Using risk for advanced proximal colonic neoplasia to tailor endoscopic screening for colorectal cancer

A self-reported symptom-based decision-making model helps to rule out outpatient cases at low risk for CRC before colonoscopy

Objectives

Effective exclusion of low-risk symptomatic outpatient cases for colorectal cancer (CRC) remains diagnostic challenges. We aimed to develop a self-reported symptom-based decision-making model for application in outpatient scenarios.

Methods

In total, 8233 symptomatic cases at risk for CRC, as judged by outpatient physicians, were involved in this study at seven medical centers. A decision-making model was constructed using 60 self-reported symptom parameters collected from the questionnaire. Further internal and external validation cohorts were built to evaluate the discriminatory power of the CRC model. The discriminatory power of the CRC model was assessed by the C-index and calibration plot. After that, the clinical utility and user experience of the CRC model were evaluated.

Results

Nine symptom parameters were identified as valuable predictors used for modeling. Internal and external validation cohorts verified the adequate discriminatory power of the CRC model. In the clinical application step, all 17 physicians found the model easy to grasp, 99.9 % of the patients were satisfied with the survey form. Application of this model detected all CRC cases. The total consistency ratio of outpatient cases undergoing colonoscopy was 81.4 %. None of the low-risk patients defined by the CRC model had been diagnosed with CRC.

Conclusion

This multicenter study developed and validated a simple and user-friendly decision-making model covering self-reported information. The CRC model has been demonstrated to perform well in terms of rapid outpatient decision-making scenarios and clinical utility, particularly because it can better rule out low-risk outpatient cases.

External validation of the Dat'AIDS score: A risk score for predicting 5-year overall mortality in people living with HIV aged 60 years or older

OBJECTIVE

To perform an external validation of the Dat'AIDS score for predicting 5-year overall mortality among people with HIV (PWH) aged 60 years or older.

METHODS

This was a multi-centre prospective cohort study at all sites participating in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study (SHCS). We calculated the Dat'AIDS score in PWH aged 60 years or older at their first visit between 1 January 2015 and 1 January 2020. People living with HIV-2 and those whose Dat'AIDS score could not be calculated were excluded. Patients were followed until 1 January 2020. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. Vital status was collected throughout the study period. We obtained population and score descriptive statistics and assessed the score's discrimination and calibration.

RESULTS

We included 2205 participants (82% male) of median [interquartile range (IQR)] age 62.0 (60.3-67.0) years, mostly with viraemia <50 copies/mL (92.7%). Median follow-up time was 15.9 years and median (IQR) CD4 cell count at enrolment was 586 (420-782) cells/μL. In all, 152 deaths were recorded during a total follow-up period of 7147 patient-years. The median (IQR) observed Dat'AIDS score was 3 (0-8). Discriminative capacities were good as the C-statistic was 0.73 (95% CI: 0.69-0.77) and consistent across all subgroups. Comparison of observed and expected survival probabilities showed good calibration.

CONCLUSIONS

External validation of the Dat'AIDS score in patients aged 60 years or older showed that it could be a useful tool not only for research purposes, but also to identify older patients at a higher mortality risk and to tailor the most appropriate interventions.

Prediction Model Using Readily Available Clinical Data for Colorectal Cancer in Chinese Population

BACKGROUND

In China, health screening has become common, although colonoscopy is not always available or acceptable. We sought to develop a prediction model of colorectal cancer (CRC) for health screening population based on readily available clinical data to reduce labor and economic costs.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study based on a health screening population in Karamay Central Hospital. By collecting clinical data and basic information from participants, we identified independent risk factors and established a prediction model of CRC. Internal and external validation, calibration plot, and decision curve analysis were employed to test discriminating ability, calibration ability, and clinical practicability.

RESULTS

Independent risk factors of CRC, which were readily available in basic public health institutions, included high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, male sex, total cholesterol, advanced age, and hemoglobin. These factors were successfully incorporated into the prediction model (AUC 0.740, 95% CI 0.713-0.767). The model demonstrated a high degree of discrimination and calibration, in addition to a high degree of clinical practicability in high-risk people.

CONCLUSIONS

The prediction model exhibits good discrimination and calibration and is pragmatic for CRC screening in rural areas and basic public health institutions.

Factors associated with positive predictive value of preliminary screening in a two-step screening strategy for colorectal neoplasms in China

BACKGROUND

The positive predictive value (PPV) of high risk factor questionnaire (HRFQ) plus fecal immunochemical test (FIT) as preliminary screening strategy for colorectal-related neoplasia is relatively low. We aim to explore independent factors associated with PPVs of HRFQ combined FIT for selecting high risk individuals for colonoscopy.

METHODS

A total of 6971 residents were enrolled in a community-based screening program. Participants who had positive results of HRFQ and/or FIT and subsequently received colonoscopy were involved. The associations of socio-demographic factors, lifestyle behaviors, and high risk factors of colorectal cancer with PPVs of HRFQ, FIT, and their combination were evaluated by multivariable logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Among 572 involved cases, 249 (43.5%) colorectal neoplasms were detected by colonoscopy, including 71 advanced adenoma (12.4%) and 9 colorectal cancer (CRC) (1.6%). The PPVs of preliminary screening were 43.5% for total colorectal neoplasms, 14.0% for advanced neoplasm, and 1.6% for CRC. Adding positive HRFQ to FIT could improve the PPV from 3.5 to 8.0% for detecting CRC. Preliminarily screened positive individuals who were males [adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 1.95, 95% CI 1.31, 2.90; p  < 0.001], elders (> 60 years) (AOR: 1.70, 95% CI 1.17, 2.46; p  = 0.005), or ex-/current smokers (AOR: 3.04, 95% CI 1.31, 7.09; p  = 0.10) had higher odds of PPVs of detecting colorectal neoplasms.

