Changes in quality of life in colorectal cancer screening: A multicentre trial in populations in China.
Xin-Yi Zhou, Yan-Jie Li, Hong Wang et al.
✦ AI-curated · Sources linked
In 30 seconds
This multicentre randomised trial assessed quality of life among 19,373 participants in China allocated to one-time colonoscopy, annual faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) with colonoscopy after a positive result, or annual risk-adapted screening. EuroQol five-dimensional utility scores were compared with pre-screening baseline scores over three years. After baseline screening, changes were −0.008 for colonoscopy, 0.006 for FIT, and 0.000 for risk-adapted screening; differences among strategies were statistically significant (P < 0.001). At the second follow-up round, changes were 0.011, 0.011, and 0.005, respectively, with no significant overall difference (P = 0.113).
Key findings
- After baseline screening, utility-score changes were −0.008 with colonoscopy, 0.006 with FIT, and 0.000 with risk-adapted screening (overall P < 0.001).
- At the second follow-up round, utility-score changes were 0.011, 0.011, and 0.005, respectively; the overall difference was not significant (P = 0.113).
- The authors concluded that none of the three strategies had a major effect on quality of life over three years.
Why it matters
Quality-of-life effects are relevant when comparing colorectal cancer screening approaches, alongside screening outcomes. In this Chinese trial, measured utility changes differed among strategies after baseline screening but not at the second follow-up round, and the authors judged the overall effects over three years to be small. These findings provide patient-reported outcome data for the screening strategies studied.
What to keep in mind
The abstract reports quality-of-life comparisons using pre-screening baseline scores as comparators; it does not provide further detail on the survey response or missing-data methods.