1
|
Zhang J, Ali K, Wang J. Research Advances of Lipid Nanoparticles in the Treatment of Colorectal Cancer. Int J Nanomedicine 2024; 19:6693-6715. [PMID: 38979534 PMCID: PMC11229238 DOI: 10.2147/ijn.s466490] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/17/2024] [Accepted: 06/15/2024] [Indexed: 07/10/2024] Open
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a common type of gastrointestinal tract (GIT) cancer and poses an enormous threat to human health. Current strategies for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) therapy primarily focus on chemotherapy, targeted therapy, immunotherapy, and radiotherapy; however, their adverse reactions and drug resistance limit their clinical application. Advances in nanotechnology have rendered lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) a promising nanomaterial-based drug delivery system for CRC therapy. LNPs can adapt to the biological characteristics of CRC by modifying their formulation, enabling the selective delivery of drugs to cancer tissues. They overcome the limitations of traditional therapies, such as poor water solubility, nonspecific biodistribution, and limited bioavailability. Herein, we review the composition and targeting strategies of LNPs for CRC therapy. Subsequently, the applications of these nanoparticles in CRC treatment including drug delivery, thermal therapy, and nucleic acid-based gene therapy are summarized with examples provided. The last section provides a glimpse into the advantages, current limitations, and prospects of LNPs in the treatment of CRC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Junyi Zhang
- Department of Surgery, The Fourth Affiliated Hospital of School of Medicine, and International School of Medicine, International Institutes of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Yiwu, People’s Republic of China
| | - Kamran Ali
- Department of Surgery, The Fourth Affiliated Hospital of School of Medicine, and International School of Medicine, International Institutes of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Yiwu, People’s Republic of China
| | - Jianwei Wang
- Department of Surgery, The Fourth Affiliated Hospital of School of Medicine, and International School of Medicine, International Institutes of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Yiwu, People’s Republic of China
- Department of Colorectal Surgery and Oncology, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Intervention, Ministry of Education, 2nd Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, People’s Republic of China
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Baile-Maxía S, Jover R. Surveillance after colorectal polyp resection. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2023; 66:101848. [PMID: 37852710 DOI: 10.1016/j.bpg.2023.101848] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/17/2023] [Revised: 06/12/2023] [Accepted: 07/02/2023] [Indexed: 10/20/2023]
Abstract
Post-polypectomy surveillance has proven to reduce colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence in patients with high-risk polyps, but it implies a major burden on colonoscopy units. Therefore, it should be targeted to individuals with a higher risk. Different societies have published guidelines on surveillance after resection of polyps, with notable discrepancies among them, and many recommendations come from low-quality evidence based on surrogate measures, such as risk of advanced adenoma, and not CRC risk. In this review, we aimed to summarize the evidence supporting post-polypectomy surveillance, compare the recently updated major guidelines, and discuss the existing discrepancies on this topic. Briefly, patients with adenomas ≥10 mm or high-grade dysplasia and patients with serrated polyps ≥10 mm or dysplasia are generally considered to have an increased risk of metachronous CRC and require surveillance, whereas the indication of surveillance is not clearly established in patients without these high-risk features.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sandra Baile-Maxía
- Gastroenterology Department, Hospital General Universitario Dr. Balmis, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica ISABIAL, Universidad Miguel Hernández, Alicante, Spain
| | - Rodrigo Jover
- Gastroenterology Department, Hospital General Universitario Dr. Balmis, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica ISABIAL, Universidad Miguel Hernández, Alicante, Spain.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Bonnington SN, Hungin APS, Nickerson C, Wright S, Sharp L, Rutter MD. Colorectal cancer and advanced adenoma incidence during post-polypectomy surveillance: a national cohort study in the English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme. Endoscopy 2023; 55:740-753. [PMID: 37185968 DOI: 10.1055/a-2060-0615] [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] [Indexed: 05/17/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Improved colonoscopy quality has led to debate about whether all post-polypectomy surveillance is justified. We evaluated surveillance within the English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) to determine the yield of surveillance and identify predictive factors for surveillance outcome. METHODS We performed a retrospective cohort study of individuals undergoing post-polypectomy surveillance between July 2006 and January 2017. BCSP records were linked to the National Cancer Registration Database to identify interval-type post-colonoscopy colorectal cancers (CRCs). Advanced adenoma and CRC at surveillance were documented. CRC incidence was compared with the general population using standardized incidence ratios (SIRs). Predictors of advanced adenomas at first surveillance (S1), and CRC during follow-up, were identified. RESULTS 44 151 individuals (23 078 intermediate risk; 21 073 high risk) underwent 64 544 surveillance episodes. Advanced adenoma and CRC yields were, respectively, 10.0 % and 0.5 % at S1, 8.5 % and 0.4 % at S2, and 10.8 % and 0.4 % at S3. S1 yield was lowest in those with one index adenoma ≥ 10 mm (advanced adenoma 6.1 %; CRC 0.3 %). The SIR was 0.76 (95 %CI 0.66-0.88), accounted for by the intermediate risk group (intermediate risk SIR 0.61, 95 %CI 0.49-0.75; high risk SIR 0.95, 95 %CI 0.79-1.15). Adenoma multiplicity, presence of a large nonpedunculated adenoma, and greater villous component were associated with advanced adenoma at S1. Older age and multiplicity were significantly associated with CRC risk. CONCLUSION This large, national analysis found low levels of CRC in those undergoing surveillance and low advanced adenoma yield in most subgroups. Less intensive surveillance in some subgroups is warranted, and surveillance may be avoided in those with a single large adenoma.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stewart N Bonnington
- Gastroenterology, Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, North Tyneside General Hospital, North Shields, United Kingdom
| | - A Pali S Hungin
- Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, United Kingdom
| | | | - Suzanne Wright
- NHS Cancer Screening Programmes, Sheffield, United Kingdom
| | - Linda Sharp
- Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, United Kingdom
| | - Matthew D Rutter
- Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, United Kingdom
- Gastroenterology, University Hospital of North Tees, Stockton-on-Tees, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Jodal HC, Wieszczy-Szczepanik P, Klotz D, Herfindal M, Barua I, Tag P, Helsingen LM, Refsum E, Holme Ø, Adami HO, Bretthauer M, Kalager M, Løberg M. A Comparison of Risk Classification Systems of Colorectal Adenomas: A Case-Cohort Study. Gastroenterology 2023; 165:483-491.e7. [PMID: 37146913 DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2023.04.028] [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: 10/04/2022] [Revised: 04/14/2023] [Accepted: 04/23/2023] [Indexed: 05/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS Because post-polypectomy surveillance uses a growing proportion of colonoscopy capacity, more targeted surveillance is warranted. We therefore compared surveillance burden and cancer detection using 3 different adenoma classification systems. METHODS In a case-cohort study among individuals who had adenomas removed between 1993 and 2007, we included 675 individuals with colorectal cancer (cases) diagnosed a median of 5.6 years after adenoma removal and 906 randomly selected individuals (subcohort). We compared colorectal cancer incidence among high- and low-risk individuals defined according to the traditional (high-risk: diameter ≥10 mm, high-grade dysplasia, villous growth pattern, or 3 or more adenomas), European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) 2020 (high-risk: diameter ≥10 mm, high-grade dysplasia, or 5 or more adenomas), and novel (high-risk: diameter ≥20 mm or high-grade dysplasia) classification systems. For the different classification systems, we calculated the number of individuals recommended frequent surveillance colonoscopy and estimated number of delayed cancer diagnoses. RESULTS Four hundred and thirty individuals with adenomas (52.7%) were high risk based on the traditional classification, 369 (45.2%) were high risk based on the ESGE 2020 classification, and 220 (27.0%) were high risk based on the novel classification. Using the traditional, ESGE 2020, and novel classifications, the colorectal cancer incidences per 100,000 person-years were 479, 552, and 690 among high-risk individuals, and 123, 124, and 179 among low-risk individuals, respectively. Compared with the traditional classification, the number of individuals who needed frequent surveillance was reduced by 13.9% and 44.2%, respectively, and 1 (3.4%) and 7 (24.1%) cancer diagnoses were delayed using the ESGE 2020 and novel classifications. CONCLUSIONS Using the ESGE 2020 and novel risk classifications will substantially reduce resources needed for colonoscopy surveillance after adenoma removal.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Henriette C Jodal
- Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; Section of Oncology, Drammen Hospital, Vestre Viken Hospital Trust, Drammen, Norway.
| | - Paulina Wieszczy-Szczepanik
- Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Clinical Oncology, Centre of Postgraduate Medical Education, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Dagmar Klotz
- Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; Department of Pathology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Magnhild Herfindal
- Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Ishita Barua
- Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Petter Tag
- Department of Medicine, Nordland Hospital Bodø, Bodø, Norway
| | - Lise M Helsingen
- Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Erle Refsum
- Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Øyvind Holme
- Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; Department of Medicine, Sørlandet Hospital Kristiansand, Kristiansand, Norway
| | - Hans-Olov Adami
- Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Michael Bretthauer
- Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Mette Kalager
- Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Magnus Løberg
- Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Baile-Maxía S, Mangas-Sanjuán C, Ladabaum U, Hassan C, Rutter MD, Bretthauer M, Medina-Prado L, Sala-Miquel N, Pomares OM, Zapater P, Jover R. Risk Factors for Metachronous Colorectal Cancer or Advanced Adenomas After Endoscopic Resection of High-risk Adenomas. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2023; 21:630-643. [PMID: 36549471 DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2022.12.005] [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: 10/09/2022] [Revised: 11/24/2022] [Accepted: 12/06/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sandra Baile-Maxía
- Servicio de Medicina Digestiva, Hospital General Universitario Dr Balmis, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica ISABIAL, Universidad Miguel Hernández, Alicante, Spain
| | - Carolina Mangas-Sanjuán
- Servicio de Medicina Digestiva, Hospital General Universitario Dr Balmis, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica ISABIAL, Universidad Miguel Hernández, Alicante, Spain
| | - Uri Ladabaum
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California
| | - Cesare Hassan
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan, Italy; IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Matthew D Rutter
- North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Foundation Trust, Stockton-On-Tees, Cleveland, Yorkshire, United Kingdom; Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom
| | - Michael Bretthauer
- Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Lucía Medina-Prado
- Servicio de Medicina Digestiva, Hospital General Universitario Dr Balmis, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica ISABIAL, Universidad Miguel Hernández, Alicante, Spain
| | - Noelia Sala-Miquel
- Servicio de Medicina Digestiva, Hospital General Universitario Dr Balmis, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica ISABIAL, Universidad Miguel Hernández, Alicante, Spain
| | - Oscar Murcia Pomares
- Servicio de Medicina Digestiva, Hospital General Universitario Dr Balmis, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica ISABIAL, Universidad Miguel Hernández, Alicante, Spain
| | - Pedro Zapater
- Clinical Pharmacology Department, Hospital General Universitario Dr Balmis, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica ISABIAL, CIBERehd, Alicante, Spain
| | - Rodrigo Jover
- Servicio de Medicina Digestiva, Hospital General Universitario Dr Balmis, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica ISABIAL, Universidad Miguel Hernández, Alicante, Spain.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Risk of Colorectal Cancer and Advanced Polyps One Year After Excision of High-Risk Adenomas. Dis Colon Rectum 2022; 65:1112-1120. [PMID: 34840293 DOI: 10.1097/dcr.0000000000002068] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patients with multiple or large adenomas are considered to be high-risk for metachronous colorectal cancer. OBJECTIVE Evaluate the risks of detecting colorectal cancer, advanced adenoma, and advanced serrated polyps at 1-year surveillance colonoscopy in patients with >5 adenomas or adenomas >20 mm. DESIGN Descriptive, retrospective, multicentric, cohort study. We calculated the absolute risk of developing colorectal cancer, advanced adenomas, and advanced serrated polyps at the 1-year surveillance colonoscopy. Potential risk factors for advanced neoplasia at follow-up were evaluated with univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses. SETTINGS This study included data from a multicenter cohort colorectal cancer screening program, conducted from January 2014 to December 2015, based on fecal immunochemical tests in Spain. PATIENTS We included 2119 participants with at least 1 adenoma ≥20 mm or ≥5 adenomas of any size. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES We calculated the absolute risk of developing colorectal cancer, advanced adenomas, and advanced serrated polyps at the 1-year surveillance colonoscopy. Potential risk factors for advanced neoplasia at follow-up were evaluated with univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses. RESULTS At 1 year, participants displayed 6 colorectal cancers (0.3%), 228 advanced adenomas (10.5%), and 58 advanced serrated polyps (2.7%). The adjusted analysis identified 2 factors associated with advanced neoplasia: >5 adenomas (odds ratio 1.53; 95% CI: 1.15-2.03; p = 0.004) and polyps in a proximal location (OR 1.52; 95% CI: 1.15-2.02; p = 0.004). LIMITATIONS First, the sample size was relatively small compared to other studies with similar aims. Another limitation was the lack of a comparison group, which could have provided more practical results in terms of surveillance recommendations. CONCLUSIONS The colorectal cancer detection rate at a 1-year colonoscopy surveillance was low among patients classified at high risk of advanced neoplasia. The risk factors for advanced neoplasia were ≥5 adenomas and proximal polyps at baseline. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B820 . RIESGO DE CNCER COLORRECTAL Y DE PLIPOS AVANZADOS UN AO DESPUS DE LA RESECCIN DE ADENOMAS DE ALTO RIESGO ANTECEDENTES:Los pacientes con adenomas múltiples o grandes se consideran de alto riesgo para desarrollar cáncer colorrectal metacrónico.OBJETIVO:Evaluar los riesgos de detectar cáncer colorrectal, adenoma avanzado y pólipos serrados avanzados en la colonoscopia de seguimiento al año, en pacientes con un número mayor o igual a 5 adenomas o adenomas de 20 mm o más.DISEÑO:Estudio descriptivo, retrospectivo, multicéntrico, de cohortes. Calculamos el riesgo absoluto de desarrollar cáncer colorrectal, adenomas avanzados y pólipos serrados avanzados en la colonoscopia de vigilancia al año. Los factores de riesgo potenciales para el desarrollo de una neoplasia avanzada en el seguimiento, fueron evaluados mediante un análisis de regresión logística univariable y multivariable.AJUSTES:Este estudio incluyó datos de un programa de cribado de cáncer colorrectal de cohorte multicéntrico, realizado entre enero de 2014 y diciembre de 2015, con base en pruebas inmunoquímicas de materia fecal, en España.PACIENTES:Incluimos 2119 participantes con al menos un adenoma ≥20 mm o con cinco o más adenomas de cualquier tamaño.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Calculamos el riesgo absoluto de desarrollar cáncer colorrectal, adenomas avanzados y pólipos serrados avanzados en la colonoscopia de vigilancia al año. Los potenciales factores de riesgo para desarrollar una neoplasia avanzada en el seguimiento, se evaluaron mediante un análisis de regresión logística univariable y multivariable.RESULTADOS:Al año se encontraron en los pacientes participantes, 6 cánceres colorrectales (0,3%), 228 adenomas avanzados (10,5%) y 58 pólipos serrados avanzados (2,7%). Mediante el análisis ajustado se identificaron dos factores asociados con el desarrollo de neoplasia avanzada: un número igual o mayor a 5 adenomas (razón de probabilidades 1,53; IC del 95%: 1,15-2,03; p = 0,004) y la presencia de pólipos en una ubicación proximal (razón de probabilidades 1,52; IC del 95%: 1,15-2,02; p = 0,004).LIMITACIONES:Primero, el tamaño de la muestra fue relativamente pequeño en comparación con otros estudios con objetivos similares. Otra limitación fue la falta de un grupo comparativo, que podría haber proporcionado resultados más prácticos, en términos de recomendaciones de vigilancia.CONCLUSIÓNES:La tasa de detección de cáncer colorrectal mediante una colonoscopia de vigilancia al año, fue baja entre los pacientes clasificados como de alto riesgo de neoplasia avanzada. Los factores de riesgo para desarrollar una neoplasia avanzada fueron; un número igual o mayor a 5 adenomas y la presencia de pólipos proximales en la colonoscopia inicial de base. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B820 . ( Traducción-Eduardo Londoño-Schimmer ).
