Vahdat, Vahab

e15647 Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening offers an opportunity to prevent invasive disease by detecting and removing precancerous lesions. Colonoscopy-based detection of adenomas and serrated polyps is strongly associated with reduced risk of interval CRC. While the performance of noninvasive CRC screening tests is well described, comparative evidence on adenoma detection across screening colonoscopy and stool-based strategies with follow-up colonoscopy remains limited. We conducted a systematic review to compare adenoma detection across CRC screening modalities. Methods: MEDLINE (PubMed) and Embase were searched from January 1, 2000, through July 10, 2025, for peer-reviewed, U.S.-based studies reporting colonoscopy among average-risk adults aged ≥45 years, who underwent screening colonoscopy or follow-up colonoscopy after a positive stool-based screening test [fecal immunochemical test (FIT) or multi-target stool DNA (mt-sDNA) test]. The primary outcome was the detection of one or more adenomas at colonoscopy. High-risk or surveillance cohorts, AI-assisted colonoscopy, diagnostic accuracy trials, and non-U.S. studies were excluded. Results: Among 7,710 de-duplicated records, 147 studies underwent full-text review, and 47 studies were included in quantitative synthesis, with reported adenoma detection for screening colonoscopy alone (n = 31), follow-up colonoscopy after a positive FIT alone (n = 4), follow-up colonoscopy after a positive mt-sDNA test alone (n = 4), and for more than one of the screening strategies of interest (n = 8). Across included studies, overall adenoma detection differed by screening pathway. Follow-up colonoscopy after a positive mt-sDNA test demonstrated the highest adenoma detection (66.3%; 95% CI, 61.2-71.1), with lower adenoma detection observed for colonoscopy after a positive FIT (50.6%; 95% CI, 43.4-57.8) and screening colonoscopy alone (33.8%; 95% CI, 30.9-36.8) (Table 1). Conclusions: Detection of adenomas was highest following colonoscopy performed after a positive mt-sDNA test compared with FIT-positive follow-up or screening colonoscopy alone. These findings highlight differences in downstream detection across CRC screening tests and suggest that, in settings where colonoscopy resources are constrained, initial mt-sDNA screening with timely follow-up colonoscopy may help prioritize patients most likely to benefit. CRC screening modality No. of Studies Adenoma detected Study population Proportion, % (95% CI) Heterogeneity, I² (%) Between-study variance (τ 2 ) P-value* mt-sDNA 8 17,436 29,098 66.3 (61.2-71.1) 94.6 0.0924 <0.0001 FIT 11 17,588 32,630 50.6 (43.4-57.8) 94.0 0.2187 <0.0001 Screening colonoscopy 38 2,351,801 6,378,891 33.8 (30.9-36.8) 99.8 0.1710 NA *P-value represents adenoma detection vs. screening colonoscopy adenoma detection.

ABSTRACT Background Several colorectal cancer (CRC) screening modalities are guideline-recommended in the United States, yet they vary considerably in screening interval and real-world adherence. As a result, single-round test performance may not reflect cumulative effectiveness over time. This study compared the 10-year longitudinal outcomes of two CRC screening strategies— triennial next-generation multitarget stool DNA testing (ng mt-sDNA) and decennial screening colonoscopy. Methods This study used the validated, microsimulation-based Colorectal Cancer and Adenoma Incidence and Mortality (CRC-AIM) model to estimate 10-year cumulative outcomes for two guideline-recommended screening strategies: triennial ng mt-sDNA and decennial colonoscopy. Model inputs included test-specific performance and real-world adherence. Outcomes included CRC and precancerous lesions detected, CRC mortality reductions, and life-years gained (LYG). Sensitivity analyses examined the effects of varying both screening adherence and follow-up colonoscopy adherence. Results Over 10 years per 1,000 individuals offered screening, the ng mt-sDNA screening test detected 13% more precancerous lesions and 11% more CRC cases than colonoscopy, with a greater proportion of CRCs identified through screening rather than symptomatic detection. ng mt-sDNA resulted in greater CRC mortality reduction (33% vs 20%) and 62% more life-years gained, with consistent findings across sensitivity analyses. Conclusions With real-world adherence, screening with triennial ng mt-sDNA demonstrates superior cumulative effectiveness compared with decennial colonoscopy, driven by higher adherence and favorable longitudinal performance. These findings support the expanded use of noninvasive stool-based screening to reduce CRC mortality and alleviate capacity constraints associated with colonoscopy-based screening. Broader adoption of ng mt-sDNA may enhance population-level CRC prevention by increasing participation and improving early detection across the screening eligible population. Plain language summary Colorectal cancer screening tests are recommended at different time intervals and completed at different adherence rates in clinical practice. The analysis used a validated simulation model to compare 10-year outcomes of triennial next-generation multi-target stool DNA test (ng mt-sDNA) with a single colonoscopy, accounting for real-world screening and follow-up colonoscopy adherence. Our findings indicate that repeated ng mt-sDNA provides greater cumulative screening effectiveness than colonoscopy over a 10-year period.

Abstract Background Recommended noninvasive strategies for average-risk colorectal cancer (CRC) screening include multitarget stool DNA and fecal immunochemical test from ages 45 to 75 years. With new clinical trials, performance data for next-generation multitarget stool DNA, multitarget stool RNA, and blood-based screening tests are now available. This decision analytical model study evaluated the estimated benefit-to-burden ratio by means of efficient frontiers for noninvasive established and emerging CRC screening strategies. Methods Outcomes were estimated using the Colorectal Cancer and Adenoma Incidence and Mortality microsimulation model for average-risk individuals in the United States. Screening strategies were next-generation multitarget stool DNA (an updated marker panel), fecal immunochemical tests, multitarget stool RNA, or blood-based tests every 1-3 years, over various age ranges. Test performance inputs were derived from recent large clinical trials. A strategy was deemed efficient if no other strategy provided more life-years gained with equivalent or fewer lifetime colonoscopies and near-efficient if within 3 days of life-years gained of the efficient frontier. Results All modeled screening strategies resulted in life-years gained vs no screening. No strategy using blood-based tests was efficient or near-efficient. Overall, 10 strategies were efficient (6 next-generation multitarget stool DNA and 4 fecal immunochemical tests), including 2 strategies among those ages 45-75 years (biennial and triennial next-generation multitarget stool DNA). Overall, 22 strategies were near-efficient, including 4 strategies among those ages 45-75 years (annual, biennial, or triennial fecal immunochemical test; annual next-generation multitarget stool DNA). Conclusion Based on this modeling study, next-generation multitarget stool DNA was the only noninvasive screening test at guideline-endorsed interval and age-recommended ranges that was deemed efficient. Blood-based and multitarget stool RNA strategies were deemed not efficient for primary screening.

Abstract The substantial carbon footprint imparted by medical services warrants increased attention to their environmental impact. National guideline organizations such as the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommend multiple modalities for average-risk colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with varying resource intensity. The aim of this study was to quantify the environmental burden for 2 of the most used CRC screening modalities, colonoscopy and the multi-target stool DNA (mt-sDNA) test. A validated CRC microsimulation model was used to estimate the number of screening and follow-up tests for a cohort of 1 million average-risk individuals who underwent screening between ages 45 and 75. Component resources used for mt-sDNA, including waste products, energy, and transportation for colonoscopy and mt-sDNA, were collected from January 1, 2023, to January 1, 2024, and converted to carbon-equivalent emissions. Resources used for colonoscopy were captured from the literature. Resources devoted to screening colonoscopy were substantially (59%) higher than those to mt-sDNA, even when including follow-up colonoscopy. Of note, follow-up colonoscopy accounted for the majority (64%) of total emissions for the mt-sDNA screening strategy. Compared with colonoscopy screening, mt-sDNA substantially reduces the carbon emissions attributable to population-level CRC screening. Environmental impact should be included as a factor when choosing among guideline-recommended CRC screening strategies.

