Key Points Question Can different forms of financial incentives (unconditional, conditional, or lottery) boost response rates to mailed colorectal cancer screening outreach? Findings In this randomized clinical trial of 897 patients, there was no statistically significant difference in screening response rates at 2 and 6 months between the incentive arms and mailed outreach without incentive. Meaning Different forms of financial incentives of the same expected value ($10) did not increase fecal immunochemical test completion rates, as the incentive value have been too small or financial incentives may not be effective in this context.

Background & Aims: Colorectal cancer (CRC) deaths occur when patients do not receive screening or have inadequate follow up of abnormal results, or when the screening test itself fails. We have few data on the contribution of each to CRC-associated deaths or factors associated with these events. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients in the Kaiser Permanente Northern and Southern California systems (55–90 years old) who died from CRC from 2006 through 2012 and had ≥5 years of enrollment prior to diagnosis. We compared data from patients with a matched cohort of cancer-free patients in the same system. Receipt, results, indications, and follow up of CRC tests in the 10-year period prior to diagnosis were obtained from electronic databases and chart audits. Results: Among 1750 CRC deaths, 75.9% (n=1328) occurred in patients who were not up to date in screening and 24.1% (n=422) occurred in patients who were up to date. Failure to screen was associated with fewer visits to primary care physicians. Among 3486 cancer-free patients, 44.6% were up to date on their screening. Patients who were up to date in their screening had reduced risk of CRC death (odds ratio [OR], 0.38; 95% CI, 0.33–0.44). Failure to screen, or failure to screen at appropriate intervals, occurred in a 67.8% of patients who died from CRC vs 53.2% of cancer-free patients; failure to follow up on abnormal results occurred in 8.1% of patients who died from CRC vs 2.2% of cancer-free patients. CRC death was associated with higher odds of failure to screen or failure to screen at appropriate intervals (OR, 2.40; 95% CI, 2.07–2.77) and failure to follow up on abnormal results (OR, 7.26; 95% CI, 5.26–10.03). Conclusions: Being up to date on screening substantially reduces risk of CRC death. In 2 healthcare systems with high rates of screening, most people who died from CRC had failures in the screening process that could be rectified, such as failure to follow up on abnormal findings; these significantly increased risk for CRC death.

No abstract

No abstract

Background Delays in screening and timely diagnosis contribute significantly to global disparities in cervical cancer mortality in Botswana and other low- and middle-income countries, particularly those with high rates of HIV. Little is known about the modifiable factors shaping these delays from the perspectives of women themselves and how these perspectives may differ between those living with and without HIV. Methods From March–May 2019, we conducted a concurrent, mixed methods study of women receiving treatment for cervical cancer at a multidisciplinary oncology clinic in Botswana. Enrolled participants completed a one-time, concurrent semi-structured interview and structured questionnaire assessing patient characteristics, screening and HIV-related beliefs and knowledge, and barriers and facilitators to screening and follow-up care. Qualitative data were analyzed using directed content analysis guided by the Model of Pathways to Treatment and triangulated with quantitative questionnaire data to identify areas of convergence and divergence. Fisher’s exact tests were used to explore associations between questionnaire data (e.g., screening knowledge) and HIV status. Results Forty-two women enrolled in the study, 64% of whom were living with HIV and 26% were diagnosed with stage III cervical cancer. Median age was 45 years (IQR 54–67) in those living with HIV and 64 years (IQR 42–53) in those living without. Overall screening rates before symptomatic disease were low (24%). Median time from most proximal screen to diagnosis was 52 median days (IQR 15–176), with no significant differences by HIV status. General screening knowledge was higher among those living with HIV versus those without (100% vs 73%; p < 0.05), but knowledge about HPV and other risk factors was low in both groups. Similar to questionnaire results, qualitative results indicate limited awareness of the need to be screened prior to symptoms as a central barrier to timely screening. Some participants also noted that delays in the receipt of screening results and fear also contributed to treatment delays. However, many participants also described myriad sources of social and tangible support that helped them to overcome some of these challenges. Conclusion Interventions focused on increasing routine screening and supporting timely awareness and access to care are needed to reduce global disparities in cervical cancer.