In the United States screening is typically recommended between the age of 50 and 75 years. For those between 76 and 85 years of age the decision to screen should be individualized. A number of screening methods can be used including stool based tests every 3 years, sigmoidoscopy every 5 years and colonoscopy every 10 years. For those at high risk, screenings usually begin at around 40. It is unclear which of these two methods is better. Colonoscopy may find more cancers in the first part of the colon but is associated with greater cost and more complications. For people with average risk who have had a high-quality colonoscopy with normal results, the American Gastroenterological Association does not recommend any type of screening in the 10 years following the colonoscopy. For people over 75 or those with a life expectancy of less than 10 years, screening is not recommended. It takes about 10 years after screening for one out of a 1000 people to benefit.

In Canada, among those 50 to 75 at normal risk, fecal immunochemical testing or FOBT is recommended every two years or sigmoidoscopy every 10 years. Colonoscopy is less preferred.

Some countries have national colorectal screening programs which offer FOBT screening for all adults within a certain age group, typically starting between age 50 and 60. Examples of countries with organised screening include the United Kingdom, Australia and the Netherlands.

Aspirin and celecoxib appear to decrease the risk of colorectal cancer in those at high risk. Aspirin is recommended in those who are 50 to 60 years old, do not have an increased risk of bleeding, and are at risk for cardiovascular disease to prevent colorectal cancer. It is not recommended in those at average risk. There is tentative evidence for calcium supplementation, but it is not sufficient to make a recommendation. Vitamin D intake and blood levels are associated with a lower risk of colon cancer.

Screening methods for colon cancer depend on detecting either precancerous changes such as certain kinds of polyps or on finding early and thus more treatable cancer. The extent to which screening procedures reduce the incidence of gastrointestinal cancer or mortality depends on the rate of precancerous and cancerous disease in that population. gFOBT (guaiac fecal occult blood test) and flexible sigmoidoscopy screening have each shown benefit in randomized clinical trials. Evidence for other colon cancer screening tools such as iFOBT (immunochemical fecal occult blood test) or colonoscopy is substantial and guidelines have been issued by several advisory groups but does not include randomized studies.

In 2009 the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG) suggest that colon cancer screening modalities that are also directly preventive by removing precursor lesions should be given precedence, and prefer a colonoscopy every 10 years in average-risk individuals, beginning at age 50. The ACG suggests that cancer detection tests such as any type of FOB are an alternative that is less preferred, and if a colonoscopy is declined, the FIT (fecal immunochemical test, or iFOBT) should be offered instead. Two other recent guidelines, from the US Multisociety Task Force (MSTF) and the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), while permitting immediate colonoscopy as an option, did not categorize it as preferred. The ACG and MSTF also included CT colonography every five years, and fecal DNA testing as considerations. All three recommendation panels recommended replacing any older low-sensitivity, guaiac-based fecal occult blood testing (gFOBT) with either newer high-sensitivity guaiac-based fecal occult blood testing (hs gFOBT) or fecal immunochemical testing (FIT). MSTF looked at six studies that compared high sensitivity gFOBT (Hemoccult SENSA) to FIT, and concluded that there was no clear difference in overall performance between these methods.

The American College of Gastroenterology has recommended the abandoning of gFOBT testing as a colorectal cancer screening tool, in favor of the fecal immunochemical test. Though the FIT test is preferred, even the guaiac FOB testing of average risk populations may have been sufficient to reduce the mortality associated with colon cancer by about 25%. With this lower efficacy, it was not always cost effective to screen a large population with gFOBT.

If colon cancer is suspected in an individual (such as in someone with an unexplained anemia) fecal occult blood tests may not be clinically helpful. If a doctor suspects colon cancer, more rigorous investigation is necessary, whether or not the test is positive.

In 2006, the Australian Government introduced the National Bowel Cancer Program which has been updated several times since; targeted screening will be done of all Australians aged over 50 to 74 by 2017–2018. Cancer Council Australia recommended that FOBT should be done every two years. Gradually government fund disbursement meant that some people are not yet eligible for the national program and should pay for a FOBT by themselves.

The Canadian Cancer Society recommends that men and women age 50 and over have a FOBT at least every 2 years.

