CT colonography may improve colorectal cancer screening compliance. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;195:1118-1123. [PMID: 20966316 DOI: 10.2214/ajr.10.4921]

Evolving trends in CT colonography: A 10-year analysis of use and associated factors

PURPOSE

Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) is a non-invasive screening test for colorectal cancer (CRC) with high sensitivity and low risk of complications. We used a nationally representative sample of screening-eligible adults to examine trends in and factors associated with CTC use.

METHODS

We examined CTC use among 58,058 adults in the National Health Interview Survey in 2010, 2015, 2018, 2019, and 2021. For each survey year, we estimated CTC use by sociodemographic and health factors. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify factors associated with CTC use.

RESULTS

A total of 1.7 % adults reported receiving CTC across all survey years. CTC use was similar in 2010 (1.3 %), 2015 (0.8 %), 2018 (1.4 %), and 2019 (1.4 %) but increased in 2021 (3.5 %, p < 0.05). In multivariable analysis, survey year 2021 [vs. 2010, odds ratio (OR) 2.51, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.83-3.43], Hispanic (OR 1.73, 95 % CI 1.34-2.23), non-Hispanic Black (OR 2.07, 95 % CI 1.67-2.57), and household income <200 % federal poverty level (vs. >400 %, OR 1.25, 95 % CI 1.01-1.57) was associated with CTC use. Further, adults with a history of diabetes (OR 1.20, 95 % CI 1.01-1.45), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR 1.58, 95 % CI 1.25-1.99), cancer (OR 1.29, 95 % CI 1.05-1.58), or past-year hospital admissions (OR 1.44, 95 % CI 1.18-1.78) were more likely to receive CTC.

CONCLUSION

CTC use remained low from 2010 to 2019 but increased in 2021. CTC use was more frequent among adults with chronic health conditions, minorities, and adults with lower income, and may help reduce disparities in CRC screening.

Canadian Association of Radiologists Practice Guidelines for Computed Tomography Colonography

Colon cancer is the third most common malignancy in Canada. Computed tomography colonography (CTC) provides a creditable and validated option for colon screening and assessment of known pathology in patients for whom conventional colonoscopy is contraindicated or where patients self-select to use imaging as their primary modality for initial colonic assessment. This updated guideline aims to provide a toolkit for both experienced imagers (and technologists) and for those considering launching this examination in their practice. There is guidance for reporting, optimal exam preparation, tips for problem solving to attain high quality examinations in challenging scenarios as well as suggestions for ongoing maintenance of competence. We also provide insight into the role of artificial intelligence and the utility of CTC in tumour staging of colorectal cancer. The appendices provide more detailed guidance into bowel preparation and reporting templates as well as useful information on polyp stratification and management strategies. Reading this guideline should equip the reader with the knowledge base to perform colonography but also provide an unbiased overview of its role in colon screening compared with other screening options.

Sociodemographic Factors and Screening CT Colonography Use Among Medicare Beneficiaries

BACKGROUND. Approximately one-third of the eligible U.S. population have not undergone guideline-compliant colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Guidelines recognize various screening strategies to increase adherence. CMS provides coverage for all recommended screening tests except CT colonography (CTC). OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to compare CTC and other CRC screening tests in terms of associations of utilization with income, race and ethnicity, and urbanicity in Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. METHODS. This retrospective study used CMS Research Identifiable Files from January 1, 2011, through December 31, 2020. These files contain claims information for 5% of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. Data were extracted for individuals 45-85 years old, and individuals with high CRC risk were excluded. Multivariable logistic regression models were constructed to determine the likelihood of undergoing CRC screening tests (as well as of undergoing diagnostic CTC, a CMS-covered test with similar physical access as screening CTC) as a function of income, race and ethnicity, and urbanicity while controlling for sex, age, Charlson comorbidity index, U.S. census region, screening year, and related conditions and procedures. RESULTS. For 12,273,363 beneficiary years (mean age, 70.5 ± 8.2 [SD] years; 2,436,849 unique beneficiaries: 6,774,837 female beneficiaries, 5,498,526 male beneficiaries), there were 785,103 CRC screenings events, including 645 for screening CTC. Compared with individuals living in communities with per capita income of less than US$25,000, individuals in communities with income of US$100,000 or more had OR for undergoing screening CTC of 5.73, optical colonoscopy (OC) of 1.36, sigmoidoscopy of 1.03, guaiac fecal occult blood test or fecal immunochemical test of 1.50, stool DNA of 1.43, and diagnostic CTC of 2.00. The OR for undergoing screening CTC was 1.00 for Hispanic individuals and 1.08 for non-Hispanic Black individuals compared with non-Hispanic White individuals. Compared with the OR for undergoing screening CTC for residents of metropolitan areas, the OR was 0.51 for residents of micropolitan areas and 0.65 for residents of small or rural areas. CONCLUSION. The association with income was substantially larger for screening CTC than for other CRC screening tests or for diagnostic CTC. CLINICAL IMPACT. Medicare's noncoverage for screening CTC may contribute to lower adherence with CRC screening guidelines for lower-income beneficiaries. Medicare coverage of CTC could reduce income-based disparities for individuals avoiding OC owing to invasiveness, need for anesthesia, or complication risk.

CT colonography: can we achieve an adequate bowel preparation without diet restriction?

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate if an adequate bowel preparation for CT colonography, can be achieved without diet restriction, using a reduced amount of cathartic agent and fecal tagging. To investigate the influence of patients' characteristics on bowel preparation and the impact on patients' compliance.

METHODS

In total, 1446 outpatients scheduled for elective CT colonography were prospectively enrolled. All patients had the same bowel preparation based on a reduced amount of cathartic agent (120 g of macrogol in 1.5 l of water) the day before the exam and a fecal tagging agent (60 ml of hyperosmolar oral iodinated agent) the day of the exam. No dietary restrictions were imposed before the exam. The bowel preparation was evaluated using a qualitative and quantitative score. Patients were grouped by age, gender, and presence of diverticula in both scores. Patients' compliance has been evaluated with a questionnaire after the end of the exam and with a phone-calling interview the day after the exam.

RESULTS

According to the qualitative score, adequate bowel preparation was achieved in 1349 patients (93.29%) and no statistical differences were observed among the subgroups of patients. Quantitative scores demonstrated that colon distension was significantly better in younger patients and without diverticula. A good patients' compliance was observed and most patients (96.5%) were willing to repeat it.

CONCLUSIONS

The lack of diet restriction does not affect the quality of CTC preparation and good patient's compliance could potentially increase the participation rate in CRC screening programs.

KEY POINTS

• An adequate quality bowel preparation for CT colonography can be achieved without diet restriction, using a reduced amount of cathartic agent (120 g of macrogol in 1.5 l of water) and fecal tagging (60 ml of hyperosmolar oral iodinated agent). • A bowel preparation based on the combination of a reduced amount of cathartic agent and fecal tagging, without diet restriction, allows obtaining good quality in more than 90% of patients. • The bowel preparation scheme proposed reduces the distress and discomfort experienced by the patients improving adherence to CTC.