Collapse
|
7
|
Carballal S, Sánchez A, Moreira L, Cuellar-Monterrubio JE, Bernuy J, Daca M, Ortiz O, Ocaña T, Rivero-Sánchez L, Jung G, Serradesanferm A, Pozo A, Grau J, Torá I, Zaffalon D, Castells A, Pellisé M, Balaguer F. Prevalence of adenomatous polyposis in a fecal immunochemical test-based colorectal cancer screening program and risk of advanced neoplasia during follow-up. Endoscopy 2022; 54:688-697. [PMID: 34607378 DOI: 10.1055/a-1660-5353] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
Abstract
UNLABELLED BACKGROUND : Current guidelines recommend genetic counseling and intensive colonoscopy surveillance for patients with ≥ 10 colorectal adenomas based on scarce data. We investigated the prevalence of this condition in a fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based colorectal (CRC) screening program, and the incidence of metachronous lesions during follow-up. METHODS We retrospectively included all FIT-positive participants with ≥ 10 adenomas at index colonoscopy between 2010 and 2018. Surveillance colonoscopies were collected until 2019. Patients with inherited syndromes, serrated polyposis syndrome, total colectomy, or lacking surveillance data were excluded. The cumulative incidence of CRC and advanced neoplasia were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Risk factors for metachronous advanced neoplasia were investigated by multivariable logistic regression analysis. RESULTS 215 of 9582 participants (2.2 %) had ≥ 10 adenomas. Germline genetic testing was performed in 92 % of patients with ≥ 20 adenomas, identifying two inherited syndromes (3.3 %). The 3-year cumulative incidence of CRC and advanced neoplasia were 1 % and 16 %, respectively. In 39 patients (24.2 %), no polyps were found on first surveillance colonoscopy. The presence of an advanced adenoma was independently associated with a higher risk of advanced neoplasia at first surveillance colonoscopy (odds ratio 3.91, 95 %CI 1.12-13.62; P = 0.03). Beyond the first surveillance colonoscopy, the risk of metachronous advanced neoplasia was lower. CONCLUSIONS The prevalence of ≥ 10 adenomas in a FIT-based CRC screening program was 2.2 %; a small proportion of inherited syndromes were detected, even amongst those with ≥ 20 adenomas. A low rate of post-colonoscopy CRC was observed and the risk of advanced neoplasia beyond the first surveillance colonoscopy tended to progressively decrease throughout successive follow-ups.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sabela Carballal
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBEREHD), University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Ariadna Sánchez
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBEREHD), University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Leticia Moreira
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBEREHD), University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Jesús Eduardo Cuellar-Monterrubio
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBEREHD), University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.,Department of Gastroenterology, Dr. José Eleuterio González University Hospital, Autonomous University of Nuevo León, Monterrey, Mexico
| | - Julio Bernuy
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBEREHD), University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.,Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital of Zumarraga, Guipuzkoa, Spain
| | - Maria Daca
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBEREHD), University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Oswaldo Ortiz
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBEREHD), University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Teresa Ocaña
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBEREHD), University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Liseth Rivero-Sánchez
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBEREHD), University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Gerhard Jung
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBEREHD), University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Anna Serradesanferm
- Preventive Medicine and Hospital Epidemiology Department, Hospital Clinic, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Angels Pozo
- Preventive Medicine and Hospital Epidemiology Department, Hospital Clinic, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Jaume Grau
- Preventive Medicine and Hospital Epidemiology Department, Hospital Clinic, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Isabel Torá
- Preventive Medicine and Hospital Epidemiology Department, Hospital Clinic, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Diana Zaffalon
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBEREHD), University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Antoni Castells
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBEREHD), University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - María Pellisé
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBEREHD), University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Francesc Balaguer
