This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related letter  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Oncology  • Colon Cancer  • Statistics and Research Methods  • Surgical Interventions  • Colorectal Surgery  • Gastrointestinal Diseases  • Alert me on articles by topic

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

In Reply: I concur with Dr Singh and colleagues that cancer rates among those selected by a single negative colonoscopy result should not converge completely to those in the general population. However, they should come closer together as time passes, due to the diminishing selection effect as new polyps are developed in the subset of the those with negative screen results still at risk. For a simple numericalexample, suppose 90% of those with a negative screen result are polyp-free and 10% have missed polyps. Then the immediate effect of the selection is to reduce the rate to less than 10% of that in the general population. As time passes, however, more and more (though certainly a lower percentage than in the general population) of the 90% who are polyp free will develop polyps and subsequent cancer, reducing the difference between the average incidence and the incidence in those with negative . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Timothy R. Church, MS, PhD
trc@cccs.umn.edu
Division of Environmental Health Sciences
School of Public Health
University of Minnesota
Minneapolis

RELATED LETTER

Colonoscopic Screening for Colorectal Cancer
Harminder Singh, Donna Turner, Lin Xue, Laura E. Targownik, and Charles N. Bernstein
JAMA. 2006;296(20):2438.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT