• Br J Surg · Mar 2019

    Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study

    Sex differences in faecal occult blood test screening for colorectal cancer.

    • L Koskenvuo, N Malila, J Pitkäniemi, J Miettinen, S Heikkinen, and V Sallinen.
    • Department of Abdominal Surgery, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
    • Br J Surg. 2019 Mar 1; 106 (4): 436-447.

    BackgroundThis analysis of patients in a randomized population-based health services study was done to determine the effects of faecal occult blood test (FOBT) screening of colorectal cancer (CRC) in outcomes beyond mortality, and to obtain explanations for potential sex differences in screening effectiveness.MethodsIn the Finnish FOBT screening programme (2004-2011), people aged 60-69 years were randomized into the screening and control arms. Differences in incidence, symptoms, tumour location, TNM categories, non-vital outcomes and survival in the screening and control arms were analysed.ResultsFrom 321 311 individuals randomized, 743 patients with screening-detected tumours and 617 control patients with CRC were analysed. CRC was less common in women than in men (0·34 versus 0·50 per cent; risk ratio (RR) 0·82, 95 per cent c.i. 0·74 to 0·91) and women were less often asymptomatic (16·7 versus 22·0 per cent; RR 0·76, 0·61 to 0·93). Women more often had right-sided tumours (32·0 versus 21·3 per cent; RR 1·51, 1·26 to 1·80). Among men with left-sided tumours, those in the screening arm had lower N (RR 1·23, 1·02 to 1·48) and M (RR 1·57, 1·14 to 2·17) categories, as well as a higher overall survival rate than those in the control arm. Furthermore among men with left-sided tumours, non-radical resections (26·2 versus 15·7 per cent; RR 1·67, 1·22 to 2·30) and postoperative chemotherapy sessions (61·6 versus 48·2 per cent; RR 1·28, 1·10 to 1·48) were more frequent in the control arm. Similar benefits of screening were not detected in men with right-sided tumours or in women.ConclusionBiennial FOBT screening seems to be effective in terms of improving several different outcomes in men, but not in women. Differences in incidence, symptoms and tumour location may explain the differences in screening efficacy between sexes.© 2018 The Authors. BJS published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of BJS Society Ltd.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,624,503 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.