← Issue №9/ week of Aug 30, 2026/ the whole section, in full

Colorectal, in full.

All 3 Colorectal papers in this issue, as full cards, ranked by clinical utility. The issue page carries the strongest few; this is the section, whole.

Sections this issue
Filter

All 3, in full

most clinically useful first · the 1 the issue led with is ruled in green
Colorectal prospective cohort · n=395 · Aug 28, 2026 · Dig Dis Sci · IF 2.5

Validation of a Digital Platform for Colorectal Cancer Risk Stratification and Personalized Screening Recommendations.

New evidenceartificial intelligencecolorectal cancer screeninghealth servicesbiomarker
Clinical takeawayCTC may help identify at-risk individuals and personalize CRC screening recommendations, particularly for higher-risk patients with screening delays (mean 22 years), but further evaluation of patient experience and downstream screening completion is needed before widespread adoption.
What it foundChequeáTuColon (CTC) digital tool showed 100% agreement (κ=1.000) with expert adjudication for CRC risk stratification, alarm symptom detection, genetic evaluation indication, and screening initiation age in a validation study of 395 individuals (median age 59 years).
ContextConfirms that digital risk stratification can match expert judgment, addressing gaps in CRC screening participation and delays, particularly in higher-risk groups.
Measured against the standard of care· USMSTF 2017 (Rex et al., Gastroenterology) + USMSTF 2022 focused update on age (Patel et al., Gastroenterology 2022;162:285-299) / ACS 2026 (CA Cancer J Clin)

Decision at stakethe use of digital tools for risk stratification and personalized screening recommendations in colorectal cancer screening

… Multi-Society Task Force (2017 guideline, revised by the 2022 focused update on age to start and stop): offer average-risk colorectal cancer screening to everyone aged 45-75. … The American Cancer Society's May 2026 guideline agrees on the 45-75 range, no screening after 85, and colonoscopy as the preferred option. …

From our summary of this standard, unedited — the part the paper bears on. … marks omitted text. Our wording, not the guideline's; read the source for its own text.

Our full summary of this standard

U.S. Multi-Society Task Force (2017 guideline, revised by the 2022 focused update on age to start and stop): offer average-risk colorectal cancer screening to everyone aged 45-75. Screening at 45-49 is a weaker recommendation than at 50-75. Colonoscopy every 10 years and annual FIT are the Tier 1 cornerstones. Tier 2 alternatives are multi-target stool DNA every 3 years, CT colonography every 5 years, and flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5-10 years. Capsule colonoscopy every 5 years is Tier 3. Any abnormal non-colonoscopy test requires a diagnostic colonoscopy, and a stool test should not be offered to a patient who would decline follow-up colonoscopy. Patients who are up to date with negative prior screening, particularly a high-quality colonoscopy, may consider stopping at 75 or when life expectancy is under 10 years. Decisions at 76-85 are individualized by health and prior screening, and screening after 85 is not recommended. The American Cancer Society's May 2026 guideline agrees on the 45-75 range, no screening after 85, and colonoscopy as the preferred option. It adds the next-generation mt-sDNA test and the multitarget stool RNA test (ColoSense), both every 3 years, and it adds an FDA-approved blood-based cfDNA test (Shield) only for people who decline or do not complete visual or stool screening. ACS says a positive stool or blood test should be followed by colonoscopy, preferably within 6 months. The 2026 ASGE paper on follow-up after an abnormal stool test is an implementation review (navigation, tracking, direct-access colonoscopy), not a new screening guideline.

USMSTF 2017 (Rex et al., Gastroenterology) + USMSTF 2022 focused update on age (Patel et al., Gastroenterology 2022;162:285-299) / ACS 2026 (CA Cancer J Clin) · reviewed 2026-10-11 ↗
Casas MA … Pereyra L · Digestive Diseases and Sciences · IF 2.5 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Colorectal review · Aug 24, 2026 · Gut · IF 24.6

Emerging exposure-driven accelerated colorectal carcinogenesis: a model with implications for screening colonoscopy effectiveness.

