Baseline Colonoscopy Findings Associated With 10-Year Outcomes in a Screening Cohort Undergoing Colonoscopy Surveillance

Detection of colorectal cancer and advanced neoplasia during first surveillance interval after detection of adenomas in fecal immunochemical test cancer screening: a nationwide study

BACKGROUND

Adenoma surveillance guidelines are based on non-fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based screening settings. However, colorectal cancer (CRC) risk may be different in FIT-positive screening populations. We evaluated the CRC and advanced adenoma risk within the recommended surveillance periods in the Danish FIT-based CRC screening program for participants with intermediate or high risk adenomas according to 2010 European guidelines. Furthermore, we estimated CRC risk for those who were not recommended surveillance according to European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) 2020 guidelines.

METHODS

Using nationwide health registries, we identified 17 936 FIT-screening participants from 2014-2017 with adenomas undergoing surveillance (high risk 1 year, intermediate risk 3 years). Participants with a follow-up examination were included (N = 10 068). Relative risk (RR) of CRC and advance adenoma was compared between intermediate and high risk groups and between intermediates who were recommended surveillance (S) or no surveillance (NS) according to 2020 ESGE guidelines.

RESULTS

During surveillance, CRC occurred in 0.59% of the high risk group and 1.11% of the intermediate risk group (RR 0.53 [95%CI 0.34-0.84]). The high risk group had a 24% increased risk of advanced adenoma. CRC occurred in 1.69% of the intermediateNS group and 0.87% of the intermediateS group (RR 1.94 [95%CI 1.18-3.21]), and RR for advanced adenoma was 1.19 (95%CI 1.03-1.37).

CONCLUSION

CRC detection was lower among participants rated at higher risk at initial CRC screening. Findings at first screen-derived colonoscopy might not be as good a predictor of CRC risk in a FIT-positive screening population.

Colon Polyp Surveillance: Separating the Wheat From the Chaff

One goal of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is to prevent CRC incidence by removing precancerous colonic polyps, which are detected in up to 50% of screening examinations. Yet, the lifetime risk of CRC is 3.9%-4.3%, so it is clear that most of these individuals with polyps would not develop CRC in their lifetime. It is, therefore, a challenge to determine which individuals with polyps will benefit from follow-up, and at what intervals. There is some evidence that individuals with advanced polyps, based on size and histology, benefit from intensive surveillance. However, a large proportion of individuals will have small polyps without advanced histologic features (ie, "nonadvanced"), where the benefits of surveillance are uncertain and controversial. Demand for surveillance will further increase as more polyps are detected due to increased screening uptake, recent United States recommendations to expand screening to younger individuals, and emergence of polyp detection technology. We review the current understanding and clinical implications of the natural history, biology, and outcomes associated with various categories of colon polyps based on size, histology, and number. Our aims are to highlight key knowledge gaps, specifically focusing on certain categories of polyps that may not be associated with future CRC risk, and to provide insights to inform research priorities and potential management strategies. Optimization of CRC prevention programs based on updated knowledge about the future risks associated with various colon polyps is essential to ensure cost-effective screening and surveillance, wise use of resources, and inform efforts to personalize recommendations.

Colorectal Cancer Polygenic Risk Score Is Associated With Screening Colonoscopy Findings but Not Follow-Up Outcomes

Background and Aims

Colorectal cancer (CRC) polygenic risk scores (PRS) may help personalize CRC prevention strategies. We investigated whether an existing PRS was associated with advanced neoplasia (AN) in a population undergoing screening and follow-up colonoscopy.

Methods

We evaluated 10-year outcomes in the Cooperative Studies Program #380 screening colonoscopy cohort, which includes a biorepository of selected individuals with baseline AN (defined as CRC or adenoma ≥10 mm or villous histology, or high-grade dysplasia) and matched individuals without AN. A PRS was constructed from 136 prespecified CRC-risk single nucleotide polymorphisms. Multivariate logistic regression was used to evaluate the PRS for associations with AN prevalence at baseline screening colonoscopy or incident AN in participants with at least one follow-up colonoscopy.

Results

The PRS was associated with AN risk at baseline screening colonoscopy (P = .004). Participants in the lowest PRS quintile had more than a 70% decreased risk of AN at baseline (odds ratio 0.29, 95% confidence interval 0.14-0.58; P < .001) compared to participants with a PRS in the middle quintile. Using a PRS cut-off of more than the first quintile to indicate need for colonoscopy as primary screening, the sensitivity for detecting AN at baseline is 91.8%. We did not observe a relationship between the PRS and incident AN during follow-up (P = .28).

Conclusion

A PRS could identify individuals at low risk for prevalent AN. Ongoing work will determine whether this PRS can identify a subset of individuals at sufficiently low risk who could safely delay or be reassured about noninvasive screening. Otherwise, more research is needed to augment these genetic tools to predict incident AN during long-term follow-up.

Older Age at First Screening Colonoscopy is Associated With an Increased Risk of Colorectal Adenomas and Cancer

INTRODUCTION

The goal of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is to detect precancerous polyps before cancer development or identification of cancer at an early stage. Guidelines have recommended screening colonoscopy to start at age 45. Our aim was to determine the impact of delays in performing the first screening colonoscopy on the risk of adenoma or CRC detection.

METHODS

We analyzed colonoscopy and histopathology data of average CRC risk patients who had their first screening colonoscopy between 2010 and 2017. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine the association between demographic variables and the risk of adenomas or CRC.

RESULTS

A total of 1155 average risk patients underwent their initial screening colonoscopy during the study period. Median age was 54 years (range of 45-87) and 58.2% were females. In multivariable analysis, older age at first screening colonoscopy was significantly associated with the detection of adenomatous polyps (odds ratio 1.05, 95% confidence interval 1.04-1.07, P <0.001) and CRC (odds ratio 1.11, 95% confidence interval 1.06-1.16, P <0.001). The association between age and risk of adenomatous polyps (F-test 35.43, P =0.0019) and CRC (F-test 36.94, P =0.0017) fit an exponential growth model. It was estimated that the detection rate doubled every 14.20 years and 4.75 years for adenomas and CRC, respectively.

CONCLUSION

We found that older age at the initial performance of a screening colonoscopy was associated with increased detection of adenomatous polyps and CRC. This work highlights the need for guideline adherence for the prevention of CRC development.

Bowel cleansing effectiveness and safety of 1L PEG + Asc in the real-world setting: Observational, retrospective, multicenter study of over 13000 patients

Background and study aims Effective bowel cleansing is critical for detecting lesions during colonoscopy, highlighting the importance of bowel preparations. 1L polyethylene glycol (PEG) + ascorbate (Asc) is the only recommended 1L PEG product in Europe and the United States. Its efficacy was demonstrated in large-scale controlled trials and confirmed in smaller-scale real-world studies. However, no large-scale real-world data exist. Patients and methods This observational, retrospective, multicenter study, used outpatient follow-up data from medical records from 10 centers in Spain and two in Portugal. Outpatients aged ≥18 years using 1L PEG + Asc as bowel preparation were included. The main outcome measures were overall adequate colon cleansing (Boston Bowel Preparation Scale [BBPS] score ≥6 with BBPS score ≥2 in each segment) and high-quality cleansing of the right colon (BBPS score=3). Results Data from 13169 eligible patients were included. Overall cleansing success was achieved in 89.3% (95%CI 88.7%-89.8%) and high-quality cleansing in the right colon in 49.3% (95%CI 48.4%-50.2%) of patients. For the overnight split-dose and same-day regimens, overall adequate quality cleansing success rate was 94.7% and 86.7% ( P <0.0001) and high-quality cleansing of the right colon rate was 65.4% and 41.4% ( P <0.0001), respectively. Colonoscopy was completed in 97.3% of patients, with non-completion due to poor preparation in only 0.8%; 2.3% of patients experienced at least one adverse event (AE). Conclusions This large-scale, real-world study demonstrates the effectiveness of 1L PEG + Asc in the total and right colon, with a low percentage of patients with AEs in routine clinical practice.

Colorectal cancer risk after removal of polyps in fecal immunochemical test based screening

Background

Colonoscopy surveillance intervals are based on the predicted risk of metachronous colorectal cancer (CRC) after polyp removal. However, risk estimation per polyp subtype is difficult due to the fact that many patients have multiple polyps. To enable risk estimation per polyp subtypes we examined the metachronous CRC risk of subgroups based on presence or absence of co-occurring findings.

Methods

Using high-quality screening colonoscopies performed after a positive fecal immunochemical test between 2014 and 2020 within the Dutch CRC screening program, we applied Cox regression analysis to evaluate the association between findings at baseline colonoscopy and metachronous CRCs. For our primary outcome, we appointed each patient to unique subgroups based on removed polyp subtypes that were present or absent at baseline colonoscopy and used the groups without polyps as reference. High-risk subgroups were individuals with high-risk serrated polyps, defined as serrated polyp ≥10 mm, sessile serrated lesions with dysplasia, or traditional serrated adenomas, as well as high-risk adenomas, defined as adenoma ≥10 mm or containing high-grade dysplasia.

Findings

In total 253,833 colonoscopies were included. Over a median follow-up of 36 months (IQR, 21-57), we identified 504 metachronous CRCs. Hazard ratios for metachronous CRC was 1.70 (95% CI, 1.07-2.69) for individuals with high-risk serrated polyps without high-risk adenomas, 1.22 (0.96-1.55) for individuals with high-risk adenomas without high-risk serrated polyps, and 2.00 (1.19-3.39) for individuals with high-risk serrated polyps and high-risk adenomas, compared to patients without polyps.

Interpretation

Accounting for co-occurring findings, we observed an increased metachronous CRC risk for individuals that had high-risk serrated polyps with the presence of high-risk adenomas, or individuals with high-risk serrated polyps without high-risk adenomas. These findings could provide more evidence to support post-polypectomy surveillance guidelines.

Funding

None.

Risk Factors for Metachronous Colorectal Cancer or Advanced Adenomas After Endoscopic Resection of High-risk Adenomas

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Among the characteristics of high-risk adenomas (HRAs), some may predict a higher risk of metachronous advanced lesions. Our aim was to assess which HRA characteristics are associated with high risk of metachronous colorectal cancer (CRC) or advanced adenomas (AAs).

METHODS

We systematically searched Pubmed, EMBASE, and Cochrane for cohort studies and clinical trials of CRC or AA incidence at surveillance stratified by baseline lesion size, histology, and multiplicity. We calculated pooled relative risks (RRs) using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed with the I² statistic.

RESULTS

Fifty-five studies were included, with 936,540 patients with mean follow-up 5.4 ± 2.9 years. CRC incidence per 1000 person-years was 2.6 (2.1-3.0) for adenomas ≥20 mm, 2.7 (2.2-3.2) for high-grade dysplasia (HGD), 2.0 (1.8-2.3) for villous component, 0.8 (0.1-1.4) for ≥5 adenomas, 1.0 (0.7-1.2) for ≥3 adenomas. Metachronous CRC risk was higher in adenomas ≥20 mm vs 10 to 19 mm (RR, 2.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20-3.61), HGD vs low-grade dysplasia (RR, 2.89; 95% CI, 1.88-4.44), villous vs tubular (RR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.33-2.31). No significant differences in CRC risk were found in ≥3 adenomas vs 1 to 2 (RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.84-1.83), nor in ≥5 adenomas vs 3 to 4 (RR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.30-2.11). Compared with normal colonoscopy, RR for CRC risk was 2.61 (95% CI, 2.06-3.32) for ≥10mm, 6.62 (95% CI, 4.60-9.52) for HGD, 3.58 (95% CI, 2.24-5.73) for villous component, and 2.03 (95% CI, 1.40-2.94) for ≥3 adenomas. Similar trends were seen for metachronous AAs.

CONCLUSION

Metachronous CRC risk is highest in patients with baseline adenomas with ≥20 mm or HGD. Multiplicity does not seem to be associated with substantially higher CRC risk in the near term.

Clinical outcomes of colonoscopic polypectomy with strategic surveillance colonoscopies in patients with 10 or more polyps

The clinical usefulness of repeat colonoscopic polypectomy in patients with numerous polyps has not been sufficiently determined. We aimed to analyze the clinical outcomes of colonoscopic polypectomy with surveillance colonoscopies in patients with ≥ 10 polyps. We reviewed the medical records of 152 patients who underwent polypectomy of ≥ 10 polyps at the baseline colonoscopy. We investigated polyp number, polyp size, polypectomy method, procedure time, and adverse events of the baseline colonoscopy. We also investigated the frequency and interval of surveillance colonoscopies and their findings. The mean number of polyps detected at the baseline colonoscopy was 20.0, of which 16.0 polyps were endoscopically resected. The mean size of the largest polyp was 13.4 mm. The mean procedure time was 54.9 min. Post-polypectomy bleeding occurred in 6 (3.9%) patients, all of whom were treated conservatively. No patients developed perforation. With an increasing number of surveillance colonoscopies, the number of detected polyps and the procedure time decreased. Surveillance colonoscopies identified colorectal cancer only in three patients (2.0%), all of which were mucosal cancers that could be curatively treated by polypectomy. Colonoscopic polypectomy with repeat surveillance colonoscopies is a clinically effective, efficient, and safe management option in patients with ≥ 10 polyps.

At What Age Should We Stop Colorectal Cancer Screening? When Is Enough, Enough?

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.

Korean Guidelines for Postpolypectomy Colonoscopic Surveillance: 2022 revised edition

Colonoscopic polypectomy is effective in decreasing the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer (CRC). Premalignant polyps discovered during colonoscopy are associated with the risk of metachronous advanced neoplasia. Postpolypectomy surveillance is the most important method for managing advanced metachronous neoplasia. A more efficient and evidence-based guideline for postpolypectomy surveillance is required because of the limited medical resources and concerns regarding colonoscopy complications. In these consensus guidelines, an analytic approach was used to address all reliable evidence to interpret the predictors of CRC or advanced neoplasia during surveillance colonoscopy. The key recommendations state that the high-risk findings for metachronous CRC following polypectomy are as follows: adenoma ≥10 mm in size; 3 to 5 (or more) adenomas; tubulovillous or villous adenoma; adenoma containing high-grade dysplasia; traditional serrated adenoma; sessile serrated lesion containing any grade of dysplasia; serrated polyp of at least 10 mm in size; and 3 to 5 (or more) sessile serrated lesions. More studies are needed to fully comprehend the patients who are most likely to benefit from surveillance colonoscopy and the ideal surveillance interval to prevent metachronous CRC.

Korean guidelines for postpolypectomy colonoscopic surveillance: 2022 revised edition

Colonoscopic polypectomy is effective in decreasing the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer (CRC). Premalignant polyps discovered during colonoscopy are associated with the risk of metachronous advanced neoplasia. Postpolypectomy surveillance is the most important method for the management of advanced metachronous neoplasia. A more efficient and evidence-based guideline for postpolypectomy surveillance is required because of limited medical resources and concerns regarding colonoscopy complications. In these consensus guidelines, an analytic approach was used to address all reliable evidence to interpret the predictors of CRC or advanced neoplasia during surveillance colonoscopy. The key recommendations state that the high-risk findings for metachronous CRC following polypectomy are as follows: (1) adenoma ≥10 mm in size; (2) 3 to 5 (or more) adenomas; (3) tubulovillous or villous adenoma; (4) adenoma containing high-grade dysplasia; (5) traditional serrated adenoma; (6) sessile serrated lesion (SSL) containing any grade of dysplasia; (7) serrated polyp of at least 10 mm in size; and (8) 3 to 5 (or more) SSLs. More studies are needed to fully comprehend the patients most likely to benefit from surveillance colonoscopy and the ideal surveillance interval to prevent metachronous CRC.

Incidence of colorectal cancer at different screening intervals after index colonoscopy and post-polypectomy: a meta-analysis of 811,181 participants

OBJECTIVES

To examine the evidence on the incidence of colorectal cancers (CRCs) at a follow-up screening colonoscopy (after index colonoscopy and post-polypectomy) in individuals with no adenoma, low-risk adenomas, and high-risk adenomas.

METHODS

We included studies reporting the incidence of CRCs at different screening intervals after index colonoscopy and post-polypectomy. The main outcome was pooled cumulative incidence rate of CRCs stratified by intervals of 3, 5, 10, and >10 years.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies with 811,181 participants were analyzed, including 10 multicenter studies and 3 national CRC screening programs. The cumulative incidence of CRCs was 0.63% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.30, 0.97) in the high-risk-adenoma group at 3 years, 0.37% (95% CI: 0.13, 0.61) and 0.67% (95% CI: 0.36, 0.99) in the low-risk-adenoma group at 5 and 10 years, respectively, and 0.32% (95% CI: 0.20, 0.45) and 0.50% (95% CI: 0.30, 0.69) in the no-adenoma-group at 10 and >10 years, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis summarizes the results of colonoscopy surveillance programs with detailed data support for different screening intervals. The data on date suggest that reasonable surveillance intervals are within 3 years for the high-risk-adenoma group, 5-10 years for the low-risk-adenoma group, and ≥10 years for the no-adenoma group.

Adenoma Detection Rate and Clinical Characteristics Influence Advanced Neoplasia Risk After Colorectal Polypectomy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Postpolypectomy risk stratification for subsequent metachronous advanced neoplasia (MAN) is imprecise and does not account for colonoscopist adenoma detection rate (ADR). Our aim was to assess association of ADR with MAN and create a prediction model for postpolypectomy risk stratification incorporating ADR and other factors.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of individuals with baseline polypectomy and subsequent surveillance colonoscopy from 2004 to 2016 within the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). Clinical factors, polyp findings, and baseline colonoscopist ADR were considered for the model. Model performance (sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve) for identifying individuals with MAN was compared with 2020 U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer (USMSTF) surveillance recommendations.

RESULTS

A total of 30,897 individuals were randomly assigned 2:1 into independent model training and validation sets. Increasing age, male sex, diabetes, current smoking, adenoma number, polyp location, adenoma ≥10 mm or with tubulovillous/villous features, and decreasing colonoscopist ADR were independently associated with MAN. A range of 1.48- to 1.66-fold increased risk for MAN was observed for ADR in the lowest 3 quintiles (ADR <19.7%-39.3%) vs the highest quintile (ADR >47.0%). When the final model selected based on the training set was applied to the validation set, improved sensitivity and specificity over 2020 USMSTF risk stratification were achieved (P = .001), with an area under the curve of 0.62 (95% confidence interval, 0.60-0.64).

CONCLUSIONS

Colonoscopist ADR is associated with MAN. Combining clinical factors and ADR for risk stratification has potential to improve postpolypectomy risk stratification. Improving ADR is likely to improve postpolypectomy outcomes.

CircHADHA-augmented autophagy suppresses tumor growth of colon cancer by regulating autophagy-related gene via miR-361

Colon cancer undergoes a traditional pathway from colon polyps to colon cancer. It is of great significance to investigate the key molecules involved in carcinogenesis from polyps to malignancies. Circular RNAs (circRNAs) are stably expressed in human body fluids such as plasma. Here, we demonstrated a differential expression pattern of plasma circRNAs in healthy individuals, colon polyp patients and colon cancer patients using circRNA Arraystar microarray. We explored that circRNA HADHA (circHADHA) was upregulated in plasma from polyp patients, whereas it was downregulated in plasma from colon cancer patients. Overexpression of circHADHA promoted autophagy in colon epithelial cells. Moreover, in colon cancer cells, overexpression of circHADHA promoted autophagy, whereas it inhibited cell proliferation and colony formation. CircHADHA increased the expression of ATG13 via miR-361 in both colon epithelial and cancer cells. ATG13 knockdown reduced autophagy even in the presence of circHADHA in colon cancer cells. Furthermore, the growth of circHADHA-overexpressing colon cancer cell-derived xenograft tumors was significantly decreased compared with control tumors in nude mice. In conclusion, circHADHA was differentially expressed in the plasma of healthy individuals, colon polyp patients and colon cancer patients. CircHADHA promoted autophagy by regulating ATG13 via miR-361 in both colon epithelial and cancer cells. CircHADHA suppressed tumor growth by inducing cell autophagy in colon cancer cells. CircHADHA potentially serves as a biomarker for screening of precursor colon cancer and a therapeutic target for colon cancer treatment.

[Korean Guidelines for Postpolypectomy Colonoscopic Surveillance: 2022 Revised Edition]

Colonoscopic polypectomy is effective in decreasing the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer (CRC). Premalignant polyps discovered during colonoscopy are associated with the risk of metachronous advanced neoplasia. Postpolypectomy surveillance is the most important method for managing advanced metachronous neoplasia. A more efficient and evidence-based guideline for postpolypectomy surveillance is required because of the limited medical resources and concerns regarding colonoscopy complications. In these consensus guidelines, an analytic approach was used to address all reliable evidence to interpret the predictors of CRC or advanced neoplasia during surveillance colonoscopy. The key recommendations state that the high-risk findings for metachronous CRC following polypectomy are as follows: 1) adenoma ≥10 mm in size; 2) 3-5 (or more) adenomas; 3) tubulovillous or villous adenoma; 4) adenoma containing high-grade dysplasia; 5) traditional serrated adenoma; 6) sessile serrated lesion (SSL) containing any grade of dysplasia; 7) serrated polyp of at least 10 mm in size; and 8) 3-5 (or more) SSLs. More studies are needed to fully comprehend the patients who are most likely to benefit from surveillance colonoscopy and the ideal surveillance interval to prevent metachronous CRC.

Longitudinal assessment of colonoscopy adverse events in the prospective Cooperative Studies Program no. 380 colorectal cancer screening and surveillance cohort

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Data are limited regarding colonoscopy risk during long-term, programmatic colorectal cancer screening and follow-up. We aimed to describe adverse events during follow-up in a colonoscopy screening program after the baseline examination and examine factors associated with increased risk.

METHODS

Cooperative Studies Program no. 380 includes 3121 asymptomatic veterans aged 50 to 75 years who underwent screening colonoscopy between 1994 and 1997. Periprocedure adverse events requiring significant intervention were defined as major events (other events were minor) and were tracked during follow-up for at least 10 years. Multivariable odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for factors associated with risk of follow-up adverse events.

RESULTS

Of 3727 follow-up examinations in 1983 participants, adverse events occurred in 105 examinations (2.8%) in 93 individuals, including 22 major and 87 minor events (examinations may have had >1 event). Incidence of major events (per 1000 examinations) remained relatively stable over time, with 6.1 events at examination 2, 4.8 at examination 3, and 7.2 at examination 4. Examinations with major events included 1 perforation, 3 GI bleeds requiring intervention, and 17 cardiopulmonary events. History of prior colonoscopic adverse events was associated with increased risk of events (major or minor) during follow-up (OR, 2.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.6-4.6).

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term programmatic screening and surveillance was safe, as major events were rare during follow-up. However, serious cardiopulmonary events were the most common major events. These results highlight the need for detailed assessments of comorbid conditions during routine clinical practice, which could help inform individual decisions regarding the utility of ongoing colonoscopy follow-up.

Detection and Yield of Colorectal Cancer Surveillance in Adults with PTEN Hamartoma Tumour Syndrome

Colorectal cancer surveillance (CCS) with colonoscopy every five years is advised for PTEN Hamartoma Tumour Syndrome (PHTS) patients aged ≥40 due to an increased colorectal cancer (CRC) risk. However, data to support CCS guidelines are scarce and available CRC risks are low (0-5% at age 50) and likely overestimated. We aimed to assess the detection and yield of CCS for PHTS patients without a CRC history. A retrospective cohort study including PHTS patients aged ≥40 with CCS at a PHTS expertise centre between 2011 and 2022. Adenomas with a ≥10 mm size, (tubulo)villous histology, or high-grade dysplasia were considered advanced. During 67 follow-up years, 37 patients (median age 47 years) underwent 61 colonoscopies. CCS yielded no CRCs. Adenomas were diagnosed in 13/37 (35%) patients during 23/100 colonoscopies (95% CI: 14-36), including one advanced adenoma. Baseline adenoma detection rates were similar to follow-up and higher in patients aged above 50 (50/100, 95% CI: 24-76) vs. age 50 or below (11/100, 95% CI: 3-30; p = 0.021). The low CRC and advanced adenoma yield allow for a more personalised surveillance program. Following our findings combined with literature on CRC risk and progression, we suggest starting CCS at age 40 with variable follow-up intervals between 1 and 10 years depending on previous colonoscopy findings.

Ten or More Cumulative Lifetime Adenomas Are Associated with Increased Risk for Advanced Neoplasia and Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening guidelines recommend frequent colonoscopies and consideration of genetic testing in individuals with ≥10 cumulative adenomas. However, it is unclear how these guidelines apply to routine practice.

AIMS

We estimated the proportion of participants found to have ≥10 cumulative adenomas in a screening population and described their outcomes of advanced neoplasia (AN), CRC, and extra-colonic malignancy.

METHODS

We performed a secondary analysis of VA CSP#380, which includes 3121 veterans aged 50-75 who were followed up to 10 years after screening colonoscopy. We calculated the cumulative risk of ≥10 cumulative adenomas by Kaplan-Meier method. We compared baseline risk factors in those with and without ≥10 cumulative adenomas as well as the risk for AN (adenoma ≥1 cm, villous adenoma or high-grade dysplasia, or CRC) and extra-colonic malignancy by multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

The cumulative risk of ≥10 cumulative adenomas over 10.5 years was 6.51% (95% CI 4.38%-9.62%). Age 60-69 or 70-75 at baseline colonoscopy was the only factors associated with the finding of ≥10 cumulative adenomas. Compared to those with 0-9 cumulative adenomas, participants with ≥10 cumulative adenomas were more likely to have had AN (OR 17.03; 95% CI 9.41-30.84), including CRC (OR 7.00; 95% CI 2.84-17.28), but not extra-colonic malignancies.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately 6.5% of participants in this screening population were found to have ≥10 cumulative adenomas over 10.5 years, which was uncommon before age 60. These participants were found to have AN and CRC significantly more often compared to those with lower cumulative adenomas.

Scoping out the future: The application of artificial intelligence to gastrointestinal endoscopy

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a quickly expanding field in gastrointestinal endoscopy. Although there are a myriad of applications of AI ranging from identification of bleeding to predicting outcomes in patients with inflammatory bowel disease, a great deal of research has focused on the identification and classification of gastrointestinal malignancies. Several of the initial randomized, prospective trials utilizing AI in clinical medicine have centered on polyp detection during screening colonoscopy. In addition to work focused on colorectal cancer, AI systems have also been applied to gastric, esophageal, pancreatic, and liver cancers. Despite promising results in initial studies, the generalizability of most of these AI systems have not yet been evaluated. In this article we review recent developments in the field of AI applied to gastrointestinal oncology.

Colorectal cancer surveillance by colonoscopy in a prospective, population-based long-term Swiss screening study - outcomes, adherence, and costs

Background The success of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening depends mainly on screening quality, patient adherence to surveillance, and costs. Consequently, it is essential to assess the performance over time.

Methods In 2000, a closed cohort study on CRC screening in individuals aged 50 to 80 was initiated in Uri, Switzerland. Participants who chose to undergo colonoscopy were followed over 18 years. We investigated the adherence to recommended surveillance and collected baseline characteristics and colonoscopy data. Risk factors at screening for the development of advanced adenomas were analyzed. Costs for screening and follow-up were evaluated retrospectively.

Results 1278 subjects with a screening colonoscopy were included, of which 272 (21.3%; 69.5% men) had adenomas, and 83 (6.5%) had advanced adenomas. Only 59.8% participated in a follow-up colonoscopy, half of them within the recommended time interval. Individuals with advanced adenomas at screening had nearly five times the risk of developing advanced adenomas compared to individuals without adenomas (24.3% vs. 5.0%, OR 4.79 CI 2.30–9.95). Individuals without adenomas developed advanced adenomas in 4.9%, including four cases of CRC; three of them without control colonoscopy. The villous component in adenomas smaller than 10 mm was not an independent risk factor. Costs for screening and follow-up added up to CHF 1’934’521 per 1’000 persons screened, almost half of them for follow-up examinations; 60% of these costs accounted for low-risk individuals.

Conclusion Our findings suggest that follow-up of screening colonoscopy should be reconsidered in Switzerland; in particular, long-term adherence is critical. Costs for follow-up could be substantially reduced by adopting less expensive long-term screening methods for low-risk individuals.

Risk of Metachronous Colorectal Advanced Neoplasia and Cancer in Patients With 3-4 Nonadvanced Adenomas at Index Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the available evidence on the risk of metachronous advanced neoplasia (AN) and colorectal cancer (CRC) in patients with 3-4 nonadvanced adenomas (NAAs).

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases up to January 2021 for studies evaluating metachronous AN and CRC risk by comparing 3 groups (1-2 vs 3-4 vs ≥5 NAAs) at index colonoscopy. The estimates for risk of metachronous AN and CRC were evaluated using random-effects models.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies (n = 36,375) were included. The risk of metachronous AN was significantly higher in the 3-4 NAAs group than in the 1-2 NAAs group (relative risk [RR] 1.264, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.053-1.518, P = 0.012; I2 = 0%); there was no difference between the ≥ 5 NAAs and 3-4 NAAs groups (RR 1.962, 95% CI 0.972-3.958, P = 0.060; I2 = 68%). The risks of metachronous CRC between the 1-2 NAAs and 3-4 NAAs groups (RR 2.663, 95% CI 0.391-18.128, P = 0.317; I2 = 0%) or the 3-4 NAAs and ≥ 5 NAAs groups (RR 1.148, 95% CI 0.142-9.290, P = 0.897; I2 = 0%) were not significantly different.

DISCUSSION

Although the risk of metachronous AN was greater in the 3-4 NAAs group than in the 1-2 NAAs group, the risk of metachronous AN and CRC between the 3-4 NAAs and ≥ 5 NAAs groups was not different. This suggests that further studies on metachronous AN and CRC risk in the 3-4 NAAs group are warranted to confirm a firm ≥5-year interval surveillance colonoscopy.

Screening Colonoscopy Findings Are Associated With Noncolorectal Cancer Mortality

INTRODUCTION

Controversy exists regarding the impact of various risk factors on noncolorectal cancer (CRC) mortality in healthy screening populations. We examined the impact of known CRC risk factors, including baseline colonoscopy findings, on non-CRC mortality in a screening population.

METHODS

Cooperative Studies Program (CSP) #380 is comprised of 3,121 veterans aged 50-75 years who underwent screening colonoscopy from 1994 to 97 and were then followed for at least 10 years or until death. Hazard ratios (HRs) for risk factors on non-CRC mortality were estimated by multivariate Cox proportional hazards.

RESULTS

Current smoking (HR 2.12, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.78-2.52, compared with nonsmokers) and physical activity (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.84-0.93) were the modifiable factors most associated with non-CRC mortality in CSP#380. In addition, compared with no neoplasia at baseline colonoscopy, non-CRC mortality was higher in participants with ≥3 small adenomas (HR 1.43, 95% CI 1.06-1.94), advanced adenomas (HR 1.32, 95% CI 0.99-1.75), and CRC (HR 2.95, 95% CI 0.98-8.85). Those with 1-2 small adenomas were not at increased risk for non-CRC mortality (HR 1.15, 95% CI 0.94-1.4).

