1 / 5

That's right!

Correct answer: Decreased 2x

A simulated analysis was conducted to compare the outcomes of Cologuard-first and colonoscopy-first screening approaches at various adherence levels. When adherence was adjusted to approximated real-world adherence at 70% for the Cologuard test and 40% for colonoscopy, the analysis showed that 2x deaths would be averted.1,2*

Sorry, that’s incorrect.

Correct answer: Decreased 2x

A simulated analysis was conducted to compare the outcomes of Cologuard-first and colonoscopy-first screening approaches at various adherence levels. When adherence was adjusted to approximated real-world adherence at 70% for the Cologuard test and 40% for colonoscopy, the analysis showed that 2x deaths would be averted.1,2*

References and footnotes

  • *Analysis based on data from a review for the USPSTF to demonstrate how the benefits, burdens, and harms of CRC screening vary by screening modality. 3 microsimulation models were used to estimate life-years gained, CRC incidence and mortality, number of screening tests required, and complications of screening: CRC-SPIN, MISCAN, and SimCRC. All models were calibrated to SEER CRC incidence rates from 1975-1979 and adenoma prevalence from autopsy studies. Screening test characteristics were primarily based on a systematic USPSTF review. No formal sensitivity analysis on adherence rates was performed. Perfect adherence was assumed for a baseline. This analysis evaluated the effect imperfect adherence on screening outcomes.1
  • 1.CISNET Colorectal Cancer Working Group. Colorectal cancer screening an updated decision analysis for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. May 18, 2021. Accessed December 11, 2024. Colorectal Cancer Screening: An Updated Decision Analysis for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force
  • 2.Data on file for USPSTF modeling data. 2024. Exact Sciences Corporation. Madison, WI.