Annual stool test may be as effective as colonoscopy, study finds

[Cpadave]

Sounds like maybe a good option


https://www.nbcnews.com/health/canc...-be-effective-colonoscopy-study-finds-n975871

 

[joeea]

... for people who don’t have risk factors for the disease.

As always, consult your doctor to see if this is right for you.

 

[meleana]

The doctors won't make any money on this one.


I always have polyps. After the first one he wanted me back in 5 years and I went back in 7. Now I had a colonsocopy in November (which was 5 years since my last one) and now he wants me to have another one this year!


I wonder why I could not just do this FIT test and if there was an indication then I would have the colonsocopy.

 

[Dawg52]

I've had 2 colon scopes and no polyps found. And no history of colon cancer in my family. I'll probably go this route in the future.

 

[zinger1457]

I did the Cologuard test back in November, cost was $650 but covered by insurance. I had a colonoscopy at 50yo and nothing was found. Seems to be a popular test, when I went to the local UPS store to return my kit there were two other people in line returning theirs (Cologuard uses a very distinctive return box). Cologuard test is done every 3 years instead of annual.

 

[COcheesehead]

The only but part, no pun intended, is if they find something, you have to have a colonoscopy anyway.

 

[MRG]

The only but part, no pun intended, is if they find something, you have to have a colonoscopy anyway.

+1

And cologuard is only 42% effective for detection of polyps. So if you never had a colonoscopy how would you know?

 

[RobbieB]

Yeah, I crap on the paper and collect a bit and send it in every year.

No CC in my family.

 

[sengsational]

Cologuard is more sophisticated than hemoccult, which is the absolute minimum. The latter just detects hidden blood, whereas the more expensive former detects "stuff" that cancer throws off. I'll probably alternate between Cologuard and colonoscopy.

 

[upset264]

In 2008 I reluctantly had my first colonoscopy at age 59. No family history of cancer, previous stool tests negative. The result was two large polyps, too large to remove during the procedure.

I had 4 inches of my intestines removed to get rid of the polyps. They were described as pre-cancerous.

Bottom line, if I hadn't had the colonoscopy I most likely would have had to deal with colon cancer. I will always remember the young intern who was training with my regular doctor who pressured me into having the procedure.

 

[COcheesehead]

This thread is sooooo relevant for me right now. I am having my second colonoscopy a week from Friday. In all honesty I am looking forward to cleaning out all the fecal decay in me and then a day off of work followed by a big juicy hamburger.
Colonoscopies aren’t so bad, it’s all in how you choose to view them.

 

[Dtail]

I have had 2 colonoscopies so far. Next one due in 2 years. Removed non cancerous polyps each time. Will continue with the colonoscopies for now. Best 30 minute sleep you will have.

 

[Cpadave]

In 2008 I reluctantly had my first colonoscopy at age 59. No family history of cancer, previous stool tests negative. The result was two large polyps, too large to remove during the procedure.

I had 4 inches of my intestines removed to get rid of the polyps. They were described as pre-cancerous.

Bottom line, if I hadn't had the colonoscopy I most likely would have had to deal with colon cancer. I will always remember the young intern who was training with my regular doctor who pressured me into having the procedure.

The question I have is how much more benefit one would get from using the regular colonoscopy vs alternative methods. Perhaps if other options are more advocated, more people will be willing to do them and it will reduce the overall cancer rate.

I am 52 vegetarian and do not have any family history that I know of. I have been reluctant to do the regular colonoscopy in the past. If the risk of cancer using the alternative is low or very low, I am willing to live with it. One can not test every possible health issue. For example, my insurance does not cover skin cancer screening. So I would like to see the risk of cancer using alternatives vs regular method.

 

[MRG]

In 2008 I reluctantly had my first colonoscopy at age 59. No family history of cancer, previous stool tests negative. The result was two large polyps, too large to remove during the procedure.

I had 4 inches of my intestines removed to get rid of the polyps. They were described as pre-cancerous.

Bottom line, if I hadn't had the colonoscopy I most likely would have had to deal with colon cancer. I will always remember the young intern who was training with my regular doctor who pressured me into having the procedure.

+1

You're telling my sister's story. She was older on her first but had to have 6" removed. It's not worth the risk.

 

[COcheesehead]

The question I have is how much more benefit one would get from using the regular colonoscopy vs alternative methods. Perhaps if other options are more advocated, more people will be willing to do them and it will reduce the overall cancer rate.

I am 52 vegetarian and do not have any family history that I know of. I have been reluctant to do the regular colonoscopy in the past. If the risk of cancer using the alternative is low or very low, I am willing to live with it. One can not test every possible health issue. For example, my insurance does not cover skin cancer screening. So I would like to see the risk of cancer using alternatives vs regular method.

Polyps are the most common and if the test is only 42% accurate....