DISCUSSION

In a CRC screening population, known modifiable risk factors were significantly associated with 10-year non-CRC mortality. Furthermore, those who died from non-CRC causes within 10 years were more likely to have had high-risk findings at baseline colonoscopy. These results suggest that advanced colonoscopy findings may be a risk marker of poor health outcomes. Integrated efforts are needed to motivate healthy lifestyle changes during CRC screening, particularly in those with high-risk colonoscopy findings and unaddressed risk factors.

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

Background and Aims

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Long-term colorectal cancer incidence and mortality after adenoma removal in women and men

BACKGROUND

Women and men with colorectal adenomas are at increased risk of colorectal cancer and colonoscopic surveillance is recommended. However, the long-term cancer risk remains unknown.

AIMS

To investigate colorectal cancer incidence and mortality after adenoma removal in women and men METHODS: We identified all individuals who had adenomas removed in Norway from 1993 to 2007, with follow-up through 2018. We calculated standardized incidence ratios (SIR) and incidence-based mortality ratios (SMR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for colorectal cancer in women and men using the female and male population for comparison. We defined high-risk adenomas as ≥2 adenomas, villous component, or high-grade dysplasia.

RESULTS

The cohort comprised 40 293 individuals. During median follow-up of 13.0 years, 1079 women (5.5%) and 866 men (4.2%) developed colorectal cancer; 328 women (1.7%) and 275 men (1.3%) died of colorectal cancer. Colorectal cancer incidence was more increased in women (SIR 1.64, 95% CI 1.54-1.74) than in men (SIR 1.12, 95% CI 1.05-1.19). Colorectal cancer mortality was increased in women (SMR 1.13, 95% CI 1.02-1.26) and reduced in men (SMR 0.79, 95% CI 0.71-0.89). Women with high-risk adenomas had an increased risk of colorectal cancer death (SMR 1.37, 95% CI 1.19-1.57); women with low-risk adenomas (SMR 0.90, 95% CI 0.76-1.07) and men with high-risk adenomas had a similar risk (SMR 0.89, 95% CI 0.76-1.04), while men with low-risk adenomas had reduced risk (SMR 0.70, 95% CI 0.59-0.84).

CONCLUSIONS

After adenoma removal, women had an increased risk of colorectal cancer death, while men had reduced risk, compared to the general female and male populations. Sex-specific surveillance recommendations after adenoma removal should be considered.

Long-term cumulative incidence of metachronous advanced colorectal neoplasia after colonoscopy and a novel risk factor: a cohort study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Long-term cumulative incidence of and risk factors for metachronous advanced colorectal neoplasia, including both advanced colorectal adenoma (≥10 mm, or with villous or high-grade dysplasia) and colorectal cancer, are critical for surveillance strategies. The aim of this study was to determine the cumulative incidence of metachronous advanced colorectal neoplasia and its risk factors.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted on 6720 consecutive individuals who underwent general health check-ups and colonoscopy. Colorectal adenomas at initial colonoscopy were categorized as low-risk (1-2 small [<10 mm] tubular adenomas) or high-risk adenoma (≥3 tubular adenomas of any size; at least one adenoma ≥10 mm; or villous adenoma or adenoma with high-grade dysplasia). Kaplan-Meier estimates and hazard ratio by Cox-proportional hazard regression were calculated.

RESULTS

The cumulative incidence (95% confidence interval [CI]) of metachronous advanced colorectal neoplasia at 5 and 10 years was 5.7% [4.6-7.1], and 11% [8.9-14] in the low-risk adenoma group, and 10% [8.6-13], and 17% [14-21] in high-risk adenoma group, respectively. Adjusted hazard ratio [95% CI] of low-risk adenoma (vs. no colorectal adenoma), high-risk adenoma (vs. no colorectal adenoma), current smoking and positive fecal immunochemical test were 1.34 [1.04-1.74], 1.94 [1.48-2.55], 1.55 [1.2-2.02] and 1.69 [1.35-2.1], respectively. Adjusted hazard ratio [95% CI] of positive fecal immunochemical test was 1.88 [1.29-2.74] in those with normal colonoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

Both low-risk and high-risk adenomas confer substantial risk for metachronous advanced colorectal neoplasia at 10 years. Positive fecal immunochemical test was a significant risk factor for metachronous advanced colorectal neoplasia despite normal colonoscopy.

Long-term risk of colorectal cancer after removal of adenomas during screening colonoscopies in a large community-based population in China

Patients with conventional adenoma removal are recommended to undergo colonoscopy surveillance to prevent colorectal cancer (CRC). However, evidence supporting the guidelines of colonoscopy surveillance is limited, especially among the Chinese population. We investigated the association between colonoscopy adenoma findings and CRC risk among individuals aged 40 to 74 years who underwent baseline colonoscopy from 2007 to 2016 in Jiashan and Haining, Zhejiang, China; 34 382 participants were categorized into advanced adenoma, nonadvanced adenoma and no adenoma based on adenoma findings. A multivariable Cox regression model was used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) of CRC incidence with adjustment for potential confounding factors. After a median follow-up time of 7.7 years, 113 incident cases of CRC were identified (18 occurred in 1632 participants with advanced adenoma, 16 in 3973 participants with nonadvanced adenoma and 79 in 28 777 participants with no adenoma). Compared to no adenoma group, the adjusted HR for CRC in advanced adenoma group was 4.01 (95% CI, 2.37-6.77). For nonadvanced adenomas, individuals with ≥3 adenomas showed an increased risk of CRC (HR, 3.65; 95% CI, 1.43-9.31), but no significantly increased risk of CRC was found for 1 to 2 nonadvanced adenomas, compared to those with no adenoma. Our study suggested that the risk of subsequent CRC increased in individuals with high-risk adenoma (at least one advanced adenoma or ≥3 nonadvanced adenomas), but not in those with 1 to 2 nonadvanced adenomas. These results provide the first evidence from the Chinese population for the current surveillance guidelines.

A Polyp Worth Removing: A Paradigm for Measuring Colonoscopy Quality and Performance of Novel Technologies for Polyp Detection

Leaving no significant polyp behind while avoiding risks due to unnecessary resections is a commonsense strategy to safely and effectively prevent colorectal cancer (CRC) with colonoscopy. It also alludes to polyps worth removing and, therefore, worth finding. The majority of "worthy" precancerous polyps are adenomas, which for over 2 decades, have received the most attention in performance research and metrics. Consequently, the detection rate of adenomas is currently the only validated, outcome-based measure of colonoscopy demonstrated to correlate with reduced risk of postcolonoscopy CRC. However, a third or more of postcolonoscopy CRCs originate from sessile serrated polyps (SSPs), which are notoriously difficult to find, diagnose and completely resect. Among serrated polyps, the agreement among pathologists differentiating SSPs from non-neoplastic hyperplastic polyps is moderate at best. This lack of ground truth precludes SSPs from consideration in primary metrics of colonoscopy quality or performance of novel polyp detection technologies. By instead leveraging the distinct endoscopic and clinical features of serrated polyps, including those considered important due to proximal location and larger size, clinically significant serrated polyps represent serrated polyps worth removing, enriched with subtle precancerous SSPs. With the explosion of technologies to assist polyp detection, now is the time to broaden benchmarks to include clinically significant serrated polypss alongside adenomas, a measure that is relevant both for assessing the performance of endoscopists, and for assessing new polyp detection technologies.

The influence of the surveillance time interval on the risk of advanced neoplasia after non-advanced adenoma removal

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the incidence of advanced neoplasia (colorectal cancer or advanced adenoma) at surveillance colonoscopy following removal of non-advanced adenoma; to determine whether the time interval before surveillance colonoscopy influences the likelihood of advanced neoplasia.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING, PARTICIPANTS

Patients enrolled in a South Australian surveillance colonoscopy program with findings of non-advanced adenoma during 1999-2016 who subsequently underwent surveillance colonoscopy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Incidence of advanced neoplasia at follow-up surveillance colonoscopy.

