advice: a follow-up study. Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2011;7:67-74. doi: 10.2147/VHRM.S16340. Epub 2011 Feb 9.

    PMID: 21415919BACKGROUND
  • Umar A, Boland CR, Terdiman JP, Syngal S, de la Chapelle A, Ruschoff J, Fishel R, Lindor NM, Burgart LJ, Hamelin R, Hamilton SR, Hiatt RA, Jass J, Lindblom A, Lynch HT, Peltomaki P, Ramsey SD, Rodriguez-Bigas MA, Vasen HF, Hawk ET, Barrett JC, Freedman AN, Srivastava S. Revised Bethesda Guidelines for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (Lynch syndrome) and microsatellite instability. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004 Feb 18;96(4):261-8. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djh034.

    PMID: 14970275BACKGROUND
  • Rex DK. Quality in colonoscopy: cecal intubation first, then what? Am J Gastroenterol. 2006 Apr;101(4):732-4. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00483.x.

    PMID: 16635220BACKGROUND
  • Protocol voor de toelating en auditing van coloscopiecentra en endoscopisten. Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu; 2018

    BACKGROUND
  • Landelijke Monitoring en Evaluatie Bevolkingsonderzoek Darmkanker. In: Milieu RvVe, ed.2019

    BACKGROUND
  • Schlemper RJ, Riddell RH, Kato Y, Borchard F, Cooper HS, Dawsey SM, Dixon MF, Fenoglio-Preiser CM, Flejou JF, Geboes K, Hattori T, Hirota T, Itabashi M, Iwafuchi M, Iwashita A, Kim YI, Kirchner T, Klimpfinger M, Koike M, Lauwers GY, Lewin KJ, Oberhuber G, Offner F, Price AB, Rubio CA, Shimizu M, Shimoda T, Sipponen P, Solcia E, Stolte M, Watanabe H, Yamabe H. The Vienna classification of gastrointestinal epithelial neoplasia. Gut. 2000 Aug;47(2):251-5. doi: 10.1136/gut.47.2.251.

    PMID: 10896917BACKGROUND
  • Nederlandse Richtlijn Coloscopie Surveillance. Nederlandse Vereniging van Maag-, Darm- en Levertartsen; 2013

    BACKGROUND
  • Kortlever TL, van der Vlugt M, Duijkers FAM, Masclee A, Kraaijenhagen R, Spaander MCW, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Bossuyt PM, Dekker E. Diagnostic yield of a risk model versus faecal immunochemical test only: a randomised controlled trial in a colorectal cancer screening programme. Br J Cancer. 2023 Sep;129(5):791-796. doi: 10.1038/s41416-023-02358-z. Epub 2023 Jul 19.

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Colorectal NeoplasmsCarcinoma

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Intestinal NeoplasmsGastrointestinal NeoplasmsDigestive System NeoplasmsNeoplasms by SiteNeoplasmsDigestive System DiseasesGastrointestinal DiseasesColonic DiseasesIntestinal DiseasesRectal DiseasesNeoplasms, Glandular and EpithelialNeoplasms by Histologic Type

Study Officials

  • Evelien Dekker, PhD MD

    Amsterdam UMC

    PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
not applicable
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Masking
NONE
Purpose
SCREENING
Intervention Model
PARALLEL
Model Details: The researchers conduct a parallel group randomized controlled trial. Asymptomatic individuals will be randomized to either risk-based screening or FIT-only screening.
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
PI Title
Professor

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

July 13, 2020

First Posted

July 29, 2020

Study Start

December 5, 2019

Primary Completion

December 31, 2020

Study Completion

June 1, 2021

Last Updated

August 13, 2021

Record last verified: 2021-08

Data Sharing

IPD Sharing
Will not share

Conditional on the permission of the Dutch government, anonymized research data may be shared after publication of the results in a peer-reviewed paper.

Locations