<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Hol, L.</title>
    <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/aut/16853/</link>
    <description>List of Publications</description>
    <language>en</language>
    
    <item>
      <title>What influences the decision to participate in colorectal cancer screening with faecal occult blood testing and sigmoidoscopy? (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/39830/</link>
      <pubDate>2013-04-08T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Introduction: Uptake is an important determinant of the effectiveness of population-based screening. Uptake of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening generally remains sub-optimal. Aim: To determine factors influencing the decision whether to participate or not among individuals invited for faecal occult blood test (FOBT) or flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening. Methods: A questionnaire was sent to a stratified random sample of individuals aged 50-74, previously invited for a randomised CRC screening trial offering FOBT or FS, and a reference group from the same population not previously invited (screening naïve group). The questionnaire assessed reasons for (non)-participation, individuals' characteristics associated with participation, knowledge, attitudes and level of informed choice. Results: The response rate was 75% (n = 341/452) for CRC screening participants, 21% (n = 676/3212) for non-participants and 38% (n = 192/500) for screening-naïve individuals. The main reasons for FOBT and FS participation were acquiring certainty about CRC presence and possible early CRC detection. Anticipated regret and positive attitudes towards CRC screening were strong predictors of actual participation and intention to participate in a next round. The main reason for non-participation in FOBT screening was lack of abdominal complaints. Non-participation in FS screening was additionally influenced by worries about burden. Eighty-one percent of participants and 12% of non-participants made an informed choice on participation. Conclusion: Only 12% of non-participants made an informed choice not to participate. These results imply that governments and/or organizations offering screening should focus on adequately informing and educating target populations about the harms and benefits of CRC screening. This may impact uptake of CRC screening. </description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Are fecal immunochemical test characteristics influenced by sample return time a population-based colorectal cancer screening trial (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/34934/</link>
      <pubDate>2012-01-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Objectives: Fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) are preferred over guaiac-based fecal occult blood testing as colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tool. However, hemoglobin (Hb) degradation over time may influence FIT outcome. We therefore evaluated the effect of sample return time on FIT performance characteristics in a population-based CRC screening trial. Methods: A representative random sample of the Dutch population (n=17,677), aged 50-74 years, was invited for FIT screening (OC-Sensor Micro; cutoff 50 ng Hb/ml). Sample return time was defined as the interval in days between fecal sampling and FIT laboratory delivery. Moreover, a random sample of positive FITs were selected to be stored at room temperature and re-tested every 3-4 days. Results: In total, 8,958 screenees fulfilled our inclusion criteria. The mean sample return time was 3 days (±3). Overall, 792 screenees (8.8%) had a positive test. Between the sample return time groups, the positivity rate (PR) varied between 7.7 and 9.0%. No statistically significant associations were found between PR or detection rate (DR) and the different sample return time groups (P value=0.84 and 0.76, respectively). For the laboratory experiment, 71 positive FITs were stored at room temperature and re-tested with standard intervals. The mean daily fecal Hb decrease was 5.88% per day (95% confidence interval 4.78-6.96%). None of the positive FITs became negative before 10 days after fecal sampling. Conclusions: This population-based CRC screening trial demonstrates that both the PR and DR of FITs do not decrease with prolonged sample return times up to 10 days. This means that a delay in sending the FIT back to the laboratory, of up to at least 1 week, does not necessitate repeat sampling in case of a negative test result. These data support the use of FIT-based screening as a reliable tool for nationwide CRC screening programs. </description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Fecal occult blood testing when colonoscopy capacity is limited (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/33175/</link>