In colon cancer screening, using only one sample of feces collected by a doctor performing a digital rectal examination is discouraged.

The use of the M2-PK Test is encouraged over gFOBT for routine screening as it may pick up tumors that are both bleeding and non bleeding. It is able to pick up 80 percent of colorectal cancer and 44 percent for adenoma > 1 centimeter, while gFOBT picks up 13 to 50 percent of colorectal cancers.

An important anatomic landmark in anal cancer is the pectinate line (dentate line), which is located about 1–2 cm from the anal verge (where the anal mucosa of the anal canal becomes skin). Anal cancers located above this line (towards the head) are more likely to be carcinomas, whilst those located below (towards the feet) are more likely to be squamous cell carcinomas that may ulcerate. Anal cancer is strongly associated with ulcerative colitis and the sexually transmissible infections HPV and HIV. Anal cancer may be a cause of constipation or tenesmus, or may be felt as a palpable mass, although it may occasionally present as an ulcerative form.

Anal cancer is investigated by biopsy and may be treated by excision and radiotherapy, or with external beam radiotherapy and adjunctive chemotherapy. The five-year survival rate with the latter procedure is above 70%.

Colorectal cancer is a disease of old age: It typically originates in the secretory cells lining the gut, and risk factors include diets low in vegetable fibre and high in fat. If a younger person gets such a cancer, it is often associated with hereditary syndromes like Peutz-Jegher's, hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer or familial adenomatous polyposis. Colorectal cancer can be detected through the bleeding of a polyp, colicky bowel pain, a bowel obstruction or the biopsy of a polyp at a screening colonoscopy. A constant feeling of having to go to the toilet or anemia might also point to this kind of cancer.

Use of a colonoscope can find these cancers, and a biopsy can reveal the extent of the involvement of the bowel wall. Removal of a section of the colon is necessary for treatment, with or without chemotherapy. Colorectal cancer has a comparatively good prognosis when detected early.

Diet and lifestyle are believed to play a large role in whether colorectal polyps form. Studies show there to be a protective link between consumption of cooked green vegetables, brown rice, legumes, and dried fruit and decreased incidence of colorectal polyps.

Genetic testing for mutations in DNA mismatch repair genes is expensive and time-consuming, so researchers have proposed techniques for identifying cancer patients who are most likely to be HNPCC carriers as ideal candidates for genetic testing. The Amsterdam Criteria (see below) are useful, but do not identify up to 30% of potential Lynch syndrome carriers. In colon cancer patients, pathologists can measure microsatellite instability in colon tumor specimens, which is a surrogate marker for DNA mismatch repair gene dysfunction. If there is microsatellite instability identified, there is a higher likelihood for a Lynch syndrome diagnosis. Recently, researchers combined microsatellite instability (MSI) profiling and immunohistochemistry testing for DNA mismatch repair gene expression and identified an extra 32% of Lynch syndrome carriers who would have been missed on MSI profiling alone. Currently, this combined immunohistochemistry and MSI profiling strategy is the most advanced way of identifying candidates for genetic testing for the Lynch syndrome.

Genetic counseling and genetic testing are recommended for families that meet the Amsterdam criteria, preferably before the onset of colon cancer.

This disease is often discovered during surgery for other conditions, e.g., hernia repair, following which an experienced pathologist can confirm the diagnosis. Advanced stages may present as tumors palpable on the abdomen or distention of the belly ("jelly belly" is sometimes used as a slang term for the condition). Due to the rarity of this disease, it is important to obtain an accurate diagnosis so that appropriate treatment may be obtained from a surgical oncologist who specializes in appendix cancer. Diagnostic tests may include CT scans, examination of tissue samples obtained through laparoscopy, and the evaluation of tumor markers. In most cases a colonoscopy is unsuitable as a diagnostic tool because in most cases appendix cancer invades the abdominal cavity but not the colon (however, spread inside the colon is occasionally reported). PET scans may be used to evaluate high-grade mucinous adenocarcinoma, but this test is not reliable for detecting low-grade tumors because those do not take up the dye which shows up on scans. New MRI procedures are being developed for disease monitoring, but standard MRIs are not typically used as a diagnostic tool. Diagnosis is confirmed through pathology.

