Whites and blacks have similar risk of metachronous advanced colorectal neoplasia

Prevalence of Metachronous Advanced Colorectal Neoplasia in Black and White Patients at a Safety Net Hospital

Background and Aims

Current postpolypectomy surveillance guidelines are based primarily on data from non-Hispanic Whites (NHWs); thus, generalizability to non-Hispanic Blacks (NHBs) remains unknown. Hence, the primary objective of this study was to assess the validity of these guidelines for NHBs by comparing the prevalence of metachronous advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACN) between NHWs and NHBs undergoing surveillance colonoscopy.

Methods

This was a retrospective cross-sectional study of NHWs (N = 1500) and NHBs (N = 1260) aged 40-75 years who underwent surveillance colonoscopy at an academic safety net hospital between 2007 and 2017. The primary outcome measure was the prevalence of metachronous ACN, defined as an advanced adenoma, advanced sessile polyp, or invasive cancer. Multivariate logistic regression was used to measure associations between race/ethnicity and ACN prevalence after adjustment for potential confounding factors.

Results

Overall, the prevalence of metachronous ACN was similar for NHBs and NHWs (6.8% vs 7.4%, respectively; P = .60). The prevalence of metachronous cancers (0.2% vs 0.1%; P = .48), advanced adenomas (2.8% vs 3.8%; P = .14), advanced serrated polyps (3.5% vs 3.3%; P = .82), and large hyperplastic polyps ≥10 mm (0.2% vs 0.6%, P = .24) were also similar between the 2 groups. Moreover, race was not a determinant of metachronous ACN after adjustment for age, sex, education, type of insurance, indication (screen/surveillance) for baseline colonoscopy, surveillance interval, and findings at baseline colonoscopy (adjusted odds ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.70-1.30; P = .78).

Conclusion

Our study finds no significant difference in the prevalence of metachronous ACN between NHWs and NHBs undergoing appropriate postpolypectomy surveillance at an urban safety net hospital, suggesting that current guidelines are appropriate for both NHWs and NHBs.

Characteristics of Serrated Adenomas in Non-Hispanic Whites and African Americans Undergoing Screening Colonoscopy

Background and aim

Adenomatous polyps are precursor lesions for colorectal cancer (CRC). Serrated adenomas/polyps are considered a risk factor for the development of proximal and interval CRC. African-Americans are at higher risk for right-sided CRC. Minimal data evaluating serrated adenoma characteristics by race/ethnicity on initial screening colonoscopy (SC) exist. The aim of this investigation was to compare the characteristics of serrated adenomas found in non-Hispanic whites (nHw) and African-Americans (AA) undergoing initial SC.

Methods

The University of Florida-Jacksonville endoscopy database was searched for all SC performed between January 2000 and December 2014. Inclusion criteria were nHw or AA race/ethnicity and histologically proven serrated adenoma found at SC. Data were collected for all included age at SC, sex, number, location, and size of serrated adenomas found.

Results

A total of 8693 individuals (nHw - 4199 and AA - 4494) underwent SC between January 2000 and December 2014. Serrated adenomas were found in 479 individuals (nHw, n=294; AA, n=185), and AA were significantly less likely than nHw to have serrated adenomas on SC (AA 4.1% vs nHw 7%; p< 0.0001). No difference was observed in mean age, location, or size between nHw and AA with serrated adenomas.

Conclusions

Serrated adenomas are more frequent in nHw compared to AA at initial SC. No difference was seen in size or location of serrated adenomas, as well as patient age, between AA and nHw. A study of genetic factors predisposing to serrated adenoma formation and the impact of socioeconomic disparities should be performed across ethnic groups to understand this difference.

Black and White Differences in Colorectal Cancer Screening and Screening Outcomes: A Narrative Review

Racial disparities in colorectal cancer incidence are widely documented. There are two potential mechanisms for these disparities: differences in access to screening, including screening follow-up, and differences in underlying risk of colorectal cancer. We reviewed the literature for evidence of these two mechanisms. We show that higher colorectal cancer incidence in blacks relative to whites emerged only after the dissemination of screening and describe evidence of racial disparities in screening rates. In contrast to the strong evidence for differences in colorectal cancer screening utilization, there is limited evidence for racial differences in adenoma prevalence. In general, black and white patients who are screened have similar adenoma prevalence, though there is some evidence that advanced adenomas and adenomas in the proximal colon are somewhat more likely in black than white patients. We conclude that higher rates of colorectal cancer incidence among black patients are primarily driven by lower rates of colorectal cancer screening. Our findings highlight the need to increase black patients' access to quality screening to reduce colorectal cancer incidence and mortality.

Should asymptomatic young men with iron deficiency anemia necessarily undergo endoscopy?

BACKGROUND/AIMS

There has been no evidence for the necessity of endoscopy in asymptomatic young men with iron deficiency anemia (IDA). To determine whether endoscopy should be recommended in asymptomatic young men with IDA, we compared the prevalence of gastrointestinal (GI) lesions between young men (< 50 years) with IDA and those without IDA.

METHODS

We conducted a case-control study on asymptomatic young men aged < 50 years who underwent both esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and colonoscopy as part of a health checkup between 2010 and 2014.

RESULTS

Of 77,864 participants, 128 (0.16%) had IDA and 512 subjects without IDA were matched for several variables including age. Young men with IDA had a significantly higher proportion of colorectal cancer (CRC) (0.8% vs. 0.0%, p = 0.045), villous adenoma (0.8% vs. 0.0%, p = 0.045), and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD; 2.3% vs. 0.4%, p = 0.025) than those without IDA. Additionally, the prevalence of advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACRN) tended to be higher in subjects with IDA than in those without IDA (3.1% vs. 1.0%, p = 0.084). The prevalence of significant lower GI lesions including ACRN and IBD was higher in subjects with IDA than in those without IDA (5.5% vs. 1.4%, p = 0.011). Regarding upper GI lesions, a positive association with IDA was observed only for gastric ulcer (4.7% vs. 1.0%, p = 0.011).

CONCLUSION

GI lesions including CRC, villous adenoma, IBD, and gastric ulcer were more common in asymptomatic young men with IDA. Our results suggest that EGD and particularly colonoscopy should be recommended even in asymptomatic young men with IDA.

A Combination of Fecal Immunochemical Test Results and Iron Deficiency Anemia for Detection of Advanced Colorectal Neoplasia in Asymptomatic Men

PURPOSE

A substantial proportion of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) present with iron deficiency anemia (IDA), and fecal immunochemical test (FIT) has proven to be an effective method for detecting the majority of CRC cases. A combination strategy of FIT results and IDA may be useful for risk stratification for detecting advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACRN). We compared the prevalence of ACRN among four groups stratified by FIT results and the presence of IDA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A cross-sectional study was performed on asymptomatic male participants who underwent both FIT and colonoscopy between 2010 and 2014 as part of a comprehensive health screening program in Korea.

RESULTS

Of 17236 participants, 522 (3.0%) showed positive FIT results and 26 (0.2%) had IDA. The mean age of the study participants was 40.8 years. The participants were classified into four groups: positive FIT result/IDA (G1, n=7), positive FIT result/no IDA (G2, n=515), negative FIT result/IDA (G3, n=19), and negative FIT result/no IDA (G4, n=16695). The prevalences of ACRN in G1, G2, G3, and G4 were 28.6, 13.4, 5.3, and 1.5%, respectively (p<0.001) and those of CRC were 28.6, 1.6, 0.0, and 0.01%, respectively (p<0.001). Subjects with positive FIT results and IDA had an increased risk of ACRN and CRC in both group aged <50 and ≥50 years.

CONCLUSION

Subjects with positive FIT results and IDA had an increased risk of ACRN. Our results suggest that a combination strategy of FIT and IDA may be helpful in selecting and prioritizing asymptomatic men for colonoscopy.

