Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Noncolorectal Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
메타분석
2/5 보강
TL;DR
Major progress is highlighted in intelligent probe designs that respond to disease microenvironments for simultaneous drug delivery and dynamic SERS feedback; closed-loop theranostic systems that directly link diagnostic outcomes to therapeutic actions; and demonstrations of improved precision and safety across oncology, infectious diseases, and other fields.
OpenAlex 토픽 ·
Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
Multiple and Secondary Primary Cancers
Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
ℹ️ 이 논문은 무료 전문이 아직 없습니다. 코퍼스 전체의 43.8%는 무료 가능 (통계 →) · 🏥 기관 EZproxy로 시도
Major progress is highlighted in intelligent probe designs that respond to disease microenvironments for simultaneous drug delivery and dynamic SERS feedback; closed-loop theranostic systems that dire
- p-value p=0.092
- OR 1.39
APA
Sanjeev Bista, Momtafin Khan, et al. (2026). Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Noncolorectal Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.. American journal of preventive medicine, 70(5), 108239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2025.108239
MLA
Sanjeev Bista, et al.. "Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Noncolorectal Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.." American journal of preventive medicine, vol. 70, no. 5, 2026, pp. 108239.
PMID
41448287 ↗
Abstract 한글 요약
[INTRODUCTION] This study aimed to determine the prevalence of colorectal cancer screening among cancer survivors and compare the likelihood of colorectal cancer screening among cancer survivors with that of the cancer-free general population.
[METHODS] A systematic search of MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE, PubMed, and CINAHL databases from inception through September 16, 2024 was conducted. Studies reporting colorectal cancer screening among cancer survivors or in both cancer survivors and cancer-free controls were included. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted to pool estimates. Analyses were performed across primary cancer sites where at least 3 studies were identified.
[RESULTS] Of the 2,492 articles identified, 59 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The overall pooled prevalence of colorectal cancer screening (up to date for screening or had been screened during a specific time period after noncolorectal cancer diagnosis) was 0.53 (95% CI=0.46, 0.61), with estimates ranging from 0.72 (prostate) to 0.51 (breast) across primary cancer sites. Cancer survivors were more likely to participate in colorectal cancer screening than cancer-free controls (OR=1.39, 95% CI=1.26, 1.52), but there was some evidence of publication bias (Egger's test p=0.092). Study design, method of colorectal cancer screening ascertainment (self-report versus medical records), and first primary cancer site were significant sources of heterogeneity.
[DISCUSSION] Cancer survivors were more likely to undergo colorectal cancer screening than cancer-free controls, but overall rates were well below generally recommended levels for population-based screening. Future studies should evaluate the predictors of nonadherence to colorectal cancer screening among cancer survivors to inform policymakers in targeting populations with lower screening rates.
[METHODS] A systematic search of MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE, PubMed, and CINAHL databases from inception through September 16, 2024 was conducted. Studies reporting colorectal cancer screening among cancer survivors or in both cancer survivors and cancer-free controls were included. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted to pool estimates. Analyses were performed across primary cancer sites where at least 3 studies were identified.
[RESULTS] Of the 2,492 articles identified, 59 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The overall pooled prevalence of colorectal cancer screening (up to date for screening or had been screened during a specific time period after noncolorectal cancer diagnosis) was 0.53 (95% CI=0.46, 0.61), with estimates ranging from 0.72 (prostate) to 0.51 (breast) across primary cancer sites. Cancer survivors were more likely to participate in colorectal cancer screening than cancer-free controls (OR=1.39, 95% CI=1.26, 1.52), but there was some evidence of publication bias (Egger's test p=0.092). Study design, method of colorectal cancer screening ascertainment (self-report versus medical records), and first primary cancer site were significant sources of heterogeneity.
[DISCUSSION] Cancer survivors were more likely to undergo colorectal cancer screening than cancer-free controls, but overall rates were well below generally recommended levels for population-based screening. Future studies should evaluate the predictors of nonadherence to colorectal cancer screening among cancer survivors to inform policymakers in targeting populations with lower screening rates.
🏷️ 키워드 / MeSH 📖 같은 키워드 OA만
같은 제1저자의 인용 많은 논문 (1)
🏷️ 같은 키워드 · 무료전문 — 이 논문 MeSH/keyword 기반
- A Phase I Study of Hydroxychloroquine and Suba-Itraconazole in Men with Biochemical Relapse of Prostate Cancer (HITMAN-PC): Dose Escalation Results.
- Self-management of male urinary symptoms: qualitative findings from a primary care trial.
- Clinical and Liquid Biomarkers of 20-Year Prostate Cancer Risk in Men Aged 45 to 70 Years.
- Diagnostic accuracy of Ga-PSMA PET/CT versus multiparametric MRI for preoperative pelvic invasion in the patients with prostate cancer.
- Association of patient health education with the postoperative health related quality of life in low- intermediate recurrence risk differentiated thyroid cancer patients.
- Early local immune activation following intra-operative radiotherapy in human breast tissue.