Basic sciencebasic scienceepidemiologymicrobiomebiomarker
Clinical takeawayNo clinical action yet: a conceptual model proposing mechanisms for accelerated CRC development, not yet tested in humans.
What it foundProposes a model where environmental and lifestyle exposures accelerate colorectal carcinogenesis, potentially bypassing conventional precursor stages.
ContextChallenges the traditional slow-progression model of CRC, suggesting some cases may arise too rapidly for current screening to prevent.
Measured against the standard of care· USMSTF 2017 (Rex et al., Gastroenterology) + USMSTF 2022 focused update on age (Patel et al., Gastroenterology 2022;162:285-299) / ACS 2026 (CA Cancer J Clin)

Decision at stakethe need to consider exposure-driven accelerated carcinogenesis in colorectal cancer screening strategies

… Multi-Society Task Force (2017 guideline, revised by the 2022 focused update on age to start and stop): offer average-risk colorectal cancer screening to everyone aged 45-75. … The American Cancer Society's May 2026 guideline agrees on the 45-75 range, no screening after 85, and colonoscopy as the preferred option. …

From our summary of this standard, unedited — the part the paper bears on. … marks omitted text. Our wording, not the guideline's; read the source for its own text.

Our full summary of this standard

U.S. Multi-Society Task Force (2017 guideline, revised by the 2022 focused update on age to start and stop): offer average-risk colorectal cancer screening to everyone aged 45-75. Screening at 45-49 is a weaker recommendation than at 50-75. Colonoscopy every 10 years and annual FIT are the Tier 1 cornerstones. Tier 2 alternatives are multi-target stool DNA every 3 years, CT colonography every 5 years, and flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5-10 years. Capsule colonoscopy every 5 years is Tier 3. Any abnormal non-colonoscopy test requires a diagnostic colonoscopy, and a stool test should not be offered to a patient who would decline follow-up colonoscopy. Patients who are up to date with negative prior screening, particularly a high-quality colonoscopy, may consider stopping at 75 or when life expectancy is under 10 years. Decisions at 76-85 are individualized by health and prior screening, and screening after 85 is not recommended. The American Cancer Society's May 2026 guideline agrees on the 45-75 range, no screening after 85, and colonoscopy as the preferred option. It adds the next-generation mt-sDNA test and the multitarget stool RNA test (ColoSense), both every 3 years, and it adds an FDA-approved blood-based cfDNA test (Shield) only for people who decline or do not complete visual or stool screening. ACS says a positive stool or blood test should be followed by colonoscopy, preferably within 6 months. The 2026 ASGE paper on follow-up after an abnormal stool test is an implementation review (navigation, tracking, direct-access colonoscopy), not a new screening guideline.

USMSTF 2017 (Rex et al., Gastroenterology) + USMSTF 2022 focused update on age (Patel et al., Gastroenterology 2022;162:285-299) / ACS 2026 (CA Cancer J Clin) · reviewed 2026-10-11 ↗
Truninger K … Fazilaty H · Gut · IF 24.6 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Colorectal rct · n=41 · Aug 27, 2026 · Dis Colon Rectum · IF 3.5

Hypnosis for Postoperative Pain Management Following Colectomies: A Single-Center Randomized Controlled Feasibility Trial.

New evidence
Clinical takeawayNo clinical action yet: a feasibility trial showing signals of benefit, but efficacy requires confirmation in a definitive trial.
What it foundHypnosis reduced median pain scores from 5.0 to 2.5 at 24 hours and from 4.0 to 1.5 at day 3 post-colectomy, with a between-group difference of -1.2 at 24 hours (95% CI -2.3 to -0.1).
ContextPost-colectomy pain management remains opioid-dependent; this is the first RCT to assess hypnosis as an adjunct in this setting.
No standard claimed for this paper

Every paper is compared to the standard governing its question. This one is not: either no standard in the corpus matches it, or the comparison did not hold up on review and was withdrawn rather than published unverified. Both are logged.

Toth AM … Alcacer-Pitarch B · Diseases of the Colon and Rectum · IF 3.5 · PubMed ↗Permalink
← Back to issue №9 Every section of this issue is one click away, at the top of this page. Follow Colorectal by RSS