The following are the Amsterdam criteria in identifying high-risk candidates for molecular genetic testing:

"Amsterdam Criteria (all bullet points must be fulfilled):"

- Three or more family members with a confirmed diagnosis of colorectal cancer, one of whom is a first degree (parent, child, sibling) relative of the other two

- Two successive affected generations

- One or more colon cancers diagnosed under age 50 years

- Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) has been excluded

"Amsterdam Criteria II (all bullet points must be fulfilled):"

- Three or more family members with HNPCC-related cancers, one of whom is a first-degree relative of the other two

- Two successive affected generations

- One or more of the HNPCC-related cancers diagnosed under age 50 years

- Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) has been excluded

There are four methods in clinical use for testing for occult blood in feces. These look at different properties, such as antibodies, heme, globin, or porphyrins in blood, or at DNA from cellular material such as from lesions of the intestinal mucosa.

- Fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), and immunochemical fecal occult blood test (iFOBT). FIT products utilize specific antibodies to detect globin. FIT screening is more effective in terms of health outcomes and cost compared with guaiac FOBT. According to the guidelines of the American College of Gastroenterology, "Annual fecal immunochemical testing is the preferred colorectal cancer detection test." A FIT test detects globin levels in feces at or above 50 nanograms per mL, the established cutoff by the World Health Organization for Colorectal Cancer Screening.

FIT testing has replaced most gFOBT tests as the colon cancer screening test of choice. This methodology can be adapted for automated test reading and to report quantitative results, which are potential factors in design of a widescale screening strategy. The number of fecal samples submitted for FIT may affect the clinical sensitivity and specificity of the methodology.[8] High sensitivity gFOBT tests such as Hemoccult SENSA remains an accepted option;[8] and may retain a role in monitoring gastrointestinal conditions such as ulcerative colitis; however the FIT test is preferred in recent guidelines.

- Stool guaiac test for fecal occult blood (gFOBT): – The stool guaiac test involves smearing some feces onto some absorbent paper that has been treated with a chemical. Hydrogen peroxide is then dropped onto the paper; if trace amounts of blood are present, the paper will change color in one or two seconds. This method works as the heme component in hemoglobin has a peroxidase-like effect, rapidly breaking down hydrogen peroxide. In some settings such as gastric or proximal upper intestinal bleeding the guaiac method may be more sensitive than tests detecting globin because globin is broken down in the upper intestine to a greater extent than is heme. There are various commercially available gFOBT tests which have been categorized as being of low or high sensitivity, and only high sensitivity tests remain an acceptable alternative to FIT testing, which is now the best-practices recommendation in colon cancer screening. Optimal clinical performance of the stool guaiac test depends on preparatory dietary adjustment.

- Stool DNA screening tests look for DNA alterations that have been associated with cancer.

Additional methods of looking for occult blood are being explored, including transferrin dipstick and stool cytology.

Little research is conducted on these cancers due to their relative rarity when compared to the more common colorectal cancers. APC-min mice which carry a gene deficiency corresponding to that of humans with FAP also go on to develop small intestinal tumors, though humans do not.

Colorectal polyps can be detected using a faecal occult blood test, flexible sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, virtual colonoscopy, digital rectal examination, barium enema or a pill camera.

Malignant potential is associated with

- degree of dysplasia

- Type of polyp (e.g. villous adenoma):

- Tubular Adenoma: 5% risk of cancer

- Tubulovillous adenoma: 20% risk of cancer

- Villous adenoma: 40% risk of cancer

- Size of polyp:

- <1 cm =<1% risk of cancer

- 1 cm=10% risk of cancer

- 2 cm=15% risk of cancer

Normally an adenoma which is greater than 0.5 cm is treated

Monitoring involves the provision of outpatient colonoscopy, and occasionally upper gastric tract esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD, to search for premalignant gastric or duodenal tumors), typically once every 1–3 years, and/or a genetic blood test to definitively confirm or deny susceptibility. A small number of polyps can often be excised (removed) during the procedure, if found, but if there are more severe signs or numbers, in patient surgery may be required.