      <pubDate>2011-12-07T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Background Fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) can be adapted to a limited colonoscopy capacity by narrowing the age range or extending the screening interval, by using a more specific test or hemoglobin cutoff level for referral to colonoscopy, and by restricting surveillance colonoscopy. Which of these options is most clinically effective and cost-effective has yet to be established. Methods We used the validated MISCAN-Colon microsimulation model to estimate the number of colonoscopies, costs, and health effects of different screening strategies using guaiac FOBT or fecal immunochemical test (FIT) at various hemoglobin cutoff levels between 50 and 200 ng hemoglobin per mL, different surveillance strategies, and various age ranges. We optimized the allocation of a limited number of colonoscopies on the basis of incremental cost-effectiveness. Results When colonoscopy capacity was unlimited, the optimal screening strategy was to administer an annual FIT with a 50 ng/mL hemoglobin cutoff level in individuals aged 45-80 years and to offer colonoscopy surveillance to all individuals with adenomas. When colonoscopy capacity was decreasing, the optimal screening adaptation was to first increase the FIT hemoglobin cutoff value to 200 ng hemoglobin per mL and narrow the age range to 50-75 years, to restrict colonoscopy surveillance, and finally to further decrease the number of screening rounds. FIT screening was always more cost-effective compared with guaiac FOBT. Doubling colonoscopy capacity increased the benefits of FIT screening up to 100%. Conclusions FIT should be used at higher hemoglobin cutoff levels when colonoscopy capacity is limited compared with unlimited and is more effective in terms of health outcomes and cost compared with guaiac FOBT at all colonoscopy capacity levels. Increasing the colonoscopy capacity substantially increases the health benefits of FIT screening. </description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Cost-effectiveness analysis of a quantitative immunochemical test for colorectal cancer screening (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/33245/</link>
      <pubDate>2011-11-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Background &amp; Aims: Two European randomized trials (N = 30,000) compared guaiac fecal occult blood testing with quantitative fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) and showed better attendance rates and test characteristics for FIT. We aimed to identify the most cost-effective FIT cutoff level for referral to colonoscopy based on data from these trials and allowing for differences in screening ages. Methods: We used the validated MIcrosimulation SCreening ANalysis (MISCAN)-Colon microsimulation model to estimate costs and effects of different screening strategies for FIT cutoff levels of 50, 75, 100, 150, and 200 ng/mL hemoglobin. For each cutoff level, screening strategies were assessed with various age ranges and screening intervals. We assumed sufficient colonoscopy capacity for all strategies. Results: At all cost levels, FIT screening was most effective with the 50 ng/mL cutoff level. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of biennial screening between ages 55 and 75 years using FIT at 50 ng/mL, for example, was 3900 euro per life year gained. Annual screening had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 14,900 euro per life year gained, in combination with a wider age range (between ages 45 and 80 years). In the sensitivity analysis, 50 ng/mL remained the preferred cutoff level. Conclusions: FIT screening is more cost-effective at a cutoff level of 50 ng/mL than at higher cutoff levels. This supports the recommendation to use FIT at a cutoff level of 50 ng/mL, which is considerably lower than the values used in current practice. </description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Advance notification letters increase adherence in colorectal cancer screening: A population-based randomized trial (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/25923/</link>
      <pubDate>2011-06-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Objective: The population benefit of screening depends not only on the effectiveness of the test, but also on adherence, which, for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening remains low. An advance notification letter may increase adherence, however, no population-based randomized trials have been conducted to provide evidence of this. Method: In 2008, a representative sample of the Dutch population (aged 50-74. years) was randomized. All 2493 invitees in group A were sent an advance notification letter, followed two weeks later by a standard invitation. The 2507 invitees in group B only received the standard invitation. Non-respondents in both groups were sent a reminder 6. weeks after the invitation. Results: The advance notification letters resulted in a significantly higher adherence (64.4% versus 61.1%, p-value 0.019). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed no significant interactions between group and age, sex, or socio-economic status. Cost analysis showed that the incremental cost per additional detected advanced neoplasia due to sending an advance notification letter was €957. Conclusion: This population-based randomized trial demonstrates that sending an advance notification letter significantly increases adherence by 3.3%. The incremental cost per additional detected advanced neoplasia is acceptable. We therefore recommend that such letters are incorporated within the standard CRC-screening invitation process. </description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Inter-observer variation in the histological diagnosis of polyps in colorectal cancer screening (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/25905/</link>
      <pubDate>2011-05-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Aim: To determine the inter-observer variation in the histological diagnosis of colorectal polyps. Methods and results: Four hundred and forty polyps were randomly selected from a colorectal cancer screening programme. Polyps were first evaluated by a general (324 polyps) or expert (116 polyps) pathologist, and subsequently re-evaluated by an expert pathologist. Conditional agreement was reported, and inter-observer agreement was determined using kappa statistics. In 421/440 polyps (96%), agreement for their non-adenomatous or adenomatous nature was obtained, corresponding to a very good kappa value of 0.88. For differentiation of adenomas as non-advanced and advanced, consensus was obtained in 266/322 adenomas (83%), with a moderate kappa value of 0.58. For the non-adenomatous or adenomatous nature, both general and expert pathologists, and expert pathologists between each other, showed very good agreement {kappa values of 0.89 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83-0.95] and 0.86 (95% CI 0.73-0.98), respectively}. For categorization of adenomas as non-advanced and advanced, moderate agreement was found between general and expert pathologists, and between expert pathologists [kappa values of 0.56 (95% CI 0.44-0.67) and 0.64 (95% CI 0.43-0.85), respectively]. Conclusions: General and expert pathologists demonstrate very good inter-observer agreement for differentiating non-adenomas from adenomas, but only moderate agreement for non-advanced and advanced adenomas. The considerable variation in differentiating non-advanced and advanced adenomas suggests that more objective criteria are required for risk stratification in screening and surveillance guidelines. </description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Inter-observer variation in the histological diagnosis of polyps in colorectal cancer screening (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/26389/</link>
      <pubDate>2011-05-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Aim: To determine the inter-observer variation in the histological diagnosis of colorectal polyps. Methods and results: Four hundred and forty polyps were randomly selected from a colorectal cancer screening programme. Polyps were first evaluated by a general (324 polyps) or expert (116 polyps) pathologist, and subsequently re-evaluated by an expert pathologist. Conditional agreement was reported, and inter-observer agreement was determined using kappa statistics. In 421/440 polyps (96%), agreement for their non-adenomatous or adenomatous nature was obtained, corresponding to a very good kappa value of 0.88. For differentiation of adenomas as non-advanced and advanced, consensus was obtained in 266/322 adenomas (83%), with a moderate kappa value of 0.58. For the non-adenomatous or adenomatous nature, both general and expert pathologists, and expert pathologists between each other, showed very good agreement {kappa values of 0.89 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83-0.95] and 0.86 (95% CI 0.73-0.98), respectively}. For categorization of adenomas as non-advanced and advanced, moderate agreement was found between general and expert pathologists, and between expert pathologists [kappa values of 0.56 (95% CI 0.44-0.67) and 0.64 (95% CI 0.43-0.85), respectively]. Conclusions: General and expert pathologists demonstrate very good inter-observer agreement for differentiating non-adenomas from adenomas, but only moderate agreement for non-advanced and advanced adenomas. The considerable variation in differentiating non-advanced and advanced adenomas suggests that more objective criteria are required for risk stratification in screening and surveillance guidelines. </description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Diagnostic Yield Improves With Collection of 2 Samples in Fecal Immunochemical Test Screening Without Affecting Attendance (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/23899/</link>
      <pubDate>2011-04-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Background &amp; Aims: The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is superior to the guaiac-based fecal occult blood test in detecting neoplasia. There are not much data on the optimal number of FITs to perform. We conducted a population-based trial to determine attendance and diagnostic yield of 1- and 2-sample FIT screening. Methods: The study included 2 randomly selected groups of subjects aged 50-74 years (1-sample FIT, n = 5007; 2-sample FIT, n = 3197). The 2-sample group was instructed to collect fecal samples on 2 consecutive days. Subjects were referred for colonoscopy when at least 1 sample tested positive (≥50 ng hemoglobin/mL). Results: Attendance was 61.5% in the 1-sample group (2979 of 4845; 95% confidence interval, 60.1%-62.9%) and 61.3% in the 2-sample group (1875 of 3061; 95% confidence interval, 59.6%-63.0%; P = .84). In the 1-sample group 8.1% tested positive, and in the 2-sample group 12.8% had at least 1 positive test outcome and 5.0% had 2 positive test outcomes (P &lt; .05). When the mean from both test results in the 2-sample group was used, 10.1% had a positive test outcome (P &lt; .05). The detection rates for advanced neoplasia were 3.1% in the 1-sample group, 4.1% in the 2-sample group with at least 1 positive test outcome, 2.5% when both test results were positive, and 3.7% among subjects with the mean from both test results being positive. Conclusions: There is no difference in attendance for subjects offered 1- or 2-sample FIT screening. The results allow for the development of efficient FIT screening strategies that can be adapted for local colonoscopy capacities, rather than varying the cut-off value in a 1-sample strategy. </description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Uptake of faecal immunochemical test screening among non-participants in a flexible sigmoidoscopy screening programme (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/25876/</link>
      <pubDate>2011-01-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description></description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Screening for colorectal cancer: Comparison of perceived test burden of guaiac-based faecal occult blood test, faecal immunochemical test and flexible sigmoidoscopy (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/20126/</link>
      <pubDate>2010-07-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Background: Perceived burden of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is an important determinant of participation in subsequent screening rounds and therefore crucial for the effectiveness of a screening programme. This study determined differences in perceived burden and willingness to return for a second screening round among participants of a randomised population-based trial comparing a guaiac-based faecal occult blood test (gFOBT), a faecal immunochemical test (FIT) and flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening. Methods: A representative sample of the Dutch population (aged 50-74 years) was randomised to be invited for gFOBT, FIT and FS screening. A random sample of participants of each group was asked to complete a questionnaire about test burden and willingness to return for CRC screening. Results: In total 402/481 (84%) gFOBT, 530/659 (80%) FIT and 852/1124 (76%) FS screenees returned the questionnaire. The test was reported as burdensome by 2.5% of gFOBT, 1.4% of FIT and 12.9% of FS screenees (comparing gFOBT versus FIT p = 0.05; versus FS p &lt; 0.001). In total 94.1% of gFOBT, 94.0% of FIT and 83.8% of FS screenees were willing to attend successive screening rounds (comparing gFOBT versus FIT p = 0.84; versus FS p &lt; 0.001). Women reported more burden during FS screening than men (18.2% versus 7.7%; p &lt; 0.001). Conclusions: FIT slightly outperforms gFOBT with a lower level of reported discomfort and overall burden. Both FOBTs are better accepted than FS screening. All three tests have a high level of acceptance, which may affect uptake of subsequent screening rounds and should be taken into consideration before implementing a CRC screening programme.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Population-based screening for colorectal cancer (Doctoral Thesis)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/19271/</link>
      <pubDate>2010-04-16T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>The incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) shows considerable geographical differences around
the world. The highest incidence rates are mainly seen in the Western world including North
America, Australia/New Zealand, Western Europe, and Japan. Development countries report
the lowest incidence rates. In Europe, CRC is the second most common diagnosed cancer in
women and third in men (13% of all cancer cases in both women and men). Incidence rates
are somewhat higher in men (1.2:1.0). The lifetime incidence of CRC in patients at average risk
is approximately five percent. Incidence rates show demographic disparities over the last
decades, with a gradual increase in South/Eastern Europe, stabilising numbers in North and
West Europe, and a declining trend in the United States. Age is a major risk factor for the
development of CRC. CRC rarely develops before the age of 40 (IKC), except in patients with a
genetic predisposition. Incidence rates rapidly increase beyond the age of 50.
