1
|
Moqueet N, Cornacchi SD, Antony J, Khalil I, Manca D, Fernandes C, Paszat L, Aubrey-Bassler K, Grunfeld E, Sopcak N, Pinto A, Konkin J, Nykiforuk C, Rabeneck L, Selby P, Wall B, O'Brien MA, Lofters A. BETTER LIFE- guidelines for chronic disease preventive care for people aged 18-39 years: a literature review. BMC PRIMARY CARE 2024; 25:224. [PMID: 38909200 PMCID: PMC11193284 DOI: 10.1186/s12875-024-02471-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2023] [Accepted: 06/10/2024] [Indexed: 06/24/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The original 'BETTER' (Building on Existing Tools To Improve Chronic Disease Prevention and Screening in Primary Care) approach consisted of a prevention-focused visit between participants aged 40-65 years and a "Prevention Practitioner" (PP), who empowered the participant to set achievable prevention and screening goals for cancers and chronic diseases. BETTER was successfully adapted for economically deprived communities (BETTER HEALTH) in Canada. Our objective was to conduct a review of guidelines in preparation for adapting the 'BETTER HEALTH' approach for younger adults aged 18-39 years living with lower income, a group known to have earlier mortality due to a higher prevalence of preventable chronic diseases than their peers with higher income. METHODS We searched multiple electronic databases and grey literature for clinical practice guidelines on prevention/screening and included those that met the following criteria: published in English from 2008-2020 in Canada or any of the following countries (Australia, Ireland, New Zealand, Scotland, United States and England); and addressed prevention or screening. We assessed quality using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II tool and extracted data (publication details, recommendations, and Quality/Level of evidence as reported by authors) from sources with overall scores of 5 or higher. Final recommendations were compiled after harmonization with input from diverse stakeholders (co-investigators, PPs, and the Community Advisory Committee). RESULTS We included a total of 85 guidelines, and developed a final list of 42 recommendations for 18-39 year-olds across 21 topics. Specific recommendations fell under the following topics: cancers, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, obesity, lifestyle (alcohol; healthy nutrition/physical activity); healthy relationships and healthy sexuality, immunization, oral health, social determinants of health, and substance use. CONCLUSION We identified evidence-based guidelines on individual-level prevention/screening actions for adults 18-39 years old and relevant for those living with lower income which will directly inform development and implementation of the BETTER LIFE intervention.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Jesmin Antony
- Women's College Hospital, 76 Grenville St, Toronto, ON, M5S 1B2, Canada
| | - Ielaf Khalil
- Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Donna Manca
- Department of Family Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
| | - Carolina Fernandes
- Department of Family Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
| | - Lawrence Paszat
- Sunnybrook Research Institute, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Kris Aubrey-Bassler
- Primary Healthcare Research Unit, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, NL, Canada
| | - Eva Grunfeld
- Ontario Institute for Cancer Research, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Nicolette Sopcak
- Department of Family Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
| | - Andrew Pinto
- Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Jill Konkin
- Department of Family Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
| | - Candace Nykiforuk
- School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
| | - Linda Rabeneck
- Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Peter Selby
- Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Becky Wall
- Durham Region Health Department, Whitby, ON, Canada
| | - Mary Ann O'Brien
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Aisha Lofters
- Women's College Hospital, 76 Grenville St, Toronto, ON, M5S 1B2, Canada.
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Tanadi C, Tandarto K, Stella MM, Sutanto KW, Steffanus M, Tenggara R, Bestari MB. Colorectal cancer screening guidelines for average-risk and high-risk individuals: A systematic review. ROMANIAN JOURNAL OF INTERNAL MEDICINE = REVUE ROUMAINE DE MEDECINE INTERNE 2024; 62:101-123. [PMID: 38153878 DOI: 10.2478/rjim-2023-0038] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/27/2023] [Indexed: 12/30/2023]
Abstract
AIMS This review aims to summarize the different colorectal cancer guidelines for average-risk and high-risk individuals from various countries. METHODS A comprehensive literature search regarding guidelines, consensus recommendations, or position statements about colorectal cancer screening published within the last 10 years (1st January 2012 to 27th August 2022), was performed at EBSCOhost, JSTOR, PubMed, ProQuest, SAGE, and ScienceDirect. RESULTS A total of 18 guidelines were included in this review. Most guidelines recommended screening between 45 and 75 years for average-risk individuals. Recommendations regarding colorectal cancer screening in high-risk individuals were more varied and depended on the risk factor. For high-risk individuals with a positive family history of colorectal cancer or advanced colorectal polyp, screening should begin at age 40. Some frequently suggested screening modalities in order of frequency are colonoscopy, FIT, and CTC. Furthermore, several screening intervals were suggested, including colonoscopy every 10 years for average-risk and every 5-10 years for high-risk individuals, FIT annually in average-risk and every 1-2 years in high-risk individuals, and CTC every five years for all individuals. CONCLUSION All individuals with average-risk should undergo colorectal cancer screening between 45 and 75. Meanwhile, individuals with higher risks, such as those with a positive family history, should begin screening at age 40. Several recommended screening modalities were suggested, including colonoscopy every 10 years in average-risk and every 5-10 years in high-risk, FIT annually in average-risk and every 1-2 years in high-risk, and CTC every five years.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Caroline Tanadi
- 1Medical Profession Study Program, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Atma Jaya Catholic University of Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia
| | - Kevin Tandarto
- 2Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Atma Jaya Catholic University of Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia
| | - Maureen Miracle Stella
- 1Medical Profession Study Program, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Atma Jaya Catholic University of Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia
| | - Kenny Wijaya Sutanto
- 1Medical Profession Study Program, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Atma Jaya Catholic University of Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia
| | - Mario Steffanus
- 2Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Atma Jaya Catholic University of Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia
| | - Riki Tenggara
- 2Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Atma Jaya Catholic University of Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Fernandes C, Campbell-Scherer D, Lofters A, Grunfeld E, Aubrey-Bassler K, Cheung H, Latko K, Tink W, Lewanczuk R, Shea-Budgell M, Heisey R, Wong T, Yang H, Walji S, Wilson M, Holmes E, Lang-Robertson K, DeLonghi C, Manca DP. Harmonization of clinical practice guidelines for primary prevention and screening: actionable recommendations and resources for primary care. BMC PRIMARY CARE 2024; 25:153. [PMID: 38711031 PMCID: PMC11071261 DOI: 10.1186/s12875-024-02388-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/15/2023] [Accepted: 04/12/2024] [Indexed: 05/08/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) synthesize high-quality information to support evidence-based clinical practice. In primary care, numerous CPGs must be integrated to address the needs of patients with multiple risks and conditions. The BETTER program aims to improve prevention and screening for cancer and chronic disease in primary care by synthesizing CPGs into integrated, actionable recommendations. We describe the process used to harmonize high-quality cancer and chronic disease prevention and screening (CCDPS) CPGs to update the BETTER program. METHODS A review of CPG databases, repositories, and grey literature was conducted to identify international and Canadian (national and provincial) CPGs for CCDPS in adults 40-69 years of age across 19 topic areas: cancers, cardiovascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, hepatitis C, obesity, osteoporosis, depression, and associated risk factors (i.e., diet, physical activity, alcohol, cannabis, drug, tobacco, and vaping/e-cigarette use). CPGs published in English between 2016 and 2021, applicable to adults, and containing CCDPS recommendations were included. Guideline quality was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II tool and a three-step process involving patients, health policy, content experts, primary care providers, and researchers was used to identify and synthesize recommendations. RESULTS We identified 51 international and Canadian CPGs and 22 guidelines developed by provincial organizations that provided relevant CCDPS recommendations. Clinical recommendations were extracted and reviewed for inclusion using the following criteria: 1) pertinence to primary prevention and screening, 2) relevance to adults ages 40-69, and 3) applicability to diverse primary care settings. Recommendations were synthesized and integrated into the BETTER toolkit alongside resources to support shared decision-making and care paths for the BETTER program. CONCLUSIONS Comprehensive care requires the ability to address a person's overall health. An approach to identify high-quality clinical guidance to comprehensively address CCDPS is described. The process used to synthesize and harmonize implementable clinical recommendations may be useful to others wanting to integrate evidence across broad content areas to provide comprehensive care. The BETTER toolkit provides resources that clearly and succinctly present a breadth of clinical evidence that providers can use to assist with implementing CCDPS guidance in primary care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carolina Fernandes
- Department of Family Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
| | - Denise Campbell-Scherer
- Department of Family Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
- Office of Lifelong Learning and the Physician Learning Program, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
| | - Aisha Lofters
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Peter Gilgan Centre for Women's Cancers, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Eva Grunfeld
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Ontario Institute for Cancer Research, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Kris Aubrey-Bassler
- Discipline of Family Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, NL, Canada
- Newfoundland and Labrador Centre for Health Information, St. John's, NL, Canada
| | - Heidi Cheung
- Department of Family Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
| | - Katherine Latko
- College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Wendy Tink
- Department of Family Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Richard Lewanczuk
- Alberta Health Services, Alberta, AB, Canada
- Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
| | | | - Ruth Heisey
- Peter Gilgan Centre for Women's Cancers, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Family and Community Medicine, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Tracy Wong
- Strategic Clinical Networks, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | | | - Sakina Walji
- Department of Family Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health System, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Margo Wilson
- Discipline of Emergency Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, NL, Canada
| | | | | | | | - Donna Patricia Manca
- Department of Family Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
- Office of Lifelong Learning and the Physician Learning Program, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Zhao L, Lynch L, Eiriksson L. Information needs of Lynch syndrome and BRCA 1/2 mutation carriers considering risk-reducing gynecological surgery: a qualitative study of the decision-making process. Hered Cancer Clin Pract 2024; 22:5. [PMID: 38698439 PMCID: PMC11067152 DOI: 10.1186/s13053-024-00278-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/15/2024] [Accepted: 04/10/2024] [Indexed: 05/05/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Risk-reducing gynecological surgery (RRGS) is a prophylactic procedure that may be offered to BRCA1, BRCA2, and Lynch syndrome (LS) mutation carriers to reduce the risk of developing gynecological cancer. This study was conducted to better understand patients' information needs and evaluate how patients weigh different sources of information in their decision-making process surrounding RRGS. METHODS This study used a qualitative approach to understanding women's perspectives towards RRGS. Semi-structured interviews were conducted virtually with 8 women. Women offered RRGS between 35 and 70 years of age who are English-speaking and have an identifiable BRCA or LS mutation were included. Data from interviews was coded with constant comparative analysis to develop themes. RESULTS Of the eight women, six had selected to undergo either prophylactic hysterectomy or oophorectomy: 5 decided yes to RRGS; 1 decided no; 2 were undecided. Thematic analysis found that the key factors affecting women's decisions around prophylactic surgery were cancer risk, surgical menopause, and psychological readiness. To make an informed decision, women relied most heavily on information provided by healthcare professionals (e.g. doctors, genetic counselors) and family members with prior cancer experience. However, some women reported that they did not feel adequately informed enough to make a decision and identified COVID-19 as a significant barrier affecting access to information. CONCLUSION This qualitative study revealed the key sources of information influencing attitudes regarding RRGS and how women consulted different sources of information to reach a decision. Results underscore the need for greater attention to women's information needs in the context of psychological readiness, particularly amidst the pandemic. Research involving a larger sample size may help to better inform how support can be provided to individuals with BRCA and LS mutations considering RRGS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lucy Zhao
- Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
| | - Lorrie Lynch
- Cancer Genetics Clinic, Juravinski Hospital and Cancer Centre, Hamilton, Canada
| | - Lua Eiriksson
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Juravinski Hospital and Cancer Centre, Hamilton, Canada
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Roshandel G, Ghasemi-Kebria F, Malekzadeh R. Colorectal Cancer: Epidemiology, Risk Factors, and Prevention. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:1530. [PMID: 38672612 PMCID: PMC11049480 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16081530] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/23/2024] [Revised: 04/09/2024] [Accepted: 04/15/2024] [Indexed: 04/28/2024] Open
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer and the second most common cause of cancer mortality worldwide. There are disparities in the epidemiology of CRC across different populations, most probably due to differences in exposure to lifestyle and environmental factors related to CRC. Prevention is the most effective method for controlling CRC. Primary prevention includes determining and avoiding modifiable risk factors (e.g., alcohol consumption, smoking, and dietary factors) as well as increasing protective factors (e.g., physical activity, aspirin). Further studies, especially randomized, controlled trials, are needed to clarify the association between CRC incidence and exposure to different risk factors or protective factors. Detection and removal of precancerous colorectal lesions is also an effective strategy for controlling CRC. Multiple factors, both at the individual and community levels (e.g., patient preferences, availability of screening modalities, costs, benefits, and adverse events), should be taken into account in designing and implementing CRC screening programs. Health policymakers should consider the best decision in identifying the starting age and selection of the most effective screening strategies for the target population. This review aims to present updated evidence on the epidemiology, risk factors, and prevention of CRC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gholamreza Roshandel
- Golestan Research Center of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Gorgan 49178-67439, Iran; (G.R.); (F.G.-K.)
| | - Fatemeh Ghasemi-Kebria
- Golestan Research Center of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Gorgan 49178-67439, Iran; (G.R.); (F.G.-K.)
| | - Reza Malekzadeh
- Digestive Oncology Research Center, Digestive Diseases Research Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran 14117-13135, Iran
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Sara B, Ghinwa H, Layla M, Mahmoud H, Ali K, Remy M. Split doses versus whole dose bowel preparation using polyethylene glycol for colonoscopy: A multicentric prospective Lebanese randomized trial between 2021 and 2023. Health Sci Rep 2024; 7:e2047. [PMID: 38655418 PMCID: PMC11035750 DOI: 10.1002/hsr2.2047] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/20/2023] [Revised: 03/23/2024] [Accepted: 03/26/2024] [Indexed: 04/26/2024] Open
Abstract
Background and Aims Bowel preparation is considered as major obstacle before colonoscopy, and it is often reported as the most feared part of the procedure. The aim of this study is to determine the difference in efficacy between a split dose of PEG and the previous day regimen in cleaning the colon, using Boston bowel preparation scale. In addition, also to evaluate patient satisfaction regarding the modality of preparation. Methods The study included 200 hospitalized patients undergoing colonoscopy at Beirut hospitals between 2021 and 2023. One of the two regimens will be prescribed randomly to the patients before colonoscopy: 98 (49%) in Group A (patients treated with PEG preparation as a split dose for 2 days), and 102 (51%) in Group B (patients taking PEG preparation as a whole dose). Data was analyzed using SPSS version 25. Results Patients were distributed between 105 (52.5%) males and 95 (47.5%) females. The top two indications for colonoscopy were bleeding (34%), change in bowel habits (constipation/diarrhea) (32%). Patients experienced adverse events noting cramps (48.5%), stomach ache (32%), headache (31%), vomiting (53%), nausea (53%), sleep disturbance (27%), bloating (26.5%), and malaise (26%). A statistically significant difference (p = 0.040) was detected in sleep disturbance: 20.4% of patients in group A and 33.3% of patients in group B. The average satisfaction score was 3.02 ± 1.03 over 4 (Group A) and 3.04 ± 0.99 over 4 (Group B) (p = 0.896). The average BBPS was 8.07 ± 1.14 (Group A) and 8.28 ± 1.0 (Group B) (p = 0.162). Conclusion The two administrations were almost similar in term of satisfaction and BBPS. As multiple factors like age, sexe, comorbidities may contribute in altering how much a given drug is safe and efficace, more research is needed to choose the best 3regimen for each patient.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Blaybel Sara
- Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medical SciencesLebanese UniversityHadatLebanon
| | - Hammoud Ghinwa
- Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medical SciencesLebanese UniversityHadatLebanon
| | - Mourda Layla
- Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medical SciencesLebanese UniversityHadatLebanon
| | - Hallal Mahmoud
- Department of Gastroenterology and HepatologyAl Zahraa Hospital University Medical Center (Zhumc)BeirutLebanon
| | - Khalil Ali
- Department of Gastroenterology and HepatologyAl Zahraa Hospital University Medical Center (Zhumc)BeirutLebanon
| | - Mckey Remy
- Department of GastroenterologyLebanese UniversityBeirutLebanon
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Liang Q, Sundquist K, Sundquist J, Brenner H, Kharazmi E, Fallah M. Colonoscopy screening interval in relatives of patients with late-onset colorectal cancer: A nationwide matched cohort study. Sci Bull (Beijing) 2024; 69:732-736. [PMID: 38278709 DOI: 10.1016/j.scib.2024.01.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/14/2023] [Revised: 09/21/2023] [Accepted: 12/22/2023] [Indexed: 01/28/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Qunfeng Liang
- Division of Preventive Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg 69120, Germany; Medical Faculty Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg 69120, Germany
| | - Kristina Sundquist
- Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University, Malmö 202 13, Sweden; Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, 10029, USA; Center for Community-based Healthcare Research and Education, Department of Functional Pathology, School of Medicine, Shimane University, Izumo 693-8501, Japan
| | - Jan Sundquist
- Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University, Malmö 202 13, Sweden; Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, 10029, USA; Center for Community-based Healthcare Research and Education, Department of Functional Pathology, School of Medicine, Shimane University, Izumo 693-8501, Japan
| | - Hermann Brenner
- Division of Preventive Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg 69120, Germany; Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg 69120, Germany; German Cancer Consortium, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg 69120, Germany
| | - Elham Kharazmi
- Division of Preventive Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg 69120, Germany; Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University, Malmö 202 13, Sweden
| | - Mahdi Fallah
- Division of Preventive Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg 69120, Germany; Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University, Malmö 202 13, Sweden; Institute of Primary Health Care, University of Bern, Bern 3012, Switzerland.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Shaffer SR, Lambert P, Unruh C, Harland E, Helewa RM, Decker K, Singh H. Optimizing Timing of Follow-Up Colonoscopy: A Pilot Cluster Randomized Trial of a Knowledge Translation Tool. Am J Gastroenterol 2024; 119:547-555. [PMID: 37787644 DOI: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000002542] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2023] [Accepted: 09/12/2023] [Indexed: 10/04/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Endoscopists have low adherence to guideline-recommended colonoscopy surveillance intervals. We performed a cluster-randomized single-blind pilot trial in Winnipeg, Canada, to assess the effectiveness of a newly developed digital application tool that computes guideline-recommended follow-up intervals. METHODS Participant endoscopists were randomized to either receive access to the digital application (intervention group) or not receive access (control group). Pathology reports and final recommendations for colonoscopies performed in the 1-4 months before randomization and 3-7 months postrandomization were extracted. Generalized estimating equation models were used to determine whether the access to the digital application predicted guideline congruence. RESULTS We included 15 endoscopists in the intervention group and 14 in the control group (of 42 eligible endoscopists in the city), with 343 patients undergoing colonoscopy before randomization and 311 postrandomization. Endoscopists who received the application made guideline-congruent recommendations 67.6% of the time before randomization and 76.1% of the time after randomization. Endoscopists in the control group made guideline-congruent recommendations 72.4% and 72.9% of the time before and after randomization, respectively. Endoscopists in the intervention group trended to have an increase in guideline adherence comparing postintervention with preintervention (odds ratio [OR]: 1.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.82-2.74). By contrast, the control group had no change in guideline adherence (OR: 1.07, 95% CI 0.50-2.29). Endoscopists in the intervention group with less than median guideline congruence prerandomization had a significant increase in guideline-congruent recommendations postrandomization. DISCUSSION An application that provides colonoscopy surveillance intervals may help endoscopists with guideline congruence, especially those with a lower preintervention congruence with guideline recommendations ( ClincialTrials.gov number, NCT04889352).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Seth R Shaffer
- Department of Internal Medicine, Max Rady College of Medicine, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
| | - Pascal Lambert
- Paul Albrechtsen Research Institute Cancer, Care Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
| | - Claire Unruh
- Department of Internal Medicine, Max Rady College of Medicine, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
| | - Elizabeth Harland
- Department of Internal Medicine, Max Rady College of Medicine, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
| | - Ramzi M Helewa
- Department of Surgery, Max Rady College of Medicine, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
| | - Kathleen Decker
- Paul Albrechtsen Research Institute Cancer, Care Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Max Rady College of Medicine, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
| | - Harminder Singh
- Department of Internal Medicine, Max Rady College of Medicine, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
- Paul Albrechtsen Research Institute Cancer, Care Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Max Rady College of Medicine, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Chen X, Heisser T, Cardoso R, Hibbert J, Hoffmeister M, Brenner H. Beyond familial risk: deriving risk-adapted starting ages of screening among people with a family history of colorectal cancer. Cancer Commun (Lond) 2023; 43:1377-1380. [PMID: 37874634 PMCID: PMC10693305 DOI: 10.1002/cac2.12499] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/10/2023] [Revised: 10/05/2023] [Accepted: 10/16/2023] [Indexed: 10/25/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Xuechen Chen
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging ResearchGerman Cancer Research Center (DKFZ)HeidelbergGermany
- Medical Faculty HeidelbergHeidelberg UniversityHeidelbergGermany
| | - Thomas Heisser
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging ResearchGerman Cancer Research Center (DKFZ)HeidelbergGermany
| | - Rafael Cardoso
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging ResearchGerman Cancer Research Center (DKFZ)HeidelbergGermany
| | - Julia Hibbert
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging ResearchGerman Cancer Research Center (DKFZ)HeidelbergGermany
- Medical Faculty HeidelbergHeidelberg UniversityHeidelbergGermany
| | - Michael Hoffmeister
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging ResearchGerman Cancer Research Center (DKFZ)HeidelbergGermany
| | - Hermann Brenner
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging ResearchGerman Cancer Research Center (DKFZ)HeidelbergGermany
- Division of Preventive OncologyGerman Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) and National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT)HeidelbergGermany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK)German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ)HeidelbergGermany
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Issaka RB, Chan AT, Gupta S. AGA Clinical Practice Update on Risk Stratification for Colorectal Cancer Screening and Post-Polypectomy Surveillance: Expert Review. Gastroenterology 2023; 165:1280-1291. [PMID: 37737817 PMCID: PMC10591903 DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2023.06.033] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/26/2023] [Revised: 06/20/2023] [Accepted: 06/30/2023] [Indexed: 09/23/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel B Issaka
- Public Health Sciences and Clinical Research Divisions, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, Washington; Division of Gastroenterology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington.
| | - Andrew T Chan
- Clinical and Translational Epidemiology Unit, Division of Gastroenterology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Samir Gupta
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California; Section of Gastroenterology, Jennifer Moreno Department of Medical Affairs Medical Center, San Diego, California
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Keivanlou MH, Amini-Salehi E, Joukar F, Letafatkar N, Habibi A, Norouzi N, Vakilpour A, Aleali MS, Rafat Z, Ashoobi MT, Mansour-Ghanaei F, Hassanipour S. Family history of cancer as a potential risk factor for colorectal cancer in EMRO countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci Rep 2023; 13:17457. [PMID: 37838786 PMCID: PMC10576738 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-44487-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/02/2023] [Accepted: 10/09/2023] [Indexed: 10/16/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mohammad-Hossein Keivanlou
- Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases Research Center, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
- Student Research Committee, School of Medicine, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
| | - Ehsan Amini-Salehi
- Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases Research Center, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
- Student Research Committee, School of Medicine, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
| | - Farahnaz Joukar
- Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases Research Center, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
| | - Negin Letafatkar
- Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases Research Center, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
- Student Research Committee, School of Medicine, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
| | - Arman Habibi
- Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases Research Center, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
- Student Research Committee, School of Medicine, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
| | - Naeim Norouzi
- Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases Research Center, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
- Student Research Committee, School of Medicine, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
| | | | - Maryam Sadat Aleali
- Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases Research Center, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
| | - Zahra Rafat
- Department of Medical Parasitology and Mycology, School of Medicine, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
| | - Mohammad Taghi Ashoobi
- Razi Clinical Research Development Unit, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
| | - Fariborz Mansour-Ghanaei
- Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases Research Center, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
| | - Soheil Hassanipour
- Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases Research Center, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Chen X, Heisser T, Cardoso R, Hoffmeister M, Brenner H. Personalized Initial Screening Age for Colorectal Cancer in Individuals at Average Risk. JAMA Netw Open 2023; 6:e2339670. [PMID: 37878311 PMCID: PMC10600582 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.39670] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/15/2023] [Accepted: 09/12/2023] [Indexed: 10/26/2023] Open
Abstract
Importance Colorectal cancer (CRC) risk varies widely in the population at average risk without a family history, but there are no established routines for translating this variation into personalized starting ages of screening. Objective To illustrate derivation of risk-adapted starting ages of CRC screening based on the concept of risk advancement period (RAP) using sex and a polygenic risk score (PRS) as an example. Design, Setting, and Participants This cohort study included participants in the UK Biobank study recruited in England, Wales, and Scotland between March 13, 2006, and October 1, 2010. Participants were aged 40 to 69 years, with no previous bowel cancer screening and no family history of CRC. Follow-up of cancer data was completed February 29, 2020, for England and Wales and January 31, 2021, for Scotland. The censoring date for death data was September 30, 2021, for England and Wales and October 31, 2021, for Scotland. Exposures Data on age, sex, and family history were collected at the baseline interview. A PRS was calculated based on 139 CRC-related risk loci. Main Outcomes and Measures Hazard ratios (HRs) of sex and PRS with CRC risk and mortality were estimated using Cox proportional hazards regression models and were translated to RAPs to quantify how many years of age earlier or later men and individuals in higher or lower PRS deciles would reach risks comparable with those of the reference group (ie, women or those in the 5th and 6th PRS deciles). Results Among 242 779 participants (median age, 55 [IQR, 48-61] years; 55.7% women), 2714 incident CRC cases were identified during a median follow-up of 11.2 (IQR, 10.5-11.8) years and 758 deaths during a median follow-up of 12.8 (IQR, 12.0-13.4) years. The HRs of CRC risk were 1.57 (95% CI, 1.46-1.70) for men vs women and ranged from 0.51 (95% CI, 0.41-0.62) to 2.29 (95% CI, 2.01-2.62) across PRS deciles compared with the reference. The RAPs were 5.6 (95% CI, 4.6-6.6) years for men vs women and ranged from -8.4 (95% CI, -11.0 to -5.9) to 10.3 (95% CI, 8.5-12.1) years across PRS deciles compared with the reference deciles. Risk-adapted starting ages of screening would vary by 24 years between men in the highest PRS decile and women in the lowest PRS decile. Similar results were obtained regarding CRC mortality. Conclusions and Relevance In this large cohort study including women and men at average risk of CRC, risk-adapted starting ages of screening strongly varied by sex and a PRS. The RAP concept could easily accommodate additional factors for defining personalized starting ages of screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xuechen Chen
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany
- Medical Faculty Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Thomas Heisser
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Rafael Cardoso
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Michael Hoffmeister
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Hermann Brenner
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany
- Division of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center and National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Gimeno-García AZ, Quintero E. Role of colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening: Available evidence. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2023; 66:101838. [PMID: 37852706 DOI: 10.1016/j.bpg.2023.101838] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/09/2023] [Revised: 04/26/2023] [Accepted: 04/30/2023] [Indexed: 10/20/2023]
Abstract
Colonoscopy is the cornerstone examination for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and it is recommended as the first examination in the context of individuals with high risk of CRC development. Thereby, this examination is of choice in the setting of patients with hereditary CRC syndromes or in patients with long-standing inflammatory bowel disease with colon involvement. However, its role is less clear in the average risk-risk population and in patients with family history of CRC not linked to hereditary CRC syndromes. Despite this, current guidelines, include colonoscopy as alternative for CRC screening either in average risk population with the same evidence level that other screening strategies or in the familial risk population. The present manuscript reviews the clinical evidence on the role of colonoscopy in preventing CRC in different screening settings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Antonio Z Gimeno-García
- Department of Gastroenterology of Hospital Universitario de Canarias, Instituto Universitario de Tecnologías Biomédicas (ITB) & Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Canarias (CIBICAN), Universidad de La Laguna, Spain
| | - Enrique Quintero
- Department of Gastroenterology of Hospital Universitario de Canarias, Instituto Universitario de Tecnologías Biomédicas (ITB) & Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Canarias (CIBICAN), Universidad de La Laguna, Spain.