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBEREHD), University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Zgraggen A, Stoffel ST, Barbier MC, Marbet UA. Colorectal cancer surveillance by colonoscopy in a prospective, population-based long-term Swiss screening study - outcomes, adherence, and costs. ZEITSCHRIFT FUR GASTROENTEROLOGIE 2022; 60:761-778. [PMID: 35545112 PMCID: PMC9179214 DOI: 10.1055/a-1796-2471] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Armin Zgraggen
- Kantonsspital Aarau AG, Division of Rheumatology, Aarau, Switzerland.,Division of Gastroenterology, Kantonsspital Uri, Altdorf, Switzerland
| | - Sandro Tiziano Stoffel
- Institute for Pharmaceutical Medicine, Universität Basel, Basel, Switzerland.,Research Department of Behavioural Sciences and Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
| | | | - Urs Albert Marbet
- Division of Gastroenterology, Kantonsspital Uri, Altdorf, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Jodal HC, Klotz D, Herfindal M, Barua I, Tag P, Helsingen LM, Refsum E, Holme Ø, Adami HO, Bretthauer M, Kalager M, Løberg M. Long-term colorectal cancer incidence and mortality after adenoma removal in women and men. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2022; 55:412-421. [PMID: 34716941 DOI: 10.1111/apt.16686] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/23/2021] [Revised: 09/17/2021] [Accepted: 10/19/2021] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Henriette C Jodal
- Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.,Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Dagmar Klotz
- Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.,Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.,Department of Pathology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Magnhild Herfindal
- Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.,Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Ishita Barua
- Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.,Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Petter Tag
- Department of Medicine, Nordland Hospital Bodø, Bodø, Norway
| | - Lise M Helsingen
- Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.,Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Erle Refsum
- Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.,Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Øyvind Holme
- Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.,Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.,Department of Medicine, Sørlandet Hospital Kristiansand, Kristiansand, Norway
| | - Hans-Olov Adami
- Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.,Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.,Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Michael Bretthauer
- Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.,Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Mette Kalager
- Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.,Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.,Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Magnus Løberg
- Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.,Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Pin-Vieito N, Puga M, Fernández-de-Castro D, Cubiella J. Faecal immunochemical test outside colorectal cancer screening? World J Gastroenterol 2021; 27:6415-6429. [PMID: 34720531 PMCID: PMC8517780 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v27.i38.6415] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/07/2021] [Revised: 06/27/2021] [Accepted: 08/16/2021] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) are the most widely colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnostic biomarker available. Many population screening programmes are based on this biomarker, with the goal of reducing CRC mortality. Moreover, in recent years, a large amount of evidence has been produced on the use of FIT to detect CRC in patients with abdominal symptoms in primary healthcare as well as in surveillance after adenoma resection. The aim of this review is to highlight the available evidence on these two topics. We will summarize the evidence on diagnostic yield in symptomatic patients with CRC and significant colonic lesion and the different options to use this (thresholds, brands, number of determinations, prediction models and combinations). We will include recommendations on FIT strategies in primary healthcare proposed by regulatory bodies and scientific societies and their potential effects on healthcare resources and CRC prognosis. Finally, we will show information regarding FIT-based surveillance as an alternative to endoscopic surveillance after high-risk polyp resection. To conclude, due to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, FIT-based strategies have become extremely relevant since they enable a reduction of colonoscopy demand and access to the healthcare system by selecting individuals with the highest risk of CRC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Noel Pin-Vieito
- Department of Gastroenterology, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Ourense, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Galicia Sur, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBERehd), Ourense 32005, Spain
| | - Manuel Puga
- Department of Gastroenterology, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Ourense, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Galicia Sur, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBERehd), Ourense 32005, Spain
| | - Daniel Fernández-de-Castro
- Department of Gastroenterology, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Ourense, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Galicia Sur, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBERehd), Ourense 32005, Spain
| | - Joaquín Cubiella
- Department of Gastroenterology, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Ourense, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Galicia Sur, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBERehd), Ourense 32005, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Regueiro C, Almazán R, Portillo I, Besó M, Tourne-Garcia C, Rodríguez-Camacho E, Ono A, Gómez-Amorín Á, Cubiella J. Polyprev: Randomized, Multicenter, Controlled Trial Comparing Fecal Immunochemical Test with Endoscopic Surveillance after Advanced Adenoma Resection in Colorectal Cancer Screening Programs: A Study Protocol. Diagnostics (Basel) 2021; 11:diagnostics11091520. [PMID: 34573862 PMCID: PMC8465973 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics11091520] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/05/2021] [Revised: 08/13/2021] [Accepted: 08/17/2021] [Indexed: 01/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs have been implemented to reduce the burden of the disease. When an advanced colonic lesion is detected, clinical practice guidelines recommend endoscopic surveillance with different intervals between explorations. Endoscopic surveillance is producing a considerable increase in the number of colonoscopies, with a limited effect on the CRC incidence. Instead, participation in CRC screening programs based on the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) could be a non-inferior alternative to endoscopic surveillance to reduce 10-year CRC incidence. Based on this hypothesis, we have designed a multicenter and randomized clinical trial within the Spanish population CRC screening programs to compare FIT surveillance with endoscopic surveillance. We will include individuals aged from 50 to 65 years with complete colonoscopy and advanced lesions resected within the CRC screening programs. Patients will be randomly allocated to perform an annual FIT and colonoscopy if fecal hemoglobin concentration is ≥10 µg/g, or to perform endoscopic surveillance. On the basis of the non-superior CRC incidence, we will recruit 1894 patients in each arm. The main endpoint is 10-year CRC incidence and the secondary endpoints are diagnostic yield, participation, adverse effects, mortality and cost-effectiveness. Our results may modify the clinical practice after advanced colonic resection in CRC screening programs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cristina Regueiro
- Department of Gastroenterology, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Galicia Sur, Hospital Universitario de Ourense, 32005 Ourense, Spain;
- Correspondence:
| | - Raquel Almazán
- Conselleria de Sanidade, Dirección Xeral de Saúde Pública, 15704 Galicia, Spain; (R.A.); (E.R.-C.); (Á.G.-A.)
| | - Isabel Portillo
- Osakidetza Basque Health Service, Basque Country Colorectal Cancer Screening Programme, 48009 Bilbao, Spain;
- Biocruces Health Research Institute, Cancer Biomarker Area, 48903 Barakaldo, Spain
| | - María Besó
- Servicio de Promoción de la Salud y Prevención en el Entorno Sanitario, Dirección General de Salud Pública y Adicciones, 46021 Valencia, Spain;
| | - Carlos Tourne-Garcia
- Colon and Rectal Cancer Prevention Program, Directorate General for Public Health, Autonomous Government for Health, 30008 Mucia, Spain;
| | - Elena Rodríguez-Camacho
- Conselleria de Sanidade, Dirección Xeral de Saúde Pública, 15704 Galicia, Spain; (R.A.); (E.R.-C.); (Á.G.-A.)
| | - Akiko Ono
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Clínico Universitario Virgen de la Arrixaca, 30120 Murcia, Spain;
| | - Ángel Gómez-Amorín
- Conselleria de Sanidade, Dirección Xeral de Saúde Pública, 15704 Galicia, Spain; (R.A.); (E.R.-C.); (Á.G.-A.)
| | - Joaquín Cubiella
- Department of Gastroenterology, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Galicia Sur, Hospital Universitario de Ourense, 32005 Ourense, Spain;
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Denis B. Postpolypectomy colonoscopy surveillance guidelines: small revolutions, but still room for improvement. Gastrointest Endosc 2021; 93:993-994. [PMID: 33741102 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.12.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/13/2020] [Accepted: 12/03/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Bernard Denis
- Department of Gastroenterology, Louis Pasteur Hospital, Colmar, France
| |
Collapse
|