Colorectal Cancer Screening: Recommendations for Physicians and Patients From the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer

Colorectal Cancer Screening: Is Colonoscopy the Best Option?

Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Prospective studies demonstrate that colorectal cancer screening reduces incidence and mortality, but uptake remains suboptimal. More than a third of age-eligible Americans are not up to date on screening. There are several available screening tests, which may cause primary care providers to ponder which is the best test. This article provides an overview of the available test options and the evidence for each; a summary of major guidelines; and a comparison of the two most widely used tests, colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical testing.

A blueprint for cancer screening and early detection: Advancing screening's contribution to cancer control

From the mid-20th century, accumulating evidence has supported the introduction of screening for cancers of the cervix, breast, colon and rectum, prostate (via shared decisions), and lung. The opportunity to detect and treat precursor lesions and invasive disease at a more favorable stage has contributed substantially to reduced incidence, morbidity, and mortality. However, as new discoveries portend advancements in technology and risk-based screening, we fail to fulfill the greatest potential of the existing technology, in terms of both full access among the target population and the delivery of state-of-the art care at each crucial step in the cascade of events that characterize successful cancer screening. There also is insufficient commitment to invest in the development of new technologies, incentivize the development of new ideas, and rapidly evaluate promising new technology. In this report, the authors summarize the status of cancer screening and propose a blueprint for the nation to further advance the contribution of screening to cancer control.

Assessment of Pharmaceutical Company and Device Manufacturer Payments to Gastroenterologists and Their Participation in Clinical Practice Guideline Panels

IMPORTANCE

Payments from pharmaceutical and device manufacturers to physicians may influence the advice physicians give patients and peers.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the nature and amounts of monetary and other benefits that gastroenterologists received and to determine the participation of those receiving benefits in the formulation of clinical practice guidelines.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cohort study analyzed information from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Open Payments database, including all reports about payments that pharmaceutical and device manufacturers gave to adult or pediatric gastroenterologists in 2016. PubMed was used to examine the professional affiliations and publication records of top payment recipients. Panelists of clinical guidelines who also received personal financial rewards listed in the Open Payments database were identified.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Payments made to gastroenterologists by pharmaceutical company and device manufacturers.

RESULTS

Of 15 497 gastroenterologists, 13 467 (86.9%) received a total of 432 463 payments accounting for a total expenditure of $67 144 862. Direct financial payments for consultations, talks, or other services were made to 2055 physicians and were responsible for 4.2% of payments (18 179 of 432 463), but for 62.7% of total expenditures ($42 086 207 of $67 144 862). Although a significant number of submissions were for food and beverages, they constituted only a small amount of total expenditure. For gastroenterologists treating adult patients, 10 products were linked to 63.8% of payments (11 221 of 17 588) related to direct financial rewards and 37.1% of the total expenditures ($24 892 643 of $67 144 862). Twenty-nine of 36 clinical practice guidelines included panelists who had received honoraria or consultation fees from industry sources, with amounts exceeding $10 000 in 8 of them (22%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Most gastroenterologists accept meals or gifts from industry, with 2055 of 15 497 gastroenterologists receiving direct payments and 8 of 36 clinical practice guidelines panelists having received more than $10 000. Considering the known impact of such benefits on prescribing patterns and other professional behaviors, policy makers should consider revising regulations governing interactions with industry and disclosure formats alerting others to their potential biasing impact.

From colorectal cancer pattern to the characterization of individuals at risk: Picture for genetic research in Latin America

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common cancers in Latin America and the Caribbean, with the highest rates reported for Uruguay, Brazil and Argentina. We provide a global snapshot of the CRC patterns, how screening is performed, and compared/contrasted to the genetic profile of Lynch syndrome (LS) in the region. From the literature, we find that only nine (20%) of the Latin America and the Caribbean countries have developed guidelines for early detection of CRC, and also with a low adherence. We describe a genetic profile of LS, including a total of 2,685 suspected families, where confirmed LS ranged from 8% in Uruguay and Argentina to 60% in Peru. Among confirmed LS, path_MLH1 variants were most commonly identified in Peru (82%), Mexico (80%), Chile (60%), and path_MSH2/EPCAM variants were most frequently identified in Colombia (80%) and Argentina (47%). Path_MSH6 and path_PMS2 variants were less common, but they showed important presence in Brazil (15%) and Chile (10%), respectively. Important differences exist at identifying LS families in Latin American countries, where the spectrum of path_MLH1 and path_MSH2 variants are those most frequently identified. Our findings have an impact on the evaluation of the patients and their relatives at risk for LS, derived from the gene affected. Although the awareness of hereditary cancer and genetic testing has improved in the last decade, it is remains deficient, with 39%–80% of the families not being identified for LS among those who actually met both the clinical criteria for LS and showed MMR deficiency.

Contrasting Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening Under Commercial Insurance vs. Medicare

OBJECTIVES

Most cost-effectiveness analyses of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening assume Medicare payment rates and a lifetime horizon. Our aims were to examine the implications of differential payment levels and time horizons for commercial insurers vs. Medicare on the cost-effectiveness of CRC screening.

METHODS

We used our validated Markov cohort simulation of CRC screening in the average risk US population to examine CRC screening at ages 50-64 under commercial insurance, and at ages 65-80 under Medicare, using a health-care sector perspective. Model outcomes included discounted quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs per person, and incremental cost/QALY gained.

RESULTS

Lifetime costs/person were 20-44% higher when assuming commercial payment rates rather than Medicare rates for people under 65. Most of the substantial clinical benefit of screening at ages 50-64 was realized at ages ≥65. For commercial payers with a time horizon of ages 50-64, fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) and fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) were cost-effective (<$61,000/QALY gained), but colonoscopy was costly (>$185,000/QALY gained). Medicare experienced substantial clinical benefits and cost-savings from screening done at ages <65, even if screening was not continued. Among those previously screened, continuing FOBT and FIT under Medicare was cost-saving and continuing colonoscopy was highly cost-effective (<$30,000/QALY gained), and initiating any screening in those previously unscreened was highly effective and cost-saving.

CONCLUSIONS

Modeling suggests that CRC screening is highly cost-effective over a lifetime even when considering higher payment rates by commercial payers vs. Medicare. Screening may appear relatively costly for commercial payers if only a time horizon of ages 50-64 is considered, but it is predicted to yield substantial clinical and economic benefits that accrue primarily at ages ≥65 under Medicare.

2017 Emily Couric Memorial Lecture: Colorectal Cancer: Polyps, Prevention, and Progress

Colorectal cancer remains the second‐leading cause of cancer death in the United States—but efforts over the past two decades have resulted in tremendous progress in understanding the biology of how this disease develops, increasing screening rates, and decreasing incidence and mortality in those age 50 years and older. The drivers of this movement have been outstanding leadership, innovation, and collaboration. As we move forward to tackle issues such as the increasing incidence of this disease in younger adults, the need to address disparities in care and outcomes, and our shared goal to reach 80% screening rates, it's important to understand and appreciate the story of our past success in order to advance our future efforts.

Risk Factors for Diagnosis of Colorectal Cancer at a Late Stage: a Population-Based Study

BACKGROUND

Late-stage colorectal cancer (CRC) is associated with significantly less effective treatment and poorer survival than early-stage colorectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE

Identify and assess patient characteristics, demographic factors, and lifestyle factors that are associated with late-stage colorectal cancer at diagnosis.

APPROACH

We linked two longstanding statewide, population-based registry databases: the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry and the New Hampshire State Cancer Registry, to assess the associations between patient characteristics and late-stage CRC diagnoses. The State Cancer Registry provided information on cancer stage and the Colonoscopy Registry provided detailed information on patient characteristics and lifestyle factors, allowing these factors to be analyzed in relation to colorectal cancer stage.

KEY RESULTS

The risk of late-stage CRC diagnosis was highest among those diagnosed at a young age (< 50 years old) (OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.27-2.58). Those with Medicaid were also at increased risk, particularly < 65 years of age (OR 2.32, 95% CI 1.05-5.26). A family or personal history of polyps and/or CRC was associated with early stage at diagnosis (p = 0.014).

CONCLUSIONS

Public health outreach and screening efforts should focused on patients at risk of late-stage CRC to encourage earlier diagnosis and prevention. Underserved patients have a lower rate of CRC screening and an increased risk of late-stage CRC, emphasizing the critical need to reach these populations. Further investigation of susceptibility characteristics and the effectiveness of non-invasive early screening techniques is warranted to address the late-stage CRC diagnoses in young individuals.

Rectal Cancer in 2018: A Primer for the Gastroenterologist

The rectum has distinctive anatomic and physiologic features, which increase the risk of local spread and recurrence among rectal cancers as compared to colon cancers. Essential to the management of rectal cancers is accurate endoscopic localization as well as preoperative imaging assessment of local and distant disease. Successful oncologic care is multidisciplinary including input from Gastroenterologists, Surgeons, Medical and Radiation Oncologists, Radiologists, and Pathologists. Extensive planning of curative intent is mandatory as failures of upfront treatment present great long‐term difficulty for patients and caregivers. Local recurrences are frequently associated with major morbidity including bowel and urinary obstruction, severe pain, and significantly diminished quality of life. Distant recurrence is associated with lower survival. Over the last two decades, there have been many advances in diagnostic imaging techniques as well as surgical techniques including transanal endoscopic microsurgery for very early stage cancers. Progress in curative management paradigms includes shorter courses of preoperative radiotherapy and chemotherapy doublet paradigms for perioperative treatment. This review describes the diagnosis, workup, and multimodality curative intent treatment of rectal cancers. It is emphasized that success begins in the hands and eyes of the gastroenterologist.

Endoscopist Specialty Predicts the Likelihood of Recommending Cessation of Colorectal Cancer Screening in Older Adults

OBJECTIVES

Although the 2008 US Preventive Services Task Force guidelines recommend against routine colorectal cancer (CRC) screening for adults aged 76-85, it is unclear what endoscopists recommend in practice. Our goal was to examine current practice around cessation of CRC screening in older adults.

METHODS

We included normal screening colonoscopy exams in adults ≥ 50 years old within the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry between 2009 and 2014. The primary outcome was endoscopists' recommendation against further screening. The main exposure variables included patient age, family history of CRC, and endoscopist characteristics. Descriptive statistics and univariate and multivariable logistic regression models were used.

RESULTS

Of 13,364 normal screening colonoscopy exams, 2914 (21.8%) were in adults aged ≥ 65 and were performed by 74 endoscopists. Nearly 100% of adults aged 65-69 undergoing screening colonoscopy were given the recommendation to return for screening colonoscopy in the future. Only 15% of average-risk patients aged 70-74 were told to stop receiving screening, while 85% were told to return at a future interval, most frequently in 10 years when they would be 80-84. In the multivariable model, advancing patient age and the absence of family history of CRC were significantly associated with a recommendation to stop colonoscopy. Gastroenterologists were more likely to recommend stopping colonoscopy in accordance with guidelines than other non-gastroenterology endoscopists (adjusted OR (95% CI) 2.3 (1.6-3.4)).

CONCLUSIONS

In a large statewide colonoscopy registry, the majority of older adults are told to return for future screening colonoscopy. Having a family history of CRC or a non-gastroenterology endoscopist increases the likelihood of being told to return for screening at advanced ages.

Frailty Assessment Predicts Acute Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Screening Colonoscopy

BACKGROUND

Colonoscopy is associated with multiple adverse outcomes. With an aging population undergoing colorectal cancer screening, few modalities exist to assess the patient risk prior to colonoscopy. Frailty, the age-related decline in reserve and function across multiple organ systems, predicts poor surgical outcomes, but its role in endoscopy is unclear.

AIMS

This prospective cohort study assesses the efficacy of frailty in predicting acute colonoscopy outcomes.

METHODS

Participants aged ≥ 50 years undergoing screening colonoscopy at a tertiary care center were recruited over 2 months ending in July 2017. Frailty was assessed using a validated 20-s upper-extremity frailty test, which measures the capacity of muscle performance. Demographic data, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) status, and Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) were evaluated. Procedure-related adverse events and cardiopulmonary changes during and in the immediate post-procedure period were recorded. Adverse events were stratified into minor and major events. Chi-square and ANCOVA models were used in the analysis.

RESULTS

Ninety-nine adults (mean age 62.8 years) were enrolled, among which 49 were non-frail and 50 were pre-frail/frail; 50 were female. Overall, 55 participants experienced a total of 87 adverse events. Frailty and ASA status were significantly associated with colonoscopy adverse events (p = 0.01 and p = 0.02, respectively). Age and CCI did not predict colonoscopy outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to age and CCI, frailty status better predicts colonoscopy outcomes in older adults. Among adults undergoing colonoscopy, routine frailty screening should be considered for risk stratification. Additional prospective studies evaluating frailty measurements in endoscopy will further clarify its role in forecasting adverse events.