Is Colonoscopic Screening Necessary for Patients Younger than 50 Years with Gastric Adenoma or Cancer?

Patients, aged ≥ 50 years, with gastric neoplasm are reported to be at increased risk for colorectal neoplasia (CRN), while data regarding the risk of CRN in young patients, aged < 50 years with gastric neoplasm are limited. We aimed to investigate the risk of CRN according to the presence of gastric neoplasm in patients, aged < 50 years, and conducted a cross-sectional study on 131,888 asymptomatic examinees who underwent both esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and colonoscopy as part of a health screening program between 2010 and 2014. The prevalence of overall CRN (8.6% vs. 13.2%, P = 0.251) and advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACRN) (0.0% vs. 1.3%, P = 0.345) did not significantly differ according to the presence of gastric neoplasm in subjects, aged < 50 years. However, among subjects aged ≥ 50 years, patients with gastric neoplasm had a significantly higher proportion of overall CRN (48.2% vs. 31.7%, P < 0.001) and ACRN (12.5% vs. 4.5%, P < 0.001) compared with those without gastric neoplasm. Particularly, gastric neoplasm was an independent risk factor for ACRN after controlling for confounding factors among subjects, aged ≥ 50 years. In conclusion, gastric neoplasm was a risk factor for CRN in patients, aged ≥ 50 years, but not in patients, aged < 50 years. Young patients, aged < 50 years with gastric neoplasm do not need to undergo colonoscopy, whereas patients, aged ≥ 50 years with gastric neoplasm, should be considered a higher priority for colonoscopy.

Derivation and Validation of a Scoring System to Stratify Risk for Advanced Colorectal Neoplasia in Asymptomatic Adults: A Cross-sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Several methods are recommended equally strongly for colorectal cancer screening in average-risk persons. Risk stratification would enable tailoring of screening within this group, with less invasive tests (sigmoidoscopy or occult blood tests) for lower-risk persons and colonoscopy for higher-risk persons.

OBJECTIVE

To create a risk index for advanced neoplasia (colorectal cancer and adenomas or serrated polyps ≥1.0 cm, villous histology, or high-grade dysplasia) anywhere in the colorectum, using the most common risk factors for colorectal neoplasia.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Multiple endoscopy units, primarily in the Midwest.

PATIENTS

Persons aged 50 to 80 years undergoing initial screening colonoscopy (December 2004 to September 2011).

MEASUREMENTS

Derivation and validation of a risk index based on points from regression coefficients for age, sex, waist circumference, cigarette smoking, and family history of colorectal cancer.

RESULTS

Among 2993 persons in the derivation set, prevalence of advanced neoplasia was 9.4%. Risks for advanced neoplasia in persons at very low, low, intermediate, and high risk were 1.92% (95% CI, 0.63% to 4.43%), 4.88% (CI, 3.79% to 6.18%), 9.93% (CI, 8.09% to 12.0%), and 24.9% (CI, 21.1% to 29.1%), respectively (P < 0.001). Sigmoidoscopy to the descending colon in the low-risk groups would have detected 51 of 70 (73% [CI, 61% to 83%]) advanced neoplasms. Among 1467 persons in the validation set, corresponding risks for advanced neoplasia were 1.65% (CI, 0.20% to 5.84%), 3.31% (CI, 2.08% to 4.97%), 10.9% (CI, 8.26% to 14.1%), and 22.3% (CI, 16.9% to 28.5%), respectively (P < 0.001). Sigmoidoscopy would have detected 21 of 24 (87.5% [CI, 68% to 97%]) advanced neoplasms.

LIMITATIONS

Split-sample validation; results apply to first-time screening.

CONCLUSION

This index stratifies risk for advanced neoplasia among average-risk persons by identifying lower-risk groups for which noncolonoscopy strategies may be effective and efficient and a higher-risk group for which colonoscopy may be preferred.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Cancer Institute, Walther Cancer Institute, Indiana University Simon Cancer Center, and Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute.