Back

Colorectal Cancer Screening in Adults 45-49: Provider Availability, CT Colonography Access, and Screening Rates

Liu-Galvin, R.; Xie, Z.; Hong, Y.-R.

2024-09-26 oncology
10.1101/2024.09.25.24314175 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundThe US Preventive Services Task Force updated colorectal cancer (CRC) screening guidelines in 2021, recommending screening for adults aged 45-49. This study aimed to evaluate CRC screening prevalence among this newly eligible population and examine associations with healthcare provider supply and CT colonography facility availability in 2022. MethodsUsing 2022 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data (n=25,592), we estimated CRC screening prevalence among adults aged 45-49. We examined associations between screening rates and state-level healthcare provider supply using 2021-2022 Area Health Resources File data. Spearman rank-order correlations assessed relationships between provider supply, CT colonography facility availability, and screening prevalence. ResultsOverall CRC screening prevalence was 34.5% (95% CI: 33.4%-35.8%). Endoscopic tests were most common (74.9%), followed by stool-based tests (9.3%) and CT colonography (0.5%). Significant variations in screening modalities were observed across sociodemographic factors. Gastroenterology physician supply positively correlated with overall CRC screening prevalence ({rho}=0.42, P=.002) and endoscopy screening prevalence ({rho}=0.39, P=.005). CT colonography facility availability weakly correlated with CT colonography screening prevalence ({rho}=0.18, P=.22). ConclusionsCRC screening rates among newly eligible adults aged 45-49 appear to be suboptimal in 2022. Disparities in screening methods across sociodemographic factors highlight potential access barriers. The association between gastroenterology physician supply and screening rates emphasizes the importance of addressing projected workforce shortages. Targeted efforts are needed to increase CRC screening uptake in this age group and ensure equitable access to screening services.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.