Colorectal Cancer Presentation and Survival in Young Individuals: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Emerging evidence suggests that the incidence of colorectal cancer is increasing among individuals under the age of 50 years. However, the pattern of disease presentation in young patients remains under investigation. This is a retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC) between 2004 and 2015. Data was acquired from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results 18 program registries. A total of 269,398 patients who met the inclusion criteria were included in the final analysis. The primary outcomes were the likelihood of metastatic disease at diagnosis and survival. Of the 269,389 patients diagnosed with CRC, 11.8% of the patients were young (20 to 49 years), 45.6% were middle-aged (50 to 69 years), and 42.6% were elderly (70 years or older). Individuals in the middle-aged and elderly cohorts were significantly less likely to present with metastatic disease as compared to the young cohort (middle-aged adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.70 to 0.75, elderly aOR = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.47 to 0.50). However, overall survival was longest in the young cohort. We conclude that young individuals with colorectal cancer have an increased risk of presenting with distant metastases as compared to the middle-aged and elderly, but, nevertheless, exhibit prolonged survival.

Precision Medicine Versus Population Medicine in Colon Cancer: From Prospects of Prevention, Adjuvant Chemotherapy, and Surveillance

With the advances of technologic revolution that provides new insights into human biology, genetics and cancer, as well as advantages of big data which amasses large amounts of information for us to approach cancer treatment and prevention, we are facing challenges of organically combining data from studies based on general population and information from individual testing and setting out precisional recommendations in cancer diagnosis, prevention, and treatment. We are obligated to accelerate the adaptation of new scientific discoveries into effective treatments and prevention for cancer. In this review, we introduce our opinions on bringing knowledge of precision and population medicine together to guide our clinical practice from the prospects of colorectal cancer prevention, stage III colon cancer adjuvant therapy, and postsurgery surveillance.

Clinical and Genetic Factors to Inform Reducing Colorectal Cancer Disparitites in African Americans

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most prevalent and second deadliest cancer in the U.S. with 140,250 cases and 50,630 deaths for 2018. Prevention of CRC through screening is effective. Among categorized races in the U.S., African Americans (AAs) show the highest incidence and death rates per 100,000 when compared to Non-Hispanic Whites (NHWs), American Indian/Alaskan Natives, Hispanics, and Asian/Pacific Islanders, with an overall AA:NHW ratio of 1.13 for incidence and 1.32 for mortality (2010-2014, seer.cancer.gov). The disparity for CRC incidence and worsened mortality among AAs is likely multifactorial and includes environmental (e.g., diet and intestinal microbiome composition, prevalence of obesity, use of aspirin, alcohol, and tobacco use), societal (e.g., socioeconomic status, insurance and access to care, and screening uptake and behaviors), and genetic (e.g., somatic driver mutations, race-specific variants in genes, and inflammation and immunological factors). Some of these parameters have been investigated, and interventions that address specific parameters have proven to be effective in lowering the disparity. For instance, there is strong evidence raising screening utilization rates among AAs to that of NHWs reduces CRC incidence to that of NHWs. Reducing the age to commence CRC screening in AA patients may further address incidence disparity, due to the earlier age onset of CRC. Identified genetic and epigenetic changes such as reduced MLH1 hypermethylation frequency, presence of inflammation-associated microsatellite alterations, and unique driver gene mutations (FLCN and EPHA6) among AA CRCs will afford more precise approaches toward CRC care, including the use of 5-fluorouracil and anti-PD-1.

Colonoscopy as Part of Pre-Transplant Work-Up in Successful Kidney Transplant Candidates: Single-Center Experience and Review of Literature

Background

Screening colonoscopy is not obligatory in kidney pre-transplant work-up guidelines. According to recommendations, only transplant recipients over age 50 years should be screened. The aim of this study was to characterize endoscopic findings revealed as part of pre-transplant work-up.

Material/Methods

We retrospectively reviewed pre-transplant work-up charts of 434 adult patients who received a cadaveric donor kidney transplantation (KT) from 2012 to 2015. Endoscopic findings analysis with age subgroup (<50 and ≥50) analysis were performed.

Results

Out of 434 of patients that underwent KT, 29% have had a colonoscopy. In 75.6% of those, pathologies were found. Hemorrhoids were found in 33% and polyps in 30.7% of patients. Adenoma detection rate (ADR) was 18.1% (67.5% distal predominance). Advanced ADR was 10.2% (distal predominance). Diverticulosis was found in 28.3% of patients and ulcerative colitis was found in 2.4%. In age subgroup analysis, ADR was higher in patients ≥50 years compared to those <50 years (21.6% vs. 4%; p=0.041).

Conclusions

Colonoscopy as part of pre-transplant work-up enables removal of precancerous lesions and management of benign findings. All candidates meeting criteria for the general population should be screened. Patients under age 50 years could also benefit from colonoscopy as part of the pre-transplant work-up. Therefore, we suggest that baseline colonoscopy should be included in pre-transplant work-up guidelines for all patients, regardless of age. However, further studies are needed to confirm this recommendation.

Clinical Practice Guideline on Screening for Colorectal Cancer in Individuals With a Family History of Nonhereditary Colorectal Cancer or Adenoma: The Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Banff Consensus

BACKGROUND & AIMS

A family history (FH) of colorectal cancer (CRC) increases the risk of developing CRC. These consensus recommendations developed by the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology and endorsed by the American Gastroenterological Association, aim to provide guidance on screening these high-risk individuals.

METHODS

Multiple parallel systematic review streams, informed by 10 literature searches, assembled evidence on 5 principal questions around the effect of an FH of CRC or adenomas on the risk of CRC, the age to initiate screening, and the optimal tests and testing intervals. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach was used to develop the recommendations.

RESULTS

Based on the evidence, the Consensus Group was able to strongly recommend CRC screening for all individuals with an FH of CRC or documented adenoma. However, because most of the evidence was very-low quality, the majority of the remaining statements were conditional ("we suggest"). Colonoscopy is suggested (recommended in individuals with ≥2 first-degree relatives [FDRs]), with fecal immunochemical test as an alternative. The elevated risk associated with an FH of ≥1 FDRs with CRC or documented advanced adenoma suggests initiating screening at a younger age (eg, 40-50 years or 10 years younger than age of diagnosis of FDR). In addition, a shorter interval of every 5 years between screening tests was suggested for individuals with ≥2 FDRs, and every 5-10 years for those with FH of 1 FDR with CRC or documented advanced adenoma compared to average-risk individuals. Choosing screening parameters for an individual patient should consider the age of the affected FDR and local resources. It is suggested that individuals with an FH of ≥1 second-degree relatives only, or of nonadvanced adenoma or polyp of unknown histology, be screened according to average-risk guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

The increased risk of CRC associated with an FH of CRC or advanced adenoma warrants more intense screening for CRC. Well-designed prospective studies are needed in order to make definitive evidence-based recommendations about the age to commence screening and appropriate interval between screening tests.