In Europe, CRC ranked second (12% of all cancer related mortality) in terms of cancer related
mortality 1, despite the significant increase in five-year survival in the last two decades. This
improvement was in particular due to resection of rectal cancer with sharp dissection of the
mesorectum en bloc with the rectum (total mesorectal excision) combined with pre-operative
radiotherapy, and usage of new chemotherapeutic agents in various combinations. Additionally,
improvement in outcome can be attributed to detection of the disease at an earlier
stage due to screening and surveillance programmes.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Preferences for colorectal cancer screening strategies: a discrete choice experiment (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/18602/</link>
      <pubDate>2010-03-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Background:Guidelines underline the role of individual preferences in the selection of a screening test, as insufficient evidence is available to recommend one screening test over another. We conducted a study to determine the preferences of individuals and to predict uptake for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes using various screening tests. Methods:A discrete choice experiment (DCE) questionnaire was distributed among naive subjects, yet to be screened, and previously screened subjects, aged 50-75 years. Subjects were asked to choose between scenarios on the basis of faecal occult blood test (FOBT), flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS), total colonoscopy (TC) with various test-specific screening intervals and mortality reductions, and no screening (opt-out). Results:In total, 489 out of 1498 (33%) screening-naïve subjects (52% male; mean age±s.d. 61±7 years) and 545 out of 769 (71%) previously screened subjects (52% male; mean age±s.d. 61±6 years) returned the questionnaire. The type of screening test, screening interval, and risk reduction of CRC-related mortality influenced subjects' preferences (all P&lt;0.05). Screening-naive and previously screened subjects equally preferred 5-yearly FS and 10-yearly TC (P=0.24; P=0.11), but favoured both strategies to annual FOBT screening (all P-values &lt;0.001) if, based on the literature, realistic risk reduction of CRC-related mortality was applied. Screening-naive and previously screened subjects were willing to undergo a 10-yearly TC instead of a 5-yearly FS to obtain an additional risk reduction of CRC-related mortality of 45% (P&lt;0.001). Conclusion:These data provide insight into the extent by which interval and risk reduction of CRC-related mortality affect preferences for CRC screening tests. Assuming realistic test characteristics, subjects in the target population preferred endoscopic screening over FOBT screening, partly, due to the more favourable risk reduction of CRC-related mortality by endoscopy screening. Increasing the knowledge of potential screenees regarding risk reduction by different screening strategies is, therefore, warranted to prevent unrealistic expectations and to optimise informed choice.British Journal of Cancer advance online publication, 2 March 2010; doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6605566 www.bjcancer.com.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Labeled versus unlabeled discrete choice experiments in health economics: An application to colorectal cancer screening (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/19946/</link>
      <pubDate>2010-03-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Objectives: Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) in health economics commonly present choice sets in an unlabeled form. Labeled choice sets are less abstract and may increase the validity of the results. We empirically compared the feasibility, respondents' trading behavior, and convergent validity between a labeled and an unlabeled DCE for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs in The Netherlands. Methods: A labeled DCE version presented CRC screening test alternatives as "fecal occult blood test," "sigmoidoscopy," and "colonoscopy," whereas the unlabeled DCE version presented them as "screening test A" and "screening test B." Questionnaires were sent to participants and nonparticipants in CRC screening. Results: Total response rate was 276 (39%) out of 712 and 1033 (46%) out of 2267 for unlabeled and labeled DCEs, respectively (P &lt; 0.001). The labels played a significant role in individual choices; approximately 22% of subjects had dominant preferences for screening test labels. The convergent validity was modest to low (participants in CRC screening: r = 0.54; P = 0.01; nonparticipants: r = 0.17; P = 0.45) largely because of different preferences for screening frequency. Conclusion: This study provides important insights in the feasibility and difference in results from labeled and unlabeled DCEs. The inclusion of labels appeared to play a significant role in individual choices but reduced the attention respondents give to the attributes. As a result, unlabeled DCEs may be more suitable to investigate trade-offs between attributes and for respondents who do not have familiarity with the alternative labels, whereas labeled DCEs may be more suitable to explain real-life choices such as uptake of cancer screening.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>What determines individuals' preferences for colorectal cancer screening  programmes? A discrete choice experiment. (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/19856/</link>
