Risk of advanced metachronous colorectal adenoma during long-term follow-up

Design and verification of individualized follow-up strategy of colonoscopy for postoperative patients with colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines do not establish an individual scheme for surveillance colonoscopy in postoperative colorectal cancer (CRC) patients.

AIMS

The purpose of the study was to screen possible risk factors for the development of metachronous adenoma in postoperative CRC patients and to develop a risk prediction model and verify it.

METHODS

Consecutive postoperative patients with CRC were enrolled from April 2007 to December 2013 as the derivation group. Baseline data of patients and clinicopathological features of the tumor were collected, logistic regression analysis was performed, and clinical model was established and was verified internally. The model was externally validated in an independent cohort (validation group) from January 2014 to October 2017 in the same hospital.

RESULTS

A total of 734 patients were included, with average (64.6 ± 11.5) years old. The overall incidence of metachronous adenoma was 35.4%. There was no significant difference in the incidence of metachronous adenoma between the derivation group and validation group (P > 0.05). Age, diabetes mellitus, right colon cancer, moderately to poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma and synchronous adenoma were independent risk factors for metachronous adenoma. The C-index of the metachronous adenoma line chart model was 0.932, and the index decreased by 0.022 after internal verification. The C-index of external validation was 0.910. The Hosmer-Lemeshow test showed that the P value of metachronous adenoma risk prediction model was 0.247.

CONCLUSIONS

Individual surveillance strategies should be designed for postoperative patients with CRC. For high-risk patients, it is appropriate to undergo more than two colonoscopies in 36 months after operation.

British Society of Gastroenterology/Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland/Public Health England post-polypectomy and post-colorectal cancer resection surveillance guidelines

These consensus guidelines were jointly commissioned by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG), the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) and Public Health England (PHE). They provide an evidence-based framework for the use of surveillance colonoscopy and non-colonoscopic colorectal imaging in people aged 18 years and over. They are the first guidelines that take into account the introduction of national bowel cancer screening. For the first time, they also incorporate surveillance of patients following resection of either adenomatous or serrated polyps and also post-colorectal cancer resection. They are primarily aimed at healthcare professionals, and aim to address:Which patients should commence surveillance post-polypectomy and post-cancer resection?What is the appropriate surveillance interval?When can surveillance be stopped? two or more premalignant polyps including at least one advanced colorectal polyp (defined as a serrated polyp of at least 10 mm in size or containing any grade of dysplasia, or an adenoma of at least 10 mm in size or containing high-grade dysplasia); or five or more premalignant polyps The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument provided a methodological framework for the guidelines. The BSG's guideline development process was used, which is National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) compliant.two or more premalignant polyps including at least one advanced colorectal polyp (defined as a serrated polyp of at least 10 mm in size or containing any grade of dysplasia, or an adenoma of at least 10 mm in size or containing high-grade dysplasia); or five or more premalignant polyps The key recommendations are that the high-risk criteria for future colorectal cancer (CRC) following polypectomy comprise either:two or more premalignant polyps including at least one advanced colorectal polyp (defined as a serrated polyp of at least 10 mm in size or containing any grade of dysplasia, or an adenoma of at least 10 mm in size or containing high-grade dysplasia); or five or more premalignant polyps This cohort should undergo a one-off surveillance colonoscopy at 3 years. Post-CRC resection patients should undergo a 1 year clearance colonoscopy, then a surveillance colonoscopy after 3 more years.

Role of baseline adenoma characteristics for adenoma recurrencein patients with high-risk adenoma

Background/aim: The present observational study aimed to determine the predictive value of 3-year recurrence adenoma characteristics at baseline conventional colonoscopy in patients with high-risk adenoma.Materials and methods: A total of 47 patients with high-risk adenoma at baseline colonoscopy were followed up and underwent a surveillance colonoscopy at 3 years. Correlations between adenoma recurrence and baseline adenoma characteristics (size, number, histological features, and location) were analyzed.Results: Among 135 patients with high-risk adenoma, 47 patients (35%) who underwent surveillance colonoscopy at 3 years following baseline colonoscopy were included in the study. In these 47 patients, at least one new adenoma was detected in 19 (40.4%) patients, and new advanced adenomas were detected in 5 (10.6%) patients during the surveillance colonoscopy. No significant difference was found in patients who had adenoma recurrence versus those who did not in terms of size of adenomas (P = 0.143), number of adenomas (P = 0.562), histological properties of adenomas (P = 0.658), or locations of adenomas (P = 0.567).Conclusion: Baseline adenoma characteristics were not associated with the recurrence of adenomas or advanced adenomas in patients with high-risk adenoma.