The Differential Diagnosis in Nonlymphoproliferative Malignant Pleural Effusion Cytopathology and Its Correlation with Patients' Demographics

BACKGROUND

We report our experience with malignant pleural effusion (MPE) and the impact of patients' demographics on the differential diagnosis at the primary site.

METHODS

After IRB approval, we searched our pathology database from January 2013 to January 2017 for patients with positive pleural effusions (PEs). Patients' demographics and clinical histories were noted.

RESULTS

474 patients were identified (288 females [61%] and 186 males [39%]), ranging in age from 19 to 64 years old. Ethnicity was distributed as follows: Caucasian (n = 330, 70%), African American (n = 114, 24%) and Asian (n = 30, 6%). The most common primary sites were the lung (n = 180, 37%), followed by the breast (n = 81, 17%), and the gynecologic system (67, 13%). The lung was the most common primary for all ethnicities (n = 190, 40%). The second-most common primary site was the breast in African Americans and Caucasians and upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract in Asians. In 5 cases (1%), the primary tumor could not be determined.

CONCLUSION

Cytology examination is a useful method to diagnose primary sites of PE. Pulmonary primary is the most common cause of effusion in all ethnicities. In African American and Caucasian patients, the breast was the second-most common site of MPE, while in Asian patients it was the upper GI tract.

An integrated electronic health record-based workflow to improve management of colonoscopy-generated pathology results

Purpose

Managing and communicating colonoscopy-generated pathology results and appropriate follow-up recommendations can be challenging. To improve this process, we developed and implemented a standardized electronic health record-based intervention with built-in decision support.

Methods

Fourteen attending endoscopists performed enough colonoscopies to qualify for the study. For each, we randomly sampled and abstracted data from 35 colonoscopies that met prespecified inclusion criteria during both the pre-intervention and also post-intervention periods. Follow-up recommendations were compared to guidelines. We used the Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test to assess the change in the proportion of cases with guideline-concordant results, the proportion with a documented follow-up result letter, and the median time to letter completion. A brief survey assessed endoscopists’ satisfaction with the intervention.

Results

In total, 1,947 colonoscopies were extracted, of which 968 met inclusion criteria. The proportion of follow-up recommendations that were guideline concordant increased from a median of 82.9% pre-intervention to 85.7% post-intervention (P=0.72). The proportion of observations with a documented follow-up result letter increased from a median of 88.9% pre-intervention to 97.1% post-intervention (P=0.07). The number of calendar days between the date of the colonoscopy and the date the letter was sent decreased from a median of 7.7 days pre-intervention to 6.8 days post-intervention (P=0.79). Eighty-six percentage of endoscopists were either “very satisfied” or “satisfied” with the overall process.

Conclusion

The intervention was not associated with a statistically significant increase in guideline-concordant recommendations or efficiency measures, perhaps due to high baseline performance. The intervention was well received by endoscopists and captured data necessary for important downstream processes.

The colorectal cancer epidemic: challenges and opportunities for primary, secondary and tertiary prevention

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is both one of the most common and one of the most preventable cancers globally, with powerful but strongly missed potential for primary, secondary and tertiary prevention. CRC incidence has traditionally been the highest in affluent Western countries, but it is now increasing rapidly with economic development in many other parts of the world. CRC shares several main risk factors, such as smoking, excessive alcohol consumption, physical inactivity and being overweight, with other common diseases; therefore, primary prevention efforts to reduce these risk factors are expected to have multiple beneficial effects that extend beyond CRC prevention, and should have high public health impact. A sizeable reduction in the incidence and mortality of CRC can also be achieved by offering effective screening tests, such as faecal immunochemical tests, flexible sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy, in organised screening programmes which have been implemented in an increasing number of countries. Countries with early and high uptake rates of effective screening have exhibited major declines in CRC incidence and mortality, in contrast to most other countries. Finally, increasing evidence shows that the prognosis and quality of life of CRC patients can be substantially improved by tertiary prevention measures, such as the administration of low-dose aspirin and the promotion of physical activity.

Colorectal cancer in young African Americans: clinical characteristics and presentations

PURPOSE

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer in the USA, and the incidence in young adults has been increasing over the past decade. We studied the clinical characteristics and presentations of CRC in young African American (AA) adults because available data on how age and ethnicity influence its pattern of presentation is limited.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of 109 young adults (75 African Americans) below 50 years, who were diagnosed with CRC between 1 January 1997 and 31 December 2016. Proximal CRC was defined as lesions proximal to the splenic flexure. Independent t-tests and χ-test or Fisher's exact test were performed where appropriate to determine the differences between AA and non-AA patients.

RESULTS

The mean age at diagnosis was 42 years (range: 20-49 years). Compared with non-AAs, AAs had more frequent proximal CRC (38.7 vs. 14.7%, P=0.003), lower hemoglobin (10.5 vs. 12.7 g/dl, P<0.001), and more frequent weight loss (21.3 vs. 2.9% P=0.014). Non-AAs presented more frequently with rectal bleeding (52.9 vs. 32.0% P=0.037). There was no statistically significant difference in histology, stage, grade, tumor size, and carcinoembryonic antigen level between groups. When we stratified between proximal and distal disease among patients with CRC, we found larger tumor size in distal disease, which presented more with rectal bleeding and bowel habit changes. Proximal disease presented more as abdominal pain and weight loss.

CONCLUSION

There should be a higher index of suspicion for CRC in young AA adults presenting with anemia, abdominal pain, and weight loss. Early screening colonoscopy should be advocated in AAs because of the predominance of proximal disease.

Performance of multitarget stool DNA testing in African American patients

BACKGROUND

Multitarget stool DNA (mt-sDNA) is an approved method for colon cancer screening that is especially relevant for patients who cannot undergo colonoscopy. Although the test performance has been evaluated in a large clinical trial, it was limited to a predominantly white population. Given differences in the epidemiology and biology of colon cancer in African American individuals, the authors sought to compare the performance of mt-sDNA between racial groups.

METHODS

The authors prospectively identified patients aged ≥40 years who were referred for colonoscopy at an academic medical center and 2 satellite facilities. Prior to the colonoscopy, the authors collected stool for mt-sDNA and fecal immunochemical testing (FIT). They compared the sensitivity, specificity, and receiver operating characteristic curve between African American and white patients for the detection of advanced lesions or any adenoma.