Transfer of blocker-based qPCR reactions for DNA methylation analysis into a microfluidic LoC system using thermal modeling

Changes in the DNA methylation landscape are associated with many diseases like cancer. Therefore, DNA methylation analysis is of great interest for molecular diagnostics and can be applied, e.g., for minimally invasive diagnostics in liquid biopsy samples like blood plasma. Sensitive detection of local de novo methylation, which occurs in various cancer types, can be achieved with quantitative HeavyMethyl-PCR using oligonucleotides that block the amplification of unmethylated DNA. A transfer of these quantitative PCRs (qPCRs) into point-of-care (PoC) devices like microfluidic Lab-on-Chip (LoC) cartridges can be challenging as LoC systems show significantly different thermal properties than qPCR cyclers. We demonstrate how an adequate thermal model of the specific LoC system can help us to identify a suitable thermal profile, even for complex HeavyMethyl qPCRs, with reduced experimental effort. Using a simulation-based approach, we demonstrate a proof-of-principle for the successful LoC transfer of colorectal SEPT9/ACTB-qPCR from Epi Procolon® colorectal carcinoma test, by avoidance of oligonucleotide interactions.

Serum phosphopeptide profiling for colorectal cancer diagnosis using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry

RATIONALE

The identification and evaluation of novel biomarkers are essential to clinical diagnosis and prognosis of colorectal cancer (CRC). Serum phosphopeptides have been recognized as a potential signature pool for cancers; therefore, we aim to profile the expression of serum phosphopeptides and to evaluate their feasibility in CRC diagnosis.

METHODS

We conducted the characterization and absolute quantification of endogenous phosphopeptides in sera using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry analysis in combination with enrichment of phosphopeptides by ZrAs-Fe₃ O₄ @SiO₂ nanoparticles and use of deuterium-labeled standards. Differentially expressed analysis of four phosphopeptides was performed, generating a two-phosphopeptide-based biomarker, L_F3-4 , by logistic regression analysis, where L_F3-4 is equal to (5.85 - 5.13 × [F3] - 3.57 × [F4]), and [F3] and [F4] are the concentration of phosphopeptides DpSGEGDFLAEGGGVR and ADpSGEGDFLAEGGGVR in sera, respectively.

RESULTS

The L_F3-4 values showed significant difference in CRC cases compared with controls, and yielded a specificity of 100%, leading to correct classification of 56 (93%) out of 60 CRC patients, including 12 (92.3%) of 13 CRC cases in stage I. Double-blind validation showed that 97.5% of CRC cases were discriminated accurately.

CONCLUSIONS

The L_F3-4 value was firstly verified to be a potential biomarker for CRC diagnosis, and may expand our view in underlying mechanisms for CRC.

Predictors of CT Colonography Use: Results From the 2019 National Health Interview Cross-Sectional Survey

PURPOSE

CT colonography (CTC) is a minimally invasive screening test with high sensitivity for colonic polyps (>1 cm). Prior studies suggest that CTC utilization remains low. However, there are few studies evaluating recent CTC utilization and predictors of CTC utilization. Our purpose was to estimate recent nationwide CTC utilization and evaluate predictors of CTC utilization using 2019 nationally representative cross-sectional survey data.

METHODS

Participants between ages 50 and 75 without colorectal cancer history in the 2019 National Health Interview Survey cross-sectional data were included. Proportion of participants reporting utilization of CTC was estimated, accounting for complex survey design elements. Multiple variable logistic regression analyses evaluated predictors of CTC utilization. Analyses were conducted accounting for complex survey design elements to obtain valid estimates for the civilian, noninstitutionalized US population.

RESULTS

In all, 13,709 respondents were included, and 1.4% reported undergoing CTC, of whom 39.9% underwent CTC within the last year, 18.5% within the last 2 years, 13.0% within the last 3 years, 7.8% within the last 5 years, 11.2% within the last 10 years, and 9.6% underwent CTC 10 years ago or more. Multiple variable logistic regression analyses revealed that Hispanic (odds ratio 2.67, 95% confidence interval 1.66-4.29, P < .001) and Black (odds ratio 2.47, 95% confidence interval 1.60-3.82, P < .001) participants were more likely than White participants to undergo CTC.

CONCLUSION

Survey results suggest that nationwide utilization of CTC remains low. Black and Hispanic participants were more likely than White participants to report undergoing CTC. Promotion of CTC may reduce racial and ethnic disparities in colorectal cancer screening.

Colorectal Cancer Screening: Have We Addressed Concerns and Needs of the Target Population?

Despite the recognized benefits of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, uptake is still suboptimal in many countries. In addressing this issue, one important element that has not received sufficient attention is population preference. Our review provides a comprehensive summary of the up-to-date evidence relative to this topic. Four OVID databases were searched: Ovid MEDLINE® ALL, Biological Abstracts, CAB Abstracts, and Global Health. Among the 742 articles generated, 154 full texts were selected for a more thorough evaluation based on predefined inclusion criteria. Finally, 83 studies were included in our review. The general population preferred either colonoscopy as the most accurate test, or fecal occult blood test (FOBT) as the least invasive for CRC screening. The emerging blood test (SEPT9) and capsule colonoscopy (nanopill), with the potential to overcome the pitfalls of the available techniques, were also favored. Gender, age, race, screening experience, education and beliefs, the perceived risk of CRC, insurance, and health status influence one’s test preference. To improve uptake, CRC screening programs should consider offering test alternatives and tailoring the content and delivery of screening information to the public’s preferences. Other logistical measures in terms of the types of bowel preparation, gender of endoscopist, stool collection device, and reward for participants can also be useful.

Efficacy and Safety of Carbon Dioxide Versus Air Insufflation for Colonoscopy in Deeply Sedated Pediatric Patients

OBJECTIVES

Studies have shown the advantages of carbon dioxide (CO2) over air insufflation in the adult population during colonoscopies. This study was designed to investigate the efficacy and safety of CO2 insufflation in deeply sedated children undergoing colonoscopy.

METHODS

This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind clinical trial. We recruited 100 consecutive pediatric patients who had colonoscopy under deep sedation for various indications. Patients were first randomized by history of abdominal pain and then randomly assigned to either CO2 or air insufflation. Postprocedural abdominal pain scores were registered on a 10-point visual analog rating scale and significant pain was defined as a score of 3 or higher. Abdominal circumferences and end tidal CO2 (ETCO2) levels were measured. Complications during and after the procedure were recorded.

RESULTS

We did not find statistically significant difference between CO2 and air insufflation on univariate analysis because of low number of children experiencing significant pain after colonoscopy. After adjusting for baseline pain, we found that pain was significantly lower in patients after CO2 versus air insufflation on multivariable analysis (P = 0.03). The significant factors related to pain were duration of the procedure (P = 0.006), history of abdominal pain (P = 0.002) and previous abdominal surgery (P = 0.02). CO2 insufflation was associated with decreased abdominal circumference after colonoscopy (P = 0.002). Girls were more likely to have pain regardless of intervention (P = .04).

CONCLUSIONS

Most children tolerate endoscopic procedures without significant pain. Our study was underpowered to show significant difference between air and CO2 on univariate analysis. CO2 insufflation during colonoscopy, however, may reduce postprocedural abdominal pain. Significant factors for increased pain on multivariate analysis included colonoscopy length over 30 minutes, history of abdominal pain, and previous abdominal surgery.

Prevalence of polyps ≥6 mm on follow-up CT colonography in a cohort with no significant colon polyps at baseline

AIM

Assess the prevalence of neoplasia ≥6 mm at repeat CT colonoscopy (CTC) in individuals with no significant lesions at baseline.