RESULTS

Advanced neoplasia was detected in 169 of 965 eligible surveillance colonoscopies (18%) for 904 unique patients (median age, 62.0 years; interquartile range [IQR], 54.0-69.0 years), of whom 570 were men (59.1%). The median interval between the initial and surveillance procedures was 5.2 years (IQR, 4.4-6.0 years; range, 2.0-14 years). Factors associated with increased risk of advanced neoplasia at follow-up included age (per year: odds ratio [OR], 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.05), prior history of adenoma (OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.01-2.15), two non-advanced adenomas identified at baseline procedure (v one: OR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.18-2.57), and time to surveillance colonoscopy (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.08-1.37). The estimated incidence of advanced neoplasia was 19% five years after non-advanced adenoma removal, and 30% at ten years.

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing the surveillance colonoscopy interval beyond five years after removal of non-advanced adenoma increases the risk of detection of advanced neoplasia at follow-up colonoscopy.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on Strategies to Improve Quality of Screening and Surveillance Colonoscopy: Expert Review

The purpose of this American Gastroenterological Association Institute Clinical Practice Update was to review the available evidence and provide best practice advice regarding strategies to improve the quality of screening and surveillance colonoscopy. This review is framed around 15 best practice advice statements regarding colonoscopy quality that were agreed upon by the authors, based on a review of the available evidence and published guidelines. This is not a formal systematic review and thus no formal rating of the quality of evidence or strength of recommendation has been carried out.

Risk of Colorectal Cancer and Cancer Related Mortality After Detection of Low-risk or High-risk Adenomas, Compared With No Adenoma, at Index Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The risk of metachronous colorectal cancer (CRC) among patients with no adenomas, low-risk adenomas (LRAs), or high-risk adenomas (HRAs), detected at index colonoscopy, is unclear. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare incidence rates of metachronous CRC and CRC-related mortality after a baseline colonoscopy for each group.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases for studies that reported the incidence of CRC and adenoma characteristics after colonoscopy. The primary outcome was odds of metachronous CRC and CRC-related mortality per 10,000 person-years of follow-up after baseline colonoscopy for all the groups.

RESULTS

Our final analysis included 12 studies with 510,019 patients (mean age, 59.2 ± 2.6 years; 55% male; mean duration of follow up, 8.5 ± 3.3 years). The incidence of CRC per 10,000 person-years was marginally higher for patients with LRAs compared to those with no adenomas (4.5 vs 3.4; odds ratio [OR], 1.26; 95% CI, 1.06-1.51; I²=0), but significantly higher for patients with HRAs compared to those with no adenoma ( 13.8 vs 3.4; odds ratio [OR], 2.92; 95% CI, 2.31-3.69; I²=0 ) and patients with HRAs compared to LRAs (13.81 vs 4.5; OR, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.72-3.20; I²=55%). However, the CRC-related mortality per 10,000 person-years did not differ significantly for patients with LRAs compared to no adenomas (OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.76-1.74; I²=0) but was significantly higher in persons with HRAs compared with LRAs (OR, 2.48; 95% CI, 1.30-4.75; I²=38%) and no adenomas (OR, 2.69; 95% CI, 1.87-3.87; I²=0).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrate that the risk of metachronous CRC and mortality is significantly higher for patients with HRAs, but this risk is very low in patients with LRAs, comparable to patients with no adenomas. Follow-up of patients with LRAs detected at index colonoscopy should be the same as for persons with no adenomas.

Characterizing chronological accumulation of comorbidities in healthy veterans: a computational approach

Understanding patient accumulation of comorbidities can facilitate healthcare strategy and personalized preventative care. We applied a directed network graph to electronic health record (EHR) data and characterized comorbidities in a cohort of healthy veterans undergoing screening colonoscopy. The Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program #380 was a prospective longitudinal study of screening and surveillance colonoscopy. We identified initial instances of three-digit ICD-9 diagnoses for participants with at least 5 years of linked EHR history (October 1999 to December 2015). For diagnoses affecting at least 10% of patients, we calculated pairwise chronological relative risk (RR). iGraph was used to produce directed graphs of comorbidities with RR > 1, as well as summary statistics, key diseases, and communities. A directed graph based on 2210 patients visualized longitudinal development of comorbidities. Top hub (preceding) diseases included ischemic heart disease, inflammatory and toxic neuropathy, and diabetes. Top authority (subsequent) diagnoses were acute kidney failure and hypertensive chronic kidney failure. Four communities of correlated comorbidities were identified. Close analysis of top hub and authority diagnoses demonstrated known relationships, correlated sequelae, and novel hypotheses. Directed network graphs portray chronologic comorbidity relationships. We identified relationships between comorbid diagnoses in this aging veteran cohort. This may direct healthcare prioritization and personalized care.

≥3 Nonadvanced Adenomas are More Common in the Era of Contemporary Colonoscopy and Not Associated With Metachronous Advanced Neoplasia

INTRODUCTION

Data from standard definition colonoscopy era demonstrate patients with an advanced adenoma (≥10 mm, villous features or high-grade dysplasia) or ≥3 nonadvanced adenomas are considered high-risk for metachronous advanced neoplasia (MAN). Low-risk adenoma (LRA) patients are those with 1 to 2, <10 mm tubular adenomas. High definition colonoscopy, split-dose bowel preparation, and attention to adenoma detection enhance diminutive adenoma detection. We compared baseline adenoma characteristics between patients undergoing colonoscopy in a historic cohort (HC) and contemporary cohort (CC) to determine if number of patients with ≥3 nonadvanced adenomas are increased in CC, and if those features are associated with MAN in CC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients undergoing their first colonoscopy in HC (<2006) and CC (≥2006) at age 50 and above were identified through natural language processing. Multivariable regression analysis compared baseline adenoma characteristics between HC and CC, and determined the association between baseline characteristics and MAN in CC patients.

RESULTS

In total, 255,074 colonoscopies were performed between 1990 and 2015. A total of 9773 colonoscopies performed in the HC and 59,531 in the CC were included. At baseline, CC patients were more likely to have ≥3 nonadvanced adenomas [odds ratio (OR): 2.1, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.7-2.6]. In 3,377 CC patients undergoing follow-up colonoscopy, the risk of MAN did not differ between patients with LRA versus those with ≥3 nonadvanced adenomas (6.3% vs. 4.6%, OR: 1.4, CI: 0.58-3.5) including 3-4 (6.1%, OR: 1.4, CI: 0.52-3.6) and ≥5 (7.7%, OR: 1.8, CI: 0.23-14.6), although few patients had ≥5 nonadvanced adenomas.

CONCLUSIONS

Colonoscopy in the contemporary era increases detection of patients with ≥3 nonadvanced adenomas, which do not increase the risk of MAN compared with LRA patients. A similar surveillance to LRA patients should be considered for those patients.

Development of a Multi-Study Repository to Support Research on Veteran Health: The VA Cooperative Studies Program Epidemiology Center-Durham (CSPEC-Durham) Data and Specimen Repository

Federal agencies, including the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), have prioritized improved access to scientific data and results collected through federally funded research. Our VA Cooperative Studies Program Epidemiology Center in Durham, North Carolina (CSPEC-Durham) assembled a repository of data and specimens collected through multiple studies on Veteran health issues to facilitate future research in these areas. We developed a single protocol, request process that includes scientific and ethical review of all applications, and a database architecture using metadata (common variable descriptors) to securely store and share data across diverse studies. In addition, we created a mechanism to allow data and specimens collected through older studies in which re-use was not addressed in the study protocol or consent forms to be shared if the future research is within the scope of the original consent. Our CSPEC-Durham Data and Specimen Repository currently includes research data, genomic data, and study specimens (e.g., DNA, blood) for three content areas: colorectal cancer, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and Gulf War research. The linking of the study specimens and research data can support additional genetic analyses and related research to improve Veterans' health.

