General Practice and Primary Care - Research Publications

Permanent URI for this collection

http://hdl.handle.net/11343/217

Filters

2022 - 2023 2
2
Reset filters

Settings
Statistics
Citations
Author: Chondros, Panagiota × Author: Walter, Fiona × Start date: 2022 ×

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Item
    No Preview Available
    The Colorectal cancer RISk Prediction (CRISP) trial: a randomised controlled trial of a decision support tool for risk-stratified colorectal cancer screening
    Emery, JD ; Jenkins, MA ; Saya, S ; Chondros, P ; Oberoi, J ; Milton, S ; Novy, K ; Habgood, E ; Karnchanachari, N ; Pirotta, M ; Trevena, L ; Bickerstaffe, A ; Lourenco, RDA ; Crothers, A ; Ouakrim, DA ; Flander, L ; Dowty, JG ; Walter, FM ; Clark, M ; Doncovio, S ; Etemadmoghadam, D ; Fishman, G ; Macrae, F ; Winship, I ; McIntosh, JG (ROYAL COLL GENERAL PRACTITIONERS, 2023-08)
    BACKGROUND: A risk-stratified approach to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening could result in a more acceptable balance of benefits and harms, and be more cost-effective. AIM: To determine the effect of a consultation in general practice using a computerised risk assessment and decision support tool (Colorectal cancer RISk Prediction, CRISP) on risk-appropriate CRC screening. DESIGN AND SETTING: Randomised controlled trial in 10 general practices in Melbourne, Australia, from May 2017 to May 2018. METHOD: Participants were recruited from a consecutive sample of patients aged 50-74 years attending their GP. Intervention consultations included CRC risk assessment using the CRISP tool and discussion of CRC screening recommendations. Control group consultations focused on lifestyle CRC risk factors. The primary outcome was risk-appropriate CRC screening at 12 months. RESULTS: A total of 734 participants (65.1% of eligible patients) were randomised (369 intervention, 365 control); the primary outcome was determined for 722 (362 intervention, 360 control). There was a 6.5% absolute increase (95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.28 to 13.2) in risk-appropriate screening in the intervention compared with the control group (71.5% versus 65.0%; odds ratio [OR] 1.36, 95% CI = 0.99 to 1.86, P = 0.057). In those due CRC screening during follow-up, there was a 20.3% (95% CI = 10.3 to 30.4) increase (intervention 59.8% versus control 38.9%; OR 2.31, 95% CI = 1.51 to 3.53, P<0.001) principally by increasing faecal occult blood testing in those at average risk. CONCLUSION: A risk assessment and decision support tool increases risk-appropriate CRC screening in those due screening. The CRISP intervention could commence in people in their fifth decade to ensure people start CRC screening at the optimal age with the most cost-effective test.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    The SCRIPT trial: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial of a polygenic risk score to tailor colorectal cancer screening in primary care
    Saya, S ; Boyd, L ; Chondros, P ; McNamara, M ; King, M ; Milton, S ; Lourenco, RDA ; Clark, M ; Fishman, G ; Marker, J ; Ostroff, C ; Allman, R ; Walter, FM ; Buchanan, D ; Winship, I ; McIntosh, J ; Macrae, F ; Jenkins, M ; Emery, J (BMC, 2022-09-27)
    BACKGROUND: Polygenic risk scores (PRSs) can predict the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) and target screening more precisely than current guidelines using age and family history alone. Primary care, as a far-reaching point of healthcare and routine provider of cancer screening and risk information, may be an ideal location for their widespread implementation. METHODS: This trial aims to determine whether the SCRIPT intervention results in more risk-appropriate CRC screening after 12 months in individuals attending general practice, compared with standard cancer risk reduction information. The SCRIPT intervention consists of a CRC PRS, tailored risk-specific screening recommendations and a risk report for participants and their GP, delivered in general practice. Patients aged between 45 and 70 inclusive, attending their GP, will be approached for participation. For those over 50, only those overdue for CRC screening will be eligible to participate. Two hundred and seventy-four participants will be randomised to the intervention or control arms, stratified by general practice, using a computer-generated allocation sequence. The primary outcome is risk-appropriate CRC screening after 12 months. For those in the intervention arm, risk-appropriate screening is defined using PRS-derived risk; for those in the control arm, it is defined using family history and national screening guidelines. Timing, type and results of the previous screening are considered in both arms. Objective health service data will capture screening behaviour. Secondary outcomes include cancer-specific worry, risk perception, predictors of CRC screening behaviour, screening intentions and health service use at 1, 6 and 12 months post-intervention delivery. DISCUSSION: This trial aims to determine whether a PRS-derived personalised CRC risk estimate delivered in primary care increases risk-appropriate CRC screening. A future population risk-stratified CRC screening programme could incorporate risk assessment within primary care while encouraging adherence to targeted screening recommendations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12621000092897p. Registered on 1 February 2021.