RESULTS

A total of 760 patients were included, 34.9% of whom were African American. The prevalence of any adenoma (38.9% for African American patients and 33.9% for white patients) and that for advanced lesions (6.8% and 6.7%, respectively) were similar between groups. The overall sensitivities of mt-sDNA for the detection of advanced lesions and any adenoma were 43% and 19%, respectively, and the specificities were 91% and 93%, respectively. In general, mt-sDNA was more sensitive and less specific than FIT. When stratified by race, the sensitivity, specificity, and receiver operating characteristic curve area were similar between African American and white patients for both mt-sDNA and FIT.

CONCLUSIONS

Test performance characteristics of mt-sDNA were comparable in African American and white patients. Given the lower uptake of colonoscopy in African American individuals, mt-sDNA may offer a promising screening alternative in this patient population.

A Randomized Trial to Compare a Tailored Web-Based Intervention and Tailored Phone Counseling to Usual Care for Increasing Colorectal Cancer Screening

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer mortality could be decreased with risk-appropriate cancer screening. We examined the efficacy of three tailored interventions compared with usual care for increasing screening adherence.

METHODS

Women (n = 1,196) ages 51 to 74, from primary care networks and nonadherent to colorectal cancer guidelines, were randomized to (1) usual care, (2) tailored Web intervention, (3) tailored phone intervention, or (4) tailored Web + phone intervention. Average-risk women could select either stool test or colonoscopy, whereas women considered at higher than average risk received an intervention that supported colonoscopy. Outcome data were collected at 6 months by self-report, followed by medical record confirmation (attrition of 23%). Stage of change for colorectal cancer screening (precontemplation or contemplation) was assessed at baseline and 6 months.

RESULTS

The phone (41.7%, P < 0.0001) and combined Web + phone (35.8%, P < 0.001) interventions significantly increased colorectal cancer screening by stool test compared with usual care (11.1%), with ORs ranging from 5.4 to 6.8 in models adjusted for covariates. Colonoscopy completion did not differ between groups except that phone significantly increased colonoscopy completion compared with usual care for participants in the highest tertile of self-reported fear of cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

A tailored phone with or without a Web component significantly increased colorectal cancer screening compared with usual care, primarily through stool testing, and phone significantly increased colonoscopy compared with usual care but only among those with the highest levels of baseline fear.

IMPACT

This study supports tailored phone counseling with or without a Web program for increasing colorectal cancer screening in average-risk women.

Impact of Colonoscopy Bowel Preparation Quality on Follow-up Interval Recommendations for Average-risk Patients With Normal Screening Colonoscopies: Data From the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

National guidelines for colonoscopy screening and surveillance assume adequate bowel preparation. We used New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry (NHCR) data to investigate the influence of bowel preparation quality on endoscopist recommendations for follow-up intervals in average-risk patients following normal screening colonoscopies.

METHODS

The analysis included 9170 normal screening colonoscopies performed on average risk individuals aged 50 and above between February 2005 and September 2013. The NHCR Procedure Form instructs endoscopists to score based on the worst prepped segment after clearing all colon segments, using the following categories: excellent (essentially 100% visualization), good (very unlikely to impair visualization), fair (possibly impairing visualization), and poor (definitely impairing visualization). We categorized examinations into 3 preparation groups: optimal (excellent/good) (n=8453), fair (n=598), and poor (n=119). Recommendations other than 10 years for examinations with optimal preparation, and >1 year for examinations with poor preparation, were considered nonadherent.

RESULTS

Of all examinations, 6.2% overall received nonadherent recommendations, including 5% of examinations with optimal preparation and 89.9% of examinations with poor preparation. Of normal examinations with fair preparation, 20.7% of recommendations were for an interval <10 years. Among those examinations with fair preparation, shorter-interval recommendations were associated with female sex, former/nonsmokers, and endoscopists with adenoma detection rate ≥20%.

CONCLUSIONS

In 8453 colonoscopies with optimal preparations, most recommendations (95%) were guideline-adherent. No guideline recommendation currently exists for fair preparation, but in this investigation into community practice, the majority of the fair preparation group received 10-year follow-up recommendations. A strikingly high proportion of examinations with poor preparation received a follow-up recommendation greater than the 1-year guideline recommendation. Provider education is needed to ensure that patients with poor bowel preparation are followed appropriately to reduce the risk of missing important lesions.

Left-Sided Dominance of Early-Onset Colorectal Cancers: A Rationale for Screening Flexible Sigmoidoscopy in the Young

BACKGROUND

National databases show a recent significant increase in the incidence of colorectal cancer in people younger than 50. With current recommendations to begin average-risk screening at age 50, these patients do not have the opportunity to be screened. We hypothesized that most of the cancers among the young would be left sided, which would create an opportunity for screening the young by flexible sigmoidoscopy.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to analyze the anatomic distribution of sporadic colorectal cancers in patients under the age of 50.

DESIGN

This is a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database.

SETTING

This study was conducted at a single high-volume tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS

Patients under the age of 50 with colorectal cancer between the years 2000 and 2016 were included. Patients with IBD, familial adenomatous polyposis, Lynch syndrome, or hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer were excluded.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes measured were tumor location and stage, demographics, and family history.

RESULTS

A total of 739 patients were included. Age range at diagnosis was 18 to 49 years; median age was 44 years. Five hundred thirty patients were between the ages of 40 and 49, 167 were between the ages of 30 and 39, 40 were between the ages of 20 and 29, and 2 were under 20. Two hundred thirty-one patients (32%) had a family history of colorectal cancer. The anatomic distribution of the cancers was: 485 rectum (65%), 107 sigmoid colon (15%), 19 descending colon (3%), and 128 right colon and transverse colon (17%). Therefore, 83% of the tumors were theoretically within the range of flexible sigmoidoscopy.

LIMITATIONS

Referral bias favors rectal cancer.

CONCLUSION

The combination of an increasing incidence of colorectal cancer in those under 50 years of age and the predominance of left-sided cancer suggests that screening by flexible sigmoidoscopy starting at age 40 in average-risk individuals may prevent cancer by finding asymptomatic lesions. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A579.

Optimizing colorectal cancer screening by race and sex: Microsimulation analysis II to inform the American Cancer Society colorectal cancer screening guideline

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) risk varies by race and sex. This study, 1 of 2 microsimulation analyses to inform the 2018 American Cancer Society CRC screening guideline, explored the influence of race and sex on optimal CRC screening strategies.