CONCLUSIONS

Combining HRFQ and FIT could largely improve PPVs for screening advanced neoplasm and CRC. Gender and age-specific FIT cut-off values as well as initiating ages for CRC screening might be recommended to improve the accuracy and effectiveness of current screening algorithm.

A user-friendly objective prediction model in predicting colorectal cancer based on 234 044 Asian adults in a prospective cohort

BACKGROUND

Prediction models of colorectal cancer (CRC) had limited application for not being user-friendly. Whether fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) can help predict CRC has been overlooked.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

With 1972 CRCs identified, 234 044 adults aged ≥40 years were successively enrolled between 1994 and 2008. Prediction models were developed by questionnaire/medical screening and quantitative FIT. NNS (number needed to scope to find one cancer) is time dependent, spanning entire study period. Significant 'risk factors' were family history, body mass index, smoking, drinking, inactivity, hypertension, diabetes, carcinoembryonic antigen, and C-reactive protein.

RESULTS

Positive FIT (≥20 μg/g hemoglobin/feces) had cancer risk 10-fold larger than negative FIT, and within each age group, another 10-fold difference. The C statistic of FIT (0.81) with age and sex alone was superior to the 'common risk-factors' model (0.73). NNS, stratified by age and by FIT values, demonstrated a scorecard of cancer risks, like 1/15 or 1/25, in 5 years. When FIT was negative, cancer risk was small (1/750-1/3000 annually). The larger the FIT, the sooner the appearance of CRC. For every 80-μg/g increase of FIT, there were 1.5-year earlier development of CRC incidence and 1-year earlier development of CRC mortality, respectively. Given the same FIT value, CRC events appeared in the proximal colon sooner than the distal colon.

CONCLUSIONS

A simple user-friendly model based on a single FIT value to predict CRC risk was developed. When positive, NNS offered a simple quantitative value, with a better precision than most risk factors, even combined. When FIT is negative, risk is very small, but requiring a repeat every other year to rule out false negative. FIT values correlated well with CRC prognosis, with worst for proximal CRC.

New scoring systems for predicting advanced proximal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults with or without knowing distal colorectal findings: a prospective, cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Models estimating risk for advanced proximal colorectal neoplasia (APN) may be used to select colorectal cancer (CRC) screening test, either prior to knowing distal colorectal findings or afterward. Current models have only fair discrimination and nearly all require knowing distal findings.

OBJECTIVE

Derive and test risk prediction models for APN with and without distal findings.

SETTING

Selected endoscopy centers within central Indiana, USA.

PARTICIPANTS

Average-risk persons undergoing first-time screening colonoscopy.

INTERVENTIONS

Demographics, personal and family medical history, lifestyle factors and physical measures were linked to the most advanced finding in proximal and distal colorectal segments. For both models, logistic regression identified factors independently associated with APN on a derivation set. Based on equation coefficients, points were assigned to each factor, and risk for APN was examined for each score. Scores with comparable risks were collapsed into risk categories. Both models and their scoring systems were tested on the validation set.

MAIN OUTCOME

APN, defined as any adenoma or sessile serrated lesion ≥1 cm, one with villous histology or high-grade dysplasia, or CRC proximal to the descending colon.

RESULTS

Among 3025 subjects in the derivation set (mean age 57.3 ± 6.5 years; 52% women), APN prevalence was 4.5%; 2859 (94.5%) had complete data on risk factors. Independently associated with APN were age, sex, cigarette smoking, cohabitation status, metabolic syndrome, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use and physical activity. This model (without distal findings) was well-calibrated (P = 0.62) and had good discrimination (c-statistic = 0.73). In low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups that comprised 21, 58 and 21% of the sample, respectively, APN risks were 1.47% (95% CI, 0.67-2.77%), 3.09% (CI, 2.31-4.04%) and 11.6% (CI, 9.10-14.4%), respectively (P < 0.0001), with no proximal CRCs in the low-risk group and 2 in the intermediate-risk group. When tested in the validation set of 1455, the model retained good metrics (calibration P = 0.85; c-statistic = 0.83), with APN risks in low- (22%), intermediate- (56%) and high-risk (22%) subgroups of 0.62% (CI, 0.08-2.23%) 2.20% (CI, 1.31-3.46%) and 13.0% (CI, 9.50-17.2%), respectively (P < 0.0001). There were no proximal CRCs in the low-risk group, and two in the intermediate-risk group. The model with distal findings performed comparably, with validation set metrics of 0.18 for calibration, 0.76 for discrimination and APN risk (% sample) in low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups of 1.1 (69%), 8.3 (22%) and 22.3% (9%).

CONCLUSION

These models stratify large proportions of average-risk persons into clinically meaningful risk groups, and could improve screening efficiency, particularly for noncolonoscopy-based programs.

ACG Clinical Guidelines: Colorectal Cancer Screening 2021

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer in men and women in the United States. CRC screening efforts are directed toward removal of adenomas and sessile serrated lesions and detection of early-stage CRC. The purpose of this article is to update the 2009 American College of Gastroenterology CRC screening guidelines. The guideline is framed around several key questions. We conducted a comprehensive literature search to include studies through October 2020. The inclusion criteria were studies of any design with men and women age 40 years and older. Detailed recommendations for CRC screening in average-risk individuals and those with a family history of CRC are discussed. We also provide recommendations on the role of aspirin for chemoprevention, quality indicators for colonoscopy, approaches to organized CRC screening and improving adherence to CRC screening. CRC screening must be optimized to allow effective and sustained reduction of CRC incidence and mortality. This can be accomplished by achieving high rates of adherence, quality monitoring and improvement, following evidence-based guidelines, and removing barriers through the spectrum of care from noninvasive screening tests to screening and diagnostic colonoscopy. The development of cost-effective, highly accurate, noninvasive modalities associated with improved overall adherence to the screening process is also a desirable goal.

Development and Validation of the Asia-Pacific Proximal Colon Neoplasia Risk Score

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Patients found to be at high risk of advanced proximal neoplasia (APN) after flexible sigmoidoscopy screening should be considered for colonoscopy examination. We developed and validated a scoring system to identify persons at risk for APN.

METHODS

We collected data from 7954 asymptomatic subjects (age, 50-75 y) who received screening colonoscopy examinations at 14 sites in Asia. We randomly assigned 5303 subjects to the derivation cohort and the remaining 2651 to the validation cohort. We collected data from the derivation cohort on age, sex, family history of colorectal cancer, smoking, drinking, body mass index, medical conditions, and use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or aspirin. Associations between the colonoscopic findings of APN and each risk factor were examined using the Pearson χ² test, and we assigned each participant a risk score (0-15), with scores of 0 to 3 as average risk and scores of 4 or higher as high risk. The scoring system was tested in the validation cohort. We used the Cochran-Armitage test of trend to compare the prevalence of APN among subjects in each group.

RESULTS

In the validation cohort, 79.5% of patients were classified as average risk and 20.5% were classified as high risk. The prevalence of APN in the average-risk group was 1.9% and in the high-risk group was 9.4% (adjusted relative risk, 5.08; 95% CI, 3.38-7.62; P < .001). The score included age (61-70 y, 3; ≥70 y, 4), smoking habits (current/past, 2), family history of colorectal cancer (present in a first-degree relative, 2), and the presence of neoplasia in the distal colorectum (nonadvanced adenoma 5-9 mm, 2; advanced neoplasia, 7). The c-statistic of the score was 0.74 (95% CI, 0.68-0.79), and for distal findings alone was 0.67 (95% CI, 0.60-0.74). The Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test statistic was greater than 0.05, indicating the reliability of the validation set. The number needed to refer was 11 (95% CI, 10-13), and the number needed to screen was 15 (95% CI, 12-17).

CONCLUSIONS

We developed and validated a scoring system to identify persons at risk for APN. Screening participants who undergo flexible sigmoidoscopy screening with a score of 4 points or higher should undergo colonoscopy evaluation.

Improvement of Asia-Pacific colorectal screening score and evaluation of its use combined with fecal immunochemical test

Background

The Asia-Pacific Colorectal Screening (APCS) score is effective to screen high-risk groups of advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACN) patients but needs revising and can be combined with the fecal immunochemical test (FIT). This paper aimed to improve the APCS score and evaluate its use with the FIT in stratifying the risk of ACN.

Methods

This prospective and multicenter study enrolled 955 and 1201 asymptomatic Chinese participants to form the derivation and validation set, respectively. Participants received the risk factor questionnaire, colonoscopy and FIT. Multiple logistic regression was applied, and C-statistic, sensitivity and negative predictive values (NPVs) were used to compare the screening efficiency.

Results

A modified model was developed incorporating age, body mass index (BMI), family history, diabetes, smoking and drinking as risk factors, stratifying subjects into average risk (AR) or high risk (HR). In the validation set, the HR tier group had a 3.4-fold (95% CI 1.8–6.4) increased risk for ACN. The C-statistic for the modified score was 0.69 ± 0.04, and 0.67 ± 0.04 for the original score. The sensitivity of the modified APCS score combined with FIT for screening ACN high-risk cohorts was 76.7% compared with 36.7% of FIT alone and 70.0% of the modified APCS score alone. The NPVs of the modified score combined with FIT for ACN were 98.0% compared with 97.0% of FIT alone and 97.9% of the modified APCS score alone.

Conclusions

The modified score and its use with the FIT are efficient in selecting the HR group from a Chinese asymptomatic population.

Capability of four sigmoidoscopy-based screening strategies to predict proximal neoplasia in an asymptomatic Chinese population

BACKGROUND AND AIM

A proper colonoscopy referral criterion is essential for flexible sigmoidoscopy-based colorectal cancer screening. We aimed to compare the predictive capability of four existing criteria to detect proximal neoplasia (PN) and advanced proximal neoplasia (APN) in a Chinese population.

METHODS

Asymptomatic Chinese participants aged 50-75 years, who received screening colonoscopy, were consecutively recruited. The four criteria included (i) UK flexible sigmoidoscopy; (ii) Italian Screening for COlon REctum; (iii) NORwegian Colorectal Cancer Prevention trial; and (iv) US clinical index. The sensitivity, specificity, positive/negative predictive value, and the number of subjects needed to screen (NNS)/refer (NNR) to detect one APN/PN were examined. The area under receiver operating characteristic curve was evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 5833 subjects, 749 (12.8%) and 151 (2.6%) cases were found to have PN and APN, respectively. US criteria achieved the highest sensitivity for PN (49%) and APN (66%), while UK criteria attained the highest specificity (93%) for PN/APN. The lowest NNS was required by US criteria for PN (16 vs 19-38) and APN (58 vs 69-86), while the lowest NNR was required by UK criteria for PN (3.2 vs 4.0-4.8) and APN (7 vs 10-16). The receiver operating characteristic of all four criteria was 0.57-0.61 for PN and 0.68-0.70 for APN.

CONCLUSIONS

Among all the four criteria, US criteria had the highest sensitivity and lowest NNS, while UK criteria achieved the highest specificity and lowest NNR. Their limited discriminatory capability highlighted the need for a new score to predict PN/APN in Chinese populations.

Predicting the risk for colorectal cancer with personal characteristics and fecal immunochemical test

We aimed to predict colorectal cancer (CRC) based on the demographic features and clinical correlates of personal symptoms and signs from Tianjin community-based CRC screening data.A total of 891,199 residents who were aged 60 to 74 and were screened in 2012 were enrolled. The Lasso logistic regression model was used to identify the predictors for CRC. Predictive validity was assessed by the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Bootstrapping method was also performed to validate this prediction model.CRC was best predicted by a model that included age, sex, education level, occupations, diarrhea, constipation, colon mucosa and bleeding, gallbladder disease, a stressful life event, family history of CRC, and a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT). The area under curve (AUC) for the questionnaire with a FIT was 84% (95% CI: 82%-86%), followed by 76% (95% CI: 74%-79%) for a FIT alone, and 73% (95% CI: 71%-76%) for the questionnaire alone. With 500 bootstrap replications, the estimated optimism (<0.005) shows good discrimination in validation of prediction model.A risk prediction model for CRC based on a series of symptoms and signs related to enteric diseases in combination with a FIT was developed from first round of screening. The results of the current study are useful for increasing the awareness of high-risk subjects and for individual-risk-guided invitations or strategies to achieve mass screening for CRC.

A modified colorectal screening score for prediction of advanced neoplasia: A prospective study of 5744 subjects

BACKGROUND AND AIM

We validated a modified risk algorithm based on the Asia-Pacific Colorectal Screening (APCS) score that included body mass index (BMI) for prediction of advanced neoplasia.

METHODS

Among 5744 Chinese asymptomatic screening participants undergoing a colonoscopy in Hong Kong from 2008 to 2012, a random sample of 3829 participants acted as the derivation cohort. The odds ratios for significant risk factors identified by binary logistic regression analysis were used to build a scoring system ranging from 0 to 6, divided into "average risk" (AR): 0; "moderate risk" (MR): 1-2; and "high risk" (HR): 3-6. The other 1915 subjects formed a validation cohort, and the performance of the score was assessed.

RESULTS

The prevalence of advanced neoplasia in the derivation and validation cohorts was 5.4% and 6.0%, respectively (P = 0.395). Old age, male gender, family history of colorectal cancer, smoking, and BMI were significant predictors in multivariate regression analysis. A BMI cut-off at > 23 kg/m² had better predictive capability and lower number needed to screen than that of > 25 kg/m² . Utilizing the score developed, 8.4%, 57.4%, and 34.2% in the validation cohort were categorized as AR, MR, and HR, respectively. The corresponding prevalence of advanced neoplasia was 3.8%, 4.3%, and 9.3%. Subjects in the HR group had 2.48-fold increased prevalence of advanced neoplasia than the AR group. The c-statistics of the modified score had better discriminatory capability than that using predictors of APCS alone (c-statistics = 0.65 vs 0.60).

CONCLUSIONS

Incorporating BMI into the predictors of APCS score was found to improve risk prediction of advanced neoplasia and reduce colonoscopy resources.

A prediction model for advanced colorectal neoplasia in an asymptomatic screening population

Background

An electronic medical record (EMR) database of a large unselected population who received screening colonoscopies may minimize sampling error and represent real-world estimates of risk for screening target lesions of advanced colorectal neoplasia (CRN). Our aim was to develop and validate a prediction model for assessing the probability of advanced CRN using a clinical data warehouse.

Methods

A total of 49,450 screenees underwent their first colonoscopy as part of a health check-up from 2002 to 2012 at Samsung Medical Center, and the dataset was constructed by means of natural language processing from the computerized EMR system. The screenees were randomized into training and validation sets. The prediction model was developed using logistic regression. The model performance was validated and compared with existing models using area under receiver operating curve (AUC) analysis.

Results

In the training set, age, gender, smoking duration, drinking frequency, and aspirin use were identified as independent predictors for advanced CRN (adjusted P < .01). The developed model had good discrimination (AUC = 0.726) and was internally validated (AUC = 0.713). The high-risk group had a 3.7-fold increased risk of advanced CRN compared to the low-risk group (1.1% vs. 4.0%, P < .001). The discrimination performance of the present model for high-risk patients with advanced CRN was better than that of the Asia-Pacific Colorectal Screening score (AUC = 0.678, P < .001) and Schroy’s CAN index (AUC = 0.672, P < .001).

Conclusion

The present 5-item risk model can be calculated readily using a simple questionnaire and can identify the low- and high-risk groups of advanced CRN at the first screening colonoscopy. This model may increase colorectal cancer risk awareness and assist healthcare providers in encouraging the high-risk group to undergo a colonoscopy.

The Association between Distal Findings and Proximal Colorectal Neoplasia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

Whether screening participants with distal hyperplastic polyps (HPs) detected by flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) should be followed by subsequent colonoscopy is controversial. We evaluated the association between distal HPs and proximal neoplasia (PN)/advanced proximal neoplasia (APN) in asymptomatic, average-risk patients.

METHODS

We searched Ovid Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from inception to 30 June 2016 and included all screening studies that examined the relationship between different distal findings and PN/APN. Data were independently extracted by two reviewers with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. We pooled absolute risks and odds ratios (ORs) with a random effects meta-analysis. Seven subgroup analyses were performed according to study characteristics. Heterogeneity was characterized with the I² statistics.

RESULTS

We analyzed 28 studies (104,961 subjects). When compared with normal distal findings, distal HP was not associated with PN (OR=1.16, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.89-1.51, P=0.14, I²=40%) or APN (OR=1.09, 95% CI=0.87-1.36, P=0.39, I²=5%), while subjects with distal non-advanced or advanced adenoma had higher odds of PN/APN. Higher odds of PN/APN were observed for more severe distal lesions. Weaker association between distal and proximal findings was noticed in studies with higher quality, larger sample size, population-based design, and more stringent endoscopy quality-control measures. The Egger's regression tests showed all P>0.05.

CONCLUSIONS

Distal HP is not associated with PN/APN in asymptomatic screening population when compared with normal distal findings. Hence, the presence of distal HP alone detected by FS does not automatically indicate colonoscopy referral for all screening participants, as other risk factors of PN/APN should be considered.

Adenoma Prevalence and Distribution Among US Latino Subgroups Undergoing Screening Colonoscopy

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading malignancy diagnosed among US Latinos. Latinos in the USA represent a heterogeneous amalgam of subgroups varying in genetic background, culture, and socioeconomic status. Little is known about the frequency of CRC precursor lesions found at screening colonoscopy among Latino subgroups.

AIM

The aim was to determine the prevalence and distribution of histologically confirmed adenomas found at screening colonoscopy among average-risk, asymptomatic US Latinos according to their subgroup and socio-demographic background.

METHODS

Cross-sectional analysis of pathological findings resulting from screening colonoscopy among average-risk, asymptomatic US Latinos aged ≥50 in two prospective randomized controlled trials at an academic medical center.

RESULTS

Among the 561 Latinos who completed screening colonoscopy, the two largest subgroups were Puerto Ricans and Dominicans. The findings among both subgroups were: adenomas 30.6%, proximal adenomas 23.5%, advanced adenomas 12.0%, and proximal advanced adenomas 8.9%. These rates are at least as high as those found at screening colonoscopy among US whites. While Puerto Ricans were more likely than Dominicans to be born in the USA, speak English, be acculturated, have a smoking history, and be obese, there were no significant differences in adenoma rates between these subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of adenomas, advanced adenomas, and proximal neoplasia was high among both subgroups. These findings have implications for CRC screening and surveillance among the increasingly growing Latino population in the USA.

Multiple gene-specific DNA methylation in blood leukocytes and colorectal cancer risk: a case-control study in China

The relationship between gene-specific DNA methylation in peripheral blood leukocytes and colorectal cancer (CRC) susceptibility is unclear. In this case-control study, the methylation status of a panel of 10 CRC-related genes in 428 CRC cases and 428 cancer-free controls were detected with methylation-sensitive high-resolution melting analysis. We calculated a weighted methylation risk score (MRS) that comprehensively combined the methylation status of the panel of 10 genes and found that the MRS_10 was significantly associated with CRC risk. Compared with MRS-Low group, MRS-High group and MRS-Medium group exhibited a 6.51-fold (95% CI, 3.77-11.27) and 3.85-fold (95% CI, 2.72-5.45) increased risk of CRC, respectively. Moreover, the CRC risk increased with increasing MRS_10 (P_trend < 0.0001). Stratified analyses demonstrated that the significant association retained in both men and women, younger and older, and normal weight or underweight and overweight or obese subjects. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves for the MRS_10 model was 69.04% (95% CI, 65.57-72.66%) and the combined EF and MRS_10 model yielded an AUC of 79.12% (95% CI, 76.22-82.15%). Together, the panel of 10 gene-specific DNA methylation in leukocytes was strongly associated with the risk of CRC and might be a useful marker of susceptibility for CRC.

An algorithm to predict advanced proximal colorectal neoplasia in Chinese asymptomatic population

This study aims to develop and validate a new algorithm that incorporates distal colonoscopic findings to predict advanced proximal neoplasia (APN) in a Chinese asymptomatic population. We collected age, gender, and colonoscopic findings from a prospectively performed colonoscopy study between 2013 and 2015 in a large hospital-based endoscopy unit in Shanghai, China. Eligible subjects were allocated to a derivation group (n = 3,889) and validation group (n = 1,944) by random sampling. A new index for APN and its cut-off level were evaluated from the derivation cohort by binary logistic regression. The model performance was tested in the validation cohort using area under the curve (AUC). Age, gender, and distal finding were found to be independent predictors of APN in the derivation cohort (p < 0.001). Subjects were categorized into Average Risk (AR) and High Risk (HR) based on a cut-off score of 2. The AUC of the derivation and validation cohorts were 0.801 (0.754-0.847) and 0.722 (0.649-0.794), respectively. In the validation cohort, those in the HR group had a 3.57 fold higher risk of APN when compared with the AR group (P < 0.001), requiring 18 (95% CI = 12-28) follow-up colonoscopies to detect 1 APN. This new clinical index is useful to stratify APN risk in Chinese population.

A New Scoring System to Predict the Risk for High-risk Adenoma and Comparison of Existing Risk Calculators

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening guidelines likely over-generalizes CRC risk, 35% of Americans are not up to date with screening, and there is growing incidence of CRC in younger patients.

GOALS

We developed a practical prediction model for high-risk colon adenomas in an average-risk population, including an expanded definition of high-risk polyps (≥3 nonadvanced adenomas), exposing higher than average-risk patients. We also compared results with previously created calculators.

STUDY

Patients aged 40 to 59 years, undergoing first-time average-risk screening or diagnostic colonoscopies were evaluated. Risk calculators for advanced adenomas and high-risk adenomas were created based on age, body mass index, sex, race, and smoking history. Previously established calculators with similar risk factors were selected for comparison of concordance statistic (c-statistic) and external validation.

RESULTS

A total of 5063 patients were included. Advanced adenomas, and high-risk adenomas were seen in 5.7% and 7.4% of the patient population, respectively. The c-statistic for our calculator was 0.639 for the prediction of advanced adenomas, and 0.650 for high-risk adenomas. When applied to our population, all previous models had lower c-statistic results although one performed similarly.

CONCLUSIONS

Our model compares favorably to previously established prediction models. Age and body mass index were used as continuous variables, likely improving the c-statistic. It also reports absolute predictive probabilities of advanced and high-risk polyps, allowing for more individualized risk assessment of CRC.

Comparative effectiveness of screening strategies for colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) has been successful in decreasing the incidence and mortality from CRC. Although new screening tests have become available, their relative impact on CRC outcomes remains unexplored. This study compares the outcomes of various screening strategies on CRC outcomes.

METHODS

A Markov model representing the natural history of CRC was built and validated against empiric data from screening trials as well as the Microstimulation Screening Analysis (MISCAN) model. Thirteen screening strategies based on colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, computed tomographic colonography, as well as fecal immunochemical, occult blood, and stool DNA testing were compared with no screening. A simulated sample of the US general population ages 50 to 75 years with an average risk of CRC was followed for up to 35 years or until death. Effectiveness was measured by discounted life years gained and the number of CRCs prevented. Discounted costs and cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated. A discount rate of 3% was used in calculations. The study took a societal perspective.

RESULTS

Colonoscopy emerged as the most effective screening strategy with the highest life years gained (0.022 life years) and CRCs prevented (n = 1068) and the lowest total costs ($2861). These values were 0.012 life years gained, 574 CRCs prevented, and a total cost of $3164, respectively, for FOBT; and 0.011 life years gained, 647 CRCs prevented, and a total cost of $4296, respectively, for DNA testing. Improved sensitivity or specificity of a screening test for CRC detection was not sufficient to close the outcomes gap compared with colonoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

Improvement in CRC-detection performance is not sufficient to improve screening outcomes. Special attention must be directed to detecting precancerous adenomas. Cancer 2017;123:1516-1527. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Prediction of the Risk of a Metachronous Advanced Colorectal Neoplasm Using a Novel Scoring System

BACKGROUND AND AIM

This study aimed to develop and validate a risk score model to estimate the probability of a metachronous advanced colorectal neoplasm (ACRN) at surveillance colonoscopy.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of a prospectively obtained database of 11,042 asymptomatic subjects who underwent surveillance colonoscopy after a screening colonoscopy was conducted. Subjects were randomly divided into derivation (n = 7730) and validation sets (n = 3312). From the derivation cohort, risk factors for a metachronous ACRN were identified by a multivariable analysis. Risk points were allocated to each risk factor based on the hazard ratio to develop the Metachronous Advanced colorectal neoplasm Prediction Scoring (MAPS) model, the performance of which was assessed in the validation cohort.

RESULTS

In the derivation cohort, age, male, sessile serrated adenoma/polyp, and a high-risk CRN (ACRN or ≥3 adenomas) at screening colonoscopy were independent risk factors for a metachronous ACRN. These variables were incorporated into the MAPS model, and the risk score ranged 0-17 (high MAPS risk arbitrarily defined as 10-17). At the 3-year surveillance colonoscopy, ACRN was found in 5.1 % of the high MAPS risk group versus 3.9 % of the high-risk CRN group. The colonoscopy number needed to detect one metachronous ACRN at the 3-year surveillance was 19.5 (95 % CI 11.7-33.2) for the high MAPS risk group versus 25.8 (95 % CI 15.4-44.0) for the high-risk CRN group. These findings were similarly confirmed in the validation cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Our MAPS model based on clinical and colonoscopic parameters effectively predicts the risk of a metachronous ACRN.

Predicting advanced neoplasia at colonoscopy in a diverse population with the National Cancer Institute colorectal cancer risk-assessment tool

BACKGROUND

Tailoring screening to colorectal cancer (CRC) risk could improve screening effectiveness. Most CRCs arise from advanced neoplasia (AN) that dwells for years. To date, no available colorectal neoplasia risk score has been validated externally in a diverse population. The authors explored whether the National Cancer Institute (NCI) CRC risk-assessment tool, which was developed to predict future CRC risk, could predict current AN prevalence in a diverse population, thereby allowing its use in risk stratification for screening.

METHODS

This was a prospective examination of the relation between predicted 10-year CRC risk and the prevalence of AN, defined as advanced or multiple (≥3 adenomatous, ≥5 serrated) adenomatous or sessile serrated polyps, in individuals undergoing screening colonoscopy.

RESULTS

Among 509 screenees (50% women; median age, 58 years; 61% white, 5% black, 10% Hispanic, and 24% Asian), 58 (11%) had AN. The prevalence of AN increased progressively from 6% in the lowest risk-score quintile to 17% in the highest risk-score quintile (P = .002). Risk-score distributions in individuals with versus without AN differed significantly (median, 1.38 [0.90-1.87] vs 1.02 [0.62-1.57], respectively; P = .003), with substantial overlap. The discriminatory accuracy of the tool was modest, with areas under the curve of 0.61 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-0.69) overall, 0.59 (95% CI, 0.49-0.70) for women, and 0.63 (95% CI, 0.53-0.73) for men. The results did not change substantively when the analysis was restricted to adenomatous lesions or to screening procedures without any additional incidental indication.

CONCLUSIONS

The NCI CRC risk-assessment tool displays modest discriminatory accuracy in predicting AN at screening colonoscopy in a diverse population. This tool may aid shared decision-making in clinical practice. Cancer 2016. © 2016 American Cancer Society. Cancer 2016;122:2663-2670. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Identification of genetic and non-genetic risk factors for nasopharyngeal carcinoma in a Southeast Asian population

BACKGROUND

Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is endemic in Southern Chinese and Southeast Asian populations. Geographical and ethnic clustering of the cancer is due to genetic, environmental, and lifestyle risk factors. This case-control study aimed to identify or confirm both genetic and non-genetic risk factors for NPC in one of the endemic countries, Malaysia.

MATERIALS AND METHOD

A panel of 768 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) previously associated with various cancers and known non-genetic risk factors for NPC were selected and analyzed for their associations with NPC in a case-control study.

RESULTS

Statistical analysis identified 40 SNPs associated with NPC risk in our population, including 5 documented previously by genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and other case-control studies; the associations of the remaining 35 SNPs with NPC were novel. In addition, consistent with previous studies, exposure to occupational hazards, overconsumption of salt-cured foods, red meat, as well as low intake of fruits and vegetables were also associated with NPC risk.

CONCLUSIONS

In short, this study confirmed and/or identified genetic, environmental and dietary risk factors associated with NPC susceptibility in a Southeast Asian population.

Evaluation of a risk index for advanced proximal neoplasia of the colon

BACKGROUND

A clinical risk index that uses distal colorectal findings at flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) in conjunction with easily determined risk factors for advanced proximal neoplasia (APN) may be useful for tailoring or prioritizing screening with colonoscopy.

OBJECTIVE

To conduct an external evaluation of a previously published risk index in a large, well-characterized cohort.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional.

SETTING

Teaching hospital and colorectal cancer screening center.

PATIENTS

A total of 5139 asymptomatic persons aged 50 to 74 (54.9% women) with a mean age (±SD) of 58.3 (±6.2) years.

INTERVENTIONS

Between 2003 and 2011, all participants underwent a complete screening colonoscopy and removal of all polyps.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Participants were classified as low, intermediate, or high risk for APN, based on their composite risk index scores. The concordance or c-statistic was used to measure discriminating ability of the risk index.

RESULTS

A total of 167 persons (3.2%) had APN. The prevalence of those with APN among low-, intermediate-, and high-risk categories was 2.1%, 2.9%, and 6.5%, respectively. High-risk individuals were 3.2 times more likely to have APN compared with those in the low-risk category. The index did not discriminate well between those in the low- and intermediate-risk categories. The c-statistic for the overall index was 0.62 (95% confidence interval, 0.58-0.66).

LIMITATIONS

Distal colorectal findings were derived from colonoscopies and not FS itself.

CONCLUSION

The risk index discriminated between those at low risk and those at high risk, but it had limited ability to discriminate between low- and intermediate-risk categories for prevalent APN. Information on other risk factors may be needed to tailor, or prioritize, access to screening colonoscopy.

Colorectal Cancer Screening Based on Age and Gender: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

We evaluated whether age- and gender-based colorectal cancer screening is cost-effective.Recent studies in the United States identified age and gender as 2 important variables predicting advanced proximal neoplasia, and that women aged <60 to 70 years were more suited for sigmoidoscopy screening due to their low risk of proximal neoplasia. Yet, quantitative assessment of the incremental benefits, risks, and cost remains to be performed.Primary care screening practice (2008-2015).A Markov modeling was constructed using data from a screening cohort. The following strategies were compared according to the Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) for 1 life-year saved: flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) 5 yearly; colonoscopy 10 yearly; FS for each woman at 50- and 55-year old followed by colonoscopy at 60- and 70-year old; FS for each woman at 50-, 55-, 60-, and 65-year old followed by colonoscopy at 70-year old; FS for each woman at 50-, 55-, 60-, 65-, and 70-year old. All male subjects received colonoscopy at 50-, 60-, and 70-year old under strategies 3 to 5.From a hypothetical population of 100,000 asymptomatic subjects, strategy 2 could save the largest number of life-years (4226 vs 2268 to 3841 by other strategies). When compared with no screening, strategy 5 had the lowest ICER (US$42,515), followed by strategy 3 (US$43,517), strategy 2 (US$43,739), strategy 4 (US$47,710), and strategy 1 (US$56,510). Strategy 2 leads to the highest number of bleeding and perforations, and required a prohibitive number of colonoscopy procedures. Strategy 5 remains the most cost-effective when assessed with a wide range of deterministic sensitivity analyses around the base case.From the cost effectiveness analysis, FS for women and colonoscopy for men represent an economically favorable screening strategy. These findings could inform physicians and policy-makers in triaging eligible subjects for risk-based screening, especially in countries with limited colonoscopic resources. Future research should study the acceptability, feasibility, and feasibility of this risk-based strategy in different populations.

Validation of a risk prediction score for proximal neoplasia in colorectal cancer screening: a prospective colonoscopy study

This study developed a clinical scoring system to predict the risks of PN among screening participants for colorectal cancer. We recruited 5,789 Chinese asymptomatic screening participants who received colonoscopy in Hong Kong (2008-2014). From random sampling of 2,000 participants, the independent risk factors were evaluated for PN using binary regression analysis. The odds ratios for significant risk factors were used to develop a scoring system, with scores stratified into 'average risk' (AR):0-2 and 'high risk' (HR):3-5. The other 3,789 subjects formed an independent validation cohort. Each participant received a score calculated based on their risk factors. The performance of the scoring system was evaluated. The proportion of PN in the derivation and validation cohorts was 12.6% and 12.9%, respectively. Based on age, gender, family history, body mass index and self-reported ischaemic heart disease, 85.0% and 15.0% in the validation cohort were classified as AR and HR, respectively. Their prevalence of PN was 12.0% and 18.1%, respectively. Participants in the HR group had 1.51-fold (95% CI = 1.24-1.84, p < 0.001) higher risk of PN than the AR group. The overall c-statistics of the prediction model was 0.71(0.02). The scoring system is useful in predicting the risk of PN to prioritize patients for colonoscopy.

The discriminatory capability of existing scores to predict advanced colorectal neoplasia: a prospective colonoscopy study of 5,899 screening participants

We evaluated the performance of seven existing risk scoring systems in predicting advanced colorectal neoplasia in an asymptomatic Chinese cohort. We prospectively recruited 5,899 Chinese subjects aged 50–70 years in a colonoscopy screening programme(2008–2014). Scoring systems under evaluation included two scoring tools from the US; one each from Spain, Germany, and Poland; the Korean Colorectal Screening(KCS) scores; and the modified Asia Pacific Colorectal Screening(APCS) scores. The c-statistics, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values(PPVs), and negative predictive values(NPVs) of these systems were evaluated. The resources required were estimated based on the Number Needed to Screen(NNS) and the Number Needed to Refer for colonoscopy(NNR). Advanced neoplasia was detected in 364 (6.2%) subjects. The German system referred the least proportion of subjects (11.2%) for colonoscopy, whilst the KCS scoring system referred the highest (27.4%). The c-statistics of all systems ranged from 0.56–0.65, with sensitivities ranging from 0.04–0.44 and specificities from 0.74–0.99. The modified APCS scoring system had the highest c-statistics (0.65, 95% C.I. 0.58–0.72). The NNS (12–19) and NNR (5-10) were similar among the scoring systems. The existing scoring systems have variable capability to predict advanced neoplasia among asymptomatic Chinese subjects, and further external validation should be performed.

