Skip to content

Screening for colorectal cancer in the Netherlands; a study comparing attendance and feasibility of two different forms of faecal occult blood testing and sigmoidoscopy.

Screening for colorectal cancer in the Netherlands; a study comparing attendance and feasibility of two different forms of faecal occult blood testing and sigmoidoscopy.

Status
Recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
NL-OMON
Registry ID
NL-OMON25308
Enrollment
15000
Registered
2007-10-17
Start date
2006-11-01
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2024-02-28

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

1. Colorectal cancer

Interventions

1. Sigmoidoscopy
2. Guaiac fecal occult bloed test
3. Immunochemical fecal occult bloed test.

Sponsors

Initiator: Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam Department of Gastroenterology and hepatology
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 1. 50-75 year old; 2. Ability to provide informed consent.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1. Inability or refusal to provide informed consent; 2. History of colorectal cancer, adenomas, inflammatory bowel disease*; 3. Severe or terminal disease, life expectancy less than five years; 4. Colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy or contrast barium enema within the previous three years.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Attendance for CRC screening with guaiac based FOBT (Haemoccult II), immunochemical FOBT (OC-Hemodia Latex) and sigmoidoscopy.

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
1. The diagnostic yield of FOBT screening and sigmoidoscopy based screening in the Netherlands; 2. The feasibility and required capacity for primary sigmoidoscopy CRC screening in our country; 3. The feasibility and required colonoscopy capacity needed for further evaluation of participants with a positive screening test in relation to the initial screening method used; 4. Side effects of screening; 5. Participants experiences; the acceptability, satisfaction and burden of screening (FOBT or sigmoidoscopy); 6. Identification of optimal choices for implementation of a CRC screening program (process evaluation); 7. Comparison of the cost-effectiveness ratio of the two forms of FOBT and sigmoidoscopy in CRC screening.

Contacts

Public ContactL. Hol

Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam ’s-Gravendijkwal 230 Department of Gastroenterology and hepatology

l.hol.1@erasmusmc.nl31 10 4632983

Outcome results

None listed

Source: NL-OMON (via WHO ICTRP)