1
|
Honda M, Naoe H, Gushima R, Miyamoto H, Tateyama M, Sakurai K, Oda Y, Murakami Y, Tanaka Y. Risk stratification for advanced colorectal neoplasia based on the findings of the index and first surveillance colonoscopies. PLoS One 2021; 16:e0245211. [PMID: 33481809 PMCID: PMC7822265 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0245211] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/04/2020] [Accepted: 12/23/2020] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Risk stratification by index colonoscopy is well established for first surveillance endoscopy, but whether the previous two colonoscopies affect the subsequent advanced neoplasias has not been established. Therefore, the subsequent risk based on the findings of the index and first surveillance colonoscopies were investigated. This retrospective, cohort study was conducted in two clinics and included participants who had undergone two or more colonoscopies after index colonoscopy. High-risk was defined as advanced adenoma (≥ 1 cm, or tubulovillous or villous histology, or high-grade dysplasia). Based on the findings of the index and first surveillance colonoscopies, patients were classified into four categories: category A (both colonoscopy findings were normal), category B (no high-risk findings both times), category C (one time high-risk finding), and category D (high-risk findings both times). The incidence of subsequent advanced neoplasia was examined in each category. A total of 13,426 subjects were included and surveyed during the study periods. The subjects in category D had the highest risk of advanced neoplasia (27.4%, n = 32/117). The subjects in category A had the lowest risk (4.0%, n = 225/5,583). The hazard ratio for advanced neoplasia of category D compared to category A was 9.90 (95% Confidence interval 6.82-14.35, P<0.001). Classification based on the findings of index and first surveillance colonoscopies more effectively stratifies the risk of subsequent advanced neoplasia, resulting in more proper allocation of colonoscopy resources after two consecutive colonoscopies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Munenori Honda
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Kumamoto University Hospital, Kumamoto, Japan
| | - Hideaki Naoe
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Kumamoto University Hospital, Kumamoto, Japan
| | - Ryosuke Gushima
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Kumamoto University Hospital, Kumamoto, Japan
| | - Hideaki Miyamoto
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Kumamoto University Hospital, Kumamoto, Japan
| | - Masakuni Tateyama
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Kumamoto University Hospital, Kumamoto, Japan
| | | | - Yasushi Oda
- Oda GI Endoscopy and Gastroenterology Clinic, Kumamoto, Japan
| | | | - Yasuhito Tanaka
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Kumamoto University Hospital, Kumamoto, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
High-Risk Adenomas at Screening Colonoscopy Remain Predictive of Future High-Risk Adenomas Despite an Intervening Negative Colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2020; 115:1275-1282. [PMID: 32483010 DOI: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000000677] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
3
|
Gupta S, Lieberman D, Anderson JC, Burke CA, Dominitz JA, Kaltenbach T, Robertson DJ, Shaukat A, Syngal S, Rex DK. Recommendations for Follow-Up After Colonoscopy and Polypectomy: A Consensus Update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 91:463-485.e5. [PMID: 32044106 PMCID: PMC7389642 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.01.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 174] [Impact Index Per Article: 43.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Samir Gupta
- Veterans Affairs San Diego Healthcare System, San Diego, California; University of California-San Diego, Division of Gastroenterology La Jolla, California; Moores Cancer Center, La Jolla, California.
| | - David Lieberman
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon
| | - Joseph C Anderson
- Veterans Affairs Medical Center, White River Junction, Vermont; The Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, New Hampshire; University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, Connecticut
| | - Carol A Burke
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Jason A Dominitz
- Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, Washington; University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
| | - Tonya Kaltenbach
- San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, California; University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | - Douglas J Robertson
- Veterans Affairs Medical Center, White River Junction, Vermont; The Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, New Hampshire
| | - Aasma Shaukat
- Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota; University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Sapna Syngal
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Division of Cancer Genetics and Prevention, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Douglas K Rex
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Gupta S, Lieberman D, Anderson JC, Burke CA, Dominitz JA, Kaltenbach T, Robertson DJ, Shaukat A, Syngal S, Rex DK. Recommendations for Follow-Up After Colonoscopy and Polypectomy: A Consensus Update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Am J Gastroenterol 2020; 115:415-434. [PMID: 32039982 PMCID: PMC7393611 DOI: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000000544] [Citation(s) in RCA: 102] [Impact Index Per Article: 25.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Samir Gupta
- Veterans Affairs San Diego Healthcare System, San Diego, California
- University of California-San Diego, Division of Gastroenterology La Jolla, California
- Moores Cancer Center, La Jolla, California
| | - David Lieberman
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon
| | - Joseph C. Anderson
- Veterans Affairs Medical Center, White River Junction, Vermont
- The Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, New Hampshire
- University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, Connecticut
| | - Carol A. Burke
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Jason A. Dominitz
- Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, Washington
- University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
| | - Tonya Kaltenbach
- San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, California
- University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | - Douglas J. Robertson
- Veterans Affairs Medical Center, White River Junction, Vermont
- The Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, New Hampshire
| | - Aasma Shaukat
- Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota
- University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Sapna Syngal
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- Division of Cancer Genetics and Prevention, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Douglas K. Rex
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Gupta S, Lieberman D, Anderson JC, Burke CA, Dominitz JA, Kaltenbach T, Robertson DJ, Shaukat A, Syngal S, Rex DK. Recommendations for Follow-Up After Colonoscopy and Polypectomy: A Consensus Update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology 2020; 158:1131-1153.e5. [PMID: 32044092 PMCID: PMC7672705 DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.10.026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 232] [Impact Index Per Article: 58.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Samir Gupta
- Veterans Affairs San Diego Healthcare System, San Diego, California; University of California-San Diego, Division of Gastroenterology La Jolla, California; Moores Cancer Center, La Jolla, California.
| | - David Lieberman
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon
| | - Joseph C Anderson
- Veterans Affairs Medical Center, White River Junction, Vermont; The Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, New Hampshire; University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, Connecticut
| | - Carol A Burke
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Jason A Dominitz
- Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, Washington; University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
| | - Tonya Kaltenbach
- San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, California; University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | - Douglas J Robertson
- Veterans Affairs Medical Center, White River Junction, Vermont; The Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, New Hampshire
| | - Aasma Shaukat
- Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota; University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Sapna Syngal
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Division of Cancer Genetics and Prevention, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Douglas K Rex
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Heisser T, Peng L, Weigl K, Hoffmeister M, Brenner H. Outcomes at follow-up of negative colonoscopy in average risk population: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 2019; 367:l6109. [PMID: 31722884 PMCID: PMC6853024 DOI: 10.1136/bmj.l6109] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 10/09/2019] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To review and summarise the evidence on the prevalence of colorectal adenomas and cancers at a follow-up screening colonoscopy after negative index colonoscopy, stratified by interval between examinations and by sex. DESIGN Systematic review and meta-analysis of all available studies. DATA SOURCES PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase. Two investigators independently extracted characteristics and results of identified studies and performed standardised quality ratings. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA Studies assessing the outcome of a follow-up colonoscopy among participants at average risk for colorectal cancer with a negative previous colonoscopy (no adenomas). RESULTS 28 studies were identified, including 22 cohort studies, five cross sectional studies, and one case-control study. Findings for an interval between colonoscopies of one to five, five to 10, and more than 10 years were reported by 17, 16, and three studies, respectively. Summary estimates of prevalences of any neoplasm were 20.7% (95% confidence interval 15.8% to 25.5%), 23.0% (18.0% to 28.0%), and 21.9% (14.9% to 29.0%) for one to five, five to 10, and more than 10 years between colonoscopies. Corresponding summary estimates of prevalences of any advanced neoplasm were 2.8% (2.0% to 3.7%), 3.2% (2.2% to 4.1%), and 7.0% (5.3% to 8.7%). Seven studies also reported findings stratified by sex. Summary estimates stratified by interval and sex were consistently higher for men than for women. CONCLUSIONS Although detection of any neoplasms was observed in more than 20% of participants within five years of a negative screening colonoscopy, detection of advanced neoplasms within 10 years was rare. Our findings suggest that 10 year intervals for colonoscopy screening after a negative colonoscopy, as currently recommended, may be adequate, but more studies are needed to strengthen the empirical basis for pertinent recommendations and to investigate even longer intervals. STUDY REGISTRATION Prospero CRD42019127842.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas Heisser
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- Medical Faculty Heidelberg, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Le Peng
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- Medical Faculty Heidelberg, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Korbinian Weigl
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Michael Hoffmeister
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Hermann Brenner
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- Division of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) and National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|