METHODS

Individuals aged ≥18 years, with/without CRC risk factors, with no polyps ≥6 mm on baseline CTC (negative baseline) who underwent repeat CTC in a large HMO from 2001 to 2011 were retrospectively identified. Studies were reviewed by board-certified radiologists with experience interpreting CTC. Demographic details, CRC risk factors, and the number, size, and location of incident lesions were noted. Findings were classified using the C-RADS scale. Lesion prevalence at CTC-2 was determined, and study interval and risk characteristics of patients with- and without findings were compared.

RESULTS

Our study included 636 individuals (369 men [58.0%]; mean age 59.9 years) with negative baseline CTC who underwent repeat CTC after a mean 4.6 year interval (SD 1.6 years). At baseline, 469/636 (73.7%) were at average risk for CRC; 418 remained at average risk for CTC-2 with 51 (8.0%) developing new risk factors in the interval between studies. At CTC-2, 47 participants (7.4%) presented 52 significant neoplasia: 35 polyps 6-9 mm, 14 polyps ≥10 mm, and 3 masses in 3/636 participants (0.47%). 2/3 masses, 6/14 polyps ≥10 mm (42.9%), and 12/25 polyps 6-9 mm (48.0%) were in individuals with risk factors for CRC. Histopathology was available for 12/52 lesions (23.1%): 8 tubular adenomas, 2 villous adenomas, 1 hamartomatous polyp, 1 case of normal tissue.

CONCLUSION

A mean 4.6 years after negative-baseline CTC, neoplasia ≥6 mm were seen in 7.4% of participants, including masses in 0.47%, supporting recommendations for a 5-year study interval.

Eliciting vulnerable patients' preferences regarding colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Patient preferences are important to consider in the decision-making process for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Vulnerable populations, such as racial/ethnic minorities and low-income, veteran, and rural populations, exhibit lower screening uptake. This systematic review summarizes the existing literature on vulnerable patient populations' preferences regarding CRC screening.

METHODS

We searched the CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases for articles published between January 1, 1996 and December 31, 2017. We screened studies for eligibility and systematically abstracted and compared study designs and outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 43 articles met the inclusion criteria, out of 2,106 articles found in our search. These 43 articles were organized by the primary sub-population(s) whose preferences were reported: 27 report on preferences among racial/ethnic minorities, eight among low-income groups, six among veterans, and two among rural populations. The majority of studies (n=34) focused on preferences related to test modality. No single test modality was overwhelmingly supported by all sub-populations, although veterans seemed to prefer colonoscopy. Test attributes such as accuracy, sensitivity, cost, and convenience were also noted as important features. Furthermore, a preference for shared decision-making between vulnerable patients and providers was found.

CONCLUSION

The heterogeneity in study design, populations, and outcomes of the selected studies revealed a wide spectrum of CRC screening preferences within vulnerable populations. More decision aids and discrete choice experiments that focus on vulnerable populations are needed to gain a more nuanced understanding of how vulnerable populations weigh particular features of screening methods. Improved CRC screening rates may be achieved through the alignment of vulnerable populations' preferences with screening program design and provider practices. Collaborative decision-making between providers and vulnerable patients in preventive care decisions may also be important.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Pretreatment Staging of Colorectal Cancer

Colorectal cancers are common tumors in the United States and appropriate imaging is essential to direct appropriate care. Staging and treatment differs between tumors arising in the colon versus the rectum. Local staging for colon cancer is less integral to directing therapy given radical resection is often standard. Surgical options for rectal carcinoma are more varied and rely on accurate assessment of the sphincter, circumferential resection margins, and peritoneal reflection. These important anatomic landmarks are best appreciated on high-resolution imaging with transrectal ultrasound or MRI. When metastatic disease is suspected, imaging modalities that provide a global view of the body, such as CT with contrast or PET/CT may be indicated. Rectal cancer often metastasizes to the liver and so MRI of the liver with and without contrast provides accurate staging for liver metastases. This article focuses on local and distant staging and reviews the appropriateness of different imaging for both variants. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

Computed Tomography Colonography vs Colonoscopy for Colorectal Cancer Surveillance After Surgery

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Recommendations for surveillance after curative surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC) include a 1-year post-resection abdominal-pelvic computed tomography (CT) scan and optical colonoscopy (OC). CT colonography (CTC), when used in CRC screening, effectively identifies colorectal polyps ≥10 mm and cancers. We performed a prospective study to determine whether CTC, concurrent with CT, could substitute for OC in CRC surveillance.

METHODS

Our study enrolled 231 patients with resected stage 0-III CRC, identified at 5 tertiary care academic centers. Approximately 1 year after surgery, participants underwent outpatient CTC plus CT, followed by same-day OC. CTC results were revealed after endoscopic visualization of sequential colonic segments, which were re-examined for discordant findings. The primary outcome was performance of CTC in the detection of colorectal adenomas and cancers using endoscopy as the reference standard.

RESULTS

Of the 231 participants, 116 (50.2%) had polyps of any size or histology identified by OC, and 15.6% had conventional adenomas and/or serrated polyps ≥6 mm. No intra-luminal cancers were detected. CTC detected patients with polyps of ≥6 mm with 44.0% sensitivity (95% CI, 30.2-57.8) and 93.4% specificity (95% CI, 89.7-97.0). CTC detected polyps ≥10 mm with 76.9% sensitivity (95% CI, 54.0-99.8) and 89.0% specificity (95% CI, 84.8-93.1). Similar values were found when only adenomatous polyps were considered. The negative predictive value of CTC for adenomas ≥6 mm was 90.7% (95% CI, 86.7-94.5) and for adenomas ≥10 mm the negative predictive value was 98.6% (95% CI, 97.0-100).

CONCLUSIONS

In a CRC surveillance population 1 year following resection, CTC was inferior to OC for detecting patients with polyps ≥6 mm. Clinical Trials.gov Registration Number: NCT02143115.

Detection of potentially relevant extracolonic and colorectal findings at CT colonography in a low-risk symptomatic patient population

PURPOSE

CT colonography (CTC) is a widely accepted examination tool for detection of colorectal lesions but evidence of the proportions of relevant extracolonic findings (ECF) in a large symptomatic but still relatively low-risk cohort is lacking, as well as their relationship to symptoms, age, and sex.

METHODS

All patients (n = 3208) with colorectal symptoms, imaged between January 2007 and September 2016 with first-time CTC, were retrospectively selected. The majority (96.7%) was examined with low-dose unenhanced protocol. The most relevant ECF and colorectal lesions (≥6 mm) were prospectively assessed according to C-RADS classifications. Follow-up was elaborated based on the electronic record review. Chi-square test was utilized for evaluating the associations between relevant findings and symptoms, age, and sex.

RESULTS

A total of 270 (8.4%) patients were classified as C-RADS E3, 63 (2.0%) patients as C-RADS E4, and 437 (13.6%) patients were assessed with colorectal lesions (C-RADS C2-4). At follow-up, two thirds of ECF turned out to be a malignancy or relevant disease that required further medical attention. The proportion of ECF was not related to specific colorectal symptoms. Patients aged ≥65 years and men had significantly higher proportions of ECF than younger patients (C-RADS E3 p = 0.005; C-RADS E4 p < 0.001) and women (C-RADS E3 p = 0.013; C-RADS E4 p = 0.009), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Proportions of relevant ECF and colorectal findings are relatively low in symptomatic low-risk patients. By use of CTC as a singular examination, especially in elderly patients, most colonoscopies can be avoided with the benefit of diagnosing relevant ECF without introducing substantial over-diagnosis.

