The test came back positive, and I have to have one anyway. Here’s hoping I’m one of the 6% of 50-65 year olds that get false positives. Or at least that they are only pre-cancerous lesions. I’m now thinking that maybe just having the colonoscopy in the first place would have been easier, as I’ve been referred, and have to wait for them to call me to schedule an appointment.

The last time that happened, the doctor told me he'd referred me and I'd get a call.

I walked out of the doctor's office, looked up the phone number for the referred doctor, called, and made my appointment. They said they hadn't gotten the referral yet, and that it was policy not to make the appointment until they got the referral. I pointed out that the referral would come in long before I had to see the doctor, and I had a PPO anyway. They checked with the doctor, and made the appointment.

It saved a few days minimum, and at worst it saved the extra time when the referral might have gotten misplaced.

Referral? I just got my notice from the Gastro office reminding ME that it was time ...

quote:

Originally posted by jodi:
The test came back positive, and I have to have one anyway. Here’s hoping I’m one of the 6% of 50-65 year olds that get false positives. Or at least that they are only pre-cancerous lesions. I’m now thinking that maybe just having the colonoscopy in the first place would have been easier, as I’ve been referred, and have to wait for them to call me to schedule an appointment.

Is the test any more specific than "positive." Positive for what? Certain cell types?

This is all according to what I found online- Some sort of DNA marker that cancerous or precancerous cells throw off. But also aging cells (which are what gives the false positives, I think) though that is more common over 65, 10% false positives in that group. I turned 60 this year.

quote:

The test is an automated assay for tumor-specific DNA changes, including aberrant methylated BMP3 and NDRG4, a mutant form of KRAS, beta-actin, and hemoglobin. Unlike other fecal tests, which need to be performed annually, Cologuard can be used every three years because of its high accuracy.

sounds like they're looking for certain DNA changes and for blood in the stool (the hemoglobin part)

quote:

FDA approval was based on data from a pivotal prospective trial involving nearly 10,000 average-risk, asymptomatic patients at 90 centers in the United States and Canada. The trial, called DeeP-C, compared the safety and efficacy of Cologuard and the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) — the most commonly used fecal occult blood test —with colonoscopy. Study results were published in the March 2014 issue of The New England Journal of Medicine.

The study's primary performance measures were Cologuard CRC sensitivity and Cologuard advanced neoplasia specificity. Major findings include:

Sensitivity of Cologuard for CRC was 92.3 percent overall and 94 percent for the earliest and most curable cancer stages — on a par with colonoscopy. In contrast, sensitivity of FIT for CRC was 73.8 and 70 percent, respectively.
Detection rates for polyps with high-grade dysplasia were 69.2 percent with Cologuard versus 46.2 percent with FIT; detection rates for serrated sessile polyps measuring 1 cm or more were 42.4 percent and 5.1 percent, respectively.
Specificities for Cologuard and FIT were 90 and 95 percent, respectively, for patients with negative findings on colonoscopy.

https://www.mayoclinic.org/med...reening/mac-20429632

there's also this:

quote:

Eating certain foods prior to a Cologuard test, such as red meat, horseradish, or turnips, can result in a false positive result.

Go figure.

I'm sorry to hear this Jodi, what Quirt said, don't wait on that referral.

quote:

Originally posted by ShiroKuro:
what Quirt said, don't wait on that referral.

When I said I walked out of the office and made the phone call ... I was in the parking lot in my car. I waited long enough to turn on the car to get the air conditioning going.

What a pain! I agree, it's most likely "aging cells" (how lovely) and a false positive. But yeah, maybe just do the regular colonoscopy, in retrospect.

Sorry you're dealing with this.

I'm on the 5-year plan, and I think I have to get one done in the next year. I don't understand why they can't make the prep more reasonable. I mean, it's not awful, there's no pain or anything, but it's a lot of yucky tasting stuff you have to down in a fairly short amount of time.

Just do it.

Four years ago, I had my second one and got a mostly clean report with a recommendation for another in five years.

I asked my new PCP for a referral even though it's only been four years. She got very animated and started telling me about other people who put it off and found stage three cancer and horror stories and death and destruction. I had to stop her and say, "no, I'm asking to do it one year *sooner* than the recommendation." She said, "oh, yeah, do that."

I just got the results. "Come back in five years."


Just do it.

Block out a day before with nothing else on your schedule.


The second time, the prep nurse said she thought she'd tough it out and do it without sedation and anesthesia. She said she would never do that again.


Just do it.

quote:

Originally posted by Nina:
I'm on the 5-year plan

Yep, me too.

quote:

I don't understand why they can't make the prep more reasonable. I mean, it's not awful, there's no pain or anything, but it's a lot of yucky tasting stuff you have to down in a fairly short amount of time.

The prep is worse than the procedure. But, at least for me, I have found that drinking the entire amount of what they want me to drink is overkill. I've never finished it and I've always been clean as a whistle.

Pro tip: get your GI doc to prescribe the strong anti-nausea drugs. It makes the prep easier.

quote:

The second time, the prep nurse said she thought she'd tough it out and do it without sedation and anesthesia. She said she would never do that again.

At my old hospital in Massachusetts, the protocol was conscious sedation, which leaves you in twilight, but not totally out. It also includes an amnesiac agent so you're not supposed to remember anything.

Unfortunately, I'm resistant to anesthesia. I remember moving around and bits of discomfort during the procedure. Afterwards, the doctor was pretty short with us, he was apparently annoyed that I had moved around and complained during the procedure. (And Mary Anna was appropriately irritated with him ... like I could control that!) As he left, he grumbled, "Next time, Propofol."

Apparently, they preferred conscious sedation because there's a countering agent if they administer too much. There's no way to do that with Propofol ... if you get too much, the nurse anesthetist just has to bag you until it wears off, and that's time and labor-intensive.

And then the protocol at the hospital changed, and now they just use Propofol in all instances.

And, by the time I was due for my next colonoscopy, I was here in Oklahoma, and the guy here just only uses Propofol.

My first and second were at my old HMO where they used fentanyl and midazolam. Great stuff.

The guy I just saw uses just propofol. It was fine, but I didn't get that blissful, relaxed aura from the cocktail. I'm guessing (only guessing) that since fentanyl has been so much in the news recently, they aren't using it for minor stuff like a colonoscopy.

Colonoscopies are the bomb.

You drink some yucky stuff, turn your TV so you can see it from the bathroom, keep a blanket handy in case you get cold, and spend some serious me time in there.

Then you get a test that is super accurate, low risk, and good for 5-10 years of peace of mind. And for one glorious, shining day, all of your pants fit perfectly.

In many ways, it is far superior to a flu shot.

Cindy is on a roll.

quote:

In many ways, it is far superior to a flu shot.