NCBI states that when an individual is identified as having FAP, or the mutations resulting in FAP: "It is appropriate to evaluate the parents of an affected individual (a) with molecular genetic testing of APC if the disease-causing mutation is known in the proband [person first identified with the condition] or (b) for clinical manifestations of APC-associated polyposis conditions".

Multiple disorders are found in patients with radiation enteropathy, so guidance including an algorithmic approach to their investigation has been developed. This includes a holistic assessment with investigations including endoscopies, breath tests and other nutritional and gastrointestinal tests. Full investigation is important as many cancer survivors of radiation therapy develop other causes for their symptoms such as colonic polyps, diverticular disease or hemorrhoids.

Because of the way familial polyposis develops, it is possible to have the genetic condition, and therefore be at risk, but have no polyps or issues so far. Therefore, an individual may be diagnosed "at risk of" FAP, and require routine monitoring, but not (yet) actually have FAP (i.e., carries a defective gene but as yet appears not to have any actual medical issue as a result of this). Clinical management can cover several areas:

- Identifying those individuals who could be at risk of FAP: usually from family medical history or genetic testing

- Diagnosis (confirming whether they have FAP)—this can be done either by genetic testing, which is definitive, or by visually checking the intestinal tract itself.

- Screening / monitoring programs involve visually examining the intestinal tract to check its healthy condition. It is undertaken as a routine matter every few years where there is cause for concern, when either (a) a genetic test has confirmed the risk or (b) a genetic test has not been undertaken for any reason so the actual risk is unknown. Screening and monitoring allows polyposis to be detected visually before it can become life-threatening.

- Treatment, typically surgery of some kind, is involved if polyposis has led to a large number of polyps, or a significant risk of cancer, or actual cancer.

The 1973 WHO grading system for TCCs (papilloma, G1, G2 or G3) is most commonly used despite being superseded by the 2004 WHO grading (papillary neoplasm of low malignant potential [PNLMP], low grade, and high grade papillary carcinoma).

Some suggestions for surveillance for cancer include the following:

- Small intestine with small bowel radiography every 2 years,

- Esophagogastroduodenoscopy and colonoscopy every 2 years,

- CT scan or MRI of the pancreas yearly,

- Ultrasound of the pelvis (women) and testes (men) yearly,

- Mammography (women) from age 25 annually livelong, and

- Papanicolaou smear (Pap smear) every year

Follow-up care should be supervised by a physician familiar with Peutz–Jeghers syndrome. Genetic consultation and counseling as well as urological and gynecological consultations are often needed.

Risk factors for small intestine cancer include:

- Crohn's disease

- Celiac disease

- Radiation exposure

- Hereditary gastrointestinal cancer syndromes: familial adenomatous polyposis, hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer, Peutz-Jeghers syndrome

- Males are 25% more likely to develop the disease

Benign tumours and conditions that may be mistaken for cancer of the small bowel:

- Hamartoma

- Tuberculosis

Treatment is variable, both due to its rarity and to its frequently slow-growing nature. Treatment ranges from watchful waiting to debulking and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC, also called intraperitoneal hyperthermic chemotherapy, IPHC) with cytoreductive surgery.

An increasing number of people are now surviving cancer, with improved treatments producing cure of the malignancy (cancer survivors). There are now over 14 million such people in the US, and this figure is expected to increase to 18 million by 2022. More than half are survivors of abdominal or pelvic cancers, with about 300,000 people receiving abdominal and pelvic radiation each year. It has been estimated there are 1.6 million people in the US with post-radiation intestinal dysfunction, a greater number than those with inflammatory bowel disease such as Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis.

The purpose of radiologic imaging is to locate the lesion, evaluate for signs of invasion and detect metastasis. Features of GIST vary depending on tumor size and organ of origin. The diameter can range from a few millimeters to more than 30 cm. Larger tumors usually cause symptoms in contrast to those found incidentally which tend to be smaller and have better prognosis. Large tumors tend to exhibit malignant behavior but small GISTs may also demonstrate clinically aggressive behavior.