Insurance Coverage for CT Colonography Screening: Impact on Overall Colorectal Cancer Screening Rates

RSNA, 2017.

Multitarget stool DNA test: clinical performance and impact on yield and quality of colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Multitarget stool DNA (MT-sDNA) testing is now approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for average-risk colorectal cancer screening. Trials leading to its approval used blinded colonoscopy as the reference standard. In the postapproval screen setting, the clinical performance and impact of MT-sDNA testing on unblinded colonoscopy has not been described. We measured the impact that knowledge of a positive MT-sDNA test result has on colonoscopy yield and quality.

METHODS

The unblinded group comprised all patients with positive MT-sDNA results on screening from September 1, 2014 to September 30, 2015 at a single tertiary center. Off-label test patients were excluded. The blinded group included all MT-sDNA-positive participants in a preapproval screening study from the same center. Detailed colonoscopy findings and withdrawal times were recorded.

RESULTS

There were 172 MT-sDNA-positive patients in the unblinded group and 72 in the blinded group. More total adenomatous/sessile serrated polyps (70% vs 53%, P = .013) and advanced neoplasms (28% vs 21%, P = .27) were detected in unblinded than in blinded groups. Median numbers of polyps detected were 2 (IQR, 1-4) and 1 (IQR, 0-2) in unblinded and blinded groups, respectively (P = .0007). Among polyps detected, flat or slightly raised lesions in the right side of the colon were proportionately more frequent with unblinded (40%) than with blinded examinations (9%) (P = .0017). Median withdrawal time was 19 minutes (IQR, 13-29) in the unblinded group compared with 13 minutes (IQR, 10-20) in the blinded group (P = .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Knowledge of a positive MT-sDNA result appears to have a beneficial impact on the diagnostic yield and quality of subsequent colonoscopy.

CT Colonographic Screening of Patients With a Family History of Colorectal Cancer: Comparison With Adults at Average Risk and Implications for Guidelines

OBJECTIVE

The purposes of this study were to compare rates of lesion detection at CT colonographic (CTC) screening of adults without symptoms who had and who did not have a family history of colorectal cancer according to American Cancer Society guidelines and to consider the clinical implications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Over 134 months, consecutively registered CTC cohorts of adults without symptoms who had (n = 156; 88 [56.4%] women; 68 [43.6%] men; mean age, 56.3 years) and who did not have (n = 8857; 4757 [53.7%] women; 4100 [46.3%] men; mean age, 56.6 years) an American Cancer Society-defined family history of colorectal cancer (first-degree relative with diagnosis before age 60 years or two first-degree relatives with diagnosis at any age) were compared for relevant colorectal findings.

RESULTS

For the family history versus no family history cohorts, the frequency of all nondiminutive polyps (≥ 6 mm) reported at CTC was 23.7% versus 15.5% (p = 0.007); small polyps (6-9 mm), 13.5% versus 9.1% (p = 0.068); and large polyps (≥ 10 mm), 10.2% versus 6.5% (p = 0.068). The rate of referral for colonoscopy was greater for the family history cohort (16.0% vs 10.5%; p = 0.035). However, the frequencies of proven advanced adenoma (4.5% vs 3.2%; p = 0.357), nonadvanced adenoma (5.1% vs 2.6%; p = 0.070), and cancer (0.0% vs 0.4%; p = 0.999) were not significantly increased. The difference in positive rates between the two cohorts (11.5% vs 4.3%; p < 0.001) was primarily due to nonneoplastic findings of no colorectal cancer relevance, such as small hyperplastic polyps, diverticular disease, and false-positive CTC findings.

CONCLUSION

Although the overall CTC-positive and colonoscopy referral rates were higher in the family history cohort, the clinically relevant frequencies of advanced neoplasia and cancer were not sufficiently increased to preclude CTC screening. These findings support the use of CTC as a front-line screening option in adults with a family history of colorectal cancer.

iTRAQ-based quantitative analysis of cancer-derived secretory proteome reveals TPM2 as a potential diagnostic biomarker of colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. We aimed to find novel molecules as potential biomarkers for the early diagnosis of CRC. A serum-free conditioned medium was successfully collected from three pairs of CRC tissue and adjacent normal tissue. iTRAQ-based quantitative proteomic analysis was applied to compare the differences in secretome between primary CRC mucosa and adjacent normal mucosa. A total of 145 kinds of proteins were identified. Of these proteins, 29 were significantly different between CRC and normal tissue. Tropomyosin 2 β (TPM2) exhibited the most significant differences; as such, this protein was selected for further validation. Quantitative real-time PCR indicated that the mRNA expression of TPM2 significantly decreased in the CRC tissue compared with the paired adjacent normal tissue. Immunohistochemical analysis also confirmed that TPM2 was barely detected at protein levels in the CRC tissue. In summary, this study revealed potential molecules for future biomarker applications and provided an efficient approach for the differential analysis of cancer-associated secretome. TPM2 may be valuable for the early diagnosis of CRC.

The Italian consensus to virtual colonoscopy

OBJECTIVES

To produce an informed consent for CT colonography (CTC), to be diffused by the Italian Society of Radiology, aimed to make patients and referring physicians aware of CTC examination protocol, advantages and disadvantages, limits and potential related risks.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Delphi method was used to create a consensus among experts on an informed consent for CTC. The overall agreement among different consulted specialists was evaluated and ranked using the Cronbach's correlation coefficient (α) at two time points: after the first and the second 'round' of consultation.

RESULTS

The Cronbach index was 0.84 at the end of the first round and 0.93 at the end of the second round. The number of disagreements dropped from an overall of 11-5, from the first to the second round.

CONCLUSIONS

The experts were able to produce an informed consent for CTC, hoping that this may be the beginning of a process focused on implementation of quality standards in CTC.

Blood-based protein biomarker panel for the detection of colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The majority of colorectal cancer (CRC) cases are preventable by early detection and removal of precancerous polyps. Even though CRC is the second most common internal cancer in Australia, only 30 per cent of the population considered to have risk factors participate in stool-based test screening programs. Evidence indicates a robust, blood-based, diagnostic assay would increase screening compliance. A number of potential diagnostic blood-based protein biomarkers for CRC have been reported, but all lack sensitivity or specificity for use as a stand-alone diagnostic. The aim of this study was to identify and validate a panel of protein-based biomarkers in independent cohorts that could be translated to a reliable, non-invasive blood-based screening test.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

In two independent cohorts (n = 145 and n = 197), we evaluated seven single biomarkers in serum of CRC patients and age/gender matched controls that showed a significant difference between controls and CRC, but individually lack the sensitivity for diagnostic application. Using logistic regression strategies, we identified a panel of three biomarkers that discriminated between controls and CRC with 73% sensitivity at 95% specificity, when applied to either of the two cohorts. This panel comprised of Insulin like growth factor binding protein 2 (IGFBP2), Dickkopf-3 (DKK3), and Pyruvate kinase M2(PKM2).

CONCLUSIONS

Due to the heterogeneous nature of CRC, a single biomarker is unlikely to have sufficient sensitivity or specificity for use as a stand-alone diagnostic screening test and a panel of markers may be more effective. We have identified a 3 biomarker panel that has higher sensitivity and specificity for early stage (Stage I and -II) disease than the faecal occult blood test, raising the possibility for its use as a non-invasive blood diagnostic or screening test.

CT colonography: accuracy, acceptance, safety and position in organised population screening

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common cancer and second most common cause of cancer-related deaths in Europe. The introduction of CRC screening programmes using stool tests and flexible sigmoidoscopy, have been shown to reduce CRC-related mortality substantially. In several European countries, population-based CRC screening programmes are ongoing or being rolled out. Stool tests like faecal occult blood testing are non-invasive and simple to perform, but are primarily designed to detect early invasive cancer. More invasive tests like colonoscopy and CT colonography (CTC) aim at accurately detecting both CRC and cancer precursors, thus providing for cancer prevention. This review focuses on the accuracy, acceptance and safety of CTC as a CRC screening technique and on the current position of CTC in organised population screening. Based on the detection characteristics and acceptability of CTC screening, it might be a viable screening test. The potential disadvantage of radiation exposure is probably overemphasised, especially with newer technology. At this time-point, it is not entirely clear whether the detection of extracolonic findings at CTC is of net benefit and is cost effective, but with responsible handling, this may be the case. Future efforts will seek to further improve the technique, refine appropriate diagnostic algorithms and study cost-effectiveness.

Colonic distention at screening CT colonography: role of spasmolytic agents and body habitus

Sufficient colonic dilation is important when using CT colonography (CTC) for colorectal cancer screening. We investigated the effect of antispasmodic agents and the patient body habitus on the degree of colonic dilation in screening CTC.We assessed the effect of clinical characteristics [age, gender, body mass index (BMI), and the presence of diverticula] and the use of antispasmodics on colonic distention in 140 patients who underwent CTC for colorectal cancer screening. The CTC was performed in both the supine- and prone positions. Seventy patients received antispasmodics prior to CT examination and the other 70 did not. Colonic distention was scored using a 5-point scale: 1=collapsed, 2=poorly visualized, 3=visualized but underdistended, 4=acceptable, and 5=excellent. Images scored as 4 or 5 were considered to be of diagnostic quality. The mean visual evaluation score was significantly higher in the supine- than the prone position (4.2±0.5 vs. 4.0±0.5, p<0.01). For the supine position, only the use of antispasmodic was statistically associated with sufficient colonic dilation by univariate logistic analysis (odds ratio=2.365, p=0.03). For the prone position, age, BMI, and the use of antispasmodic were statistically associated with sufficient colonic dilation by multivariate analysis. The odds ratio of these parameters was 0.955 (p=0.02), 0.874 (p=0.03), and 2.391 (p=0.02), respectively.We obtained sufficient colonic dilation with an antispasmodic for CTC in both positions. Younger age and a lower BMI were also associated with better colonic dilation in the prone position.

Blood-based testing for colorectal cancer screening

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common non-skin cancer diagnosed in men and women in the USA and worldwide. While it has been clearly established that screening for CRC, using a variety of methods, is cost effective and has a significant impact on overall survival, screening rates have proven to be sub-optimal. It has been long conjectured that a simple blood-based test, with a specimen drawn at a routine doctor's office visit, would encourage those individuals who have refused or ignored screening recommendations to undergo screening. This article reviews the currently available blood-based screening tests for CRC, including the ColonSentry™ messenger RNA (mRNA) expression panel and the SEPT9 methylated DNA test, and explores newer biomarkers that are near clinical implementation. Also discussed are additional applications for blood-based CRC testing, such as assessing prognosis, disease surveillance, and expansion of screening tests to high-risk populations, such as the estimated 1.4 million individuals in the USA with inflammatory bowel disease.

Improved stool DNA integrity method for early colorectal cancer diagnosis

BACKGROUND

DNA integrity analysis could represent an alternative approach to the early detection of colorectal cancer. Previously, fluorescence long DNA (FL-DNA) in stools was extracted using a manual approach and analyzed by capillary electrophoresis assay (CE FL-DNA). We aimed to improve diagnostic accuracy using a simpler and more standardized method [Real Time PCR FL-DNA (RT FL-DNA)] for the detection of early malignant lesions in a population undergoing colorectal cancer screening.

METHODS

From 241 stool samples, DNA was extracted using manual and semiautomatic extraction systems and analyzed using FL-DNA tests by CE and RT assays. The RT FL-DNA approach showed slightly higher sensitivity and specificity compared with the CE FL-DNA method. Furthermore, we compared the RT FL-DNA approach with the iFOBT report.

RESULTS

Nonparametric ranking statistics were used to analyze the relationship between the median values of RT FL-DNA and the clinicohistopathologic characteristics. The median values of both variables were significantly higher in patients with cancer than in patients with noncancerous lesions. According to the Fagan nomogram results, the iFOBT and FL-DNA methods provided more accurate diagnostic information and were able to identify subgroups at varying risks of cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of the semiautomatic extraction system and RT FL-DNA analysis improved the quality of DNA extracted from stool samples.

IMPACT

RT FL-DNA shows great potential for colorectal cancer diagnosis as it is a reliable and relatively easy analysis to perform on routinely processed stool samples in combination with iFOBT.

Prospective trial of the detection of urolithiasis on ultralow dose (sub mSv) noncontrast computerized tomography: direct comparison against routine low dose reference standard

PURPOSE

In this prospective trial we compared ultralow dose computerized tomography reconstruction algorithms and routine low dose computerized tomography for detecting urolithiasis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 48 consenting adults prospectively underwent routine low dose noncontrast computerized tomography immediately followed by an ultralow dose series targeted at a 70% to 90% reduction from the routine low dose technique (sub mSv range). Ultralow dose series were reconstructed with filtered back projection, and adaptive statistical and model based iterative reconstruction techniques. Transverse (axial) and coronal images were sequentially reviewed by 3 relatively inexperienced trainees, including a radiology resident, a urology fellow and an abdominal imaging fellow. Three experienced abdominal radiologists independently reviewed the routine low dose filtered back projection images, which served as the reference standard.

RESULTS

The mean effective dose for the ultralow dose scans was 0.91 mSv (median 0.82), representing a mean ± SD 78% ± 5% decrease compared to the routine low dose. Overall sensitivity and positive predictive value per stone for ultralow dose computerized tomography at a 4 mm threshold was 0.91 and 0.98, respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy per patient were 0.87, 1.00, 1.00, 0.94 and 0.96, respectively. At a 4 mm threshold the sensitivity and positive predictive value per stone of the ultralow dose series for filtered back projection, and adaptive statistical and model based iterative reconstruction was 0.89 and 0.96, 0.91 and 0.98, and 0.93 and 1.00, respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy per patient at the 4 mm threshold were 0.82, 1.00, 1.00, 0.91 and 0.94 for filtered back projection, 0.85, 1.00, 1.00, 0.93 and 0.95 for adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction, and 0.94, 1.00, 1.00, 0.97 and 0.98 for model based iterative reconstruction, respectively. Sequential review of coronal images changed the final stone reading in 13% of cases and improved diagnostic confidence in 49%.