      <pubDate>2010-01-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>INTRODUCTION: In many countries uptake of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening remains low. AIM: To assess how procedural characteristics of CRC screening programmes determine preferences for participation and how individuals weigh these against the perceived benefits from participation in CRC screening. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment was conducted among subjects in the age group of 50-75 years, including both screening-naive subjects and participants of a CRC screening programme. Subjects were asked on their preferences for aspects of CRC screening programmes using scenarios based on pain, risk of complications, screening location, preparation, duration of procedure, screening interval and risk reduction of CRC-related death. RESULTS: The response was 31% (156/500) for screening-naive and 57% (124/210) for CRC screening participants. All aspects proved to significantly influence the respondents' preferences. For both groups combined, respondents required an additional relative risk reduction of CRC-related death by a screening programme of 1% for every additional 10 min of duration, 5% in order to expose themselves to a small risk of complications, 10% to accept mild pain, 10% to undergo preparation with an enema, 12% to use 0.75l of oral preparation combined with 12h fasting and 32% to use an extensive bowel preparation. Screening intervals shorter than 10 years were significantly preferred to a 10-year screening interval. CONCLUSION: This study shows that especially type of bowel preparation, risk reduction of CRC related death and length of screening interval influence CRC screening preferences. Furthermore, improving awareness on CRC mortality reduction by CRC screening may increase uptake.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>What determines individuals' preferences for colorectal cancer screening  programmes? A discrete choice experiment. (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/19864/</link>
      <pubDate>2010-01-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>INTRODUCTION: In many countries uptake of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening remains low. AIM: To assess how procedural characteristics of CRC screening programmes determine preferences for participation and how individuals weigh these against the perceived benefits from participation in CRC screening. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment was conducted among subjects in the age group of 50-75 years, including both screening-naive subjects and participants of a CRC screening programme. Subjects were asked on their preferences for aspects of CRC screening programmes using scenarios based on pain, risk of complications, screening location, preparation, duration of procedure, screening interval and risk reduction of CRC-related death. RESULTS: The response was 31% (156/500) for screening-naive and 57% (124/210) for CRC screening participants. All aspects proved to significantly influence the respondents' preferences. For both groups combined, respondents required an additional relative risk reduction of CRC-related death by a screening programme of 1% for every additional 10 min of duration, 5% in order to expose themselves to a small risk of complications, 10% to accept mild pain, 10% to undergo preparation with an enema, 12% to use 0.75l of oral preparation combined with 12h fasting and 32% to use an extensive bowel preparation. Screening intervals shorter than 10 years were significantly preferred to a 10-year screening interval. CONCLUSION: This study shows that especially type of bowel preparation, risk reduction of CRC related death and length of screening interval influence CRC screening preferences. Furthermore, improving awareness on CRC mortality reduction by CRC screening may increase uptake.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Screening for colorectal cancer: Randomised trial comparing guaiac-based and immunochemical faecal occult blood testing and flexible sigmoidoscopy (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/27660/</link>
      <pubDate>2010-01-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Background: Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) is widely accepted, but there is no consensus on the preferred strategy. We conducted a randomised trial comparing participation and detection rates (DR) per screenee of guaiac-based faecal occult blood test (gFOBT), immunochemical FOBT (FIT), and flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) for CRC screening. Methods: A representative sample of the Dutch population (n=15 011), aged 50-74 years, was 1:1:1 randomised prior to invitation to one of the three screening strategies. Colonoscopy was indicated for screenees with a positive gFOBT or FIT, and for those in whom FS revealed a polyp with a diameter &gt;10 mm; adenoma with &gt;25% villous component or high grade dysplasia; serrated adenoma; &gt;3 adenomas; &gt;20 hyperplastic polyps; or CRC. Results: The participation rate was 49.5% (95% confidence