% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Chen:181165,
author = {H. Chen and J. Shi and M. Lu and Y. Li and L. Du and X.
Liao and D. Wei and D. Dong and Y. Gao and C. Zhu and R.
Ying and W. Zheng and S. Yan and H. Xiao and J. Zhang and Y.
Kong and F. Li and S. Zou and C. Liu and H. Wang and Y.
Zhang and B. Lu and C. Luo and J. Cai and J. Tian and X.
Miao and K. Ding and H. Brenner$^*$ and M. Dai},
title = {{C}omparison of {C}olonoscopy, {F}ecal {I}mmunochemical
{T}est, and {R}isk-adapted {A}pproach in a {C}olorectal
{C}ancer {S}creening {T}rial ({TARGET}-{C}).},
journal = {Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology},
volume = {21},
number = {3},
issn = {1542-3565},
address = {New York, NY},
publisher = {Elsevier Science},
reportid = {DKFZ-2022-01818},
pages = {808-818},
year = {2023},
note = {Volume 21, Issue 3, March 2023, Pages 808-818},
abstract = {The screening yield and related cost of a risk-adapted
screening approach compared with established screening
strategies in population-based CRC screening are not
clear.We randomly allocated 19,373 participants into one of
the three screening arms in a 1:2:2 ratio: (1) one-time
colonoscopy (n=3,883); (2) annual fecal immunochemical test
(FIT) (n=7,793); (3) annual risk-adapted screening
(n=7,697), in which, based on the risk-stratification score,
high-risk participants were referred for colonoscopy, and
low-risk ones were referred for FIT. Three consecutive
screening rounds were conducted for both the FIT and the
risk-adapted screening arms. Follow-up to trace the health
outcome for all the participants was conducted over the
3-year study period. The detection rate of advanced
colorectal neoplasia (CRC and advanced precancerous lesions)
was the main outcome. The trial was registered in the
Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (number:
ChiCTR1800015506).In the colonoscopy, FIT, and risk-adapted
screening arms over three screening rounds, the
participation rates were $42.4\%,$ $99.3\%,$ and $89.2\%,$
respectively; the detection rates for advanced neoplasm
(intention-to-treat analysis) were $2.76\%,$ $2.17\%,$ and
$2.35\%,$ respectively, with odds ratio
(OR)colonoscopyvs.FIT of 1.27 $(95\%$ confidence interval
[CI]: 0.99-1.63; P=0.056), ORcolonoscopyvs.risk-adapted
screening of 1.17 $(95\%$ CI: 0.91-1.49; P=0.218), and
ORrisk-adapted screeningvs.FIT of 1.09 $(95\%$ CI:
0.88-1.35; P=0.438); the numbers of colonoscopies needed to
detect one advanced neoplasm were 15.4, 7.8, and 10.2,
respectively; the costs for detecting one advanced neoplasm
from a government perspective using package payment format
were CNY6,928 ($1,004), CNY5,821 ($844), and CNY6,694
($970), respectively.The risk-adapted approach is a feasible
and cost-favorable strategy for population-based CRC
screening, and therefore could complement the
well-established one-time colonoscopy and annual repeated
FIT screening strategies.},
keywords = {colonoscopy (Other) / colorectal cancer screening (Other) /
fecal immunochemical test (Other) / personalized screening
(Other) / risk stratification (Other)},
cin = {C070 / C120 / HD01},
ddc = {610},
cid = {I:(DE-He78)C070-20160331 / I:(DE-He78)C120-20160331 /
I:(DE-He78)HD01-20160331},
pnm = {313 - Krebsrisikofaktoren und Prävention (POF4-313)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-313},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
pubmed = {pmid:35964896},
doi = {10.1016/j.cgh.2022.08.003},
url = {https://inrepo02.dkfz.de/record/181165},
}