CONCLUSIONS

At a 4 mm renal calculus size threshold ultralow dose computerized tomography is accurate for detection when referenced against routine low dose series with dose reduction to below the level of a typical 2-view plain x-ray of the kidneys, ureters and bladder. Slight differences were seen among the reconstruction algorithms. There was mild improvement with model based iterative reconstruction over filtered back projection and adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction. Coronal images improved detection and diagnostic confidence over axial images alone.

Noncathartic CT colonography: Image quality assessment and performance and in a screening cohort

OBJECTIVE

Cathartic bowel preparation is a major barrier for colorectal cancer screening. We examined noncathartic CT colonography (CTC) quality and performance using four similar bowel-tagging regimens in an asymptomatic screening cohort.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

This prospective study included 564 asymptomatic subjects who underwent noncathartic CTC without dietary modification but with 21 g of barium with or without iodinated oral contrast material (four regimens). The quality of tagging with oral agents was evaluated. A gastrointestinal radiologist evaluated examinations using primary 2D search supplemented by electronic cleansing (EC) and 3D problem solving. Results were compared with complete colonoscopy findings after bowel purgation and with retrospective unblinded evaluation in 556 of the 564 (99%) subjects.

RESULTS

Of the 556 subjects, 7% (37/556) and 3% (16/556) of patients had 52 and 20 adenomatous polyps ≥ 6 and ≥ 10 mm, respectively. The addition of iodine significantly improved the percentage of labeled stool (p ≤ 0.0002) and specificity (80% vs 89-93%, respectively; p = 0.046). The overall sensitivity of noncathartic CTC for adenomatous polyps ≥ 6 mm was 76% (28/37; 95% CI, 59-88%), which is similar to the sensitivity of the iodinated regimens with most patients (sensitivity: 231 patients, 74% [14/19; 95% CI, 49-91%]; 229 patients, 80% [12/15; 95% CI, 52-96%]). The negative predictive value was 98% (481/490), and the lone cancer was detected (0.2%, 1/556). EC was thought to improve conspicuity of 10 of 21 visible polyps ≥ 10 mm.

CONCLUSION

In this prospective study of asymptomatic subjects, the per-patient sensitivity of noncathartic CTC for detecting adenomas ≥ 6 mm was approximately 76%. Inclusion of oral iodine contrast material improves examination specificity and the percentage of labeled stool. EC may improve polyp conspicuity.

The time has arrived for national reimbursement of screening CT colonography

OBJECTIVE

CT colonography (CTC) has been fully validated as an accurate screening test for colorectal carcinoma and is being disseminated globally. There is an abundance of new literature addressing the prior concerns of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Specific areas related to radiation dose, extracolonic findings, and generalizability of CTC to senior patients are discussed.

CONCLUSION

The time has arrived for national reimbursement of CTC in the United States.

An international review of the main cost-effectiveness drivers of virtual colonography versus conventional colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening: is the tide changing due to adherence?

OBJECTIVES

The majority of recent cost-effectiveness reviews concluded that computerised tomographic colonography (CTC) is not a cost-effective colorectal cancer (CRC) screening strategy yet. The objective of this review is to examine cost-effectiveness of CTC versus optical colonoscopy (COL) for CRC screening and identify the main drivers influencing cost-effectiveness due to the emergence of new research.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted for cost-effectiveness studies comparing CTC and COL as a screening tool and providing outcomes in life-years saved, published between January 2006 and November 2012.

RESULTS

Nine studies were included in the review. There was considerable heterogeneity in modelling complexity and methodology. Different model assumptions and inputs had large effects on resulting cost-effectiveness of CTC and COL. CTC was found to be dominant or cost-effective in three studies, assuming the most favourable scenario. COL was found to be not cost effective in one study.

CONCLUSIONS

CTC has the potential to be a cost-effective CRC screening strategy when compared to COL. The most important assumptions that influenced the cost-effectiveness of CTC and COL were related to CTC threshold-based reporting of polyps, CTC cost, CTC sensitivity for large polyps, natural history of adenoma transition to cancer, AAA parameters and importantly, adherence. There is a strong need for a differential consideration of patient adherence and compliance to CTC and COL. Recent research shows that laxative-free CTC screening has the potential to become a good alternative screening method for CRC as it can improve patient uptake of screening.

Clinical use of CT colonography for colorectal cancer screening in military training facilities and potential impact on HEDIS measures

PURPOSE

The National Committee for Quality Assurance developed the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set(®) (HEDIS(®)) to provide quality measures for the evaluation of standards of medical care across health plans. Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) has been shown to increase the detection of early-stage disease and reduce mortality. Current HEDIS measures for CRC screening include fecal occult blood testing, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and colonoscopy. The aim of this analysis was to quantify the use of CT colonography (CTC) for CRC screening and demonstrate the potential impact of including CTC as a HEDIS-acceptable screening modality.

METHODS

Demographic and health care utilization data from the Military Health System Population Health Portal for January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2010, for individuals aged 50 to 75, were analyzed to determine the degree of overall utilization of CTC. Screening compliance for CRC per HEDIS was also estimated, and the incremental impact of adding HEDIS-eligible patients who had undergone CTC as their only CRC screening test was then evaluated for two similarly sized, regional Navy medical centers.

RESULTS

Across all sites (10 Army, 4 Navy, 3 Air Force), 17,187 CTC studies were performed, with increasing utilization during the 6-year study period. At the two Navy medical centers, screening compliance ranged from 33.8% to 67.9% without CTC and from 33.8% to 84.0% with CTC.

CONCLUSIONS

CTC is actively being used for CRC screening across military treatment facilities. The inclusion of CTC as a HEDIS-compliant CRC screening test has the potential to significantly increase health care system compliance for National Committee for Quality Assurance CRC screening measures.

Computed tomographic colonography for colorectal cancer screening: risk factors for the detection of advanced neoplasia

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to determine whether age, sex, a positive family history of colorectal cancer, and body mass index (BMI) are important predictors of advanced neoplasia in the setting of screening computed tomographic colonography (CTC).

METHODS

Consecutive patients who were referred for first-time screening CTC from 2004 to 2011 at a single medical center were enrolled. Results at pathology were recorded for all patients who underwent polypectomy. Logistic regression was used to identify significant predictor variables for advanced neoplasia (any adenoma ≥ 10 mm or with villous component, high-grade dysplasia, or adenocarcinoma). Odds ratios (ORs) were used to express associations between the study variables (age, sex, BMI, and a positive family history of colorectal cancer) and advanced neoplasia.

RESULTS

In total, 7620 patients underwent CTC screening. Of these, 276 patients (3.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.2%-4.1%) ultimately were diagnosed with advanced neoplasia. At multivariate analysis, age (mean OR per 10-year increase, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.6-2.0) and being a man (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.3-2.2) were independent predictors of advanced neoplasia, whereas BMI and a positive family history of colorectal cancer were not. The number needed to screen to detect 1 case of advanced neoplasia varied from 51 among women aged ≤ 55 years to 10 among men aged >65 years. The number of post-CTC colonoscopies needed to detect 1 case of advanced neoplasia varied from 2 to 4.

CONCLUSIONS

Age and sex were identified as important independent predictors of advanced neoplasia risk in individuals undergoing screening CTC, whereas BMI and a positive family history of colorectal cancer were not. These results have implications for appropriate patient selection.