interval (CI) 48.1 to 50.9%) for gFOBT, 61.5% (CI, 60.1 to 62.9%) for FIT and 32.4% (CI, 31.1 to 33.7%) for FS screening. gFOBT was positive in 2.8%, FIT in 4.8% and FS in 10.2%. The DR of advanced neoplasia was significantly higher in the FIT (2.4%; OR, 2.0; CI, 1.3 to 3.1) and the FS arm (8.0%; OR, 7.0; CI, 4.6 to 10.7) than the gFOBT arm (1.1%). FS demonstrated a higher diagnostic yield of advanced neoplasia per 100 invitees (2.4; CI, 2.0 to 2.8) than gFOBT (0.6; CI, 0.4 to 0.8) or FIT (1.5; CI, 1.2 to 1.9) screening. Conclusion: This randomised population-based CRCscreening trial demonstrated superior participation and detection rates for FIT compared to gFOBT screening. FIT screening should therefore be strongly preferred over gFOBT screening. FS screening demonstrated a higher diagnostic yield per 100 invitees than both FOBTs.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Using CT colonography as a triage technique after a positive faecal occult blood test in colorectal cancer screening (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/24891/</link>
      <pubDate>2009-09-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of CT colonography (CTC) as a triage technique in faecal occult blood test (FOBT)-positive screening participants. Methods: Consecutive guaiac (G-FOBT) and immunochemical (I-FOBT) FOBT-positive patients scheduled for colonoscopy underwent CTC with iodine tagging bowel preparation. Each CTC was read independently by two experienced observers. Per patient sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) were calculated based on double reading with different CTC cut-off lesion sizes using segmental unblinded colonoscopy as the reference standard. The acceptability of the technique to patients was evaluated with questionnaires. Results: 302 FOBT-positive patients were included (54 G-FOBT and 248 I-FOBT). 22 FOBT-positive patients (7%) had a colorectal carcinoma and 211 (70%) had a lesion ≥6 mm. Participants considered colonoscopy more burdensome than CTC (p&lt;0.05). Using a 6 mm CTC size cut-off, per patient sensitivity for CTC was 91% (95% CI 85% to 91%) and specificity was 69% (95% CI 60% to 89%) for the detection of colonoscopy lesions ≥6 mm. The PPV of CTC was 87% (95% CI 80% to 93%) and NPV 77% (95% CI 69% to 85%). Using CTC as a triage technique in 100 FOBT-positive patients would mean that colonoscopy could be prevented in 28 patients while missing ≥10 mm lesions in 2 patients. Conclusion: CTC with limited bowel preparation has reasonable predictive values in an FOBT-positive population and a higher acceptability to patients than colonoscopy. However, due to the high prevalence of clinically relevant lesions in FOBT-positive patients, CTC is unlikely to be an efficient triage technique in a first round FOBT population screening programme.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Screening for colorectal cancer: Random comparison of guaiac and immunochemical faecal occult blood testing at different cut-off levels (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/16134/</link>
      <pubDate>2009-04-07T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Immunochemical faecal occult blood testing (FIT) provides quantitative test results, which allows optimisation of the cut-off value for follow-up colonoscopy. We conducted a randomised population-based trial to determine test characteristics of FIT (OC-Sensor micro, Eiken, Japan) screening at different cut-off levels and compare these with guaiac-based faecal occult blood test (gFOBT) screening in an average risk population. A representative sample of the Dutch population (n10 011), aged 50-74 years, was 1: 1 randomised before invitation to gFOBT and FIT screening. Colonoscopy was offered to screenees with a positive gFOBT or FIT (cut-off 50 ng haemoglobin/ml). When varying the cut-off level between 50 and 200 ng ml 1, the positivity rate of FIT ranged between 8.1% (95% CI: 7.2-9.1%) and 3.5% (95% CI: 2.9-4.2%), the detection rate of advanced neoplasia ranged between 3.2% (95% CI: 2.6-3.9%) and 2.1% (95% CI: 1.6-2.6%), and the specificity ranged between 95.5% (95% CI: 94.5-96.3%) and 98.8% (95% CI: 98.4-99.0%). At a cut-off value of 75 ng ml 1, the detection rate was two times higher than with gFOBT screening (gFOBT: 1.2%; FIT: 2.5%; P0.001), whereas the number needed to scope (NNscope) to find one screenee with advanced neoplasia was similar (2.2 vs 1.9; P0.69). Immunochemical faecal occult blood testing is considerably more effective than gFOBT screening within the range of tested cut-off values. From our experience, a cut-off value of 75 ng ml 1 provided an adequate positivity rate and an acceptable trade-off between detection rate and NNscope.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Transient postprandial ischemia is associated with increased intestinal fatty acid binding protein in patients with chronic gastrointestinal ischemia (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/18063/</link>