Personally I can live with a little inconvenience for a test my doctor says is 95% accurate.

 

[Helen]

The question I have is how much more benefit one would get from using the regular colonoscopy vs alternative methods. Perhaps if other options are more advocated, more people will be willing to do them and it will reduce the overall cancer rate.

I am 52 vegetarian and do not have any family history that I know of. I have been reluctant to do the regular colonoscopy in the past. If the risk of cancer using the alternative is low or very low, I am willing to live with it. One can not test every possible health issue. For example, my insurance does not cover skin cancer screening. So I would like to see the risk of cancer using alternatives vs regular method.

I am 61, been vegetarian/pescatarian since 1976 and vegan for the last six years. There is no history of colon cancer in my family.

I reluctantly had my first colonoscopy when I was 51. They found 13 polyps. The second colonoscopy detected 3 more. The last one found two polyps, one of which was on my appendix. I had my appendix removed in December. I don't know why my body likes to grow polyps, but I'm not going mess around with this stuff. They won't have to remind me twice the next time I am due for a colonoscopy.

My advice is to get tested. Routine colonoscopies would be a walk in the park compared to the treatments and follow ups of colon cancer.

 

[Cpadave]

I am 61, been vegetarian/pescatarian since 1976 and vegan for the last six years. There is no history of colon cancer in my family.

I reluctantly had my first colonoscopy when I was 51. They found 13 polyps. The second colonoscopy detected 3 more. The last one found two polyps, one of which was on my appendix. I had my appendix removed in December. I don't know why my body likes to grow polyps, but I'm not going mess around with this stuff. They won't have to remind me twice the next time I am due for a colonoscopy.

My advice is to get tested. Routine colonoscopies would be a walk in the park compared to the treatments and follow ups of colon cancer.

Thanks for the advice. I will look in to getting one this year. Do benign polyps cause any danger? If they eventual turn cancerous would other testing methods not be able to detect them? I am also worried that there might be risk from doing routine colonoscopies. Like unintentional tear or potential others. The problem I have with advice from doctors is how much I can trust them if they will directly benefit from the work. And I don't know how much of anything is true. For example a simple search found this website:

https://www.gutsense.org/colonoscopy/is-colonoscopy-worth-the-risk.html

 

[razztazz]

All I can give here is what the honest doctors and my own research have told me. And what my girlfriend said. She went to medical school and worked as researcher for 40 yrs and ran the lab at a hospital in MN.

Yes, polyps can become cancerous but they almost never do. The more you have or if you have a large one, the higher the chances, especially of you are younger. General rule: If it's 1 cm or less it has <1% chance of becoming cancerous in your lifetime.

If they go cancerous/precancerous at a later date can something be done at that point? Yes. That is exactly what that cologuard is for. All that BS about "only for average risk people" "Not for people who have had polyps" is crap. That want the money but they also want doctors to keep charging for colonoscopies. If you stay out in front of these things there is virtually no chance you will die from it or need a colonoscopy bag. They'll get in, do the thing, and get out. Even my own GP, a guy about late 50's or so, said he has had his last colonoscopy and doesn't recommend them.

Something to think of "risk-wise." Yes, a colonoscopy can have a downside but it is pretty small. Maybe 30 yrs ago it was different. If you start at age 50 and get your final one at age 70 (the traditional age when they no longer recommend them) you'd have THREE in your whole life. That doesn't seem like too much to me especially when you could find yourself at 70 with something advanced. OR with cologuard find yourself at 70 needing surgery instead of having obviated it because you had the polyp snipped 6 years ago...?

Now, if you have one done and they find either cancer, pre-cancerous things or just a sea of various polyps you will be getting colonoscopies more often. Or they will be suggesting that. But your risk for cancer or a larger more complicated/dangerous later operation is also higher. So, that's a different risk equation to work

Thanks for the advice. I will look in to getting one this year. Do benign polyps cause any danger? If they eventual turn cancerous would other testing methods not be able to detect them? I am also worried that there might be risk from doing routine colonoscopies. Like unintentional tear or potential others. The problem I have with advice from doctors is how much I can trust them if they will directly benefit from the work. And I don't know how much of anything is true. For example a simple search found this website:

https://www.gutsense.org/colonoscopy/is-colonoscopy-worth-the-risk.html

 

[Scuba]

My PCP recommended colonoscopies at 55, 65, & 75, but the American Cancer Society recommends starting at 50. I had my first one at 52. I learned when researching that colon cancer is one of the most preventable kinds. For a day of discomfort and a few bucks, for me the risk-reward equation is very clear. I’ll be getting regular colonoscopies until they’re no longer recommended. DH is going for his second one at age 60, next month.

