Population-based screening for early detection and treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC) and precursor lesions, using evidence-based methods, can be effective in populations with a significant burden of the disease provided the services are of high quality. Multidisciplinary, evidence-based guidelines for quality assurance in CRC screening and diagnosis have been developed by experts in a project co-financed by the European Union. The 450-page guidelines were published in book format by the European Commission in 2010.They include 10 chapters and over 250 recommendations, individually graded according to the strength of the recommendation and the supporting evidence. Adoption of the recommendations can improve and maintain the quality and effectiveness of an entire screening process, including identification and invitation of the target population, diagnosis and management of the disease and appropriate surveillance in people with detected lesions. To make the principles, recommendations and standards in the guidelines known to a wider professional and scientific community and to facilitate their use in the scientific literature, the original content is presented in journal format in an open-access Supplement of Endoscopy. The editors have prepared the present overview to inform readers of the comprehensive scope and content of the guidelines. IntroductionAccording to recent estimates by the International Agency for Research on Cancer [1], colorectal cancer (CRC) is the most common cancer in Europe with 432 000 new cases reported annually in men and women combined. It is the second most common cause of cancer deaths in Europe with 212 000 deaths reported in 2008.Worldwide, CRC ranks third in incidence and fourth in mortality with an estimated 1.2 million cases and 0.6 million deaths annually. In the 27 Member States of the European Union (EU), CRC ranks first in incidence and second in mortality, with approximately 334000 new cases and 149000 deaths estimated in 2008.Even in those Member States in the lower range for age-standardized rates of CRC, the burden of disease is significantly greater when compared with many other HHS Public Access Author Manuscript Author ManuscriptAuthor ManuscriptAuthor Manuscript regions of the world (see reference [1]). CRC is therefore an important health problem across the EU.Screening can be effective in cancer control in populations with a significant burden of CRC, provided the services are of high quality [2]. The aim of CRC screening is to lower the burden of cancer in the population by discovering disease in its early, latent stages [3]. Evidence-based methods permit treatment that is more effective than if disease is diagnosed later when symptoms have occurred. Early treatment of invasive lesions, for example by endoscopic resection of early CRC, can also be less detrimental for quality of life. The endoscopic removal of pre-malignant lesions also reduces the incidence of CRC by avoiding the progression to cancer. Randomized trials in people of average risk invite...

The analytical algorithm of Lynch syndrome (LS) is increasingly complex. BRAF V600E mutation and MLH1 promoter hypermethylation have been proposed as a screening tool for the identification of LS. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical usefulness and cost-effectiveness of both somatic alterations to improve the yield of the diagnostic algorithm of LS. A total of 122 colorectal tumors from individuals with family history of colorectal cancer that showed microsatellite instability and/or loss of mismatch repair (MMR) protein expression were studied. MMR germline mutations were detected in 57 cases (40 MLH1, 15 MSH2 and 2 MSH6). BRAF V600E mutation was assessed by single-nucleotide primer extension. MLH1 promoter hypermethylation was assessed by methylation-specific multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification in a subset of 71 cases with loss of MLH1 protein. A decision model was developed to estimate the incremental costs of alternative case-finding methods for detecting MLH1 mutation carriers. One-way sensitivity analysis was performed to assess robustness of estimations. Sensitivity of the absence of BRAF mutations for depiction of LS patients was 96% (23/24) and specificity was 28% (13/47). Specificity of MLH1 promoter hypermethylation for depiction of sporadic tumors was 66% (31/47) and sensitivity of 96% (23/24). The cost per additional mutation detected when using hypermethylation analysis was lower when compared with BRAF study and germinal MLH1 mutation study. Somatic hypermethylation of MLH1 is an accurate and cost-effective pre-screening method in the selection of patients that are candidates for MLH1 germline analysis when LS is suspected and MLH1 protein expression is absent.

Background:The Cancer Fast-track Programme's aim was to reduce the time that elapsed between well-founded suspicion of breast, colorectal and lung cancer and the start of initial treatment in Catalonia (Spain). We sought to analyse its implementation and overall effectiveness.Methods:A quantitative analysis of the programme was performed using data generated by the hospitals on the basis of seven fast-track monitoring indicators for the period 2006–2009. In addition, we conducted a qualitative study, based on 83 semistructured interviews with primary and specialised health professionals and health administrators, to obtain their perception of the programme's implementation.Results:About half of all new patients with breast, lung or colorectal cancer were diagnosed via the fast track, though the cancer detection rate declined across the period. Mean time from detection of suspected cancer in primary care to start of initial treatment was 32 days for breast, 30 for colorectal and 37 for lung cancer (2009). Professionals associated with the implementation of the programme showed that general practitioners faced with suspicion of cancer had changed their conduct with the aim of preventing lags. Furthermore, hospitals were found to have pursued three specific implementation strategies (top-down, consensus-based and participatory), which made for the cohesion and sustainability of the circuits.Conclusion:The programme has contributed to speeding up diagnostic assessment and treatment of patients with suspicion of cancer, and to clarifying the patient pathway between primary and specialised care.

Aims:To compare different methods in order to assess adherence and persistence with oral endocrine therapy in women diagnosed with breast cancer (BC) in Catalonia.Materials and methods:This study covered all women newly diagnosed with stage I, II or IIIa BC and positive hormone receptors at six hospitals in Catalonia (Spain) in 2004. Adherence was assessed on the basis of physician report and patient self-report using a telephone questionnaire. Persistence was measured by refill prescriptions. We used the Kappa index to compare adherence measures and logistic regression to evaluate adherence-related risk factors.Results:The study covered a total of 692 women. Adherence ranged from 92% (self-report) to 94.7% (physician report), depending on the measure used; persistence was 74.7% at 5 years of follow-up. Low concordance between measures was observed (Kappa range: 0.018–0.267). Patients aged 50–74 years showed higher adherence than those aged <50 years. Adherence was also associated with: adjuvant chemotherapy and sequential hormonal therapy.Conclusions:Concordance between the different measures was remarkably low, indicating the need for further research. Adherence is an issue in the management of BC patients taking oral drugs, and should be assessed in clinical practice.