METHODS

Two Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network microsimulation models, informed by US incidence data, were used to evaluate a variety of screening methods, ages to start and stop, and intervals for 4 demographic subgroups (black and white males and females) under 2 scenarios for the projected lifetime CRC risk for 40-year-olds: 1) assuming that risk had remained stable since the early screening era and 2) assuming that risk had increased proportionally to observed incidence trends under the age of 40 years. Model-based screening recommendations were based on the predicted level of benefit (life-years gained) and burden (required number of colonoscopies), the incremental burden-to-benefit ratio, and the relative efficiency in comparison with strategies with similar burdens.

RESULTS

When lifetime CRC risk was assumed to be stable over time, the models differed in the recommended age to start screening for whites (45 vs 50 years) but consistently recommended screening from the age of 45 years for blacks. When CRC risk was assumed to be increased, the models recommended starting at the age of 45 years, regardless of race and sex. Strategies recommended under both scenarios included colonoscopy every 10 or 15 years, annual fecal immunochemical testing, and computed tomographic colonography every 5 years through the age of 75 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Microsimulation modeling suggests that CRC screening should be considered from the age of 45 years for blacks and for whites if the lifetime risk has increased proportionally to the incidence for younger adults. Cancer 2018;124:2974-85. © 2018 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Cancer Society.

Shifts of Faecal Microbiota During Sporadic Colorectal Carcinogenesis

Gut microbiota has been implicated in the etiopathogenesis of colorectal cancer. The development of colorectal cancer is a multistep process by which healthy epithelium slowly develops into preneoplastic lesions, which in turn progress into malignant carcinomas over time. In particular, sporadic colorectal cancers can arise from adenomas (about 85% of cases) or serrated polyps through the "adenoma-carcinoma" or the "serrated polyp-carcinoma" sequences, respectively. In this study, we performed 16 S rRNA gene sequencing of bacterial DNA extracted from faecal samples to compare the microbiota of healthy subjects and patients with different preneoplastic and neoplastic lesions. We identified putative microbial biomarkers associated with stage-specific progression of colorectal cancer. In particular, bacteria belonging to the Firmicutes and Actinobacteria phyla, as well as members of the Lachnospiraceae family, proved to be specific of the faecal microbiota of patients with preneoplastic lesions, including adenomas and hyperplastic polyps. On the other hand, two families of the Proteobacteria phylum, Alcaligeneaceae and Enterobacteriaceae, with Sutterella and Escherichia/Shigella being the most representative genera, appeared to be associated with malignancy. These findings, once confirmed on larger cohorts of patients, can represent an important step towards the development of more effective diagnostic strategies.

Colorectal cancer screening for average-risk adults: 2018 guideline update from the American Cancer Society

In the United States, colorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth most common cancer diagnosed among adults and the second leading cause of death from cancer. For this guideline update, the American Cancer Society (ACS) used an existing systematic evidence review of the CRC screening literature and microsimulation modeling analyses, including a new evaluation of the age to begin screening by race and sex and additional modeling that incorporates changes in US CRC incidence. Screening with any one of multiple options is associated with a significant reduction in CRC incidence through the detection and removal of adenomatous polyps and other precancerous lesions and with a reduction in mortality through incidence reduction and early detection of CRC. Results from modeling analyses identified efficient and model-recommendable strategies that started screening at age 45 years. The ACS Guideline Development Group applied the Grades of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria in developing and rating the recommendations. The ACS recommends that adults aged 45 years and older with an average risk of CRC undergo regular screening with either a high-sensitivity stool-based test or a structural (visual) examination, depending on patient preference and test availability. As a part of the screening process, all positive results on noncolonoscopy screening tests should be followed up with timely colonoscopy. The recommendation to begin screening at age 45 years is a qualified recommendation. The recommendation for regular screening in adults aged 50 years and older is a strong recommendation. The ACS recommends (qualified recommendations) that: 1) average-risk adults in good health with a life expectancy of more than 10 years continue CRC screening through the age of 75 years; 2) clinicians individualize CRC screening decisions for individuals aged 76 through 85 years based on patient preferences, life expectancy, health status, and prior screening history; and 3) clinicians discourage individuals older than 85 years from continuing CRC screening. The options for CRC screening are: fecal immunochemical test annually; high-sensitivity, guaiac-based fecal occult blood test annually; multitarget stool DNA test every 3 years; colonoscopy every 10 years; computed tomography colonography every 5 years; and flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5 years. CA Cancer J Clin 2018;68:250-281. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Cancer screening in the United States, 2018: A review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and current issues in cancer screening

Each year, the American Cancer Society publishes a summary of its guidelines for early cancer detection, data and trends in cancer screening rates from the National Health Interview Survey, and select issues related to cancer screening. In this 2018 update, we also summarize the new American Cancer Society colorectal cancer screening guideline and include a clarification in the language of the 2013 lung cancer screening guideline. CA Cancer J Clin 2018;68:297-316. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Microbial markers in colorectal cancer detection and/or prognosis

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer worldwide. CRC is still associated with a poor prognosis among patients with advanced disease. On the contrary, due to its slow progression from detectable precancerous lesions, the prognosis for patients with early stages of CRC is encouraging. While most robust methods are invasive and costly, actual patient-friendly screening methods for CRC suffer of lack of sensitivity and specificity. Therefore, the development of sensitive, non-invasive and cost-effective methods for CRC detection and prognosis are necessary for increasing the chances of a cure. Beyond its beneficial functions for the host, increasing evidence suggests that the intestinal microbiota is a key factor associated with carcinogenesis. Many clinical studies have reported a disruption in the gut microbiota balance and an alteration in the faecal metabolome of CRC patients, suggesting the potential use of a microbial-based test as a non-invasive diagnostic and/or prognostic tool for CRC screening. This review aims to discuss the microbial signatures associated with CRC known to date, including dysbiosis and faecal metabolome alterations, and the potential use of microbial variation markers for non-invasive early diagnosis and/or prognostic assessment of CRC and advanced adenomas. We will finally discuss the possible use of these markers as predicators for treatment response and their limitations.

Evaluation of Patients with an Apparent False Positive Stool DNA Test: The Role of Repeat Stool DNA Testing

BACKGROUND

There is uncertainty as to the appropriate follow-up of patients who test positive on multimarker stool DNA (sDNA) testing and have a colonoscopy without neoplasia.

AIMS

To determine the prevalence of missed colonic or occult upper gastrointestinal neoplasia in patients with an apparent false positive sDNA.

METHODS

We prospectively identified 30 patients who tested positive with a commercially available sDNA followed by colonoscopy without neoplastic lesions. Patients were invited to undergo repeat sDNA at 11-29 months after the initial test followed by repeat colonoscopy and upper endoscopy. We determined the presence of neoplastic lesions on repeat evaluation stratified by results of repeat sDNA.