 

[Sojourner]

The problem I have with advice from doctors is how much I can trust them if they will directly benefit from the work. And I don't know how much of anything is true. For example a simple search found this website:

https://www.gutsense.org/colonoscopy/is-colonoscopy-worth-the-risk.html

I was curious, so just spent about 15 minutes reading through some of the stuff on this GutSense.org website. The author makes many, many strident, unorthodox claims about the risks and dangers of colonoscopies (e.g. "Over 85,000 people die annually from kidney failure—that is almost 50% more than from colorectal cancer. Many of these deaths have been precipitated by a careless and damaging colonoscopy prep."). Then he goes on to make many other odd, remarkable claims about how dietary fiber is actually bad for your health and is addictive and contributes to various illnesses. The author of the site earned a "pharmacy degree" in 1977 from a university in Ukraine, and seems to have no other professional or academic medical training or experience. Seems he has written two books on these subjects (Gut Sense and Fiber Menace) which he is peddling on this website. Hmmm...

 

[wmc1000]

Had a colonoscopy in 2017 since my ACA plan covered it as preventative. Luckily, nothing was found so they told me to schedule one in 2027!

 

[Cpadave]

I was curious, so just spent about 15 minutes reading through some of the stuff on this GutSense.org website. The author makes many, many strident, unorthodox claims about the risks and dangers of colonoscopies (e.g. "Over 85,000 people die annually from kidney failure—that is almost 50% more than from colorectal cancer. Many of these deaths have been precipitated by a careless and damaging colonoscopy prep."). Then he goes on to make many other odd, remarkable claims about how dietary fiber is actually bad for your health and is addictive and contributes to various illnesses. The author of the site earned a "pharmacy degree" in 1977 from a university in Ukraine, and seems to have no other professional or academic medical training or experience. Seems he has written two books on these subjects (Gut Sense and Fiber Menace) which he is peddling on this website. Hmmm...

Yes, I agree. Some of those stuff sound made up or misused. It is hard to find unbiased opinions from those who are not trying to sell you stuff or benefit somehow.

 

[sengsational]

Yes, I agree. Some of those stuff sound made up or misused. It is hard to find unbiased opinions from those who are not trying to sell you stuff or benefit somehow.

They're selling supplements directly from that site. I fear that the site caters to people that wanted to find "proof" that a colonoscopy isn't needed or is too risky and just buy their products instead.


I didn't get far into the site...I stopped and checked his "fact"

Dramatic increase in the incidence of colorectal cancer

The CDC chart goes from 56 per 100,000 to 38 per 100,000 over 15 years ending 2015. No need to look at THAT site any more!

 

[joeea]

I was curious, so just spent about 15 minutes reading through some of the stuff on this GutSense.org website. The author makes many, many strident, unorthodox claims about the risks and dangers of colonoscopies (e.g. "Over 85,000 people die annually from kidney failure—that is almost 50% more than from colorectal cancer. Many of these deaths have been precipitated by a careless and damaging colonoscopy prep."). Then he goes on to make many other odd, remarkable claims about how dietary fiber is actually bad for your health and is addictive and contributes to various illnesses. The author of the site earned a "pharmacy degree" in 1977 from a university in Ukraine, and seems to have no other professional or academic medical training or experience. Seems he has written two books on these subjects (Gut Sense and Fiber Menace) which he is peddling on this website. Hmmm...

Check out the disclaimer on this wacky website:
"https://www.gutsense.org/author/medical-disclaimer-for-gutsense-org.html"

Not exactly a go-to authority in my book.

 

[flintnational]

Where are the math wizards/MDs? Are we looking at the odds correctly? The cologuard test finds 75% of cancers compared to the colonoscopy at 95%. But, the cologuard is done annually and the colonoscopy is completed only at 10 year intervals. I suspect the testing frequency brings the two tests results much closer. IOW, are 10 annual tests each having a 75% detection rate better than one test every decade with a 95% detection rate?

ETA: I did the math and came up with a detection rate of 98.1% for 10 annual cologuard tests. But I will yield to the math gods. 1-(.25 x .75 to the 9th) Re-reading the article posted by OP they do indicate two annual cologuard tests come close to the colonoscopy detection rate.

"The study found that the FIT test had a sensitivity of a 75 to 80 percent, meaning it identified cancer in 75 to 80 percent of individuals who had the disease, said lead author Dr. Thomas Imperiale, a gastroenterologist at the Indiana University School of Medicine and Regenstrief Institute in Indianapolis. In comparison, colonoscopy had a sensitivity of 95 percent............. (Unlike a colonoscopy, which is recommended once every 10 years, the FIT test is recommended yearly.)..........What's more, comparing the performance of a single FIT test to a one-time application of colonoscopy as a screening method for colorectal cancer is like comparing apples to oranges, Allison told Live Science. That's because colonoscopy is recommended once every 10 years while FIT testing would be recommended every year, which would allow for the discovery of advanced tumors and early treatable cancers each year, he noted."