Colorectal Cancer Screening Rates Still Low: CDC Study Finds

Publication
Article
Oncology NEWS InternationalOncology NEWS International Vol 10 No 5
Volume 10
Issue 5

WASHINGTON-Colorectal cancer screening rates have risen slightly since 1997 but remain at low levels, according to a report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The report compared data from the 1999 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS)-a random-digit phone survey of residents of the United States and Puerto Rico-with findings from the 1997 BRFSS. Respondents over age 50 were asked about colorectal cancer screening.

WASHINGTON—Colorectal cancer screening rates have risen slightly since 1997 but remain at low levels, according to a report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The report compared data from the 1999 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS)—a random-digit phone survey of residents of the United States and Puerto Rico—with findings from the 1997 BRFSS. Respondents over age 50 were asked about colorectal cancer screening.

In 1999, 44% of the respondents reported receiving either a fecal occult blood test (FOBT) in the year before being surveyed and/or a sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy exam within the previous 5 years, compared with 41% in 1997 who reported getting an FOBT and/or sigmoidoscopy or proctoscopy within the same time spans.

The highest FOBT use in the 1999 survey was in the District of Columbia (36.4%) and the lowest was in Puerto Rico (8.2%). For sigmoidoscopy/colon-oscopy, the high was 46.1% in Delaware and the low 20.4% in Puerto Rico.

Newsletter

Stay up to date on recent advances in the multidisciplinary approach to cancer.

Recent Videos
Updated results from the BREAKWATER study seemed to be most impactful to the CRC space, according to Michael J. Pishvaian, MD, PhD.
Providing easier access to ancillary services for patients with PDAC who live farther away from the treatment center may help them complete the treatment regimen.
Future research will aim to assess the efficacy of PIPAC-MMC plus systemic therapy vs systemic therapy alone in patients with peritoneal tumors.
Although small incision surgery may serve as a conduit to deliver PIPAC-MMC, it may confer benefits in the staging and treatment of peritoneal tumors.
Patients with peritoneal metastases were historically associated with limited survival and low consideration for clinical trials.
Prolonging systemic therapy in patients with gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancers may offer better outcomes than radiation therapy.
Related Content