Lower Relative Contribution of Positive Family History to Colorectal Cancer Risk with Increasing Age: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 9.28 Million Individuals

Prognosis and clinicopathological features of patients with early-onset and late-onset colorectal cancer with second primary malignancies

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The risk of developing a second primary malignancy differs among colorectal cancer patients in different age groups. This study aimed to investigate the differences in prognosis and clinicopathological features of patients with early-onset colorectal cancer and late-onset colorectal cancer who developed second primary malignancies.

METHODS

The study included 15 489 patients who underwent surgery for colorectal cancer at Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center between January 2008 and December 2018. Data pertaining to these patients were derived from the database.

RESULTS

A total of 680 (4.5%) patients subsequently developed a second primary malignancy. Considering death as a competing event, the 10-year cumulative risk of second primary malignancy for early-onset colorectal cancer was 5.3%, compared with 7.3% for late-onset colorectal cancer. Cox analysis showed that late-onset colorectal cancer, colon cancer, smaller tumor size, and fewer tumor nodules without residual lymph node structure, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy were independent risk factors for second primary malignancy. In our patient cohort, early-onset colorectal cancer was associated with better prognosis compared to late-onset colorectal cancer, for both overall survival and second primary malignancy-free survival. In addition, there was insufficient evidence that early-onset colorectal cancer also affected prognosis after the occurrence of second primary malignancies.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of early-onset colorectal cancer subsequently developing second primary malignancy was significantly lower than late-onset colorectal cancer, and the second primary malignancies of early-onset colorectal cancer were more likely to be colorectal cancer. Overall survival and second primary malignancy-free survival of early-onset colorectal cancer were consistently better than late-onset colorectal cancer.

Chinese national clinical practice guidelines on prevention, diagnosis and treatment of early colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer (CRC) in China are increasing in recent years. The clarified pathogenesis and detectable precancerous lesions of CRC make it possible to prevent, screen, and diagnose CRC at an early stage. With the development of endoscopic and surgical techniques, the choice of treatment for early CRC is also worth further discussion, and accordingly, a standard follow-up program after treatment needs to be established.

METHODS

This clinical practice guideline (CPG) was developed following the recommended process of the World Health Organization, adopting Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) in assessing evidence quality, and using the Evidence to Decision framework to formulate clinical recommendations, thereby minimizing bias and increasing transparency of the CPG development process. We used the Reporting Items for practice Guidelines in HealThcare (RIGHT) statement and Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) as reporting and conduct guides to ensure the guideline's completeness and transparency.

RESULTS

This CPG comprises 46 recommendations concerning prevention, screening, diagnosis, treatment, and surveillance of CRC. In these recommendations, we have indicated protective and risk factors for CRC and made recommendations for chemoprevention. We proposed a suitable screening program for CRC based on the Chinese context. We also provided normative statements for the diagnosis, treatment, and surveillance of CRC based on existing clinical evidence and guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

The 46 recommendations in this CPG are formed with consideration for stakeholders' values and preferences, feasibility, and acceptability. Recommendations are generalizable to resource-limited settings with similar CRC epidemiology pattern as China.

Combining Colonoscopy With Fecal Immunochemical Test Can Improve Current Familial Colorectal Cancer Colonoscopy Surveillance: A Modelling Study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The authors assessed whether familial colorectal cancer (FCRC) surveillance in individuals without hereditary CRC can be optimized METHODS: The Adenoma and Serrated Pathway to Colorectal Cancer-FCRC model simulates CRC development in individuals with a family history of CRC at 2-fold and 4-fold increased CRC risk compared with the general population. The authors simulated a strategy without surveillance, the current Dutch guideline (5-yearly colonoscopy between ages 45 and 75 years), and the following 3 sets of alternative strategies: colonoscopy surveillance, surveillance combining colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical test (FIT), and FIT-based surveillance. Each set included a range of strategies differing in age range and test interval. The optimal strategy was defined as the strategy with highest quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) satisfying all of the following criteria: in the (near-)efficiency area of the cost-effectiveness frontier and compared with current surveillance; noninferior effectiveness; no substantial increase in colonoscopy burden; and not more expensive.

RESULTS

The optimal strategy was 10-yearly colonoscopy with 2-yearly FIT between colonoscopies from ages 40 to 80 years for both 2-fold and 4-fold increased CRC risk. At 2-fold risk, this strategy prevented 0.8 more CRC deaths, gained 15.8 more QALYs at 731 fewer colonoscopies, and saved €98,000 over the lifetime of 1000 individuals compared with current surveillance. At 4-fold risk, figures were 2.1 more CRC deaths prevented, 37.0 more QALYs gained at 567 fewer colonoscopies, and €127,000 lower costs. Current surveillance was not (near-)efficient.

CONCLUSIONS

FIT could play an important role in FCRC surveillance. Surveillance with 10-yearly colonoscopy and 2-yearly FIT between colonoscopies from ages 40 to 80 years increased QALYs and reduced colonoscopy burden and costs compared with current FCRC surveillance.

The frequency of colorectal lesions in the first-degree relatives of patients with colorectal lesions among PERSIAN Guilan Cohort Study population (PGCS)

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to investigate the frequency of colorectal lesions in the first-degree relatives of patients with colorectal lesions among the Prospective Epidemiological Research Studies in Iran (PERSIAN )Guilan Cohort Study (PGCS) population.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, 162 first-degree relatives with a history of colorectal lesions were randomly selected from 52 participants in PGCS. All subjects underwent total colonoscopy by a gastroenterologist, and a pathologist evaluated colorectal biopsies. Also, individuals' demographic information, clinical data, and dietary habits were recorded.

RESULTS

The mean age of the participants was 56.55 ± 7.04. Of 86 colon polyps, 52 neoplastic and 34 non-neoplastic polyps were observed in 56 patients (34.6%). Individuals with age > 60 years had 3.29-fold increased odds of developing colorectal polyps (OR = 3.29, 95% CI: 1.13-9.56, P = 0.029). The smokers were 2.73 times more susceptible to developing colorectal polyps than non-smokers (OR = 2.73, 95% CI: 1.24-6.02, P = 0.013). Moreover, consumption of vegetables more than three times per day was associated with decreased OR of colorectal polyp development (OR = 0.43, CI: 0.19-0.98, P = 0.045).

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the high prevalence of neoplastic colorectal polyps among the first-degree relatives of patients with colorectal lesions, early screening is recommended for individuals with a family history of colorectal lesions.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on Risk Stratification for Colorectal Cancer Screening and Post-Polypectomy Surveillance: Expert Review

DESCRIPTION

Since the early 2000s, there has been a rapid decline in colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality, due in large part to screening and removal of precancerous polyps. Despite these improvements, CRC remains the second leading cause of cancer deaths in the United States, with approximately 53,000 deaths projected in 2023. The aim of this American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Clinical Practice Update Expert Review was to describe how individuals should be risk-stratified for CRC screening and post-polypectomy surveillance and to highlight opportunities for future research to fill gaps in the existing literature.

METHODS

This Expert Review was commissioned and approved by the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee (CPUC) and the AGA Governing Board to provide timely guidance on a topic of high clinical importance to the AGA membership, and underwent internal peer review by the CPUC and external peer review through standard procedures of Gastroenterology. These Best Practice Advice statements were drawn from a review of the published literature and from expert opinion. Because systematic reviews were not performed, these Best Practice Advice statements do not carry formal ratings regarding the quality of evidence or strength of the presented considerations. Best Practice Advice Statements BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: All individuals with a first-degree relative (defined as a parent, sibling, or child) who was diagnosed with CRC, particularly before the age of 50 years, should be considered at increased risk for CRC. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: All individuals without a personal history of CRC, inflammatory bowel disease, hereditary CRC syndromes, other CRC predisposing conditions, or a family history of CRC should be considered at average risk for CRC. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: Individuals at average risk for CRC should initiate screening at age 45 years and individuals at increased risk for CRC due to having a first-degree relative with CRC should initiate screening 10 years before the age at diagnosis of the youngest affected relative or age 40 years, whichever is earlier. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: Risk stratification for initiation of CRC screening should be based on an individual's age, a known or suspected predisposing hereditary CRC syndrome, and/or a family history of CRC. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: The decision to continue CRC screening in individuals older than 75 years should be individualized, based on an assessment of risks, benefits, screening history, and comorbidities. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: Screening options for individuals at average risk for CRC should include colonoscopy, fecal immunochemical test, flexible sigmoidoscopy plus fecal immunochemical test, multitarget stool DNA fecal immunochemical test, and computed tomography colonography, based on availability and individual preference. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Colonoscopy should be the screening strategy used for individuals at increased CRC risk. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: The decision to continue post-polypectomy surveillance for individuals older than 75 years should be individualized, based on an assessment of risks, benefits, and comorbidities. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: Risk-stratification tools for CRC screening and post-polypectomy surveillance that emerge from research should be examined for real-world effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in diverse populations (eg, by race, ethnicity, sex, and other sociodemographic factors associated with disparities in CRC outcomes) before widespread implementation.

Family history of cancer as a potential risk factor for colorectal cancer in EMRO countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The current meta-analysis aims to investigate the existing articles that evaluated the implications of a positive family history of cancer on the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) within the EMRO countries. We employed PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science as search databases for this study. To assess the quality of the selected articles, we utilized the Newcastle-Ottawa (NCO) checklist. In comparing the impact of a family history of cancer between the case and control groups, we computed the odds ratio (OR) along with its corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Finally, 27 articles were selected for meta-analysis. The result of the meta-analysis showed a significant association between the presence of a family history of CRC or any cancers and CRC (OR 2.21; 95% CI 1.54-3.17; P < 0.001, OR 1.76; 95% CI 1.27-2.42; P = 0.001, respectively). Our findings underscore the critical importance of timely screening and early identification for individuals with a family history of cancer. By fostering close coordination among healthcare facilities and actively promoting the adoption of screening methods for early detection, we have the potential to significantly reduce both mortality rates and financial burdens of CRC on the general public, ultimately leading to enhanced patient outcomes.

Mutual association between family history of gastric and colorectal cancer and risk of gastric and colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND AND AIM

We evaluated the associations between gastric cancer (GC) family history (FH) and colorectal cancer (CRC) risk and between CRC FH and GC/gastric adenoma risk.

METHODS

We used data of participants who underwent national cancer screening between 2013 and 2014. Participants with GC or CRC FH in first-degree relatives (n = 1 172 750) and those without cancer FH (n = 3 518 250) were matched 1:3 by age and gender.

RESULTS

Of the 1 172 750 participants with a FH, 871 104, 264 040, and 37 606 had FHs of only GC, only CRC, and both GC and CRC, respectively. The median follow-up time was 4.8 years. GC and CRC FHs were associated with increased GC and CRC risks, respectively. GC FH was associated with CRC risk (adjusted hazard ratio 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.10), whereas CRC FH was not associated with the risk of GC or gastric adenoma. However, gastric adenoma risk increased 1.62-fold (95% CI 1.40-1.87) in participants with FHs of both GC and CRC, demonstrating a significant difference with the 1.39-fold (95% CI 1.34-1.44) increase in participants with only GC FH. Furthermore, GC risk increased by 5.32 times (95% CI 1.74-16.24) in participants with FHs of both GC and CRC in both parents and siblings.

CONCLUSIONS

GC FH was significantly associated with a 5% increase in CRC risk. Although CRC FH did not increase GC risk, FH of both GC and CRC further increased the risk of gastric adenoma. FHs of GC and CRC may affect each other's neoplastic lesion risk.

Early-Onset GI Cancers: Rising Trends, Genetic Risks, Novel Strategies, and Special Considerations

Cancers in young adults (commonly described as early-onset [EO] cancer) represent a group of malignancies that have unique and challenging biology and genetic, treatment, social, and psychological implications. Even more concerning is a rising trend of EO cancers in multiple tumor types. Research and investigation in EO cancers will help elucidate mechanisms of carcinogenesis, differences in biology and response to treatment, and the need for multidisciplinary care to ensure comprehensive treatment and support for young patients.

Delphi Initiative for Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer (DIRECt) International Management Guidelines

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Patients with early-onset colorectal cancer (eoCRC) are managed according to guidelines that are not age-specific. A multidisciplinary international group (DIRECt), composed of 69 experts, was convened to develop the first evidence-based consensus recommendations for eoCRC.

METHODS

After reviewing the published literature, a Delphi methodology was used to draft and respond to clinically relevant questions. Each statement underwent 3 rounds of voting and reached a consensus level of agreement of ≥80%.

RESULTS

The DIRECt group produced 31 statements in 7 areas of interest: diagnosis, risk factors, genetics, pathology-oncology, endoscopy, therapy, and supportive care. There was strong consensus that all individuals younger than 50 should undergo CRC risk stratification and prompt symptom assessment. All newly diagnosed eoCRC patients should receive germline genetic testing, ideally before surgery. On the basis of current evidence, endoscopic, surgical, and oncologic treatment of eoCRC should not differ from later-onset CRC, except for individuals with pathogenic or likely pathogenic germline variants. The evidence on chemotherapy is not sufficient to recommend changes to established therapeutic protocols. Fertility preservation and sexual health are important to address in eoCRC survivors. The DIRECt group highlighted areas with knowledge gaps that should be prioritized in future research efforts, including age at first screening for the general population, use of fecal immunochemical tests, chemotherapy, endoscopic therapy, and post-treatment surveillance for eoCRC patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The DIRECt group produced the first consensus recommendations on eoCRC. All statements should be considered together with the accompanying comments and literature reviews. We highlighted areas where research should be prioritized. These guidelines represent a useful tool for clinicians caring for patients with eoCRC.

Updated epidemiology of gastrointestinal cancers in East Asia

Globally, gastrointestinal cancers represent more than one-fourth of all cancer incidence and one-third of cancer-related mortality. Although there has been much progress in screening colorectal cancer, the prognosis of other gastrointestinal cancers tends to be poor. The highest burden of gastrointestinal cancers, including stomach, liver, oesophageal and gallbladder cancers, was observed in regions in East Asia. The increasing burden of gastrointestinal cancers in East Asian regions is related to population growth, ageing and the westernization of lifestyle habits in this region. Furthermore, the rising incidence of young-onset colorectal cancer is an emerging trend in East Asia. This Review provides a comprehensive and updated summary of the epidemiology of gastrointestinal cancers in East Asia, with emphasis on comparing their epidemiology in East Asia with that in Western regions, and highlights the major risk factors and implications for prevention. Overall, to optimally reduce the disease burden incurred by gastrointestinal cancers in East Asian regions, a concerted effort will be needed to modify unhealthy lifestyles, promote vaccination against the hepatitis virus, control Helicobacter pylori, liver fluke and hepatitis virus infections, increase the uptake rate of colorectal cancer screening, enhance detection of early cancers and their precursors, and improve cancer survivorship through an organized rehabilitation programme.

Familial component of early-onset colorectal cancer: opportunity for prevention

BACKGROUND

Individuals with a non-syndromic family history of colorectal cancer are known to have an increased risk. There is an opportunity to prevent early-onset colorectal cancer (age less than 50 years) (EOCRC) in this population. The aim was to explore the proportion of EOCRC that is preventable due to family history of colorectal cancer.

METHODS

This was a retrospective multicentre European study of patients with non-hereditary EOCRC. The impact of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), U.S. Multi-Society Task Force (USMSTF), and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines on prevention and early diagnosis was compared. Colorectal cancer was defined as potentially preventable if surveillance colonoscopy would have been performed at least 5 years before the age of diagnosis of colorectal cancer, and diagnosed early if colonoscopy was undertaken between 1 and 4 years before the diagnosis.

RESULTS

Some 903 patients with EOCRC were included. Criteria for familial colorectal cancer risk in ESGE, USMSTF, and NCCN guidelines were met in 6.3, 9.4, and 30.4 per cent of patients respectively. Based on ESGE, USMSTF, and NCCN guidelines, colorectal cancer could potentially have been prevented in 41, 55, and 30.3 per cent of patients, and diagnosed earlier in 11, 14, and 21.1 per cent respectively. In ESGE guidelines, if surveillance had started 10 years before the youngest relative, there would be a significant increase in prevention (41 versus 55 per cent; P = 0.010).

CONCLUSION

ESGE, USMSTF, and NCCN criteria for familial colorectal cancer were met in 6.3, 9.4, and 30.4 per cent of patients with EOCRC respectively. In these patients, early detection and/or prevention could be achieved in 52, 70, and 51.4 per cent respectively. Early and accurate identification of familial colorectal cancer risk and increase in the uptake of early colonoscopy are key to decreasing familial EOCRC.

Modifiable lifestyle factors have a larger contribution to colorectal neoplasms than family history

BACKGROUND

 Screening recommendations for colorectal cancer (CRC) are mainly based on family history rather than lifestyle risk factors. We aimed to assess and compare risk factors for colorectal neoplasm (CRN) and evaluate trends in neoplasm detection rates during the three rounds of screening from 2012 to 2020 in Tianjin, China.

METHODS

This study was based on 89,535 first-recorded colonoscopies in Tianjin CRC screening program, 2012-2020. Of these, 45,380 individuals with complete family history and lifestyle factors were included for population attributable fraction (PAF) estimation.

RESULTS

 The overall detection rate of nonadvanced adenomas, advanced adenomas and CRC was 39.3%, 5.9% and 1.5%, respectively. The PAFs of current smoking, alcohol consumption, physical activity, higher BMI and family history of CRC, respectively, were 8.9%, 2.6%, 1.9%, 5.8%, and 1.1% for males with nonadvanced CRN; 12.3%, 7.3%, 4.9%, 7.2%, and 0.8% for males with advanced CRN; 3.4%, 0.4%, 2.1%, 7.8%, and 0.7% for females with nonadvanced CRN; and 4.3%, 0.2%, 8.2%, 8.5%, and -0.6% for females with advanced CRN. The PAFs of selected lifestyle factors were 19.9% for males with nonadvanced CRN, 29.0% for males with advanced CRN, 9.7% for females with nonadvanced CRN and 13.8% for females with advanced CRN.

CONCLUSIONS

 Modifiable lifestyle factors, including smoking, alcohol consumption, physical activity and BMI, have a larger contribution to CRN than family history of CRC. Our findings will provide references for developing guidelines of CRC prevention and control in China.

Association between A Family History of Colorectal Cancer and the Risk of Colorectal Cancer: A Nationwide Population-Based Study

Large-scale Asian studies on this topic are lacking. We evaluated the CRC risk associated with family history in the Korean population. We analyzed the data of participants aged ≥40 years who underwent national cancer screening between 2013 and 2014. During a mean follow-up of 4.7 ± 0.8 years, 0.43% of the 292,467 participants with family history and 0.28% of the 1,169,868 participants without family history developed CRC. Participants with a family history in any FDR, parents only, and siblings only had a higher risk of CRC than those without family history; adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were 1.53, 1.46, and 1.61, respectively. Participants with a family history comprising both parents and siblings had an even higher risk of CRC than those without a family history (HR, 2.34). The HRs for CRC in the 40−49, 50−59, 60−69, 70−79, and ≥80 age groups with family history were 1.72, 1.74, 1.50, 1.30, and 0.78, respectively (p < 0.001). A family history of CRC in any FDR and both parents and siblings was associated with an approximately 1.5- and 2.3-fold increased risk of CRC. The effect of family history was relatively greater in the younger than the older age group.

Association Between Family History of Gastric Cancer and the Risk of Gastric Cancer and Adenoma: A Nationwide Population-Based Study

INTRODUCTION

A family history of gastric cancer (GC) is a well-known risk factor for GC. However, the association between family history of GC and the risk of GC and gastric adenoma according to the affected family members is unclear.

METHODS

We analyzed the data of participants aged ≥40 years who underwent national GC screening between 2013 and 2014. Participants with and without a family history of GC among first-degree relatives were matched by age and sex in a 1:4 ratio.

RESULTS

During a median follow-up of 4.9 years, 0.96% and 0.46% of 896,721 participants with a family history of GC and 0.65% and 0.32% of 3,586,884 participants without a family history of GC developed GC and gastric adenoma, respectively. A family history of GC among any first-degree relative was a risk factor for GC (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.48, 95% confidence interval 1.45-1.52) and gastric adenoma (HR 1.44, 95% confidence interval 1.39-1.50). The HRs for GC and gastric adenoma were higher in participants with a family history of GC in parents and siblings (2.26 and 2.19, respectively) than in those with a family history of GC in parents only (1.40 and 1.41, respectively) or siblings only (1.59 and 1.47, respectively). The HRs for GC in participants with vs without a family history of GC were 1.62, 1.55, and 1.42 in the 40-49, 50-59, and ≥60 years' age groups of participants, respectively. Similarly, the HRs for gastric adenoma increased with decreasing age of participants.

DISCUSSION

A family history of GC was a risk factor for both GC and gastric adenoma. The risk of GC and gastric adenoma of the participants was higher when both parents and siblings had GC.

Associations of IL-4, IL-4R, IL-17A, and IL-17F Polymorphisms with Colorectal Cancer Risk: A Meta-Analysis, Meta-Regression, and Trial Sequential Analysis

Both interleukin (IL)-4 and IL-17 polymorphisms may be involved in the pathogenesis and progression of colorectal cancer (CRC). Herein, we designed a meta-analysis to assess the associations between IL-4, IL-4R, IL-17A, and IL-17F polymorphisms and CRC risk. Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and PubMed databases were searched to retrieve articles published until October 21, 2021. We used crude odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval assessing the association of the polymorphisms and CRC risk in 5 genetic models. Trial sequential analysis for the primary analyses was used to control random errors. Twenty-three studies (8: IL-4 rs2243250, 4: IL-4R rs1801275, 5: IL-17A rs2275913, and 6: IL-17F rs763780) were involved in the meta-analysis. The pooled OR (P-value) for the association between IL-4 rs2243250 polymorphism and the CRC risk was 1.11 (0.08), 1.27 (0.12), 1.07 (0.37), 1.09 (0.17), and 1.22 (0.12), for IL-4R rs1801275 polymorphism was 0.71 (0.18), 1.05 (0.76), 0.86 (0.37), 0.87 (0.41), and 0.69 (0.39), for IL-17A rs2275913 polymorphism was 1.83 (0.0003), 1.73 (0.06), 1.47 (<0.001), 1.61 (0.001), and 1.42 (0.15), and for IL-17F rs763780 polymorphism was 1.07 (0.48), 5.33 (0.02), 1.08 (0.49), 1.08 (0.47), and 8.42 (0.002) in allelic, homozygous, heterozygous, recessive, and dominant models, respectively. The G allele and GA genotype of IL-17A rs2275913 polymorphism and the CC genotype of IL-17F rs763780 polymorphism had an elevated risk in CRC cases. The ethnicity and genotyping method, sample size, control, and publication year were effective factors on the pooled results.

Familial colorectal cancer

The introduction of average-risk colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs means that many subjects with family history of CRC and without well-described inherited syndromes can benefit from these public health policies. Therefore, the definition of which individuals should be named under the umbrella of the term "familial CRC" should be reconsidered to include only those who are outside of the protection of population-based screening and need to be moved towards a more intensive surveillance strategy. Two subgroups have been reported as having a high enough CRC risk to be included within the term "familial risk of CRC": individuals who have ≥1 first degree relative (FDR) with CRC diagnosed at age <50 years, and those who have ≥2 FDRs with CRC. Colonoscopy-based screening starting at age 40 years is proposed as the most accepted recommendation for these individuals. Finally, the evolution of Lynch syndrome screening from clinical criteria to tumor tissue analysis and new tools for screening pathogenic gene mutations associated with cancer susceptibility in individuals with early-onset CRC might help to reduce misclassification of familial CRC.

Chinese consensus on prevention of colorectal neoplasia (2021, Shanghai)

Most patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) were diagnosed in advanced stage and the prognosis is poor. Therefore, early detection and prevention of CRC are very important. As with other cancers, there is also the tertiary prevention for CRC. The primary prevention is etiological prevention, which is mainly the treatment of adenoma or inflammation for preventing the development into cancer. The secondary prevention is the early diagnosis and early treatment for avoiding progressing to advanced cancer. The tertiary prevention belongs to the broad category of prevention, mainly for advanced CRC, through surgical treatment and postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy, radiotherapy, targeted therapy, immunotherapy for preventing tumor recurrence or metastasis. This consensus is based on the recent domestic and international consensus guidelines and the latest progress of international researches in the past five years. This consensus opinion seminar was hosted by the Chinese Society of Gastroenterology and Cancer Collaboration Group of Chinese Society of Gastroenterology, and was organized by the Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology & Shanghai Institute of Digestive Disease, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University. The consensus opinion contains 60 statement clauses, the standard and basis of the evidence-based medicine grade and voting grade of the statement strictly complied with the relevant international regulations and practice.

Systematic review with meta-analysis: the effects of family history on the risk of Barrett's oesophagus and oesophageal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend different screening approaches for individuals with a family history of Barrett's oesophagus (BO) or oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC), varying from no screening to screening all individuals with a positive family history.

AIMS

To determine evidence-based risk estimates for individuals with a family history of BO or OAC METHODS: We systematically searched Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane Library until October 2020 to identify all studies that reported on the association between family history and the risk of BO and OAC. Pooled summary estimates of adjusted relative risks and prevalence of familial BO/OAC with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random effects model.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies comprising 16 189 BO/OAC patients were analysed. Familial clustering was seen in 8.84% (95% CI: 5.54-13.82) and 4.37% (95% CI: 2.15-8.69) of patients with BO and OAC, respectively (nine studies). Screening first-degree relatives of BO patients had a diagnostic yield between 12% and 44% for BO (four studies). However, the yield for high-grade dysplasia and OAC was low (<2%). Individuals with a positive family history had a higher risk of having BO (aRR 3.26; 95% CI 1.43-7.40; I²  = 46%; three studies) and OAC (aRR 2.19; 95% CI 1.14-4.21; I²  = 48%; five studies) compared to individuals without a family history.

CONCLUSIONS

A verified family history of BO or OAC is a strong risk factor for both BO and OAC. A positive family history could be a clinically meaningful way to identify high-risk individuals who may benefit from early detection strategies.

ACG Clinical Guidelines: Colorectal Cancer Screening 2021

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer in men and women in the United States. CRC screening efforts are directed toward removal of adenomas and sessile serrated lesions and detection of early-stage CRC. The purpose of this article is to update the 2009 American College of Gastroenterology CRC screening guidelines. The guideline is framed around several key questions. We conducted a comprehensive literature search to include studies through October 2020. The inclusion criteria were studies of any design with men and women age 40 years and older. Detailed recommendations for CRC screening in average-risk individuals and those with a family history of CRC are discussed. We also provide recommendations on the role of aspirin for chemoprevention, quality indicators for colonoscopy, approaches to organized CRC screening and improving adherence to CRC screening. CRC screening must be optimized to allow effective and sustained reduction of CRC incidence and mortality. This can be accomplished by achieving high rates of adherence, quality monitoring and improvement, following evidence-based guidelines, and removing barriers through the spectrum of care from noninvasive screening tests to screening and diagnostic colonoscopy. The development of cost-effective, highly accurate, noninvasive modalities associated with improved overall adherence to the screening process is also a desirable goal.

Assessing the clinical utility of genetic risk scores for targeted cancer screening

Background

Genome-wide association studies have identified thousands of disease-associated single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). A subset of these SNPs may be additively combined to generate genetic risk scores (GRSs) that confer risk for a specific disease. Although the clinical validity of GRSs to predict risk of specific diseases has been well established, there is still a great need to determine their clinical utility by applying GRSs in primary care for cancer risk assessment and targeted intervention.

Methods

This clinical study involved 281 primary care patients without a personal history of breast, prostate or colorectal cancer who were 40–70 years old. DNA was obtained from a pre-existing biobank at NorthShore University HealthSystem. GRSs for colorectal cancer and breast or prostate cancer were calculated and shared with participants through their primary care provider. Additional data was gathered using questionnaires as well as electronic medical record information. A t-test or Chi-square test was applied for comparison of demographic and key clinical variables among different groups.

Results

The median age of the 281 participants was 58 years and the majority were female (66.6%). One hundred one (36.9%) participants received 2 low risk scores, 99 (35.2%) received 1 low risk and 1 average risk score, 37 (13.2%) received 1 low risk and 1 high risk score, 23 (8.2%) received 2 average risk scores, 21 (7.5%) received 1 average risk and 1 high risk score, and no one received 2 high risk scores. Before receiving GRSs, younger patients and women reported significantly more worry about risk of developing cancer. After receiving GRSs, those who received at least one high GRS reported significantly more worry about developing cancer. There were no significant differences found between gender, age, or GRS with regards to participants’ reported optimism about their future health neither before nor after receiving GRS results.

Conclusions

Genetic risk scores that quantify an individual’s risk of developing breast, prostate and colorectal cancers as compared with a race-defined population average risk have potential clinical utility as a tool for risk stratification and to guide cancer screening in a primary care setting.

Colorectal cancer patients can be advocates for colorectal cancer screening for their siblings: A study on siblings' perspectives

OBJECTIVE

This study was performed to explore in-depth, the issues and barriers pertaining to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening amongst the siblings of CRC patients in view of their higher risk of developing CRC.

METHODS

A qualitative study of siblings of CRC patients was performed from August 2017 to October 2018. Semi-structured interviewed were performed until data saturation was achieved. The data was then thematically analysed.

RESULTS

A total of 36 siblings of CRC patients, with a median age of 59 (range 39-78) years old completed the interviews. All the interviews were conducted alone with the participants. Each interview lasted between 30 and 45 minutes. None of the participants has undergone screening colonoscopy prior to the interviews. After thematic analysis, five themes were identified. These include: (i) Misunderstanding their own risk of developing colorectal cancer; (ii) Misperceptions of the role of "screening" for colorectal cancer.; (iii) Misconception of the CRC screening modality for FDRs; (iv) Barriers and facilitators of undergoing screening; (v) Misperceptions of national healthcare policies.

CONCLUSIONS

Identifying and addressing the identified barriers for these siblings to undergo screening colonoscopy is easily attainable. A multi-pronged approach should also be adopted to address the various concerns so as to reduce the incidence of CRC amongst these higher risk individuals.

Evidenced-Based Screening Strategies for a Positive Family History

The most commonly recognized high-risk group for colorectal cancer (CRC) is individuals with a positive family history. It is generally recognized that those with a first-degree relative (FDR) with CRC are at a 2-fold or higher risk of CRC or advanced neoplasia. FDRs of patients with advanced adenomas have a similarly increased risk. Accordingly, all major US guidelines recommend starting CRC screening by age 40 in these groups. Barriers to screening this group include patient lack of knowledge on family and polyp history, provider limitations in collecting family history, and insufficient application of guidelines.

Familial Aggregation and Heritability of Nonmedullary Thyroid Cancer in an Asian Population: A Nationwide Cohort Study

PURPOSE

The purpose of this work is to assess the extent of familial aggregation of nonmedullary thyroid cancer (NMTC) and the relative risks (RRs) of chronic thyroid diseases and common malignancies in first-degree relatives of NMTC patients.

METHODS

In the National Health Insurance Research database of Taiwan, all eligible individuals in 2016 were analyzed (n = 23 696 659) and the family structures of 38 686 patients diagnosed with NMTC between 1997 and 2016 were identified. The prevalence and RRs of NMTC, chronic thyroid diseases, and common malignancies in individuals with first-degree relatives with NMTC were examined. The accountability of heritability and environmental factors to NMTC susceptibility was estimated using the polygenic liability model.

RESULTS

The prevalence of NMTC was 0.16% in the general population and 0.64% in individuals with first-degree relatives with NMTC. Regarding affected relatives, the RR (95% CI) for NMTC was 20.12 (4.86-83.29) for twins, 6.43 (4.80-8.62) for siblings, 5.24 (4.55-6.03) for offspring, 5.07 (4.41-5.81) for parents, and 2.07 (1.53-2.81) for spouses. The estimated genetic, common environmental, and nonshared environmental contributions to NMTC were 28.0%, 14.3%, and 57.7%, respectively. A family history of NMTC was associated with higher risks of thyroid nodules (RR, 2.26; 95% CI, 2.18-2.35), Hashimoto thyroiditis (2.11; 1.89-2.36), Graves disease (1.49; 1.42-1.57), lung cancer (1.56; 1.32-1.85), and leukemia and lymphoma (1.24; 1.03-1.50).

CONCLUSION

Our findings demonstrate the importance of genetic and environmental contributions to NMTC susceptibility and highlight the coaggregation of chronic thyroid diseases and multiple malignancies with NMTC.

Increased Risk of Colorectal Cancer Tied to Advanced Colorectal Polyps: An Untapped Opportunity to Screen First-Degree Relatives and Decrease Cancer Burden

Advanced adenomas represent a subset of colorectal polyps that are known to confer an increased risk of colorectal neoplasia to the affected individual and their first-degree relatives (FDRs). Accordingly, professional guidelines suggest earlier and more intensive screening for FDRs of those with advanced adenomas similar to FDRs of those with colorectal cancer (CRC). Although the risk to family members is less clear among patients with advanced serrated polyps, they are often considered in the same category. Unfortunately, there is a growing concern that patients, endoscopists, and primary care providers are unaware of the familial risk associated with these polyps, leaving a wide gap in screening these high-risk individuals. Herein, we propose a standardized language around advanced colorectal polyps and present a detailed review of the literature on associated familial risk. We outline the challenges to implementing the current screening recommendations and suggest approaches to overcome these limitations, including a proposed new colonoscopy quality metric to capture communication of familial CRC risk. Improving screening in these high-risk groups has the potential to substantially reduce the burden of CRC.

Family history of colorectal cancer and prevalence of advanced colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic screened populations in different age groups

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The clinical significance of a family history (FH) of colorectal cancer (CRC) in first-degree relatives (FDRs) in CRC screening stratified by different age groups of screened individuals is not fully understood. We investigated the relationship between FH and the presence of advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACN) in screened individuals in different age groups.

METHODS

Data from screened individuals aged 40 to 54 years (n = 2263) and 55 to 69 years (n = 2621) who underwent their first-ever screening colonoscopy were analyzed. The relationship between FH and ACN was examined, and a multivariate logistic regression analysis incorporating other baseline characteristics was performed.

RESULTS

Among individuals aged 40 to 54 years, the prevalence of ACN was significantly higher in 249 individuals with affected FDRs than in those without (5.6% vs 1.6%; P < .01), with an adjusted odds ratio of 3.7 (95% confidence interval, 1.9-7.0; P < .01); the prevalence was particularly high in those having FDRs with CRC mortality (7.3%). Among individuals aged 55 to 69 years, the prevalence of ACN was not significantly different between 291 individuals with affected FDRs and those without (5.8% vs 5.8%; P = .95); however, individuals with 2 FDRs with CRC and mortality showed a high prevalence of ACN (17.4% and 42.9%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

An FH of CRC in FDRs was associated with a higher prevalence of ACN in younger individuals, with a particularly high impact of FH of CRC mortality. In contrast, the impact of FH was weaker in older individuals except those having 2 FDRs with CRC or mortality.

The epithelial cadherin -160C/A polymorphism is associated with decreased risk of colorectal cancer: a case-control study

The epithelial cadherin (CDH1) is an important determinant of tumor progression. Previous studies have indicated that the CDH1 -160C/A polymorphism was associated with the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). However, they yielded conflicting results. Thus, we conducted this case-control study to evaluate the association between the CDH1 -160C/A polymorphism and susceptibility to CRC in a Chinese population. We recruited 351 cases and 411 controls in this case-control study. The genotype of the CDH1 -160C/A polymorphism was performed by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOFMS). This study found that the CDH1 -160C/A polymorphism was associated with decreased risk of CRC in this Chinese Han population. Subgroup analyses showed that the CDH1 -160C/A polymorphism decreased the risk of CRC among the males and non-drinkers. In addition, a significantly decreased risk was observed in CRC patients with tumor size ≤ 5 cm, and AA genotype showed a protective role in the CRC patients with no lymph node metastasis. In conclusion, this study shows that CDH1 -160C/A polymorphism is associated with decreased risk of CRC in a Chinese Han population.

Evaluating the predictive value of genetic risk score in colorectal cancer among Chinese Han population

Increasing single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) have been identified to be associated with colorectal cancer (CRC). We aimed to investigate whether genetic risk scores (GRS) that aggregate information from multiple genetic variants can predict the risk of CRC in a Chinese population. Fifty candidate SNPs were selected to explore the associations with CRC in a discovery sample with 1002 CRC cases and 999 healthy controls. We modeled the significant SNPs identified by the case-control study as a multilocus weighted GRS and estimated the association of GRS with CRC. Furthermore, 300 pairs of cases and controls were included as a validation sample to confirm the finding. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was used to evaluate the predictive power of GRS in CRC. A total of seven SNPs were found to increase the risk of CRC, and two SNPs were found to be negatively associated with CRC in the discovery sample. Relative to participants with the lowest quartile of GRS, those with the highest quartile had a 2.64-fold (95% CI: 1.99-3.51) higher risk for CRC. For every 0.1 point of GRS increase, the risk of CRC increase by 11% (95% CI: 8-14%). AUROC for GRS alone were 0.59 (95% CI: 0.57-0.62) and 0.52 (95% CI: 0.46-0.58) in the discovery and validation sample, respectively. AUROC increased to 0.62 (95% CI: 0.59-0.64) and 0.71 (95% CI: 0.65-0.76) by combining environmental risk factors. Our findings support an association between GRS and risk of CRC, which provides evidence of improved prediction model for CRC in China.

Effects of Family History on Relative and Absolute Risks for Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Guidelines recommend that individuals with familial colorectal cancer undergo colonoscopy surveillance instead of average-risk screening. However, these recommendations vary widely. To substantiate appropriate surveillance strategies, precise and valid evidence-based risk estimates are needed for individuals with a family history of colorectal cancer (CRC).

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane from inception to July 2018 for case-control and cohort studies investigating the effect of family history on CRC risk. We calculated summary estimates of pooled relative risks (RRs) using a random-effects model. Life tables were created to convert RR estimates into absolute risk estimates.

RESULTS

We screened 4417 articles and identified 42 eligible case-control and 20 cohort studies. In case-control studies, the RR for CRC in patients with 1 first-degree relative (FDR with CRC) was 1.92 (95% CI, 1.53-2.41) and 1.37 (95% CI, 0.76-2.46) for cohort studies. For individuals with 2 or more FDRs with CRC, the RR was 2.81 in case-control studies (95% CI, 1.73-4.55) and 2.40 in cohort studies (95% CI, 1.76-3.28). For individuals having a FDR diagnosed with CRC at an age younger than 50 years, the RR for CRC in their FDRs was 3.57 in case-control studies (95% CI, 1.07-11.85) and 3.26 in cohort studies (95% CI, 2.82-3.77). The cumulative absolute risks for CRC at 85 years in Western Europe were 4.8% for persons with 1 FDR with CRC (95% CI, 2.7%-8.3%), 8.2% for individuals with 2 or more FDRs (95% CI, 6.1%-10.9%), and 11% for persons with a FDR diagnosed with CRC at an age younger than 50 years (95% CI, 9.5%-12.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we found that the RR of CRC among FDRs is lower than previously expected, especially based on cohort studies. Risk estimates are affected by the number of relatives with CRC and their age at diagnosis. Intensified colonoscopy surveillance strategies could be considered for high-risk groups. PROSPERO trial identification no: CRD42018103058.

Prevalence and risk factors of colorectal cancer in Asia

Globally, colorectal cancer (CRC) is a substantial public health burden, and it is increasingly affecting populations in Asian countries. The overall prevalence of CRC is reported to be low in Asia when compared with that in Western nations, yet it had the highest number of prevalent cases. This review described the prevalence of CRC in Asia according to the International Agency for Research on Cancer from World Health Organization (WHO) database and summarized its major risk factors. Non-modifiable factors include genetic factors, ethnicity, age, gender, family history and body height; smoking, alcohol drinking, weight, Westernized diet, physical inactivity, chronic diseases and microbiota were involved in environmental factors. These risk factors were separately discussed in this review according to published literature from Asian countries. CRC screening has been playing an important role in reducing its disease burden. Some recommendations on its screening practices have been formulated in guidelines for Asia Pacific countries.

Impact of family history of colorectal cancer on age-specific prevalence of colorectal neoplasia

BACKGROUND AND AIM

There are no established guidelines on screening strategies for persons with a family history of colorectal cancer (CRC) in Korea. We aimed to evaluate the age-specific risk of colorectal neoplasia according to family history of CRC.

METHODS

Participants who underwent screening colonoscopy were included. Age-specific prevalence of non-advanced adenoma (NAA) and advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACRN) was calculated according to family history of CRC.

RESULTS

Among 35 997 participants, 1339 (3.7%) had a family history of CRC in first-degree relatives. A family history of CRC was an independent risk factor for NAA (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.16-1.52). In the subgroup analysis by age, family history of CRC was a risk factor for NAA in the 50-59 and ≥ 60 years groups (AOR [95% CI]: 1.42 [1.04-1.91] and 2.33 [1.34-4.09], respectively), but not in the 30-39 and 40-49 years groups. In the curve of age-specific prevalence of NAA, the gap of the prevalence between the family history and non-family history groups began to widen after the mid-50s. In cases of ACRN, a family history of CRC was not a risk factor in the entire age group (AOR 1.16, 95% CI 0.75-1.70). In the curve of age-specific prevalence of ACRN, however, the gap of the prevalence between the family history and non-family history groups began to widen after the early 60s.

CONCLUSION

Although a family history of CRC is a risk factor for NAA, it may affect NAA development from the mid-50s and ACRN development from the early 60s.