Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

Mass screening for colorectal cancer

Authors: I T, Khubchandani; M C, Karamchandani; F S, Kleckner; J A, Sheets; J J, Stasik; L, Rosen; R D, Riether;

Mass screening for colorectal cancer

Abstract

A voluntary community colorectal cancer screening project to detect occult blood in the stool of asymptomatic individuals was undertaken; 49,353 Hemoccult II kits were distributed. A total of 23,674 completed kits were returned to a central repository and processed (compliance rate, 48 percent); 851 participants had positive results (3.6 percent). Of the 640 who underwent further medical evaluation, 299 participants (46.7 percent) who had adequate follow-up had no evidence of disease. Diverse disease entities were detected in 341 participants, which was 1.4 percent of those enrolled. Forty-one patients (0.17 percent) showed significant findings that included 29 cancers (0.12 percent) and 12 (0.05 percent) noninvasive malignant polyps. Of the cancers, there were 27 colorectal, one non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, and one carcinoma of the vocal cord. In addition, 107 patients (0.45 percent) had benign polyps and 193 patients (0.82 percent) had various diseases of the gastrointestinal tract and other medical conditions. The cost of the program was modest and the results conformed to those found in previous screening surveys. The heightened public awareness of testing for colorectal disease and the detection of early lesions justifies the guaiac test screening program for mass survey.

Keywords

Adult, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Middle Aged, Pennsylvania, Occult Blood, Humans, Mass Screening, Patient Compliance, Reagent Kits, Diagnostic, Colorectal Neoplasms, Aged

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    27
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
27
Average
Top 10%
Top 10%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!