Histopathological and epidemiological findings of colonoscopy screening in a population with an average risk of colorectal cancer in Kuwait

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common cancer in women and the third most common in men worldwide, with a significantly rising incidence in the Middle East region over the last few decades. This study investigates the histopathological and epidemiological characteristics of colonoscopic findings in a population with an average risk of CRC in Kuwait.

METHODS

In this study, 1,005 asymptomatic average-risk Kuwaiti adults aged over 40 years had their first colonoscopy screening during the 2015-2018 period. Data on lifestyle behaviors (cigarette smoking, alcohol consumption, and physical activity), body mass index (BMI), and comorbidities were routinely collected from these individuals. All colorectal polyps or masses were assessed for their site, size, and number and then resected and sent for histopathological examination.

RESULTS

The mean age of the participants was 54 years, and 52.2% were women. In screened individuals, the polyp detection rate, adenoma detection rate, and carcinoma detection rate were 43.8%, 27.7%, and 1.2%, respectively. Tubular, tubulovillous, and villous types of adenoma constituted 17.3%, 2.8%, and 1.3% of all screened participants. Neoplastic lesions, particularly in the proximal colon, were more common among men aged 40-49 years. Age of 70 years and older (OR: 9.6; 95% CI: 4.7-19.9; P < 0.001), male gender (OR: 1.6; 95% CI: 1.1-2.3; P = 0.011), increased BMI (OR: 1.05; 95% CI: 1.02-1.08; P = 0.001), and smoking (OR: 3.5; 95% CI: 2.3-5.4; P < 0.001) were the most significant independent risk factors for colorectal neoplasia.

CONCLUSIONS

The high adenoma detection rate (ADR) in Kuwaiti population calls for the establishment of a national programe for CRC screening. The higher ADR in those younger than 50 years calls for assessment of the threshold age at which to start screening.

Contribution of Surveillance Colonoscopy to Colorectal Cancer Prevention

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The contribution of surveillance colonoscopy, as opposed to that of initial colonoscopy examination, to prevention of colorectal cancer (CRC) is uncertain. We estimated the preventive effect of surveillance colonoscopy by applying the recently developed metric of adenoma dwell time avoided needed to prevent 1 CRC case (DTA).

METHODS

We followed subjects in the prostate, lung, colorectal and ovarian (PLCO) cancer screening trial who underwent colonoscopies following positive findings from sigmoidoscopies (colonoscopy cohort, n = 15,935) for CRC incidence for 10 years. The number and timing of adenomas removed during surveillance were measured in a subset (n = 3492) of patients and extrapolated to the entire cohort to estimate the total avoided adenoma dwell time. A previously determined DTA value of 612 dwell years was applied to estimate the number of CRC cases prevented by surveillance. Proportional reduction in CRC was computed as C_P/(C_O+C_P), where C_O and C_P are observed and estimated prevented cases, respectively.

RESULTS

In the colonoscopy cohort of the PLCO, 2882 subjects had advanced adenomas (AAs), 572 had 3 or more non-advanced adenomas (NAA₃₊), 4496 had 1-2 non-advanced adenomas (NAA_1-2), and 7985 had no adenoma (NA). The mean number of subsequent colonoscopy examinations over 10 years were 1.80 for subjects with AAs, 1.63 for subjects with NAA₃₊, and 1.46 for subjects with NAA_1-2. Average years of avoided adenoma dwell time per subject were 4.0 for subjects with AAs, 5.5 for subjects with NAA₃₊, and 2.4 for subjects with NAA_1-2. There were 56 cases of CRC in subjects with AAs, 4 cases of CRC in subjects with NAA₃₊, and 33 cases of CRC in subjects with NAA_1-2. Estimated proportional reductions in CRC incidence were 25.0% in subjects with AAs (95% CI, 16%-34%), 34.4% in subjects with NAA_1-2 (95% CI, 25%-40%), and 30.4% overall (in subjects with AAs, NAA₃₊, or NAA_1-2; 95% CI, 25%-40%). Absolute CRC incidence reductions were 7.1 per 10,000 PY in subjects with AAs and 4.1 per 10,000 PY in subjects with NAA_1-2.

CONCLUSIONS

Using the recently developed metric of DTA, we estimated that surveillance colonoscopy in the PLCO colonoscopy cohort during 10 years of follow up prevented 30% of CRC cases. Because the methodology for estimation is indirect, the true effect is uncertain.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Cancer Screening: Challenges and Opportunities

Cancer is a leading cause of death in the United States and across the globe. Cancer screening is an effective preventive measure that can reduce cancer incidence and mortality. While cancer screening is integral to cancer control and prevention, due to the COVID-19 outbreak many screenings have either been canceled or postponed, leaving a vast number of patients without access to recommended health care services. This disruption to cancer screening services may have a significant impact on patients, health care practitioners, and health systems. In this paper, we aim to offer a comprehensive view of the impact of COVID-19 on cancer screening. We present the challenges COVID-19 has exerted on patients, health care practitioners, and health systems as well as potential opportunities that could help address these challenges.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Colorectal Cancer Screening, Version 2.2020

The NCCN Guidelines for Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening describe various colorectal screening modalities as well as recommended screening schedules for patients at average or increased risk of developing sporadic CRC. They are intended to aid physicians with clinical decision-making regarding CRC screening for patients without defined genetic syndromes. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on select recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines, including a section on primary and secondary CRC prevention, and provide context for the panel's recommendations regarding the age to initiate screening in average risk individuals and follow-up for low-risk adenomas.

Regulatory considerations for artificial intelligence technologies in GI endoscopy

Artificial intelligence (AI) technologies in clinical medicine have become the subject of intensive investigative efforts and popular attention. In domains ranging from pathology to radiology, AI has demonstrated the potential to improve clinical performance and efficiency. In gastroenterology, AI has been applied on multiple fronts, with particular progress seen in the areas of computer-aided polyp detection (CADe) and computer-aided polyp diagnosis (CADx), to assist gastroenterologists during colonoscopy. As clinical evidence accrues for CADe and CADx, our attention must also turn toward the unique challenges that this new wave of technologies represent for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and other regulatory agencies, who are tasked with protecting public health by ensuring the safety of medical devices. In this review, we describe the current regulatory pathways for AI tools in gastroenterology and the expected evolution of these pathways.

Genetic Colorectal Cancer and Adenoma Risk Variants Are Associated with Increasing Cumulative Adenoma Counts

BACKGROUND

The genetic basis for most individuals with high cumulative lifetime colonic adenomas is unknown. We investigated associations between known colorectal cancer-risk single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) and increasing cumulative adenoma counts.

METHODS

The Cooperative Studies Program #380 screening colonoscopy cohort includes 612 selected participants age 50 to 75 with genotyped blood samples and 10 years of clinical follow-up. We evaluated 41 published "colorectal cancer-risk SNPs" for associations with individual cumulative adenoma counts or having ≥10 cumulative adenomas. SNPs were analyzed singly or combined in a polygenic risk score (PRS). The PRS was constructed from eight published SNPs associated with multiple adenomas, termed "adenoma-risk SNPs."

RESULTS

Four colorectal cancer-risk SNPs were associated with increasing cumulative adenoma counts (P < 0.05): rs12241008 (gene: VTI1A), rs2423279 (BMP2/HAO1), rs3184504 (SH2B3), and rs961253 (FERMT1/BMP2), with risk allele risk ratios of 1.31, 1.29, 1.24, and 1.23, respectively. Three colorectal cancer-risk SNPs were associated with ≥10 cumulative adenomas (P < 0.05), with risk allele odds ratios of 2.09 (rs3184504), 2.30 (rs961253), and 1.94 (rs3217901). A weighted PRS comprised of adenoma-risk SNPs was associated with higher cumulative adenomas (weighted rate ratio = 1.57; P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

In this mostly male veteran colorectal cancer screening cohort, several known colorectal cancer-risk SNPs were associated with increasing cumulative adenoma counts and the finding of ≥10 cumulative adenomas. In addition, an increasing burden of adenoma-risk SNPs, measured by a weighted PRS, was associated with higher cumulative adenomas.