RESULTS

Twelve patients were restudied. Seven patients had a negative second sDNA test and a normal second colonoscopy and upper endoscopy. In contrast, 5 of 12 subjects had a persistently positive second sDNA test, and 3 had positive findings, including a 3-cm sessile transverse colon adenoma with high-grade dysplasia, a 2-cm right colon sessile serrated adenoma with dysplasia, and a nonadvanced colon adenoma (p = 0.045). These corresponded to a positive predictive value of 0.60 (95% CI 0.17-1.00) and a negative predictive value of 1.00 (95% CI 1.00-1.00) for the second sDNA test. In addition, the medical records of all 30 subjects with apparent false positive testing were reviewed and no documented cases of malignant tumors were recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

Repeat positive sDNA testing may identify a subset of patients with missed or occult colorectal neoplasia after negative colonoscopy for an initially positive sDNA. High-quality colonoscopy with careful attention to the right colon in patients with positive sDNA is critically important and may avoid false negative colonoscopy.

Identification of volumetric laser endomicroscopy features of colon polyps with histologic correlation

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

There are limited data on the use of volumetric laser endomicroscopy (VLE) for imaging colon polyps. Our aim was to identify VLE features of colon polyps.

METHODS

A total of 45 patients were included; 43 underwent endoscopic mucosal resection of colorectal polyps 2 cm or greater. These polyps were then scanned with VLE immediately after resection. Two patients who underwent partial colonic resection served as controls.

RESULTS

Forty-three polyps were included with review of matching histology: 3 intramucosal cancer (IMCA), 5 tubular adenoma (TAs)/tubulovillous adenoma (TVA) with high-grade dysplasia (HGD), 9 TVA with only low-grade dysplasia (LGD), 5 serrated adenoma, and 21 TA with LGD. All TAs and TVAs were hyper-reflective compared with normal tissue. Effacement occurred in 82.4% (14/17) of the colonic polyps with advanced pathology (TVA with HGD/IMCA) compared with 11.6% (3/26) with non-advanced pathology (TA with LGD and serrated adenoma) (P < .0001). Forty-seven percent (8/17) of polyps with advanced pathology had greater than 5 glands on VLE compared with none in the non-advanced pathology group (P = .0001). An irregular surface mainly occurred in polyps with high-grade pathology (HGD/IMCA) versus TAs. Eighty-eight percent of polyps with HGD/IMC had an irregular surface (7/8) versus 6% (2/35) of TAs (P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this ex vivo clinicopathologic study, we show that there are distinct VLE features of colon polyps that may help identify polyps or features of a higher-grade lesion. This may have implications for possible in vivo application to aid in dysplasia or polyp detection.

Adenoma Detection Rate in Asymptomatic Patients with Positive Fecal Immunochemical Tests

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a powerful measure of screening colonoscopy quality. Patients who undergo colonoscopy for the evaluation of a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) have increased prevalence of colorectal neoplasia, but it is not known whether separate quality benchmarks are required. The aim of this study was to compare the conventional ADR to the ADR of colonoscopies performed for the evaluation of positive FIT, in asymptomatic average-risk patients.

METHODS

Patients ≥ 50 years old who underwent colonoscopy for the evaluation of a positive FIT between January 1, 2013, and July 31, 2014, at a tertiary Veterans Affairs Medical Center were identified. FIT performed for any indication other than average-risk screening was excluded. The comparison group included average-risk patients ≥ 50 years old undergoing screening colonoscopy during the same time frame. The two groups were compared for ADR, advanced neoplasm [adenoma ≥ 10 mm, tubulovillous, high-grade dysplasia, CRC, sessile serrated polyp (SSP) ≥ 10 mm], CRC, and SSP detection after propensity score adjustment using a logistic regression model adjusted for endoscopist.

RESULTS

There were 207 patients in the FIT group and 601 in the screening colonoscopy comparison group. After propensity score adjustment, ADR (72.9 vs. 50.0%, p = 0.003), number of adenomas per colonoscopy (3.3 ± 3.6 vs. 1.4 ± 2.3, p = 0.033), and advanced neoplasm detection rate (32.4 vs. 11.0%, p < 0.0001) were significantly higher in the FIT group. There were no significant differences in the number of CRC and the SSP detection rate.

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort of average-risk Veterans, the ADR of colonoscopies performed for the evaluation of a positive FIT was higher than the ADR of screening colonoscopies. Patients with a positive FIT also had significantly more adenomas per colonoscopy and advanced neoplasms. These findings suggest that the quality of colonoscopies performed for a positive FIT is insufficiently assessed by the conventional ADR and requires additional quality metrics.

Advances in CRC Prevention: Screening and Surveillance

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is among the most commonly diagnosed cancers and causes of death from cancer across the world. CRC can, however, be detected in asymptomatic patients at a curable stage, and several studies have shown lower mortality among patients who undergo screening compared with those who do not. Using colonoscopy in CRC screening also results in the detection of precancerous polyps that can be directly removed during the procedure, thereby reducing the incidence of cancer. In the past decade, convincing evidence has appeared that the effectiveness of colonoscopy as CRC prevention tool is associated with the quality of the procedure. This review aims to provide an up-to-date overview of recent efforts to improve colonoscopy effectiveness by enhancing detection and improving the completeness and safety of resection of colorectal lesions.

Quality of Reporting in Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: Effect of a Simple Audit Intervention

Background and Aim

In contrast to colonoscopy, there are few studies regarding upper gastrointestinal (UGI) endoscopy reporting its quality and ways of improving it. Quality audits are recommended, but their influence on the abovementioned quality is not well studied. Our aim was to evaluate the quality of UGI endoscopy reports and assess the effect of a simple audit intervention on UGI endoscopy reporting quality.

Methods

This was a prospective study in a tertiary referral center, including the evaluation of 1,000 consecutive reports of UGI endoscopies before an audit intervention and 250 after. The reports were analyzed according to performance measures defined by three experienced gastroenterologists.

Results

Before the intervention, 51.8% of the incomplete endoscopies did not present any justification for its incompleteness and 88.1% of lesions were correctly described. Overall, 64.1% of the reports were considered as being of high quality. After the audit intervention, follow-up recommendation (53.4 vs. 80.8%, p = 0.001), correct lesion description (88.1 vs. 95.8%, p = 0.001), and correct segment description (92.2 vs. 96.4%, p = 0.020) improved significantly. The rate of unjustified incomplete endoscopies decreased significantly (51.8 vs. 28.9%, p = 0.010). The high-quality endoscopy rate improved 13.9% after the intervention (p < 0.001). Both specialists and residents improved with the audit intervention with a similar percentage of improvement in the high-quality endoscopy rate (13.9 vs. 13.4%).