Suspected extracolonic neoplasms detected on CT colonography: literature review and possible outcomes

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

This study summarizes the literature on the detection of cancer among indeterminate extracolonic findings on computed tomographic (CT) colonography in five targeted organs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched PubMed for English-language literature published between January 1, 1994, and December 31, 2010. We describe extracolonic findings in the kidney, lung, liver, pancreas, and ovary suspect for malignancy as they are associated with high mortality. For each organ, we calculated the median prevalence, positive predictive value (PPV), and false positive rate of malignancy and a pooled false-positive rate across studies.

RESULTS

Of 91 publications initially identified, 24 were eligible for review. Indeterminate renal masses on CT colonography had 20.5% median PPV and low pooled false positive rate of 1.3% (95% confidence interval 0.6-2.0). In contrast, indeterminate masses of the lung, liver, pancreas, and ovary had low PPV (median values ranged from 0% to 3.8%). Indeterminate masses of the ovary resulted in the highest pooled false-positive rate of 2.2%. Results were similar in studies of both screening and nonscreening populations. We estimated the probability of false positive results through the detection of significant extracolonic findings as 46 per 1000 for men and 68 per 1000 for women.

CONCLUSIONS

Indeterminate renal masses newly detected on CT colonography have an estimated one in five chance of malignancy and therefore warrant further follow-up to provide a definitive diagnosis. Conversely, indeterminate masses of the lung, liver, pancreas, and ovary are associated with high false positive rates and merit more conservative clinical follow-up.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria pretreatment staging of colorectal cancer

Because virtually all patients with colonic cancer will undergo some form of surgical therapy, the role of preoperative imaging is directed at determining the presence or absence of synchronous carcinomas or adenomas and local or distant metastases. In contrast, preoperative staging for rectal carcinoma has significant therapeutic implications and will direct the use of radiation therapy, surgical excision, or chemotherapy. CT of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis is recommended for the initial evaluation for the preoperative assessment of patients with colorectal carcinoma. Although the overall accuracy of CT varies directly with the stage of colorectal carcinoma, CT can accurately assess the presence of metastatic disease. MRI using endorectal coils can accurately assess the depth of bowel wall penetration of rectal carcinomas. Phased-array coils provide additional information about lymph node involvement. Adding diffusion-weighted imaging to conventional MRI yields better diagnostic accuracy than conventional MRI alone. Transrectal ultrasound can distinguish layers within the rectal wall and provides accurate assessment of the depth of tumor penetration and perirectal spread, and PET and PET/CT have been shown to alter therapy in almost one-third of patients with advanced primary rectal cancer. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.

Variation in diagnostic performance among radiologists at screening CT colonography

PURPOSE

To assess the variation in diagnostic performance among radiologists at screening computed tomographic (CT) colonography.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this HIPAA-compliant, institutional review board-approved study, 6866 asymptomatic adults underwent first-time CT colonographic screening at a single center between January 2005 and November 2011. Results of examinations were interpreted by one of eight board-certified abdominal radiologists (mean number of CT colonographic studies per reader, 858; range, 131-2202). Findings at CT colonography and subsequent colonoscopy were recorded, and key measures of diagnostic performance, including adenoma and advanced neoplasia detection rate, were compared among the radiologists.

RESULTS

The overall prevalence of histopathologically confirmed advanced neoplasia was 3.6% and did not differ significantly among radiologists (range, 2.4%-4.4%; P = .067; P = .395 when one outlier was excluded). Overall, 19.5% of polyps detected at CT colonography proved to be advanced neoplasia and did not differ significantly among radiologists (range, 14.4%-23.2%; P = .223). The overall per-polyp endoscopic confirmation rate was 93.5%, ranging from 80.0% to 97.6% among radiologists (P = .585). The overall percentage of nondiagnostic CT colonographic examinations was 0.7% and was consistent among radiologists (range, 0.3%-1.1%; P = .509).

CONCLUSION

Consistent performance for adenoma and advanced neoplasia detection, as well as other clinically relevant end points, were observed among radiologists at CT colonographic screening.

Pilot study on efficacy of reduced cathartic bowel preparation with polyethylene glycol and bisacodyl

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy of reduced cathartic bowel preparation with 2 L polyethylene glycol (PEG)-4000 electrolyte solution and 10 mg bisacodyl enteric-coated tablets for computed tomographic colonography (CTC).

METHODS: Sixty subjects who gave informed consent were randomly assigned to study group A, study group B or the control group. On the day prior to CTC, subjects in study group A were given 20 mL 40% wt/vol barium sulfate suspension before 3 mealtimes, 60 mL 60% diatrizoate meglumine diluted in 250 mL water after supper, and 10 mg bisacodyl enteric-coated tablets 1 h before oral administration of 2 L PEG-4000 electrolyte solution. Subjects in study group B were treated identically to those in study group A, with the exception of bisacodyl which was given 1 h after oral PEG-4000. Subjects in the control group were managed using the same strategy as the subjects in study group A, but without administration of bisacodyl. Residual stool and fluid scores, the attenuation value of residual fluid, and discomfort during bowel preparation in the three groups were analyzed statistically.

RESULTS: The mean scores for residual stool and fluid in study group A were lower than those in study group B, but the differences were not statistically significant. Subjects in study group A showed greater stool and fluid cleansing ability than the subjects in study group B. The mean scores for residual stool and fluid in study groups A and B were lower than those in the control group, and were significantly different. There was no significant difference in the mean attenuation value of residual fluid between study group A, study group B and the control group. The total discomfort index during bowel preparation was 46, 45 and 45 in the three groups, respectively, with no significant difference.

CONCLUSION: Administration of 10 mg bisacodyl enteric-coated tablets prior to or after oral administration of 2 L PEG-4000 electrolyte solution enhances stool and fluid cleansing ability, and has no impact on the attenuation value of residual fluid or the discomfort index. The former is an excellent alternative for CTC colorectum cleansing

Computed tomography colonography: emerging evidence to further support clinical effectiveness

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Computed tomography colonography (CTC) continues to mature and evolve as a noninvasive imaging test of the large intestine. The aim of this review is to provide an update on the recent and emerging data that further supports the clinical effectiveness of CTC.

RECENT FINDINGS

The diagnostic performance of CTC for detecting colorectal polyps and masses is well established, but its precise clinical role is yet to be determined. Recent data on test performance, patient acceptance, and study technique may help to clarify the role of CTC and accelerate its clinical implementation.

SUMMARY

Recent advances and refinements in CTC should help to clarify and expand its clinical role, both as a screening and diagnostic test. High patient acceptance for CTC could lead to increased adherence rates. Ultimately, the complementary nature of CTC and optical colonoscopy should result in improved patient care.

Rescreening of persons with a negative colonoscopy result: results from a microsimulation model

BACKGROUND

Persons with a negative result on screening colonoscopy are recommended to repeat the procedure in 10 years.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness and costs of colonoscopy versus other rescreening strategies after an initial negative colonoscopy result.

DESIGN

Microsimulation model.

DATA SOURCES

Literature and data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program.

TARGET POPULATION

Persons aged 50 years who had no adenomas or cancer detected on screening colonoscopy.

TIME HORIZON

Lifetime.

PERSPECTIVE

Societal.

INTERVENTION

No further screening or rescreening starting at age 60 years with colonoscopy every 10 years, annual highly sensitive guaiac fecal occult blood testing (HSFOBT), annual fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), or computed tomographic colonography (CTC) every 5 years.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Lifetime cases of colorectal cancer, life expectancy, and lifetime costs per 1000 persons, assuming either perfect or imperfect adherence.

RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS

Rescreening with any method substantially reduced the risk for colorectal cancer compared with no further screening (range, 7.7 to 12.6 lifetime cases per 1000 persons [perfect adherence] and 17.7 to 20.9 lifetime cases per 1000 persons [imperfect adherence] vs. 31.3 lifetime cases per 1000 persons with no further screening). In both adherence scenarios, the differences in life-years across rescreening strategies were small (range, 30 893 to 30 902 life-years per 1000 persons [perfect adherence] vs. 30 865 to 30 869 life-years per 1000 persons [imperfect adherence]). Rescreening with HSFOBT, FIT, or CTC had fewer complications and was less costly than continuing colonoscopy.

RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Results were sensitive to test-specific adherence rates.

LIMITATION

Data on adherence to rescreening were limited.

CONCLUSION

Compared with the currently recommended strategy of continuing colonoscopy every 10 years after an initial negative examination, rescreening at age 60 years with annual HSFOBT, annual FIT, or CTC every 5 years provides approximately the same benefit in life-years with fewer complications at a lower cost. Therefore, it is reasonable to use other methods to rescreen persons with negative colonoscopy results.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Cancer Institute.

Preference for colonoscopy versus computerized tomographic colonography: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

In recent years, colorectal cancer (CRC) screening using computerized tomographic colonography (CTC) has attracted considerable attention. In order to better understand patient preferences for CTC versus colonoscopy, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the available literature. Data sources included published studies, abstracts and book chapters, in any language, with publication dates from 1995 through February 2012, and with prospective or retrospective enrollment of diagnostic or screening patients who had undergone both procedures and explicit assessment of their preference for colonoscopy versus CTC. A predefined algorithm identified eligible studies using computer and hand searches performed by two independent investigators. We used a mixed effects model to pool preference differences (defined as the proportion of subjects who preferred CTC minus the proportion who preferred colonoscopy for each study). Twenty-three studies met inclusion criteria, totaling 5616 subjects. In 16 of these studies, patients preferred CTC over colonoscopy, while colonoscopy was preferred in three studies. Due to the high degree of heterogeneity, an overall pooled preference difference was not calculated. Stratified analysis revealed that studies published in radiology journals (preference difference 0.590 [95 % CI 0.485, 0.694]) seemed more likely than studies in gastroenterology (0.218 [-0.015-0.451]) or general medicine journals (-0.158 [-0.389-0.072]) to report preference for CTC (p<0.001). Studies by radiology authors showed a trend towards stronger preference for CTC compared with studies by gastroenterology authors. Symptomatic patients expressed no preference, but screening patients preferred CTC. There was no difference in preferences between studies using "masked" and "unmasked" preference ascertainment methods. Three studies featuring limited bowel preparations for CTC reported marked preference for CTC. There was no evidence of publication bias, while cumulative and exclusion analysis did not show any temporal trend or dominant study. Limitations included data heterogeneity and preference ascertainment limitations. In conclusion, most included studies reported preference for CTC. On stratified analysis, screening patients preferred CTC while diagnostic patients showed no preference. Studies published in radiology journals showed significantly stronger preference for CTC compared with studies in gastroenterology or general medicine journals.

Randomized controlled trial evaluating participation and yield of colonoscopy versus CT colonography screening

Colorectal cancer is a common yet preventable condition. Population screening attempts suffer from a lack of widespread participation with the currently available options. Computerized tomography colonography (CTC) represents a promising addition to the screening armamentarium. CTC is less invasive than optical colonoscopy but has been shown to be equivalent to colonoscopy for the detection of advanced neoplasia, which represents the primary target of screening and prevention. Although CTC has generally been preferred over colonoscopy by patients in most published studies, little hard evidence exists regarding the level of increase in screening participation related to CTC. The landmark trial under discussion adds key data in terms of participation rates for CTC screening relative to colonoscopy screening.

Screening CT colonography: multicenter survey of patient experience, preference, and potential impact on adherence

OBJECTIVE

Prior research indicates CT colonography (CTC) would be a cost-effective colorectal cancer (CRC) screening test if widespread availability were to increase overall CRC screening adherence rates. The primary aims of this multicenter study were to evaluate patient experience and satisfaction with CTC screening and compare preference against screening colonoscopy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A 12-question survey instrument measuring pretest choice, experience, and satisfaction was given to a consecutive cohort of adults undergoing CTC screening in three disparate screening settings: university academic center, military medical center, and community practice. The study cohort was composed of individuals voluntarily participating in clinical CTC screening programs.

RESULTS

A total of 1417 patients responded to the survey. The top reasons for choosing CTC for screening included "noninvasiveness" (68.0%), "avoidance of sedation/anesthesia" (63.1%), "ability to drive after the test" (49.2%), "avoidance of optical colonoscopy risks" (46.9%), and "identifying abnormalities outside the colon" (43.3%). Only 7.2% of patients reported pain during the CTC examination and only 2.5% reported greater than moderate discomfort. Of 441 patients who had experienced both CTC and optical colonoscopy, 77.1% preferred CTC and 13.8% preferred optical colonoscopy. Of all patients, 29.6% indicated that they may not have undergone optical colonoscopy screening if CTC were not available. Of all patients, 92.9% labeled their overall experience with CTC as "excellent" or "good," and 93.0% indicated they would choose CTC for their next screening.

CONCLUSION

Respondents reported a very high satisfaction level with CTC, and those who had experienced both modalities indicated a preference for CTC over optical colonoscopy. These results suggest that CTC has the potential to increase adherence to CRC screening guidelines if widely available.

Septin 9 methylated DNA is a sensitive and specific blood test for colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

About half of Americans 50 to 75 years old do not follow recommended colorectal cancer (CRC) screening guidelines, leaving 40 million individuals unscreened. A simple blood test would increase screening compliance, promoting early detection and better patient outcomes. The objective of this study is to demonstrate the performance of an improved sensitivity blood-based Septin 9 (SEPT9) methylated DNA test for colorectal cancer. Study variables include clinical stage, tumor location and histologic grade.

METHODS

Plasma samples were collected from 50 untreated CRC patients at 3 institutions; 94 control samples were collected at 4 US institutions; samples were collected from 300 colonoscopy patients at 1 US clinic prior to endoscopy. SEPT9 methylated DNA concentration was tested in analytical specimens, plasma of known CRC cases, healthy control subjects, and plasma collected from colonoscopy patients.

RESULTS

The improved SEPT9 methylated DNA test was more sensitive than previously described methods; the test had an overall sensitivity for CRC of 90% (95% CI, 77.4% to 96.3%) and specificity of 88% (95% CI, 79.6% to 93.7%), detecting CRC in patients of all stages. For early stage cancer (I and II) the test was 87% (95% CI, 71.1% to 95.1%) sensitive. The test identified CRC from all regions, including proximal colon (for example, the cecum) and had a 12% false-positive rate. In a small prospective study, the SEPT9 test detected 12% of adenomas with a false-positive rate of 3%.

CONCLUSIONS

A sensitive blood-based CRC screening test using the SEPT9 biomarker specifically detects a majority of CRCs of all stages and colorectal locations. The test could be offered to individuals of average risk for CRC who are unwilling or unable to undergo colonscopy.