A prognostic model for advanced colorectal neoplasia recurrence

PURPOSE

Following colonoscopic polypectomy, US Multisociety Task Force (USMSTF) guidelines stratify patients based on risk of subsequent advanced neoplasia (AN) using number, size, and histology of resected polyps, but have only moderate sensitivity and specificity. We hypothesized that a state-of-the-art statistical prediction model might improve identification of patients at high risk of future AN and address these challenges.

METHODS

Data were pooled from seven prospective studies which had follow-up ascertainment of metachronous AN within 3-5 years of baseline polypectomy (combined n = 8,228). Pooled data were randomly split into training (n = 5,483) and validation (n = 2,745) sets. A prognostic model was developed using best practices. Two risk cut-points were identified in the training data which achieved a 10 percentage point improvement in sensitivity and specificity, respectively, over current USMSTF guidelines. Clinical benefit of USMSTF versus model-based risk stratification was then estimated using validation data.

RESULTS

The final model included polyp location, prior polyp history, patient age, and number, size and histology of resected polyps. The first risk cut-point improved sensitivity but with loss of specificity. The second risk cut-point improved specificity without loss of sensitivity (specificity 46.2 % model vs. 42.1 % guidelines, p < 0.001; sensitivity 75.8 % model vs. 74.0 % guidelines, p = 0.64). Estimated AUC was 65 % (95 % CI: 62-69 %).

CONCLUSION

This model-based approach allows flexibility in trading sensitivity and specificity, which can optimize colonoscopy over- versus underuse rates. Only modest improvements in prognostic power are possible using currently available clinical data. Research considering additional factors such as adenoma detection rate for risk prediction appears warranted.

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for management of colorectal polyps

BACKGROUND

Recently in Japan, the morbidity of colorectal polyp has been increasing. As a result, a large number of cases of colorectal polyps that are diagnosed and treated using colonoscopy has now increased, and clinical guidelines are needed for endoscopic management and surveillance after treatment.

METHODS

Three committees [the professional committee for making clinical questions (CQs) and statements by Japanese specialists, the expert panelist committee for rating statements by the modified Delphi method, and the evaluating committee by moderators] were organized. Ten specialists for colorectal polyp management extracted the specific clinical statements from articles published between 1983 and September 2011 obtained from PubMed and a secondary database, and developed the CQs and statements. Basically, statements were made according to the GRADE system. The expert panel individually rated the clinical statements using a modified Delphi approach, in which a clinical statement receiving a median score greater than seven on a nine-point scale from the panel was regarded as valid.

RESULTS

The professional committee created 91CQs and statements for the current concept and diagnosis/treatment of various colorectal polyps including epidemiology, screening, pathophysiology, definition and classification, diagnosis, treatment/management, practical treatment, complications and surveillance after treatment, and other colorectal lesions (submucosal tumors, nonneoplastic polyps, polyposis, hereditary tumors, ulcerative colitis-associated tumor/carcinoma).

CONCLUSIONS

After evaluation by the moderators, evidence-based clinical guidelines for management of colorectal polyps have been proposed for 2014.

Features of adenoma and colonoscopy associated with recurrent colorectal neoplasia based on a large community-based study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

We investigated adenoma and colonoscopy characteristics that are associated with recurrent colorectal neoplasia based on data from community-based surveillance practice.