89 Background: With estimates of over 150,000 incident and 50,000 fatal colorectal cancer (CRC) cases in 2024, efforts are ongoing to improve the national screening performance and engagement in the US. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) have established criteria for covering new blood-based CRC screening tests if minimum CRC sensitivity and specificity thresholds are met. However, the current blood-based tests are challenged by their relative inability to detect advanced precancerous lesions (APLs). At present, the importance of APL versus CRC sensitivity on screening outcomes remains undetermined. To address this knowledge gap, we conducted a simulation study to compare the screening effectiveness and outcomes of a hypothetical blood-based test across a range of sensitivities for CRC and APL detection. Methods: Outcomes were simulated using the CRC-AIM microsimulation model, which has been previously calibrated and validated. Predicted outcomes were calculated for average-risk individuals screened triennially with a blood-based test between ages 45-75 years, assuming perfect adherence. Base-case screening sensitivity and specificity inputs were based on CMS minimum thresholds (74% CRC sensitivity, 90% specificity) with assumed 10% APL sensitivity. Additional scenarios considered an increase in either APL or CRC sensitivity. Outcomes of interest included life years-gained (LYG), CRC incidence, and mortality reductions. Results: Compared to the CMS minimum performance (Table), increasing APL sensitivity by 1% (from 10% to 11%) resulted in a similar increase in LYG as compared to increasing CRC sensitivity by 11% (from 74% to 85%). Additionally, increasing APL sensitivity by 1% resulted in greater reductions in CRC cases and deaths (3% decrease) as compared to increasing CRC sensitivity by 11% (0% and 1% reductions, respectively). Conclusions: Data from this study show that increased APL sensitivity is a key determinant of screening-related outcomes, such as LYG, derived from a blood-based strategy, and that similar results would require much larger increases in CRC sensitivity. With the current CMS minimum performance threshold, blood-based tests that are designed to have high APL sensitivity can outperform tests with higher CRC sensitivity and little to no APL sensitivity. Comparison of CRC screening health outcomes with CMS proposed minimum threshold blood-test versus hypothetical tests with either increased APL and CRC sensitivity. APL Sensitivity CRC Sensitivity CRC Specificity Follow-up Colonoscopies CRC Cases (% reduction) CRC Deaths (% reduction) Life-Years Gained (LYG) (% increase) 10% 74% 90% 809 50 (ref) 18 (ref) 220 (ref) 11% 74% 90% 813 48 (-3%) 17 (-3%) 226 (3%) 10% 85% 90% 809 50 (0%) 18 (-1%) 227 (3%) APL: Advanced precancerous lesions; CRC: Colorectal cancer.

88 Background: There are an estimated 60 million individuals in the US who are not up-to-date with average-risk colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, as screening rates and adherence have remained stubbornly below the national target of 80%. Efforts are ongoing to improve CRC screening performance and participation, including the development of new blood-based tests. Despite high expectations for these tests, performance remains lower than other guideline-recommended strategies, particularly with respect to advanced precancerous lesion (APL) sensitivity. We conducted a simulation study of estimated clinical and economical outcomes for CRC screening with a blood-based test (at perfect adherence) compared to the multi-target stool-DNA (mt-sDNA) test (at published adherence rates). Methods: Utilizing CRC-AIM, a calibrated and validated microsimulation model, CRC screening outcomes were calculated for 1 million average-risk individuals screened between ages 45-75 years with triennial blood-based versus mt-sDNA testing. CRC and APL sensitivity and specificity inputs were derived from two large clinical validation studies for these screening modalities: ECLIPSE (NCT04136002) and DeeP-C (NCT01397747), respectively. To demonstrate the maximum benefits and burdens of blood-based screening, adherence to initial screening and follow-up colonoscopy after a positive blood test was modeled at 100%, while real-world adherence estimates of 65.6% were used for the mt-sDNA test. Outcomes of interest included life years-gained (LYG) and CRC cases missed by the blood-based test compared to the stool-based test, additional treatment costs imposed by theblood-based test, and additional CRC-related deaths per 1 million screened. Results: Compared to triennial screening with mt-sDNA at real-world adherence, blood-based screening at perfect adherence resulted in a higher number of incident (n=18,464) and fatal (n=6,483) CRC cases that would been avoided with the mt-sDNA test. Over a lifetime, screening with blood-based tests required 1,276,310 more tests (21% more) and 52,942 additional follow-up colonoscopies (7% more) compared to mt-sDNA screening. This increased testing burden did not generate additional benefits and instead reduced life-years gained by 67,645 per 1 million screened, resulting in an additional $1.6 billion in treatment costs compared to the mt-sDNA strategy. Conclusions: Data from this CRC-AIM modeling study show that even with perfect adherence, blood-based screening yields inferior clinical and economic benefits compared to mt-sDNA screening, due to suboptimal APL detection with the former test.