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Chan FKL, Wong MCS, Chan AT, East JE, Chiu HM, Makharia GK, Weller D, Ooi CJ, Limsrivilai J, Saito Y, Hang DV, Emery JD, Makmun D, Wu K, Ali RAR, Ng SC. Joint Asian Pacific Association of Gastroenterology (APAGE)-Asian Pacific Society of Digestive Endoscopy (APSDE) clinical practice guidelines on the use of non-invasive biomarkers for diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia. Gut 2023:gutjnl-2023-329429. [PMID: 37019620 DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2023-329429] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2023] [Accepted: 03/07/2023] [Indexed: 04/07/2023]
Abstract
Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) is effective in reducing CRC related mortality. Current screening methods include endoscopy based and biomarker based approaches. This guideline is a joint official statement of the Asian Pacific Association of Gastroenterology (APAGE) and the Asian Pacific Society of Digestive Endoscopy (APSDE), developed in response to the increasing use of, and accumulating supportive evidence for the role of, non-invasive biomarkers for the diagnosis of CRC and its precursor lesions. A systematic review of 678 publications and a two stage Delphi consensus process involving 16 clinicians in various disciplines was undertaken to develop 32 evidence based and expert opinion based recommendations for the use of faecal immunochemical tests, faecal based tumour biomarkers or microbial biomarkers, and blood based tumour biomarkers for the detection of CRC and adenoma. Comprehensive up-to-date guidance is provided on indications, patient selection and strengths and limitations of each screening tool. Future research to inform clinical applications are discussed alongside objective measurement of research priorities. This joint APAGE-APSDE practice guideline is intended to provide an up-to-date guide to assist clinicians worldwide in utilising non-invasive biomarkers for CRC screening; it has particular salience for clinicians in the Asia-Pacific region.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francis K L Chan
- Medicine and Therapeutics, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, People's Republic of China
| | - Martin C S Wong
- JC School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, People's Republic of China
- Centre for Health Education and Health Promotion, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, People's Republic of China
| | - Andrew T Chan
- Clinical and Translational Epidemiology Unit, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
- Division of Gastroenterology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
- Department of Immunology and Infectious Diseases, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - James E East
- Translational Gastroenterology Unit, Nuffield Department of Medicine, Oxford NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, John Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic Healthcare, London, UK
| | - Han-Mo Chiu
- Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Govind K Makharia
- Department of Gastroenterology and Human Nutrition, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
| | - David Weller
- Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, The University of Edinburgh Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, Edinburgh, UK
| | | | - Julajak Limsrivilai
- Internal Medicine, Mahidol University Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Yutaka Saito
- Endoscopy Division, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Dao V Hang
- Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi, Vietnam
| | - Jon D Emery
- Department of General Practice, The University of Melbourne Faculty of Medicine Dentistry and Health Sciences, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | | | - Kaichun Wu
- Xijing Hospital of Digestive Diseases, Xijing Hospital, Xian, China
| | | | - Siew C Ng
- Medicine and Therapeutics, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, People's Republic of China
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Maes-Carballo M, García-García M, Martín-Díaz M, Estrada-López CR, Iglesias-Álvarez A, Filigrana-Valle CM, Khan KS, Bueno-Cavanillas A. A comprehensive systematic review of colorectal cancer screening clinical practices guidelines and consensus statements. Br J Cancer 2023; 128:946-957. [PMID: 36476659 PMCID: PMC9734419 DOI: 10.1038/s41416-022-02070-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/12/2022] [Accepted: 11/14/2022] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
High-quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and consensus statements (CSs) are essential for evidence-based medicine. The purpose of this systematic review was to appraise the quality and reporting of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening CPGs and CSs. After prospective registration (Prospero no: CRD42021286156), a systematic review searched CRC guidances in duplicate without language restrictions in ten databases, 20 society websites, and grey literature from 2018 to 2021. We appraised quality with AGREE II (% of maximum score) and reporting with RIGHT (% of total 35 items) tools. Twenty-four CPGs and 5 CSs were analysed. The median overall quality and reporting were 54.0% (IQR 45.7-75.0) and 42.0% (IQR 31.4-68.6). The applicability had low quality (AGREE II score <50%) in 83% of guidances (24/29). Recommendations and conflict of interest were low-reported (RIGHT score <50%) in 62% guidances (18/29) and 69% (20/29). CPGs that deployed systematic reviews had better quality and reporting than CSs (AGREE: 68.5% vs. 35.5%; p = 0.001; RIGHT: 74.6% vs. 41.4%; p = 0.001). In summary, CRC screening CPGs and CSs achieved low quality and reporting. It is necessary a revision and an improvement of the current guidances. Their development should apply a robust methodology using proper guideline development tools to obtain high-quality evidence-based documents.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marta Maes-Carballo
- Department of General Surgery, Breast cancer Unit, Complexo Hospitalario de Ourense, Ourense, Spain. .,Hospital Público de Verín, Ourense, Spain. .,Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.
| | - Manuel García-García
- Department of General Surgery, Breast cancer Unit, Complexo Hospitalario de Ourense, Ourense, Spain
| | | | | | | | | | - Khalid Saeed Khan
- Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.,Instituto de Investigación Biosanitaria IBS, Granada, Spain
| | - Aurora Bueno-Cavanillas
- Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.,Instituto de Investigación Biosanitaria IBS, Granada, Spain.,CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Chen X, Heisser T, Cardoso R, Hoffmeister M, Brenner H. Overall and age-specific risk advancement periods of colorectal cancer for men vs women: Implications for gender-sensitive screening offers? Int J Cancer 2023. [PMID: 36727542 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.34455] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/24/2022] [Revised: 12/30/2022] [Accepted: 01/24/2023] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality are higher among men than among women. We aimed to estimate overall and age-specific risk advancement periods (RAPs) for men compared to women, which quantify how many years earlier comparable levels of risk are reached by men. RAPs were derived by Cox regression models among 331 224 participants aged 40 to 69 at baseline of the UK Biobank with no previous diagnosis of CRC and no previous CRC screening examination who were followed with respect to CRC incidence for up to 13 years. Men were at substantially higher risk of CRC than women in age groups 50 to 59 and 60 to 69, with RAPs (95% confidence intervals) as high as 8.7 (4.5-13.0) and 6.2 (4.5-7.9), respectively. These RAPs were higher than those for family history of CRC in these age groups. By contrast, no significant sex difference but a major impact of family history was seen in age group 40 to 49 (P-value for interaction between sex and age = .00079). The observed patterns suggest that consideration of gender-specific starting ages of screening might be warranted in countries in which screening offers start at ages above 50 years.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xuechen Chen
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Medical Faculty Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Thomas Heisser
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Medical Faculty Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Rafael Cardoso
- Medical Faculty Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
- Division of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) and National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Michael Hoffmeister
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Hermann Brenner
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Division of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) and National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Lieberman D. At What Age Should We Stop Colorectal Cancer Screening? When Is Enough, Enough? Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2023; 32:6-8. [PMID: 36620899 DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-22-1006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/28/2022] [Revised: 11/01/2022] [Accepted: 11/22/2022] [Indexed: 01/10/2023] Open
Abstract
There is strong evidence that colorectal cancer screening can reduce both colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. Guidelines recommend screening for individuals age 45 to 75 years, but are less certain about the benefits after age 75 years. Dalmat and colleagues provide evidence that individuals with a prior negative colonoscopy 10 years or more prior to reaching age 76 to 85 years, had a low risk of colorectal cancer, and would be less likely to benefit from further screening. It is important to note that this study population did not include individuals with a family history of colon cancer or a personal history of having high-risk adenomas. These data suggest that a negative colonoscopy can be an effective risk-stratification tool when discussing further screening with elderly patients. See related article by Dalmat et al., p. 37.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David Lieberman
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Oregon Health and Science University L461, Portland, Oregon
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Shanahan JJ, LeBlanc DM, Courage ER, Benesch MGK, Hickey KE, Hartwig KA, Armstrong CD, Engelbrecht R, Fagan MG, Borgaonkar MR, Pace DE. Characteristics of Interval Colorectal Cancer: A Canadian Retrospective Population-Level Analysis from Newfoundland and Labrador. Curr Oncol 2022; 29:9150-9162. [PMID: 36547130 PMCID: PMC9776431 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol29120716] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/29/2022] [Revised: 11/15/2022] [Accepted: 11/23/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Interval colorectal cancers (I-CRCs) arise during the interval time period between scheduled colonoscopies. Predicting which patients are at risk of I-CRCs remains an elusive undertaking, but evidence would suggest that most I-CRCs arise from lesions missed on index endoscopy. The procedural factors that lead to missed lesions are numerous and lack consensus in the literature. In Canada, the province of Newfoundland and Labrador has the highest incidence of CRCs. In this study our aim was to examine I-CRCs (3-60 months after last colonoscopy) in NL through a population-level analysis covering 67% of the province from 2001-2018. We estimated the I-CRC rate to be up to 9.3%. Median age of I-CRC diagnosis was 67.1 years with an interval time of 2.9 years. About 57% of these tumors occurred proximal to the splenic flexure, with 53% presenting as local disease. No temporal differences were observed in interval time or tumor distribution. On univariate and multivariable logistical regression, risk of right-sided I-CRC did not correlate to the index colonoscopy indication, bowel preparation quality, size of largest polyp removed, colonoscopy completion rate, or stage at presentation. Improvements in synoptic reporting utilization and national registries are needed to identity risk factors and reduce I-CRC frequency.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jessica J. Shanahan
- Discipline of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, NL A1B 3V6, Canada
| | - Danielle M. LeBlanc
- Discipline of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, NL A1B 3V6, Canada
| | - Emily R. Courage
- Discipline of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, NL A1B 3V6, Canada
| | - Matthew G. K. Benesch
- Discipline of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, NL A1B 3V6, Canada
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY 14263, USA
| | - Kala E. Hickey
- Discipline of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, NL A1B 3V6, Canada
| | - Katia A. Hartwig
- Discipline of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, NL A1B 3V6, Canada
| | - Casey D. Armstrong
- Discipline of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, NL A1B 3V6, Canada
| | - Reniel Engelbrecht
- Discipline of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, NL A1B 3V6, Canada
| | - Mitchell G. Fagan
- Discipline of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, NL A1B 3V6, Canada
| | - Mark R. Borgaonkar
- Discipline of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, NL A1B 3V6, Canada
| | - David E. Pace
- Discipline of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, NL A1B 3V6, Canada
- Correspondence:
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Sung JJY, Chiu HM, Lieberman D, Kuipers EJ, Rutter MD, Macrae F, Yeoh KG, Ang TL, Chong VH, John S, Li J, Wu K, Ng SSM, Makharia GK, Abdullah M, Kobayashi N, Sekiguchi M, Byeon JS, Kim HS, Parry S, Cabral-Prodigalidad PAI, Wu DC, Khomvilai S, Lui RN, Wong S, Lin YM, Dekker E. Third Asia-Pacific consensus recommendations on colorectal cancer screening and postpolypectomy surveillance. Gut 2022; 71:2152-2166. [PMID: 36002247 DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2022-327377] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/15/2022] [Accepted: 08/07/2022] [Indexed: 12/09/2022]
Abstract
The Asia-Pacific region has the largest number of cases of colorectal cancer (CRC) and one of the highest levels of mortality due to this condition in the world. Since the publishing of two consensus recommendations in 2008 and 2015, significant advancements have been made in our knowledge of epidemiology, pathology and the natural history of the adenoma-carcinoma progression. Based on the most updated epidemiological and clinical studies in this region, considering literature from international studies, and adopting the modified Delphi process, the Asia-Pacific Working Group on Colorectal Cancer Screening has updated and revised their recommendations on (1) screening methods and preferred strategies; (2) age for starting and terminating screening for CRC; (3) screening for individuals with a family history of CRC or advanced adenoma; (4) surveillance for those with adenomas; (5) screening and surveillance for sessile serrated lesions and (6) quality assurance of screening programmes. Thirteen countries/regions in the Asia-Pacific region were represented in this exercise. International advisors from North America and Europe were invited to participate.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Han-Mo Chiu
- Department of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.,Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | | | | | | | - Finlay Macrae
- The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | | | | | - Vui Heng Chong
- Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha Hospital, Brunei, Brunei Darussalam
| | - Sneha John
- Digestive Health, Endoscopy, Gold Coast University Hospital, Southport, Queensland, Australia
| | - Jingnan Li
- Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Kaichun Wu
- Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China
| | - Simon S M Ng
- The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| | | | - Murdani Abdullah
- Division of Gastroenterology, Pancreatibiliar and Digestive Endoscopy. Department of Internal Medicine, Hospital Dr Cipto Mangunkusumo, Jakarta, Indonesia.,Human Cancer Research Center. IMERI. Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia
| | - Nozomu Kobayashi
- Cancer Screening Center/ Endoscopy Division, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.,Division of Screening Technology, National Cancer Center Institute for Cancer Control, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Masau Sekiguchi
- Cancer Screening Center/ Endoscopy Division, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.,Division of Screening Technology, National Cancer Center Institute for Cancer Control, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Jeong-Sik Byeon
- University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea (the Republic of)
| | - Hyun-Soo Kim
- Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea (the Republic of)
| | - Susan Parry
- National Bowel Screening Programme, New Zealand Ministry of Health, Auckland, New Zealand.,The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| | | | | | | | - Rashid N Lui
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Prince of Wales Hospital, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong.,Institute of Digestive Disease, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| | - Sunny Wong
- Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Singapore
| | - Yu-Min Lin
- Shin Kong Wu Ho Su Memorial Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - E Dekker
- Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Maes‐Carballo M, García‐García M, Gómez‐Fandiño Y, Estrada‐López CR, Iglesias‐Álvarez A, Bueno‐Cavanillas A, Khan KS. Systematic review of shared decision-making in guidelines about colorectal cancer screening. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 2022; 31:e13738. [PMID: 36254840 PMCID: PMC9786598 DOI: 10.1111/ecc.13738] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/16/2022] [Revised: 09/15/2022] [Accepted: 09/27/2022] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION We aimed to systematically evaluate quality of shared decision-making (SDM) in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and consensus statements (CSs). METHODS Search for CRC screening guidances was from 2010 to November 2021 in EMBASE, Web of Science, MEDLINE, Scopus and CDSR, and the World Wide Web. Three independent reviewers and an arbitrator rated the quality of each guidance using a SDM quality assessment tool (maximum score: 31). Reviewer agreement was 0.88. RESULTS SDM appeared in 41/83 (49.4%) CPGs and 9/19 (47.4%) CSs. None met all the quality criteria, and 51.0% (52/102) failed to meet any quality items. Overall compliance was low (mean 1.63, IQR 0-2). Quality was better in guidances published after 2015 (mean 1, IQR 0-3 vs. mean 0.5, IQR 0-1.5; p = 0.048) and when the term SDM was specifically reported (mean 4.5, IQR 2.5-4.5 vs. mean 0.5, IQR 0-1.5; p < 0.001). CPGs underpinned by systematic reviews showed better SDM quality than consensus (mean 1, IQR 0-3 vs. mean 0, IQR 0-2, p = 0.040). CONCLUSION SDM quality was suboptimal and mentioned in less than half of the guidances, and recommendations were scarce. Guideline developers should incorporate evidence-based SDM recommendations in guidances to underpin the translation of evidence into practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marta Maes‐Carballo
- Department of General Surgery, Breast Cancer UnitComplexo Hospitalario de OurenseOurenseSpain,Department of General SurgeryHospital Público de VerínOurenseSpain,Department of Preventive Medicine and Public HealthUniversity of GranadaGranadaSpain
| | - Manuel García‐García
- Department of General Surgery, Breast Cancer UnitComplexo Hospitalario de OurenseOurenseSpain
| | - Yolanda Gómez‐Fandiño
- Department of General Surgery, Breast Cancer UnitComplexo Hospitalario de OurenseOurenseSpain
| | | | - Andrés Iglesias‐Álvarez
- Department of General SurgeryUniversity of Santiago de CompostelaSantiago de CompostelaSpain
| | - Aurora Bueno‐Cavanillas
- Department of Preventive Medicine and Public HealthUniversity of GranadaGranadaSpain,Instituto de Investigación Biosanitaria IBSGranadaSpain,CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP)MadridSpain
| | - Khalid Saeed Khan
- Department of Preventive Medicine and Public HealthUniversity of GranadaGranadaSpain,Instituto de Investigación Biosanitaria IBSGranadaSpain
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Association between A Family History of Colorectal Cancer and the Risk of Colorectal Cancer: A Nationwide Population-Based Study. J Pers Med 2022; 12:jpm12101566. [PMID: 36294706 PMCID: PMC9605451 DOI: 10.3390/jpm12101566] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/14/2022] [Revised: 09/15/2022] [Accepted: 09/19/2022] [Indexed: 12/09/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
22
|
Zheng G, Sundquist J, Sundquist K, Ji J. Colorectal cancer risk in association with colorectal cancer as a second malignancy in relatives: a nationwide cohort study. BMC Cancer 2022; 22:902. [PMID: 35982395 PMCID: PMC9389686 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-022-10000-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/21/2022] [Accepted: 08/10/2022] [Indexed: 01/22/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Increasing number of individuals will have first-degree relatives (FDRs) diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC), as a second primary malignancy (CRCa-2) after a non-CRC cancer. We aimed to estimate whether and to what extent a family history of CRCa-2 is associated with an increased CRC risk. Methods In this Swedish nationwide cohort study, rate ratio (RR) and cumulative incidence of CRC were estimated among 172,531 individuals with a family history of CRC as a first primary malignancy (CRCa-1) and 17,830 with a family history of CRCa-2, respectively, using individuals without cancer family history as the reference group. Results A cumulative incidence of CRC by age 80 was 6.3 and 5.6% for individuals with a parental and a sibling family history of CRCa-2, respectively. RRs of CRC for one FDR diagnosed with CRCa-1 and CRCa-2 were respectively 1.72 (95% CI, 1.65–1.79) and 1.50 (1.32–1.70); the latter RR was lower than the former (P = 0.0356), but no difference was observed after adjusting age of diagnosis of CRC in FDR and family relationship (P = 0.6898). Increased RRs were found to be associated with a CRCa-2 diagnosis in FDR that occured after cancers in upper aerodigestive tract, breast, prostate, kidney and nervous system. Conclusions Individuals who have relatives with CRCa-2 have an increased risk of CRC, but the magnitude is lower than those having relatives with CRCa-1, which is related to different ages of diagnosis of CRC in FDR and family relationships. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-10000-z.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Guoqiao Zheng
- Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University/Region Skåne, Jan Waldenströms gata 35, 205 02, Malmö, Sweden.
| | - Jan Sundquist
- Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University/Region Skåne, Jan Waldenströms gata 35, 205 02, Malmö, Sweden.,Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, USA.,Center for Community-based Healthcare Research and Education (CoHRE), Department of Functional Pathology, School of Medicine, Shimane University, Matsue, Japan
| | - Kristina Sundquist
- Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University/Region Skåne, Jan Waldenströms gata 35, 205 02, Malmö, Sweden.,Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, USA.,Center for Community-based Healthcare Research and Education (CoHRE), Department of Functional Pathology, School of Medicine, Shimane University, Matsue, Japan
| | - Jianguang Ji
- Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University/Region Skåne, Jan Waldenströms gata 35, 205 02, Malmö, Sweden.
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Paszat L, Sutradhar R, Luo J, Tinmouth J, Rabeneck L, Baxter NN. Uptake and Short-term Outcomes of High-risk Screening Colonoscopy Billing Codes: A Population-based Study Among Young Adults. J Can Assoc Gastroenterol 2022; 5:86-95. [PMID: 35368324 PMCID: PMC8972288 DOI: 10.1093/jcag/gwab014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/15/2021] [Accepted: 05/14/2021] [Indexed: 01/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Persons suspected or confirmed with familial colorectal cancer syndrome are recommended to have biennial colonoscopy from late adolescence or early adulthood. Persons without a syndrome but with one or more affected first-degree relatives are recommended to begin colonoscopy 10 years before the age at diagnosis of the youngest affected relative, and every 5 to 10 years. Ontario introduced colonoscopy billing codes for these two indications in 2011. Methods We identified persons in Ontario under 50 years of age, without a prior history of colorectal cancer or inflammatory bowel disease, with one or more of these billing claims between 2013 and 2017. We described the index colonoscopy, and subsequent colonoscopy up-to-date status. We computed average annual rates of colorectal and other cancer diagnoses, and displayed mean cumulative function plots, stratified by billing code, age and sex. Results Billing claims for ‘familial syndrome’ high-risk screening colonoscopy were identified among 14,846 persons; the average annual rate of CRC diagnoses was 38.6 per 100,000 among males and 22.2 among females. Colonoscopy up-to-date status fell to 50% within 7 years. Billing claims for ‘first-degree relative’ screening colonoscopy was identified among 49,505 persons; average annual rates of CRC diagnoses were 16.3 among males and 13.5 per 100,000 among females, respectively. Conclusion Colorectal cancer was more frequent following billing claims for high-risk screening colonoscopy for familial syndromes, as were noncolorectal malignancies potentially associated with these syndromes. This billing claim for familial colorectal cancer syndrome colonoscopy appears to identify a group at elevated short-term risk for cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lawrence Paszat
- Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Rinku Sutradhar
- Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Jin Luo
- Cancer Research Programme, Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Jill Tinmouth
- Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Linda Rabeneck
- Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Nancy N Baxter
- School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Mangas-Sanjuan C, Jover R. Familial colorectal cancer. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2022; 58-59:101798. [PMID: 35988967 DOI: 10.1016/j.bpg.2022.101798] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/15/2021] [Revised: 02/01/2022] [Accepted: 03/08/2022] [Indexed: 01/31/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carolina Mangas-Sanjuan
- Servicio de Medicina Digestiva, Hospital General Universitario de Alicante, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica ISABIAL, Universidad Miguel Hernández, Alicante, Spain
| | - Rodrigo Jover
- Servicio de Medicina Digestiva, Hospital General Universitario de Alicante, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica ISABIAL, Universidad Miguel Hernández, Alicante, Spain.
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Burke CA, Lieberman D, Feuerstein JD. AGA Clinical Practice Update on Approach to the Use of Noninvasive Colorectal Cancer Screening Options: Commentary. Gastroenterology 2022; 162:952-956. [PMID: 35094786 DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2021.09.075] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/09/2021] [Revised: 09/17/2021] [Accepted: 09/22/2021] [Indexed: 12/09/2022]
Abstract
The purpose of this American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute Clinical Practice Update Commentary is to review the available evidence and provide expert advice regarding the approach to using noninvasive colorectal cancer (CRC) screening options, including evidence for their effectiveness, selection of individuals for whom these tests are appropriate, implications of a positive non-colonoscopy screening test, and opportunities to enhance the quality of noninvasive CRC screening programs. This Clinical Practice Update was commissioned and approved by the AGA Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee 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 Clinical Practice Updates Committee and external peer review through standard procedures of Gastroenterology. This expert commentary reflects recently published studies in this field, as well as the experiences of the authors who are gastroenterologists with high-level expertise in CRC screening and prevention.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Joseph D Feuerstein
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Duong A, Pohl H, Djinbachian R, Deshêtres A, Barkun AN, Marques PN, Bouin M, Deslandres E, Aguilera-Fish A, Leduc R, von Renteln D. Evaluation of the polyp-based resect and discard strategy: a retrospective study. Endoscopy 2022; 54:128-135. [PMID: 33561880 DOI: 10.1055/a-1386-7434] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Standard colonoscopy practice requires removal and histological characterization of almost all detected small (< 10 mm) and diminutive (≤ 5 mm) colorectal polyps. This study aimed to test a simplified polyp-based resect and discard (PBRD) strategy that assigns surveillance intervals based only on size and number of small/diminutive polyps, without the need for pathology examination. METHODS A post hoc analysis was performed on patients enrolled in a prospective study. The primary outcome was surveillance interval agreement of the PBRD strategy with pathology-based management according to 2020 US Multi-Society Task Force guidelines. Chart analysis also evaluated clinician adherence to pathology-based recommendations. One-sided testing was performed with a null-hypothesis of 90 % agreement with pathology-based surveillance intervals and a two-sided 96.7 % confidence interval (CI) using correction for multiple testing. RESULTS 452 patients were included in the study. Surveillance intervals assigned using the PBRD strategy were correct in 97.8 % (96.7 %CI 96.3-99.3 %) of patients compared with pathology-based management. The PBRD strategy reduced pathology examinations by 58.7 % while providing 87.8 % of patients with immediate surveillance interval recommendations on the day of colonoscopy, compared with 47.1 % when using pathology-based management. Chart analysis of surveillance interval assignments showed 63.3 % adherence to pathology-based guidelines. CONCLUSION The PBRD strategy surpassed the 90 % agreement with the pathology-based standard for determining surveillance interval, reduced the need for pathology examinations, and increased the proportion of patients receiving immediate surveillance interval recommendations. The PBRD strategy does not require expertise in optical diagnosis and may replace histological characterization of small and diminutive colorectal polyps.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Antoine Duong
- Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.,University of Montreal Hospital Research Center (CRCHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Heiko Pohl
- Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, White River Junction, Vermont, United States.,Dartmouth Geisel School of Medicine and The Dartmouth Institute, Hanover, New Hampshire, United States
| | - Roupen Djinbachian
- University of Montreal Hospital Research Center (CRCHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada.,Division of Internal Medicine, University of Montreal Hospital Center (CHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Annie Deshêtres
- University of Montreal Hospital Research Center (CRCHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada.,Division of Internal Medicine, University of Montreal Hospital Center (CHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Alan N Barkun
- Division of Gastroenterology, McGill University Health Center, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Paola N Marques
- Faculty of Medicine, Bahia State University, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil
| | - Mickael Bouin
- University of Montreal Hospital Research Center (CRCHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada.,Division of Gastroenterology, University of Montreal Hospital Center (CHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Eric Deslandres
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of Montreal Hospital Center (CHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Andres Aguilera-Fish
- Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, White River Junction, Vermont, United States.,Dartmouth Geisel School of Medicine and The Dartmouth Institute, Hanover, New Hampshire, United States
| | - Raymond Leduc
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of Montreal Hospital Center (CHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Daniel von Renteln
- University of Montreal Hospital Research Center (CRCHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada.,Division of Gastroenterology, University of Montreal Hospital Center (CHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Paszat L, Sutradhar R, Luo J, Rabeneck L, Tinmouth J, Baxter NN. Overall Health Care Cost During the Year Following Diagnosis of Colorectal Cancer Stratified by History of Colorectal Evaluative Procedures. J Can Assoc Gastroenterol 2021; 4:274-283. [PMID: 34877466 PMCID: PMC8643617 DOI: 10.1093/jcag/gwab001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/05/2020] [Accepted: 02/01/2021] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The cost-effectiveness of colorectal screening has been modeled; however, the cost of health care following the diagnosis of colorectal cancer has not been described stratified by history of colorectal evaluative procedures. Methods We identified persons with first diagnosis of colorectal cancer between 2015 and 2017 from the Ontario Cancer Registry, and categorized them by history of colorectal evaluative procedures during Period 1 (the 10 years before the 6-month prediagnostic interval) with or without procedures during Period 2 (the 6 month prediagnostic interval), versus only during Period 2, versus none. We extracted overall health care cost 1 year following diagnosis from population-wide administrative databases. Results Among cases diagnosed at 52 to 74 years, overall health care cost among those with no colorectal evaluative procedures on or before the date of diagnosis is $71,039.65 (SD $51,825.18), compared to $48,406.15 (SD $38,843.64) among those who received colorectal evaluative procedures during Period 1, with or without procedures during Period 2. Among the population aged 20 to 74 years at diagnosis, cases with ≥1 screening colonoscopies for hereditary CRC syndrome, the mean overall initial cost was between $32,300.32 (SD) and $33,084.67 (SD $39,905.77), and those with ≥1 screening colonoscopies because of a first-degree relative with CRC, was between $36,344.71 (SD $35,539.85) and $45,456.41 (SD $49,818.59). Conclusions Overall health care cost is lower among cases who received colorectal evaluative procedures during Period 1, with or without procedures during Period 2, and among those with screening colonoscopy for hereditary CRC syndromes or affected first-degree relatives.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lawrence Paszat
- Institute for Healthcare Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Rinku Sutradhar
- Institute for Healthcare Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Jin Luo
- Cancer Research Program, ICES, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Linda Rabeneck
- Institute for Healthcare Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Jill Tinmouth
- Institute for Healthcare Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Nancy N Baxter
- Institute for Healthcare Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Epidemiological factors associated with colorectal cancer in north-east India: A hospital-based descriptive cross-sectional study. JOURNAL OF SURGERY AND MEDICINE 2021. [DOI: 10.28982/josam.911871] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
|
29
|
Tian Y, Kharazmi E, Brenner H, Xu X, Sundquist K, Sundquist J, Fallah M. Importance of Family History of Colorectal Carcinoma In Situ Versus Invasive Colorectal Cancer: A Nationwide Cohort Study. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2021; 19:1252-1257. [PMID: 34517339 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2021.7004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/24/2020] [Accepted: 01/07/2021] [Indexed: 01/21/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to explore the risk of invasive colorectal cancer (CRC) in relatives of patients with colorectal carcinoma in situ (CCIS), which is lacking in the literature. PATIENTS AND METHODS We collected data from Swedish family-cancer datasets and calculated standardized incidence ratio (SIR) and cumulative risk of CRC in family histories of CCIS in first- and second-degree relatives. Family history was defined as a dynamic (time-dependent) variable allowing for changes during the follow-up period from 1958 to 2015. Of 12,829,251 individuals with available genealogical data, 173,796 were diagnosed with CRC and 40,558 with CCIS. RESULTS The lifetime (0-79 years) cumulative risk of CRC in first-degree relatives of patients with CCIS was 6.5%, which represents a 1.6-fold (95% CI, 1.5-1.7; n=752) increased risk. A similarly increased lifetime cumulative risk (6.7%) was found among first-degree relatives of patients with CRC (SIR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.6-1.7; n=6,965). An increased risk of CRC was also found in half-siblings of patients with CCIS (SIR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.1-3.0; n=18) and also in half-siblings of patients with CRC (SIR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.3-2.1; n=78). Moreover, the increased risk of CRC was higher for younger age at diagnosis of CCIS in the affected first-degree relative and for younger age at diagnosis of CRC in the index person. CONCLUSIONS Results of this study show that first-degree relatives and half-siblings of patients with CCIS have an increased risk of CRC, which is comparable in magnitude to the risk of those with a family history of invasive CRC. These findings extend available evidence on familial risk of CRC and may help to refine guidelines and recommendations for CRC screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yu Tian
- 1Division of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), and National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), and.,2Medical Faculty Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.,3School of Public Health, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| | - Elham Kharazmi
- 1Division of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), and National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), and.,4Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden.,5Statistical Genetics Group, Institute of Medical Biometry and Informatics, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Hermann Brenner
- 1Division of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), and National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), and.,6Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.,7German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Xing Xu
- 1Division of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), and National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), and.,2Medical Faculty Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Kristina Sundquist
- 4Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden.,8Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York.,9Center for Community-based Healthcare Research and Education, Department of Functional Pathology, School of Medicine, Shimane University, Japan; and
| | - Jan Sundquist
- 4Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden.,8Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York.,9Center for Community-based Healthcare Research and Education, Department of Functional Pathology, School of Medicine, Shimane University, Japan; and
| | - Mahdi Fallah
- 1Division of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), and National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), and.,4Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden.,10Department of Global Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, University of Bergen, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Han J, Tao M, Wu X, Li D, Ma Y, Dawood S, Steele CW, Tan KK, Wang Q. Reporting quality of practice guidelines on colorectal cancer: evaluation using the RIGHT reporting checklist. ANNALS OF TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE 2021; 9:1175. [PMID: 34430616 PMCID: PMC8350680 DOI: 10.21037/atm-21-2798] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/16/2021] [Accepted: 07/02/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
Background Clinical practice guidelines are an essential tool for translating evidence into practice. Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT) checklist assists to guide the reporting in guidelines. We used RIGHT to assess the reporting completeness and quality of guidelines on colorectal cancer (CRC). Methods We searched the electronic databases Medline (via PubMed), Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang and Chinese Biomedical Literature (CBM) from January 1st, 2018 to December 1st, 2020 for guidelines on CRC. Websites of guideline development organizations were also searched. Two investigators assessed the reporting quality of the included guidelines, and calculated the numbers of guidelines that were compliant with each RIGHT checklist item and the mean proportions of reported items for each of the seven RIGHT checklist domains. Results Twenty-seven colorectal guidelines were included. The proportions of reported items in each RIGHT domain were 71.0% for Basic information, 66.2% for Background, 45.9% for Evidence, 68.8% for Recommendations, 24.1% for Review and quality assurance, 33.3% for Funding and declaration and management of interests, and 40.7% for Other information. Conclusions The reporting quality of colorectal guidelines was moderate. A systematic use of the RIGHT checklist during the development process could improve the reporting quality of guidelines in the future.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jing Han
- Department of Internal Medicine, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan Cancer Hospital, Zhengzhou, China
| | - Meng Tao
- Department of General Surgery, Huaihe Hospital of Henan University, Kaifeng, China
| | - Xuan Wu
- Department of Internal Medicine, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan Cancer Hospital, Zhengzhou, China
| | - Ding Li
- Department of Pharmacy, Henan Cancer Hospital Affiliated to Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China
| | - Yanfang Ma
- School of Chinese Medicine of Hong Kong Baptist University, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong, China
| | - Shaheenah Dawood
- Department of Medical Oncology, Mediclinic City Hospital - North Wing, Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai Health Care City, Dubai, United Arab Emirates
| | - Colin W Steele
- University Department of Surgery, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, UK
| | - Ker-Kan Tan
- Division of Colorectal Surgery, University Surgical Cluster, National University Health System, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Qiming Wang
- Department of Internal Medicine, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan Cancer Hospital, Zhengzhou, China
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Del Vecchio Blanco G, Dwairi R, Giannelli M, Palmieri G, Formica V, Portarena I, Grasso E, Di Iorio L, Benassi M, Giudice EA, Nardecchia A, Rossi P, Roselli M, Sica G, Monteleone G, Paoluzi OA. Clinical care pathway program versus open-access system: a study on appropriateness, quality, and efficiency in the delivery of colonoscopy in the colorectal cancer. Intern Emerg Med 2021; 16:1197-1206. [PMID: 33555540 PMCID: PMC8310505 DOI: 10.1007/s11739-020-02565-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/24/2020] [Accepted: 11/06/2020] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
Open-access colonoscopy (OAC), whereby the colonoscopy is performed without a prior office visit with a gastroenterologist, is affected by inappropriateness which leads to overprescription and reduced availability of the procedure in case of alarming symptoms. The clinical care pathway (CCP) is a healthcare management tool promoted by national health systems to organize work-up of various morbidities. Recently, we started a CCP dedicated to colorectal cancer (CRC), including a colonoscopy session for CRC diagnosis and prevention. We aimed to evaluate the appropriateness, the quality, and the efficiency in the delivery of colonoscopy with the open-access system and a CCP program in the CRC. Quality indicators for colonoscopy in subjects in the CCP were compared to referrals by general practitioners (OAC) or by non-gastroenterologist physicians (non-gastroenterologist physician colonoscopy, NGPC). Attendance rate to colonoscopy was greater in the CCP group and NGPC group than in the OAC group (99%, 99%, and 86%, respectively). Waiting time in the CCP group was shorter than in the OAC group (3.88 ± 2.27 vs. 32 ± 22.31 weeks, respectively). Appropriateness of colonoscopy prescription was better in the CCP group than in the OAC group (92 vs. 50%, respectively). OAC is affected by the lack of timeliness and low appropriateness of prescription. A CCP reduces the number of inappropriate colonoscopies, especially for post-polypectomy surveillance, and improves the delivery of colonoscopy in patients requiring a fast-track examination. The high rate of inappropriate OAC suggests that this modality of healthcare should be widely reviewed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Rami Dwairi
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Mutah, Karak, Jordan
| | - Mario Giannelli
- Department of Systems Medicine, Gastroenterology Unit, University of Rome "Tor Vergata", Rome, Italy
| | - Giampiero Palmieri
- Department of Biomedicine and Prevention, Anatomic Pathology Unit, University "Tor Vergata", Rome, Italy
| | - Vincenzo Formica
- Department of Oncohematology, Oncology Unit, University Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy
| | - Ilaria Portarena
- Department of Oncohematology, Oncology Unit, University Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy
| | - Enrico Grasso
- Department of Systems Medicine, Gastroenterology Unit, University of Rome "Tor Vergata", Rome, Italy
| | - Laura Di Iorio
- Department of Systems Medicine, Gastroenterology Unit, University of Rome "Tor Vergata", Rome, Italy
| | - Michela Benassi
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Interventional Radiology and Radiotherapy, University "Tor Vergata", Rome, Italy
| | - Emilia Anna Giudice
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Interventional Radiology and Radiotherapy, University "Tor Vergata", Rome, Italy
| | - Antonella Nardecchia
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Interventional Radiology and Radiotherapy, University "Tor Vergata", Rome, Italy
| | - Piero Rossi
- Department of Surgery, University Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy
| | - Mario Roselli
- Department of Oncohematology, Oncology Unit, University Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Sica
- Department of Surgery, University Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy
| | - Giovanni Monteleone
- Department of Systems Medicine, Gastroenterology Unit, University of Rome "Tor Vergata", Rome, Italy
| | - Omero Alessandro Paoluzi
- Department of Systems Medicine, Gastroenterology Unit, University of Rome "Tor Vergata", Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Variation in the risk of colorectal cancer in families with Lynch syndrome: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol 2021; 22:1014-1022. [PMID: 34111421 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(21)00189-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 54] [Impact Index Per Article: 18.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/19/2021] [Revised: 03/26/2021] [Accepted: 03/26/2021] [Indexed: 01/13/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Existing clinical practice guidelines for carriers of pathogenic variants of DNA mismatch repair genes (Lynch syndrome) are based on the mean age-specific cumulative risk (penetrance) of colorectal cancer for all carriers of pathogenic variants in the same gene. We aimed to estimate the variation in the penetrance of colorectal cancer between carriers of pathogenic variants in the same gene by sex and continent of residence. METHODS In this retrospective cohort study, we sourced data from the International Mismatch Repair Consortium, which comprises 273 members from 122 research centres or clinics in 32 countries from six continents who are involved in Lynch syndrome research. Families with at least three members and at least one confirmed carrier of a pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant in a DNA mismatch repair gene (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, or PMS2) were included. The families of probands with known de-novo pathogenic variants were excluded. Data were collected on the method of ascertainment of the family, sex, carrier status, cancer diagnoses, and ages at the time of pedigree collection and at last contact or death. We used a segregation analysis conditioned on ascertainment to estimate the mean penetrance of colorectal cancer and modelled unmeasured polygenic factors to estimate the variation in penetrance. The existence of unknown familial risk factors modifying colorectal cancer risk for Lynch syndrome carriers was tested by use of a Wald p value for the null hypothesis that the polygenic SD is zero. FINDINGS 5585 families with Lynch syndrome from 22 countries were eligible for the analysis. Of these, there were insufficient numbers to estimate penetrance for Asia and South America, and for those with EPCAM variants. Therefore, we used data (collected between July 11, 2014, and Dec 31, 2018) from 5255 families (1829 MLH1, 2179 MSH2, 798 MSH6, and 449 PMS2), comprising 79 809 relatives, recruited in 15 countries in North America, Europe, and Australasia. There was strong evidence of the existence of unknown familial risk factors modifying colorectal cancer risk for Lynch syndrome carriers (p<0·0001 for each of the three three continents). These familial risk factors resulted in a wide within-gene variation in the risk of colorectal cancer for men and women from each continent who all carried pathogenic variants in the same gene or the MSH2 c.942+3A>T variant. The variation was especially prominent for MLH1 and MSH2 variant carriers, depending on gene, sex and continent, with 7-56% of carriers having a colorectal cancer penetrance of less than 20%, 9-44% having a penetrance of more than 80%, and only 10-19% having a penetrance of 40-60%. INTERPRETATION Our study findings highlight the important role of risk modifiers, which could lead to personalised risk assessments for precision prevention and early detection of colorectal cancer for people with Lynch syndrome. FUNDING National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia.
Collapse
|
33
|
Smith RA, Fedewa S, Siegel R. Early colorectal cancer detection-Current and evolving challenges in evidence, guidelines, policy, and practices. Adv Cancer Res 2021; 151:69-107. [PMID: 34148621 DOI: 10.1016/bs.acr.2021.03.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
The understanding at the beginning of the last century that colorectal cancer began as a localized disease that progressed and became systemic, and that most colorectal cancer arose from adenomatous polyps gave rise to aggressive attempts at curative treatment and eventually attempts to detect advanced lesions before they progressed to invasive disease. In the last four decades, steadily greater uptake of screening has led to reductions in colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. However, the fullest potential of screening is not being met due to the lack of organized screening, where a systems approach could lead to higher rates of screening of average and high risk groups, higher quality screening, and prompt followup of adults with positive screening tests. ABSTRACT: Since the beginning of the 20th century, there has been a general understanding that colorectal cancer is a clonal disease that progresses from a localized stage with a favorable prognosis through progressively more advanced stages which have progressively worse prognosis. That understanding led first to determined efforts to detect and treat early stage symptomatic disease, and then to detect pre-symptomatic colorectal cancer and precursor lesions, where there was hope that the natural history of the disease could be arrested and the incidence and premature mortality of colorectal cancer averted. Toward the end of the last century, guidelines for colorectal cancer screening, growth in the number of technical options for screening, and a steady increase in the proportion of the adult population who attended screening contributed to the beginning of a significant decline in colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. Despite this progress, colorectal cancer remains the third leading cause of death among men and women in the United States. Screening for early detection of precursor lesions and localized cancer offers the single most productive opportunity to further reduce the burden of disease, and yet nearly four in five deaths from colorectal cancer are associated with having never been screened, not recently screened, or not followed up for an abnormal screening test. This simple observation is a call to action in all communities to apply existing knowledge to fulfill the potential to prevent avertable incidence and mortality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert A Smith
- Cancer Prevention and Early Detection Department, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA, United States.
| | - Stacey Fedewa
- Screening and Risk Factors Research, Surveillance and Health Equity Science Department, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA, United States
| | - Rebecca Siegel
- Surveillance Research, Surveillance and Health Equity Science Department, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Miller DR, Averbukh L, Virk G, Jafri M, Tadros M. The Value of Family History in Colorectal Screening Decisions for Oldest Old Geriatric Populations. Cureus 2021; 13:e12815. [PMID: 33628681 PMCID: PMC7894966 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.12815] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common form of cancer affecting both men and women. Extensive screening guidelines have been developed to help reduce the incidence of disease. Currently, United States Preventative Service Task Force guidelines recommend against routine screening in those 85 years and older. However, octogenarians and nonagenarians continue to be screened for CRC with no consensus on indications. The aim of this study is to examine family history of CRC as a risk factor and clinical indication for providing screening colonoscopies to the “oldest old” geriatric population, defined as aged 80 years and above. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of a Veterans’ Health Administration database to identify male veterans aged 80 years and older who underwent screening colonoscopy. Subsequently, we examined those who tested positive for CRC with a family history of CRC. Results: Of the 458,224 patients who are 80 years and older in the Veterans Affairs (VA) database, 17.8% underwent a screening colonoscopy; 11.42% of these individuals were further diagnosed with CRC; and 8.89% of those with diagnosed CRC had a documented family history of CRC. Conclusion: Family history should not be used as an inclusionary criterion for CRC screening in the 80 years and above age group as the rate of CRC in these patients with a family history of CRC is significantly lower than that in the younger age groups with a family history of CRC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Leon Averbukh
- Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, USA
| | - Gurjiwan Virk
- Gastroenterology, Albany Medical Center, Albany, USA
| | - Mikram Jafri
- Internal Medicine, Albany Veterans Affairs Stratton Medical Center, Albany, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
35
|
Carroll JC, Permaul JA, Semotiuk K, Yung EM, Blaine S, Dicks E, Warner E, Rothenmund H, Esplen MJ, Moineddin R, McLaughlin J. Hereditary colorectal cancer screening: A 10-year longitudinal cohort study following an educational intervention. Prev Med Rep 2020; 20:101189. [PMID: 33117641 PMCID: PMC7581973 DOI: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2020.101189] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/13/2020] [Revised: 07/23/2020] [Accepted: 08/23/2020] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Family history (FH) of a first-degree relative with colorectal cancer (CRC) is associated with two to fourfold increased risk, yet screening uptake is suboptimal despite proven mortality reduction. We developed a FH-based CRC Risk Triage/Management tool for family physicians (FPs), and educational booklet for patients with CRC FH. This report describes physician referral and patient screening behavior 5 and 10 years post-educational intervention, and factors associated with screening. Longitudinal cohort study. FPs/patients in Ontario and Newfoundland, Canada were sent questionnaires at baseline (2005), 5 and 10 years (2015) following tool/booklet receipt. FPs were asked about CRC screening, patients about FH, screening type and timing. "Correct" screening was concordance with tool recommendations. Results reported for 29/121 (24%) FPs and 98/297 (33%) patients who completed all 3 questionnaires. Over 10 years 2/3 patients received the correct CRC screening test at appropriate timing (baseline 75%, 5-year 62%, 10-year 65%). About half reported their FP recommended CRC screening (5-year 51%, 10-year 63%). Fewer than half the patients correctly assessed their CRC risk (44%, 40%, 41%). Patients were less likely to have correct screening timing if female (RR 0.78; 95% CI 0.61, 0.99; p = 0.045). Patients were less likely to have both correct test and timing if moderate/high CRC risk (RR 0.66; 95% CI 0.47, 0.93; p = 0.017) and more likely if their physician recommended screening (RR1.69; 95% CI 1.15, 2.49; p = 0.007). Physician discussion of CRC risk and screening can positively impact patient screening behavior. Efforts are particularly needed for women and patients at moderate/high CRC risk.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- June C. Carroll
- Ray D. Wolfe Department of Family Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Joanne A. Permaul
- Ray D. Wolfe Department of Family Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Kara Semotiuk
- Zane Cohen Centre for Digestive Diseases, Mount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Eric M. Yung
- Department of Anesthesia, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Sean Blaine
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Elizabeth Dicks
- Craig L. Dobbin Centre for Genetics Research, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, Newfoundland, Canada
| | - Ellen Warner
- Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - Mary Jane Esplen
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Rahim Moineddin
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - John McLaughlin
- Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Moosavi S, Gentile L, Gondara L, Mcgahan C, Enns RA, Telford J. Performance of the Fecal Immunochemical Test in Patients With a Family History of Colorectal Cancer. J Can Assoc Gastroenterol 2020; 3:288-292. [PMID: 33241182 PMCID: PMC7678728 DOI: 10.1093/jcag/gwz027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective To assess the performance of a fecal immunochemical test (FIT) among participants of a population-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program with one or more first-degree relatives (FDR) with CRC. Methods Asymptomatic 50 to 74 years olds with a FDR diagnosed with CRC, enrolled in a colon screening program completed FIT (two samples, cut-off 20 µg Hemoglobin/gram feces) and underwent colonoscopy. FIT-interval CRCs were identified from the British Columbia cancer registry. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify variables associated with the detection of CRC and high-risk polyps (nonmalignant findings that required a 3-year surveillance colonoscopy) in those patients undergoing FIT and colonoscopy. Results Of the 1387 participants with a FDR with CRC, 1244 completed FIT with a positivity rate of 10.8%, 52 declined FIT but underwent colonoscopy and 90 declined screening. Seven CRCs were identified: six in patients with a positive FIT, one in a patient who only had colonoscopy. No CRCs were found in patients with a negative FIT. The positive and negative predictive values of FIT in the detection of CRC were 4.8% and 100%, respectively. On multivariate logistic regression, positive FIT, and not type of family history, was the only variable associated with detection of CRC or high-risk polyps. At 2-year follow-up, there was no FIT interval cancer detected in the study cohort. Conclusion FIT is more strongly associated with high-risk findings on colonoscopy than type of family history. FIT may be an alternative screening strategy to colonoscopy in individuals with a single FDR with CRC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarvee Moosavi
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Laura Gentile
- British Columbia Cancer, Colon Cancer Screening Program
| | | | | | - Robert Alan Enns
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Jennifer Telford
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.,British Columbia Cancer, Colon Cancer Screening Program
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Interval Cancer Rate and Diagnostic Performance of Fecal Immunochemical Test According to Family History of Colorectal Cancer. J Clin Med 2020; 9:jcm9103302. [PMID: 33066629 PMCID: PMC7602405 DOI: 10.3390/jcm9103302] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/29/2020] [Revised: 10/07/2020] [Accepted: 10/13/2020] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: The potential role of the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) in individuals with a family history of colorectal cancer (CRC) remains unclear. We assessed interval cancer rate (ICR) after the FIT and FIT diagnostic performance according to family history of CRC. Methods: Using the Korean National Cancer Screening Program Database, we collected data on subjects who underwent the FIT between 2009 and 2011. The interval cancer rate (ICR) was defined as the number of subjects diagnosed with CRC within 1 year after the FIT per 1000 subjects with negative FIT results. Results: Of 5,643,438 subjects, 224,178 (3.97%) had a family history of CRC. FIT positivity rate (6.4% vs. 5.9%; adjusted relative risk (aRR) 1.11; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09–1.13) and ICR (1.4 vs. 1.1; aRR 1.43 (95% CI 1.27–1.60)) were higher in these subjects than in those with no such history. These results were the same regardless of whether subjects had undergone colonoscopy within the last 5 years before the FIT. However, the diagnostic performance of the FIT for CRC, as measured using the area under the operating characteristic curve, was similar between subjects without a family history and those with one (85.5% and 84.6%, respectively; p = 0.259). Conclusion: the FIT was 1.4 times more likely to miss CRC in subjects with a family history than in those without (aRR 1.43 for ICR), although its diagnostic performance was similar between the two groups. Our results suggest that for individuals with a family history of CRC, colonoscopy should be preferred over FIT for both screening and surveillance.
Collapse
|
38
|
Weigl K, Tikk K, Hoffmeister M, Hampe J, Igel S, Kolligs F, Klug SJ, Mansmann U, Müller O, Nagel JM, Pichler M, Schwab M, Schweigler D, Stephan AM, De Toni EN, Brenner H. Prevalence of a First-Degree Relative With Colorectal Cancer and Uptake of Screening Among Persons 40 to 54 Years Old. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020; 18:2535-2543.e3. [PMID: 31809916 DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2019.11.044] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/04/2019] [Revised: 11/14/2019] [Accepted: 11/22/2019] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS People with a first-degree relative with colorectal cancer (CRC) are recommended to start CRC screening at age 40. However, there is limited information on how many people in different age groups have a known family history of CRC and how many of them have had a colonoscopy. METHODS We set up a multicenter, cross-sectional, population-based study in Germany to determine what proportions of persons in age groups from 40 to 54 years old have a known family history of CRC. We invited 160,000 persons to participate in an online survey from 2015 through 2016. We investigated what proportions of persons in each age group reported a family history of CRC and what proportions of persons underwent a colonoscopy examination using descriptive statistics and multiple logistic regression models. RESULTS Of 28,711 responders to the online questionnaire (8428 were age 40-44 years, 9879 were age 45-49 years, and 10,404 were age 50-54 years), 2705 stated that they had a first-degree relative with CRC (9.4%). The prevalence of a first-degree relative with CRC increased with age: 7.5%, 9.6%, and 10.9% for people 40 to 44 years old, 45 to 49 years old, and 50 to 54 years old, respectively. The prevalence of a first-degree relative who received a diagnosis of CRC at age 70 years or older increased steadily with each age group. Although a greater proportion of people with a family history of CRC had undergone a colonoscopy examination (54.5%) than people without a family history of CRC (25.7%; P < .0001), large proportions of people within this risk group were not in compliance with the guidelines (54.8%, 47.6%, and 38.6% for ages 40-44 y, 45-49 y, and 50-54 y, respectively). CONCLUSIONS One in 10 persons in Germany age 40 to 54 years old has a first-degree relative with CRC. Guidelines recommend initiation of screening at ages 40 to 45 years for people with a family history, yet at this age many people do not have a family history of CRC yet, and almost half of persons 40 to 54 years old with a family history of CRC have not yet received a screening colonoscopy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Korbinian Weigl
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, Heidelberg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Kaja Tikk
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, Heidelberg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany
| | | | - Jochen Hampe
- Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Medical Klinic I, University Clinic Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Svitlana Igel
- Dr. Margarete Fischer-Bosch Institute of Clinical Pharmacology, Stuttgart, Germany
| | - Frank Kolligs
- German Cancer Consortium, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Medicine II, University of Munich, Munich, Germany; Department of Medicine, Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Infectiology, Helios Clinic Berlin-Buch, Berlin, Germany
| | - Stefanie J Klug
- Cancer Epidemiology, University Cancer Center, Technical University, Dresden, Germany; Epidemiology, Department of Sport und Health Sciences, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Ulrich Mansmann
- Institute for Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Oliver Müller
- Outpatient Gastroenterology Clinic "Am Pragsattel," Stuttgart, Germany
| | - Jutta M Nagel
- Department of Medicine II, University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Marcus Pichler
- Outpatient Gastroenterology Clinic "Am Pragsattel," Stuttgart, Germany
| | - Matthias Schwab
- Dr. Margarete Fischer-Bosch Institute of Clinical Pharmacology, Stuttgart, Germany; German Cancer Consortium, German Cancer Research Center (Partner Site), Tuebingen, Germany; Department of Clinical Pharmacology, University Hospital, Department of Biochemistry and Pharmacy, University of Tuebingen, Stuttgart, Germany
| | - Dirk Schweigler
- Cancer Epidemiology, University Cancer Center, Technical University, Dresden, Germany
| | - Anna-Magdalena Stephan
- Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Medical Klinic I, University Clinic Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Enrico N De Toni
- German Cancer Consortium, German Cancer Research Center (Partner Site), Tuebingen, Germany
| | - Hermann Brenner
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, Heidelberg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany; Division of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center, National Center of Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Kupfer SS, Gupta S, Weitzel JN, Samadder J. AGA Clinical Practice Update on Colorectal and Pancreatic Cancer Risk and Screening in BRCA1 and BRCA2 Carriers: Commentary. Gastroenterology 2020; 159:760-764. [PMID: 32335146 PMCID: PMC7483595 DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2020.03.086] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/18/2019] [Revised: 03/18/2020] [Accepted: 03/30/2020] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Sonia S. Kupfer
- Section of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL
| | - Samir Gupta
- VA San Diego Healthcare System; University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
40
|
Gupta S, Coronado GD, Argenbright K, Brenner AT, Castañeda SF, Dominitz JA, Green B, Issaka RB, Levin TR, Reuland DS, Richardson LC, Robertson DJ, Singal AG, Pignone M. Mailed fecal immunochemical test outreach for colorectal cancer screening: Summary of a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-sponsored Summit. CA Cancer J Clin 2020; 70:283-298. [PMID: 32583884 PMCID: PMC7523556 DOI: 10.3322/caac.21615] [Citation(s) in RCA: 68] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/24/2020] [Revised: 05/07/2020] [Accepted: 05/08/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Uptake of colorectal cancer screening remains suboptimal. Mailed fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) offers promise for increasing screening rates, but optimal strategies for implementation have not been well synthesized. In June 2019, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention convened a meeting of subject matter experts and stakeholders to answer key questions regarding mailed FIT implementation in the United States. Points of agreement included: 1) primers, such as texts, telephone calls, and printed mailings before mailed FIT, appear to contribute to effectiveness; 2) invitation letters should be brief and easy to read, and the signatory should be tailored based on setting; 3) instructions for FIT completion should be simple and address challenges that may lead to failed laboratory processing, such as notation of collection date; 4) reminders delivered to initial noncompleters should be used to increase the FIT return rate; 5) data infrastructure should identify eligible patients and track each step in the outreach process, from primer delivery through abnormal FIT follow-up; 6) protocols and procedures such as navigation should be in place to promote colonoscopy after abnormal FIT; 7) a high-quality, 1-sample FIT should be used; 8) sustainability requires a program champion and organizational support for the work, including sufficient funding and external policies (such as quality reporting requirements) to drive commitment to program investment; and 9) the cost effectiveness of mailed FIT has been established. Participants concluded that mailed FIT is an effective and efficient strategy with great potential for increasing colorectal cancer screening in diverse health care settings if more widely implemented.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samir Gupta
- Section of Gastroenterology, Veterans Affairs San Diego Healthcare System, San Diego, California
- Department of Medicine, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, California
- Moores Cancer Center, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, California
| | | | - Keith Argenbright
- University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Harold C. Simmons Cancer Center, Dallas, Texas
- Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
- University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Moncrief Cancer Institute, Fort Worth, Texas
| | - Alison T Brenner
- Division of General Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
- Lineberger Cancer Center, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Sheila F Castañeda
- Department of Psychology, School of Public Health, San Diego State University, San Diego, California
| | - Jason A Dominitz
- Gastroenterology Section, Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, Washington
- Department of Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
| | - Beverly Green
- Kaiser Permanente Washington, Seattle, Washington
- Health Research Institute, Kaiser Permanente Washington, Seattle, Washington
- Department of Family Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
| | - Rachel B Issaka
- Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
| | - Theodore R Levin
- Gastroenterology Department, Kaiser Permanente Medical Center, Walnut Creek, California
- Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente, Oakland, California
| | - Daniel S Reuland
- Division of General Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
- Lineberger Cancer Center, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Lisa C Richardson
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Douglas J Robertson
- Department of Medicine, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, White River Junction, Vermont
- Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, New Hampshire
| | - Amit G Singal
- Division of Digestive and Liver Diseases, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | - Michael Pignone
- Department of Internal Medicine and LiveStrong Cancer Institutes, Dell Medical School, University of Texas Austin, Austin, Texas
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Bajaj JS, Brenner DM, Cai Q, Cash BD, Crowell M, DiBaise J, Gallegos-Orozco JF, Gardner TB, Gyawali CP, Ha C, Holtmann G, Jamil LH, Kaplan GG, Karsan HA, Kinoshita Y, Lebwohl B, Leontiadis GI, Lichtenstein GR, Longstreth GF, Muthusamy VR, Oxentenko AS, Pimentel M, Pisegna JR, Rubenstein JH, Russo MW, Saini SD, Samadder NJ, Shaukat A, Simren M, Stevens T, Valdovinos M, Vargas H, Spiegel B, Lacy BE. Major Trends in Gastroenterology and Hepatology Between 2010 and 2019: An Overview of Advances From the Past Decade Selected by the Editorial Board of The American Journal of Gastroenterology. Am J Gastroenterol 2020; 115:1007-1018. [PMID: 32618649 DOI: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000000709] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- J S Bajaj
- Virginia Commonwealth University and McGuire VA Medical Center, Richmond, Virginia, USA
| | - D M Brenner
- Northwestern University, Chicago Illinois, USA
| | - Q Cai
- Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| | - B D Cash
- McGovern Medical School, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - M Crowell
- Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Arizona, USA
| | - J DiBaise
- Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Arizona, USA
| | | | - T B Gardner
- Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire, USA
| | - C P Gyawali
- Division of Gastroenterology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA
| | - C Ha
- Inflammatory Bowel Diseases Center, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles CA, USA
| | - G Holtmann
- University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia, USA
| | - L H Jamil
- Beaumont Health-Royal Oak, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Royal Oak, Michigan, USA
| | - G G Kaplan
- Department of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - H A Karsan
- Atlanta Gastroenterology Associates and Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| | - Y Kinoshita
- Steel Memorial Hirohata Hospital and Himeji Brain and Heart Center, Himeji, Japan
| | - B Lebwohl
- Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York, USA
| | | | | | - G F Longstreth
- Kaiser Permanente Southern California, San Diego, California, USA
| | - V R Muthusamy
- David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | | | - M Pimentel
- Inflammatory Bowel Diseases Center, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles CA, USA
| | - J R Pisegna
- Department of Veterans Affairs, VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System and David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - J H Rubenstein
- Veterans Affairs Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
| | - M W Russo
- Carolinas Medical Center-Atrium Health, Charlotte, North Carolina, USA
| | - S D Saini
- Veterans Affairs Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
| | | | - A Shaukat
- Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center and University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - M Simren
- Institute of Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
- University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
| | - T Stevens
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - M Valdovinos
- Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutricion S.Z., Mexico City, Mexico
| | - H Vargas
- Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Arizona, USA
| | - B Spiegel
- Inflammatory Bowel Diseases Center, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles CA, USA
| | - B E Lacy
- Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, USA
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Kolb JM, Ahnen DJ, Samadder NJ. Evidenced-Based Screening Strategies for a Positive Family History. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 2020; 30:597-609. [PMID: 32439091 PMCID: PMC7302941 DOI: 10.1016/j.giec.2020.02.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer M. Kolb
- Division of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, University of Colorado Hospital, Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA;,Corresponding author. Division of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, University of Colorado Hospital, Anschutz Medical Campus, 1635 Aurora Court, F735, Aurora, CO 80045.,
| | - Dennis J. Ahnen
- Division of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, University of Colorado Hospital, Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA
| | - N. Jewel Samadder
- Division of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, 5881 East Mayo Boulevard, Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA;,Department of Clinical Genomics, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Kolb JM, Molmenti CL, Patel SG, Lieberman DA, Ahnen DJ. Increased Risk of Colorectal Cancer Tied to Advanced Colorectal Polyps: An Untapped Opportunity to Screen First-Degree Relatives and Decrease Cancer Burden. Am J Gastroenterol 2020; 115:980-988. [PMID: 32618646 PMCID: PMC9351033 DOI: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000000639] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer M. Kolb
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado, USA
| | - Christine L. Molmenti
- Department of Occupational, Medicine, Epidemiology, and Prevention, Center for Health Innovations and Outcomes Research, Feinstein Institute for Medical Research, Hofstra/Northwell School of Medicine, Northwell Health, Manhasset, New York, USA
| | - Swati G. Patel
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado, USA
- Rocky Mountain Regional Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Aurora, Colorado, USA
| | - David A. Lieberman
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA
- Portland Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Portland, Oregon, USA
| | - Dennis J. Ahnen
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado, USA
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Tian Y, Kharazmi E, Brenner H, Xu X, Sundquist K, Sundquist J, Fallah M. Calculating the Starting Age for Screening in Relatives of Patients With Colorectal Cancer Based on Data From Large Nationwide Data Sets. Gastroenterology 2020; 159:159-168.e3. [PMID: 32251666 DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2020.03.063] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/30/2019] [Revised: 02/17/2020] [Accepted: 03/24/2020] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS Although colorectal cancer (CRC) screening guidelines acknowledge the need for earlier screening for high-risk individuals, such as those with family history of CRC, there is limited information on how many years earlier these high-risk individuals should be screened; current practice is based on weak evidence. We aimed to provide risk-adapted recommendations on the starting age of CRC screening for individuals with different family histories. METHODS We collected data from nationwide family-cancer data sets in Sweden and calculated risk-adapted starting ages of screening for individuals with different family histories of CRC. Family history was defined as a dynamic (time-dependent) variable, allowing for changes during the follow-up period of 1958 through 2015. RESULTS During a follow-up of 12,829,251 individuals with genealogy information, 173,796 developed CRC. The 10-year cumulative risk for the average-risk population at age 50 years (the guideline-recommended age for screening) was 0.44%. Individuals with different family histories of CRC attained this equivalent 0.44% risk 3-29 years earlier than their peers in the general population without such a family history. For example, individuals with 1 affected first-degree relative diagnosed before age 45 years reached the corresponding risk level 16 years earlier. CONCLUSIONS We determined risk-adapted starting ages of CRC screening for close or distant relatives of patients with CRC, using high quality nationwide data sets. These findings might be used in counselling individuals about the appropriate age to start CRC screening, to optimize screening practice, and to supplement guidelines for CRC screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yu Tian
- Division of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center and National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany; Medical Faculty Heidelberg, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Elham Kharazmi
- Division of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center and National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany; Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden.