Conclusions

A simple audit intervention is a good way to improve the quality of reporting of UGI endoscopy, independently of degree and experience. Some of the performance measure accomplishments may depend on the software used by the endoscopy centers and it should be a priority to optimize it.

Colorectal Cancer in the Young

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Colorectal cancer incidence has been rapidly rising in those under the age of 50 over the last 20 years. This paper will review the epidemiology, clinicopathologic, molecular features, proposed risk factors, and prevention/treatment approach for early onset CRC (EOCRC) patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

EOCRC appears to have a different spectrum of clinical, pathologic, and molecular presentation compared to CRC diagnosed in older individuals. EOCRCs are disproportionately located in the distal colon; these patients tend to present with symptoms, and there is a longer interval between symptoms and diagnosis. There may be a distinct molecular signature, including progression through the microsatellite and chromosomal stable (MACS) pathway and LINE-1 hypomethylation for a subset of EOCRCs. The majority of EOCRCs are sporadic without clear risk factors that would have made the patient eligible for earlier screening. There is an acute need for educational efforts aimed at both providers and patients to raise awareness about CRC in the young. Improving adherence to screening in young patients eligible for screening and emphasizing early evaluation of symptoms are important steps to decreasing the burden of CRC in younger patients. Modeling and empiric data are needed to determine whether our current screening approach should be modified and whether causation and treatment options may be different in a molecular subset EOCRCs.

Review of Blood-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening: How Far Are Circulating Cell-Free DNA Methylation Markers From Clinical Implementation?

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer related deaths worldwide, and late stages (III-IV) in particular have low 5-year survival rates. Stage shifting by CRC screening programs has proven effective by decreasing morbidity and mortality and in many countries national CRC screening programs have been implemented. Currently, European, Asian, and American authorities recommend screening for CRC using fecal occult blood testing, sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy. Because these approaches all have weaknesses (eg, poor compliance, high costs, test invasiveness), much effort has been put into the development of alternative screening approaches, many of which are blood-based. Blood-based strategies especially present the advantages of minimally invasiveness compared to endoscopies and an expectantly higher compliance rate compared to stool-based tests. The last decades have seen many discovery studies identifying promising blood-based biomarkers of CRC; however, common to all of these markers is that their clinical usefulness remains evasive. At present only one blood-based CRC screening marker has been approved in the United States. The aim of this review is to discuss the development of blood-based cell-free DNA methylation marker candidates for CRC screening. On the basis of a methodical literature search, the past, present, and future of cell-free DNA screening markers for CRC are revised and discussed. Resource limitations and technical challenges related to sensitivity and specificity measurements keep many markers at bay. Possible solutions to these problems are offered to enable markers to benefit future screening participants.

Decoding colorectal cancer epigenomics

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is very heterogeneous and presents different types of epigenetic alterations including DNA methylation, histone modifications and microRNAs. These changes are considered as characteristics of various observed clinical phenotypes. Undoubtedly, the discovery of epigenetic pathways with novel epigenetic-related mechanisms constitutes a promising advance in cancer biomarker discovery. In this review, we provide an evidence-based discussing of the current understanding of CRC epigenomics and its role in initiation, epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition and metastasis. We also discuss the recent findings regarding the potential clinical perspectives of these alterations as potent biomarkers for CRC diagnosis, prognosis, and therapy in the era of liquid biopsy.

Family history of prostate and colorectal cancer and risk of colorectal cancer in the Women's health initiative

Background

Evidence suggests that risk of colorectal and prostate cancer is increased among those with a family history of the same disease, particularly among first-degree relatives. However, the aggregation of colorectal and prostate cancer within families has not been well investigated.

Methods

Analyses were conducted among participants of the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) observational cohort, free of cancer at the baseline examination. Subjects were followed for colorectal cancer through August 31st, 2009. A Cox-proportional hazards regression modeling approach was used to estimate risk of colorectal cancer associated with a family history of prostate cancer, colorectal cancer and both cancers among first-degree relatives of all participants and stratified by race (African American vs. White).

Results

Of 75,999 eligible participants, there were 1122 colorectal cancer cases diagnosed over the study period. A family history of prostate cancer alone was not associated with an increase in colorectal cancer risk after adjustment for confounders (aHR =0.94; 95% CI =0.76, 1.15). Separate analysis examining the joint impact, a family history of both colorectal and prostate cancer was associated with an almost 50% increase in colorectal cancer risk (aHR = 1.48; 95% CI = 1.04, 2.10), but similar to those with a family history of colorectal cancer only (95% CI = 1.31; 95% CI = 1.11, 1.54).

Conclusions

Our findings suggest risk of colorectal cancer is increased similarly among women with colorectal cancer only and among those with both colorectal and prostate cancer diagnosed among first-degree family members. Future studies are needed to determine the relative contribution of genes and shared environment to the risk of both cancers.

New insights into colorectal cancer screening and early detection tests

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a common cancer in both men and women worldwide. Creating a diagnostic panel is necessary for early diagnosis which could lead to a better long-term survival in cancer patients. Colonoscopy every 10 years, starting at age 50, is the preferred CRC screening test. Many studies have been worked on potential diagnostic biomarkers of CRC. In this article, we described the recent evolutions in the development of CRC noninvasive screening assays. Recently, a multifunctional fecal DNA test has been available commercially in the USA. A few other US FDA-approved tests like Epi proColon® (Epigenomics AG, Berlin, Germany) are also available now. Although a new marker class for fecal occult blood test, a novel biomarker based on fecal bacteria in CRC patients and circulating tumor cells are under investigation, there is still a strong need to do more research for CRC screening strategies.

Screening of colorectal cancer: present and future

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer in males and second in females, and the fourth most common cause of cancer death worldwide. Currently, about 60-70% of diagnosed cases in symptomatic patients are detected at an advanced stage of disease. Earlier stage detection through the use of screening strategies would allow for better outcomes in terms of reducing the disease burden. Areas covered: The aim of this paper is to review the current published evidence from literature which assesses the performance and effectiveness of different screening tests for the early detection of CRC. Expert commentary: Adequate screening strategies can reduce CRC incidence and mortality. In the last few decades, several tests have been proposed for CRC screening. To date, there is still insufficient evidence to identify which approach is definitively superior, and no screening strategy for CRC can therefore be defined as universally ideal. The best strategy would be the one that can be economically viable and to which the patient can adhere best to over time. The latest guidelines suggest colonoscopy every 10 years or annual fecal immuno-chemical test (FIT) for people with normal risk, while for individuals with high risk or hereditary syndromes specific recommendations are provided.