      <pubDate>2009-03-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Background Chronic gastrointestinal ischemia (CGI) is still a difficult diagnosis to make. Currently, the only diagnostic with an acceptable sensitivity for actual mucosal ischemia is gastrointestinal tonometry. However, tonometry is a cumbersome and invasive diagnostic test We are in need of a more simple, noninvasive test for diagnosing mucosal ischemia. A sensitive and early serum marker could be of great use in this setting. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of promising serum markers for mucosal ischemia [intestinal fatty acid binding protein (I-FABP), D-lactate, and lipopolysaccharide] and compared findings with corresponding gastrointestinal tonometry measurements. Methods Patients referred for evaluation of CGI were included. All patients had visualization of abdominal arteries and gastrointestinal tonometry. Before, during, and after tonometry blood samples were drawn for measurements of serum markers. Results Forty-nine patients were eligible for evaluation. CGI was diagnosed in 24 (49%) patients. The baseline measurements showed a significant increase in I-FABP before exercise tonometry in the abnormal-response groups compared with the normal-response group, respectively, 0.45 and 1.3μg/I (P= 0.04). An abnormal response on meal tonometry was associated with increased I-FABP levels, 1, 2, and 4 h after tonometry, compared with the patients with a normal response, respectively, 1.26, 1.11, and 0.58 μg/I (P= 0.048, 0.01, and 0.03). The measurements of D-lactate and lipopolysaccharide were undetectable, or low, at all different points of time. Conclusion Transient postprandial mucosal ischemia, as detected with gastrointestinal tonometry, is associated with increased I-FABP levels, indicating epithelial damage. Late markers for mucosal ischemia remained negative.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Colon tumors and colonoscopy (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/14549/</link>
      <pubDate>2008-10-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description></description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Hepatocellular carcinoma complicating biliary atresia after Kasai portoenterostomy (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/29878/</link>
      <pubDate>2008-03-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Kasai portoenterostomy (PE) increases the survival for children with biliary atresia (BA) and consequently postpones subsequential liver transplantation. All long-term survivors, however, develop complications of biliary cirrhosis. We report a case of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in a 19-year-old male patient with BA and Kasai PE. The preoperative abdominal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging showed a large hepatic mass (diameter 10 cm). The serum α-fetoprotein level was within normal range. Pathologic findings of the mass, after orthotopic liver transplantation, demonstrated a well-differentiated HCC (T1N0M0). HCC is a rare complication of BA, but will intensively impair the survival. Therefore, clinicians should be alert to the development of HCC in this very young patient group. Repeated sequential magnetic resonance imaging of the native liver in patients with Kasai PE is necessary to monitor possible malignant transformation of liver nodules that may potentially develop as a result of chronic cholestatic liver disease. </description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Fat mass accumulation during childhood determines insulin sensitivity in early adulthood (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/28844/</link>
      <pubDate>2008-02-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Background/Objectives: Low birth weight and postnatal catch-up growth have been associated with an increased risk for diabetes mellitus type II (DMII). We evaluated the contribution of birth and adult size, body composition, and waist-to-hip ratio to DMII risk factors in young adulthood. Methods: In a group of 136 young adults, aged 18-24 yr, insulin sensitivity and disposition index were determined by frequent sampling iv glucose tolerance test. The association of clinical parameters with these variables was analyzed with multiple regression modeling. In addition, differences in insulin sensitivity and disposition index, a measure for β-cell function, were analyzed in four subgroups, young adults either born small for gestational age SGA with short stature (n = 25) or SGA with catch-up growth (n = 23) or born appropriate for gestational age with idiopathic short stature (n = 23) or with normal stature (controls) (n = 26). Results: Fat mass was the only significant predictor of insulin sensitivity, whereas birth length and birth weight were not significant. After correction for age, gender, and adult body size, insulin sensitivity was significantly lower in subjects born SGA with catch-up growth compared with controls. None of the variables had a significant influence on disposition index, and there was no significant difference in disposition index between the subgroups. Conclusions: Our data show that a higher body fat mass at 21 yr is associated with reduced insulin sensitivity, independent of birth size. These findings have important implications for public health practice. Copyright </description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Clinical Challenges and Images in GI (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/35295/</link>
      <pubDate>2007-08-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description></description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>