| | - Hermann Brenner
- Division of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center and National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany; Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Xing Xu
- Division of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center and National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany; Medical Faculty Heidelberg, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Kristina Sundquist
- Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden; Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York; Center for Community-Based Healthcare Research and Education, Department of Functional Pathology, School of Medicine, Shimane University, Japan
| | - Jan Sundquist
- Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden; Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York; Center for Community-Based Healthcare Research and Education, Department of Functional Pathology, School of Medicine, Shimane University, Japan
| | - Mahdi Fallah
- Division of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center and National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany; Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden.
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Sekiguchi M, Kakugawa Y, Nakamura K, Matsumoto M, Tomizawa Y, Murakami Y, Saito Y, Matsuda T. Family history of colorectal cancer and prevalence of advanced colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic screened populations in different age groups. Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 91:1361-1370. [PMID: 32004550 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.01.033] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/14/2019] [Accepted: 01/16/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Masau Sekiguchi
- Cancer Screening Center, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan; Division of Screening Technology, Center for Public Health Sciences, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan; Endoscopy Division, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Yasuo Kakugawa
- Endoscopy Division, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Keiko Nakamura
- Cancer Screening Center, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan; Endoscopy Division, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Minori Matsumoto
- Endoscopy Division, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Yutaka Tomizawa
- Division of Gastroenterology, Harborview Medical Center, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | | | - Yutaka Saito
- Endoscopy Division, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Takahisa Matsuda
- Cancer Screening Center, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan; Division of Screening Technology, Center for Public Health Sciences, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan; Endoscopy Division, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Gupta S, Bharti B, Ahnen DJ, Buchanan DD, Cheng IC, Cotterchio M, Figueiredo JC, Gallinger SJ, Haile RW, Jenkins MA, Lindor NM, Macrae FA, Le Marchand L, Newcomb PA, Thibodeau SN, Win AK, Martinez ME. Potential impact of family history-based screening guidelines on the detection of early-onset colorectal cancer. Cancer 2020; 126:3013-3020. [PMID: 32307706 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.32851] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2019] [Revised: 02/04/2020] [Accepted: 02/06/2020] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Initiating screening at an earlier age based on cancer family history is one of the primary recommended strategies for the prevention and detection of early-onset colorectal cancer (EOCRC), but data supporting the effectiveness of this approach are limited. The authors assessed the performance of family history-based guidelines for identifying individuals with EOCRC. METHODS The authors conducted a population-based, case-control study of individuals aged 40 to 49 years with (2473 individuals) and without (772 individuals) incident CRC in the Colon Cancer Family Registry from 1998 through 2007. They estimated the sensitivity and specificity of family history-based criteria jointly recommended by the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on CRC, and the American College of Radiology in 2008 for early screening, and the age at which each participant could have been recommended screening initiation if these criteria had been applied. RESULTS Family history-based early screening criteria were met by approximately 25% of cases (614 of 2473 cases) and 10% of controls (74 of 772 controls), with a sensitivity of 25% and a specificity of 90% for identifying EOCRC cases aged 40 to 49 years. Among 614 individuals meeting early screening criteria, 98.4% could have been recommended screening initiation at an age younger than the observed age of diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS Of CRC cases aged 40 to 49 years, 1 in 4 met family history-based early screening criteria, and nearly all cases who met these criteria could have had CRC diagnosed earlier (or possibly even prevented) if earlier screening had been implemented as per family history-based guidelines. Additional strategies are needed to improve the detection and prevention of EOCRC for individuals not meeting family history criteria for early screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samir Gupta
- Section of Gastroenterology, San Diego Veterans Affairs Healthcare System, San Diego, California.,Department of Medicine, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, California.,Moores Cancer Center, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, California
| | - Balambal Bharti
- Department of Medicine, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, California.,Moores Cancer Center, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, California
| | - Dennis J Ahnen
- Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Center, Aurora, Colorado.,Gastroenterology of the Rockies, Boulder, Colorado
| | - Daniel D Buchanan
- Colorectal Oncogenomics Group, Department of Clinical Pathology, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.,University of Melbourne Centre for Cancer Research, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.,Genomic Medicine and Family Cancer Clinic, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| | - Iona C Cheng
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | - Michelle Cotterchio
- Prevention and Cancer Control, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Jane C Figueiredo
- Department of Medicine, Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California
| | | | - Robert W Haile
- Department of Medicine, Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California
| | - Mark A Jenkins
- University of Melbourne Centre for Cancer Research, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.,Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| | - Noralane M Lindor
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Arizona
| | - Finlay A Macrae
- Colorectal Medicine and Genetics, Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Loïc Le Marchand
- Epidemiology Program, Research Cancer Center of Hawaii, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii
| | - Polly A Newcomb
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
| | - Stephen N Thibodeau
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Aung Ko Win
- University of Melbourne Centre for Cancer Research, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.,Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| | - Maria Elena Martinez
- Moores Cancer Center, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, California.,Department of Family Medicine and Public Health, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, California
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Gallo G, Martellucci J, Sturiale A, Clerico G, Milito G, Marino F, Cocorullo G, Giordano P, Mistrangelo M, Trompetto M. Consensus statement of the Italian society of colorectal surgery (SICCR): management and treatment of hemorrhoidal disease. Tech Coloproctol 2020; 24:145-164. [PMID: 31993837 PMCID: PMC7005095 DOI: 10.1007/s10151-020-02149-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 124] [Impact Index Per Article: 31.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/28/2019] [Accepted: 01/06/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
Hemorrhoidal disease (HD) is the most common proctological disease in the Western countries. However, its real prevalence is underestimated due to the frequent self-medication.The aim of this consensus statement is to provide evidence-based data to allow an individualized and appropriate management and treatment of HD. The strategy used to search for evidence was based on application of electronic sources such as MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane Review Library, CINAHL, and EMBASE.These guidelines are inclusive and not prescriptive.The recommendations were defined and graded based on the current levels of evidence and in accordance with the criteria adopted by American College of Chest Physicians. The recommendations were graded A, B, and C.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- G Gallo
- Department of Surgical and Medical Sciences, University "Magna Graecia" of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Santa Rita Clinic, Vercelli, Italy
| | - J Martellucci
- Department of General, Emergency and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy
| | - A Sturiale
- Proctological and Perineal Surgical Unit, Cisanello University Hospital, Pisa, Italy
| | - G Clerico
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Santa Rita Clinic, Vercelli, Italy
| | - G Milito
- Department of General Surgery, Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy
| | - F Marino
- Operative Unit of General Surgery, IRCCS de Bellis, Castellana Grotte, Bari, Italy
| | - G Cocorullo
- Department of Surgical, Oncological and Stomatological Disciplines, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy
| | - P Giordano
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Whipps Cross University Hospital, Barts Health, London, UK
| | - M Mistrangelo
- Department of General and Minimally Invasive Surgery, University of Turin, Turin, Italy
| | - M Trompetto
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Santa Rita Clinic, Vercelli, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Kastrinos F, Samadder NJ, Burt RW. Use of Family History and Genetic Testing to Determine Risk of Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology 2020; 158:389-403. [PMID: 31759928 DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.11.029] [Citation(s) in RCA: 44] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/11/2019] [Revised: 11/11/2019] [Accepted: 11/18/2019] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
Approximately 35% of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) have a family history of the disease attributed to genetic factors, common exposures, or both. Some families with a history of CRC carry genetic variants that cause CRC with high or moderate penetrance, but these account for only 5% to 10% of CRC cases. Most families with a history of CRC and/or adenomas do not carry genetic variants associated with cancer syndromes; this is called common familial CRC. Our understanding of familial predisposition to CRC and cancer syndromes has increased rapidly due to advances in next-generation sequencing technologies. As a result, there has been a shift from genetic testing for specific inherited cancer syndromes based on clinical criteria alone, to simultaneous testing of multiple genes for cancer-associated variants. We summarize current knowledge of common familial CRC, provide an update on syndromes associated with CRC (including the nonpolyposis and polyposis types), and review current recommendations for CRC screening and surveillance. We also provide an approach to genetic evaluation and testing in clinical practice. Determination of CRC risk based on family cancer history and results of genetic testing can provide a personalized approach to cancer screening and prevention, with optimal use of colonoscopy to effectively decrease CRC incidence and mortality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fay Kastrinos
- Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York; Division of Digestive and Liver Diseases, Columbia University Irving Medical Center and the Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, New York.
| | - N Jewel Samadder
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Arizona
| | - Randall W Burt
- Department of Gastroenterology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah; Emeritus Professor of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Roos VH, Mangas-Sanjuan C, Rodriguez-Girondo M, Medina-Prado L, Steyerberg EW, Bossuyt PMM, Dekker E, Jover R, van Leerdam ME. Effects of Family History on Relative and Absolute Risks for Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019; 17:2657-2667.e9. [PMID: 31525516 DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2019.09.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/04/2019] [Revised: 08/27/2019] [Accepted: 09/08/2019] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Victorine H Roos
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Amsterdam, Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Carolina Mangas-Sanjuan
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital General Universitario de Alicante, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria y Biomédica de Alicante, Alicante, Spain
| | - Mar Rodriguez-Girondo
- Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Medical Statistics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Lucia Medina-Prado
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital General Universitario de Alicante, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria y Biomédica de Alicante, Alicante, Spain
| | - Ewout W Steyerberg
- Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Medical Statistics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Patrick M M Bossuyt
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Evelien Dekker
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Amsterdam, Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Rodrigo Jover
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital General Universitario de Alicante, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria y Biomédica de Alicante, Alicante, Spain
| | - Monique E van Leerdam
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Hissong E, Pittman ME. Colorectal carcinoma screening: Established methods and emerging technology. Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci 2019; 57:22-36. [PMID: 31603697 DOI: 10.1080/10408363.2019.1670614] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/09/2023]
Abstract
Colorectal carcinoma screening programs have shown success in lowering both the incidence and mortality rate of colorectal carcinoma at a population level, in part because this carcinoma is relatively slow growing and has an identifiable premalignant lesion. Still, many patients do not undergo the recommended screening for colorectal carcinoma, and of those who do, a subset may be over- or under-diagnosed by the currently available testing methods. The primary purpose of this article is to review the data regarding currently available colorectal cancer screening modalities, which include fecal occult blood testing, direct colonic visualization, and noninvasive imaging techniques. In addition, readers will be introduced to a variety of biomarkers that may serve as stand-alone or adjunct tests in the future. Finally, there is a brief discussion of the current epidemiologic considerations that public health officials must address as they create population screening guidelines. The data we provide as laboratory physicians and scientists are critical to the construction of appropriate recommendations that ultimately decrease the burden of disease from colorectal carcinoma.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erika Hissong
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York City, NY, USA
| | - Meredith E Pittman
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York City, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|