Adenoma detection following screening colonoscopy and stool-based colorectal cancer screening tests with follow-up colonoscopy: A systematic and network meta-analysis.

C Chris Estes (Exact Sciences Corp., Madison, WI) V Vahab Vahdat (Exact Sciences Corp., Madison, WI) H Heather Johnson (School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester) G Gina Thompson (Exact Sciences, Madison, WI) J Jordyn Brown (Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC) J John B. Kisiel (Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN) D Derek W. Ebner (Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN) O Oguzhan Alagoz J Joseph C. Anderson (White River Junction VA Medical Center, White River Junction, VT) L Lynn F. Butterly (Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH) P Paul J. Limburg (Exact Sciences Corp., Madison, WI)

Abstract

e15647 Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening offers an opportunity to prevent invasive disease by detecting and removing precancerous lesions. Colonoscopy-based detection of adenomas and serrated polyps is strongly associated with reduced risk of interval CRC. While the performance of noninvasive CRC screening tests is well described, comparative evidence on adenoma detection across screening colonoscopy and stool-based strategies with follow-up colonoscopy remains limited. We conducted a systematic review to compare adenoma detection across CRC screening modalities. Methods: MEDLINE (PubMed) and Embase were searched from January 1, 2000, through July 10, 2025, for peer-reviewed, U.S.-based studies reporting colonoscopy among average-risk adults aged ≥45 years, who underwent screening colonoscopy or follow-up colonoscopy after a positive stool-based screening test [fecal immunochemical test (FIT) or multi-target stool DNA (mt-sDNA) test]. The primary outcome was the detection of one or more adenomas at colonoscopy. High-risk or surveillance cohorts, AI-assisted colonoscopy, diagnostic accuracy trials, and non-U.S. studies were excluded. Results: Among 7,710 de-duplicated records, 147 studies underwent full-text review, and 47 studies were included in quantitative synthesis, with reported adenoma detection for screening colonoscopy alone (n = 31), follow-up colonoscopy after a positive FIT alone (n = 4), follow-up colonoscopy after a positive mt-sDNA test alone (n = 4), and for more than one of the screening strategies of interest (n = 8). Across included studies, overall adenoma detection differed by screening pathway. Follow-up colonoscopy after a positive mt-sDNA test demonstrated the highest adenoma detection (66.3%; 95% CI, 61.2-71.1), with lower adenoma detection observed for colonoscopy after a positive FIT (50.6%; 95% CI, 43.4-57.8) and screening colonoscopy alone (33.8%; 95% CI, 30.9-36.8) (Table 1). Conclusions: Detection of adenomas was highest following colonoscopy performed after a positive mt-sDNA test compared with FIT-positive follow-up or screening colonoscopy alone. These findings highlight differences in downstream detection across CRC screening tests and suggest that, in settings where colonoscopy resources are constrained, initial mt-sDNA screening with timely follow-up colonoscopy may help prioritize patients most likely to benefit. CRC screening modality No. of Studies Adenoma detected Study population Proportion, % (95% CI) Heterogeneity, I² (%) Between-study variance (τ 2 ) P-value* mt-sDNA 8 17,436 29,098 66.3 (61.2-71.1) 94.6 0.0924 <0.0001 FIT 11 17,588 32,630 50.6 (43.4-57.8) 94.0 0.2187 <0.0001 Screening colonoscopy 38 2,351,801 6,378,891 33.8 (30.9-36.8) 99.8 0.1710 NA *P-value represents adenoma detection vs. screening colonoscopy adenoma detection.

Article Details

Volume / Issue Vol. 44, Issue 16_suppl
Published June 01, 2026
ISSN 0732-183X
Publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Journal Info

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

ISSN: 0732-183X Health Sciences

Authors (11)

C

Chris Estes

Exact Sciences Corp., Madison, WI

V

Vahab Vahdat

Exact Sciences Corp., Madison, WI

H

Heather Johnson

School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester

G

Gina Thompson

Exact Sciences, Madison, WI

J

Jordyn Brown

Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC

J

John B. Kisiel

Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN

D

Derek W. Ebner

Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN

O

Oguzhan Alagoz

J

Joseph C. Anderson

White River Junction VA Medical Center, White River Junction, VT

L

Lynn F. Butterly

Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH

P

Paul J. Limburg

Exact Sciences Corp., Madison, WI