METHODS

We analyzed data of 2990 consecutive patients (55% male; mean age 61 years) newly diagnosed with adenomas from 1988 to 2002 at 10 hospitals throughout The Netherlands. Medical records were reviewed until December 1, 2008. We excluded patients with hereditary colorectal cancer (CRC) syndromes, a history of CRC, inflammatory bowel disease, or without surveillance data. We analyzed associations among adenoma number, size, grade of dysplasia, villous histology, and location with recurrence of advanced adenoma (AA) and nonadvanced adenoma (NAA). We performed a multivariable multinomial logistic regression analysis to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

During the surveillance period, 203 (7%) patients were diagnosed with AA and 954 (32%) patients with NAA. The remaining 1833 (61%) patients had no adenomas during a median follow-up of 48 months. Factors associated with AA during the surveillance period included baseline number of adenomas (ORs ranging from 1.6 for 2 adenomas; 95% CI: 1.1-2.4 to 3.3 for ≥5 adenomas; 95% CI: 1.7-6.6), adenoma size ≥10 mm (OR = 1.7; 95% CI: 1.2-2.3), villous histology (OR = 2.0; 95% CI: 1.2-3.2), proximal location (OR = 1.6; 95% CI: 1.2-2.3), insufficient bowel preparation (OR = 3.4; 95% CI: 1.6-7.4), and only distal colonoscopy reach (OR = 3.2; 95% CI: 1.2-8.5). Adenoma number had the greatest association with NAA. High-grade dysplasia was not associated with AA or NAA.

CONCLUSIONS

Large size and number, villous histology, proximal location of adenomas, insufficient bowel preparation, and poor colonoscopy reach were associated with detection of AA during surveillance based on data from community-based practice. These characteristics should be used jointly to develop surveillance policies for adenoma patients.

Predictors of colorectal polyp recurrence after the first polypectomy in private practice settings: a cohort study

Background

Supplementary observational data in the community setting are required to better assess the predictors of colorectal polyp recurrence and the effectiveness of colonoscopy surveillance under real circumstances.

Aim

The goal of this study was to identify patient characteristics and polyp features at baseline colonoscopy that are associated with the recurrence of colorectal polyps (including hyperplastic polyps) among patients consulting private practice physicians.

Patients and Methods

This cohort study was conducted from March 2004 to December 2010 in 26 private gastroenterology practices (France). It included 1023 patients with a first-time diagnosis of histologically confirmed polyp removed during a diagnostic or screening colonoscopy. At enrollment, interviews were conducted to obtain data on socio-demographic variables and risk factors. Pathology reports were reviewed to abstract data on polyp features at baseline colonoscopy. Colorectal polyps diagnosed at the surveillance colonoscopy were considered as end points. The time to event was analyzed with an accelerated failure time model assuming a Weibull distribution.

Results

Among the 1023 patients with colorectal polyp at baseline, 553 underwent a surveillance colonoscopy. The mean time interval from baseline colonoscopy to first surveillance examination was 3.42 (standard deviation, 1.45) years. The recurrence rates were 50.5% and 32.9% for all polyps and adenomas, respectively. In multivariate models, the number of polyps at baseline was the only significant predictor for both polyp recurrence (hazard ratio [HR] 1.19, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.33), and adenoma recurrence (HR 1.17, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.34).

Conclusion

The efficacy of surveillance colonoscopy in community gastroenterology practice compared favorably with academic settings. This study provides further evidence that the number of initial colorectal polyps is useful for predicting the risk of polyp recurrence, even in the community setting.

Prognostic significance of high-grade dysplasia in colorectal adenomas

AIM

Colonoscopy to detect and remove polyps has contributed to a reduction in colorectal carcinoma. Three-year follow up is recommended for patients considered to be at high risk (at least three adenomas, adenoma ≥ 1 cm, villous or high-grade features). Our study focused on patients diagnosed with high-grade dysplasia with regard to initial management and follow up.

METHOD

A search of patients who had had endoscopic removal of a high-grade adenoma was carried out. Patients with the following were excluded: follow up of < 1 year, polyposis syndromes, prior colon cancer and a diagnosis of adenocarcinoma within 6 months following initial diagnosis.

RESULTS

Eighty-three patients treated between 1999 and 2007 for high-grade dysplasia (HGD) in a colorectal adenoma were identified. Over a median follow-up period of 4 years, 53 (64%) developed further adenomatous polyps. Among these, 7% had an adenoma with HGD or an adenocarcinoma. In all these patients, the initial high-grade adenoma was > 1 cm in diameter. Initial follow-up colonoscopy was performed on average 7 months following the initial diagnosis. Ten per cent of patients underwent prophylactic segmental resection, and 6% received argon laser therapy.

CONCLUSION

The study demonstrates that patients who have a colorectal adenoma > 1 cm with HGD may be at high risk of developing further adenomas with HGD or carcinoma. Close follow up is warranted.