Plain radiographs are not very helpful in the evaluation of GISTs. If an abnormality is seen, it will be an indirect sign due to the tumor mass effect on adjacent organs. On abdominal x-ray, stomach GISTs may appear as a radiopaque mass altering the shape of the gastric air shadow. Intestinal GISTs may displace loops of bowel and larger tumors may obstruct the bowel and films will show an obstructive pattern. If cavitations are present, plain radiographs will show collections of air within the tumor. Calcification is an unusual feature of GIST but if present can be visible on plain films.

Barium fluoroscopic examinations and CT are commonly used to evaluate the patient with abdominal complaints. Barium swallow images show abnormalities in 80% of GIST cases. However, some GISTs may be located entirely outside the lumen of the bowel and will not be appreciated with a barium swallow. Even in cases when the barium swallow is abnormal, an MRI or CT scan must follow since it is impossible to evaluate abdominal cavities and other abdominal organs with a barium swallow alone. In a CT scan, abnormalities may be seen in 87% of patients and it should be made with both oral and intravenous contrast. Among imaging studies, MRI has the best tissue contrast, which aids in the identification of masses within the GI tract (intramural masses). Intravenous contrast material is needed to evaluate lesion vascularity.

Preferred imaging modalities in the evaluation of GISTs are CT and MRI, and, in selected situations, endoscopic ultrasound. CT advantages include its ability to demonstrate evidence of nearby organ invasion, ascites, and metastases. The ability of MRI to produce images in multiple planes is helpful in determining the bowel as the organ of origin (which is difficult when the tumor is very large), facilitating diagnosis.

Transitional refers to the histological subtype of the cancerous cells as seen under a microscope.

CT scanning is often undertaken (see the "radiology" section).

The definitive diagnosis is made with a biopsy, which can be obtained endoscopically, percutaneously with CT or ultrasound guidance or at the time of surgery. A biopsy sample will be investigated under the microscope by a pathologist physician. The pathologist examines the histopathology to identify the characteristics of GISTs (spindle cells in 70-80%, epitheloid aspect in 20-30%). Smaller tumors can usually be confined to the muscularis propria layer of the intestinal wall. Large ones grow, mainly outward, from the bowel wall until the point where they outstrip their blood supply and necrose (die) on the inside, forming a cavity that may eventually come to communicate with the bowel lumen.

When GIST is suspected—as opposed to other causes for similar tumors—the pathologist can use immunohistochemistry (specific antibodies that stain the molecule CD117 [also known as "c-kit"] —see below). 95% of all GISTs are CD117-positive (other possible markers include CD34, DOG-1, desmin, and vimentin). Other cells that show CD117 positivity are mast cells.

If the CD117 stain is negative and suspicion remains that the tumor is a GIST, the newer antibody DOG-1 (Discovered On GIST-1) can be used. Also sequencing of Kit and PDGFRA can be used to prove the diagnosis.

As outlined above, there is no recommended alcohol intake with respect to cancer risk alone as it varies with each individual cancer. See Recommended maximum intake of alcoholic beverages for a list of governments' guidances on alcohol intake which, for a healthy man, range from 140–280g per week.

One meta-analysis suggests that risks of cancers may start below the recommended levels. "Risk increased significantly for drinkers, compared with non-drinkers, beginning at an intake of 25 g (< 2 standard drinks) per day for the following: cancers of the oral cavity and pharynx (relative risk, RR, 1.9), esophagus (RR 1.4), larynx (RR 1.4), breast (RR 1.3), liver (RR 1.2), colon (RR 1.1), and rectum (RR 1.1)"

World Cancer Research Fund recommends that people aim to limit consumption to two drinks a day for a man and one for a woman. It defines a "drink" as containing about 10–15 grams of ethanol.

Several tests are used to diagnose vaginal cancer, including:

- Physical exam and history

- Pelvic exam

- Pap smear

- Biopsy

- Colposcopy

Recommendations for women with vaginal cancer is not to have routine surveillance imaging to monitor the cancer unless they have new symptoms or rising tumor markers. Imaging without these indications is discouraged because it is unlikely to detect a recurrence or improve survival, and because it has its own costs and side effects. MRI provides visualization of the extent of vaginal cancer.

Prevention