IMPACT

Future work will seek to validate these findings in different populations and then augment current colorectal cancer risk prediction tools with precancerous, adenoma genetic data.

High-Risk Adenomas at Screening Colonoscopy Remain Predictive of Future High-Risk Adenomas Despite an Intervening Negative Colonoscopy

INTRODUCTION

Limited data inform the current postpolypectomy surveillance guidelines, which suggest a shortened interval to third colonoscopy after a negative second examination if high-risk adenomas (HRA) were present on the initial screening colonoscopy. Therefore, we examined the risk of HRA at third colonoscopy stratified by findings on 2 previous examinations in a prospective screening colonoscopy cohort of US veterans.

METHODS

We identified participants who had 3 or more colonoscopies from CSP#380. We examined the risk of HRA on the third examination based on findings from the previous 2 examinations. Multivariate logistic regression was used to adjust for multiple covariates.

RESULTS

HRA were found at the third examination in 114 (12.8%) of 891 participants. Those with HRA on both previous examinations had the greatest incidence of HRA at third examination (14/56, 25.0%). Compared with those with no adenomas on both previous examinations, participants with HRA on the first examination remained at significantly increased risk for HRA at the third examination at 3 years after a negative second examination (odds ratio [OR] 3.41, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.28-9.08), 5 years (OR 3.14, 95% CI 1.49-6.61), and 7 years (OR 2.89, 95% CI 1.08-7.74).

DISCUSSION

In a screening population, HRA on the first examination identified individuals who remained at increased risk for HRA at the third examination, even after a negative second examination. This finding supports current colorectal cancer surveillance guidelines, which suggest a shortened, 5-year time interval to third colonoscopy after a negative second examination if high-risk findings were present on the baseline examination.

Improved detection of colorectal adenomas by high-quality colon cleansing

Background and study aims  Reliable adenoma detection requires "adequate" bowel preparation. The adenoma detection rate (ADR) was assessed in patients with high-quality (stool-free) cleansing versus adequate cleansing. Patients and methods  This study was a post-hoc combined analysis of three randomized trials individually powered for cleansing quality assessment. Treatment-independent ADR was assessed versus colon cleansing quality by central readers using the Harefield Cleansing Scale (HCS) and the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). The number needed to treat (NNT) to find an additional patient with at least one adenoma was calculated for high-quality versus adequate-quality cleansing. Results  A total of 1749 patients were included. ADR increased with high-quality versus adequate-quality cleansing: HCS grade A versus B, 39 % (94/242) versus 27 % (336/1229); NNT = 8.7; P  < 0.001. ADR also increased with high-quality versus uniform adequate segmental cleansing scores: HCS grade A versus uniform segmental scores 2, 39 % (94/242) versus 26 % (97/379); NNT = 7.5; P  < 0.001. ADR increased with top-quality versus adequate segmental cleansing scores: HCS uniform segmental scores 4 versus 2, 54 % (21/39) versus 26 % (97/379); NNT = 3.6; P  < 0.001. ADR increased with BBPS 9 versus 6, 43 % (71/166) versus 26 % (247/950); NNT = 6.0; P  < 0.001. Right colon ADR increased with top-quality versus adequate cleansing: HCS 4 versus 2, 20 % (25/122) versus 11 % (121/1117); NNT = 10.4; P  < 0.001 and BBPS 3 versus 2, 15 % (42/284) versus 11 % (130/1192); NNT = 25.8; P  = 0.033. Conclusions  High-quality colon cleansing improves adenoma detection, and it should be a priority for bowel preparations for colonoscopy.

Quality in Colorectal Cancer Screening with Colonoscopy

The goal of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with colonoscopy is to minimize CRC with minimal risk and cost. In order to continuously improve the quality of colonoscopy, different outcomes must be measured. For this topic, the priority indicators to be measured are (1) frequency of scheduling colonoscopy at appropriate interval based on current guidelines; (2) frequency of identifying adenomas in average-risk individuals undergoing their first screening colonoscopy; and, (3) providing guideline-consistent recommendations for repeat colonoscopy after the procedure.

High-quality colon cleansing and multiple neoplasia detection with 1L NER1006 versus mid-volume options: Post hoc analysis of phase 3 clinical trials

Background and study aims  Multiple neoplasia increase the risk of colorectal cancer. High-quality cleansing may improve adenoma detection. We assessed whether a new bowel preparation can improve colon cleansing and multiple lesion detection. Patients and methods  This post hoc analysis of two randomized clinical trials in Europe and the US assessed the per study and combined cleansing efficacy of overnight split dosing with (preparation + clear fluids) 1 + 1 L polyethylene glycol (PEG) NER1006 versus 2 + 1 L PEG + ascorbate (2LPEG) or 1 + 2 L oral sulfate solution (OSS) combined. Treatment-blinded central readers assessed cleansing quality using the Harefield Cleansing Scale (HCS). Patients with full segmental scoring were included. HCS segmental scores 0-4 (high-quality = HCS 3-4) were analyzed for NER1006 versus 2LPEG/OSS. Mean number of polyps or adenomas per patient (MPP/MAP) was calculated for treatments in patients with at least one polyp or adenoma. Results  In 1037 patients, NER1006 attained a greater rate of HCS 3 scores (29 % vs. 20 %; P  < 0.001) and HCS 4 scores (20 % vs. 17 %; P  = 0.007) versus 2LPEG/OSS. More polyps (678 versus 585) and adenomas (397 versus 331) were detected with NER1006 (N = 517) versus 2LPEG/OSS (N = 520). In all neoplasia-positive patients, with increasing minimal per-patient neoplasia multiplicity from 1 to 10, NER1006 numerically improved MPP (difference ± SE: 0.48 ± 0.24 to 3.89 ± 3.37) and MAP (0.47 ± 0.26 to 7.50 ± 9.00) versus 2LPEG/OSS. Conclusions  Low-volume NER1006 enhances high-quality cleansing versus medium-volume 2LPEG or OSS, individually and when combined. NER1006 may consequently facilitate the detection of multiple neoplasia in patients.

Variation in post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer across colonoscopy providers in English National Health Service: population based cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To quantify post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC) rates in England by using recent World Endoscopy Organisation guidelines, compare incidence among colonoscopy providers, and explore associated factors that could benefit from quality improvement initiatives.

DESIGN

Population based cohort study.

SETTING

National Health Service in England between 2005 and 2013.

POPULATION

All people undergoing colonoscopy and subsequently diagnosed as having colorectal cancer up to three years after their investigation (PCCRC-3yr).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

National trends in incidence of PCCRC (within 6-36 months of colonoscopy), univariable and multivariable analyses to explore factors associated with occurrence, and funnel plots to measure variation among providers.

RESULTS

The overall unadjusted PCCRC-3yr rate was 7.4% (9317/126 152), which decreased from 9.0% in 2005 to 6.5% in 2013 (P<0.01). Rates were lower for colonoscopies performed under the NHS bowel cancer screening programme (593/16 640, 3.6%), while they were higher for those conducted by non-NHS providers (187/2009, 9.3%). Rates were higher in women, in older age groups, and in people with inflammatory bowel disease or diverticular disease, in those with higher comorbidity scores, and in people with previous cancers. Substantial variation in rates among colonoscopy providers remained after adjustment for case mix.

CONCLUSIONS

Wide variation exists in PCCRC-3yr rates across NHS colonoscopy providers in England. The lowest incidence was seen in colonoscopies performed under the NHS bowel cancer screening programme. Quality improvement initiatives are needed to address this variation in rates and prevent colorectal cancer by enabling earlier diagnosis, removing premalignant polyps, and therefore improving outcomes.