Targeted screening for colorectal cancer in high-risk individuals

The idea of targeted screening for colorectal cancer based on risk profiles originates from its benefits to improve detection yield and optimize screening efficiency. Clinically, it allows individuals to be more aware of their own risk and make informed decisions on screening choice. From a public health perspective, the implementation of risk stratification strategies may better justify utilization of colonoscopic resources, and facilitate resource-planning in the formulation of population-based screening programmes. There are several at-risk groups who should receive earlier screening, and colonoscopy is more preferred. This review summarizes the currently recommended CRC screening strategies among subjects with different risk factors, and introduces existing risk scoring systems. Additional genetic, epidemiological, and clinical parameters may be needed to enhance their performance to risk-stratify screening participants. Future research studies should refine these scoring systems, and explore the adaptability, feasibility, acceptability, and user-friendliness of their use in clinical practice among different population groups.

Evaluation of a clinical risk index for advanced colorectal neoplasia among a North American population of screening age

Background

A clinical risk index employing age, sex, family history of colorectal cancer (CRC), smoking history and body mass index (BMI) may be useful for prioritizing screening with colonoscopy. The aim of this study was to conduct an external evaluation of a previously published risk index for advanced neoplasia (AN) in a large, well-characterized cohort.

Methods

Five thousand one hundred thirty-seven asymptomatic persons aged 50 to 74 (54.9 % women) with a mean age (SD) of 58.3 (6.2) years were recruited for the study from a teaching hospital and colorectal cancer screening centre between 2003 and 2011. All participants underwent a complete screening colonoscopy and removal of all polyps. AN was defined as cancer or a tubular adenoma, traditional serrated adenoma (TSA), or sessile serrated adenoma (SSA) with villous characteristics (≥25% villous component), and/or high-grade dysplasia and/or diameter ≥10 mm. Risk scores for each participant were summed to derive an overall score (0–8). The c-statistic was used to measure discriminating ability of the risk index.

Results

The prevalence of AN in the study cohort was 6.8 %. The likelihood of detecting AN increased from 3.6 to 13.1 % for those with a risk score of 1 to 6 respectively. The c-statistic for the multivariable logistic model in our cohort was 0.64 (95 % CI = 0.61–067) indicating modest overlap between risk scores.

Conclusions

The risk index for AN using age, sex, family history, smoking history and BMI was found to be of limited discriminating ability upon external validation. The index requires further refinement to better predict AN in average risk persons of screening age.

Effects of personalized colorectal cancer risk information on laypersons' interest in colorectal cancer screening: The importance of individual differences

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate how personalized quantitative colorectal cancer (CRC) risk information affects laypersons' interest in CRC screening, and to explore factors influencing these effects.

METHODS

An online pre-post experiment was conducted in which a convenience sample (N=578) of laypersons, aged >50, were provided quantitative personalized estimates of lifetime CRC risk, calculated by the National Cancer Institute Colorectal Cancer Risk Assessment Tool (CCRAT). Self-reported interest in CRC screening was measured immediately before and after CCRAT use; sociodemographic characteristics and prior CRC screening history were also assessed. Multivariable analyses assessed participants' change in interest in screening, and subgroup differences in this change.

RESULTS

Personalized CRC risk information had no overall effect on CRC screening interest, but significant subgroup differences were observed. Change in screening interest was greater among individuals with recent screening (p=.015), higher model-estimated cancer risk (p=.0002), and lower baseline interest (p<.0001), with individuals at highest baseline interest demonstrating negative (not neutral) change in interest.

CONCLUSION

Effects of quantitative personalized CRC risk information on laypersons' interest in CRC screening differ among individuals depending on prior screening history, estimated cancer risk, and baseline screening interest.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Personalized cancer risk information has personalized effects-increasing and decreasing screening interest in different individuals.

Derivation and Validation of a Scoring System to Stratify Risk for Advanced Colorectal Neoplasia in Asymptomatic Adults: A Cross-sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Several methods are recommended equally strongly for colorectal cancer screening in average-risk persons. Risk stratification would enable tailoring of screening within this group, with less invasive tests (sigmoidoscopy or occult blood tests) for lower-risk persons and colonoscopy for higher-risk persons.

OBJECTIVE

To create a risk index for advanced neoplasia (colorectal cancer and adenomas or serrated polyps ≥1.0 cm, villous histology, or high-grade dysplasia) anywhere in the colorectum, using the most common risk factors for colorectal neoplasia.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Multiple endoscopy units, primarily in the Midwest.

PATIENTS

Persons aged 50 to 80 years undergoing initial screening colonoscopy (December 2004 to September 2011).

MEASUREMENTS

Derivation and validation of a risk index based on points from regression coefficients for age, sex, waist circumference, cigarette smoking, and family history of colorectal cancer.

RESULTS

Among 2993 persons in the derivation set, prevalence of advanced neoplasia was 9.4%. Risks for advanced neoplasia in persons at very low, low, intermediate, and high risk were 1.92% (95% CI, 0.63% to 4.43%), 4.88% (CI, 3.79% to 6.18%), 9.93% (CI, 8.09% to 12.0%), and 24.9% (CI, 21.1% to 29.1%), respectively (P < 0.001). Sigmoidoscopy to the descending colon in the low-risk groups would have detected 51 of 70 (73% [CI, 61% to 83%]) advanced neoplasms. Among 1467 persons in the validation set, corresponding risks for advanced neoplasia were 1.65% (CI, 0.20% to 5.84%), 3.31% (CI, 2.08% to 4.97%), 10.9% (CI, 8.26% to 14.1%), and 22.3% (CI, 16.9% to 28.5%), respectively (P < 0.001). Sigmoidoscopy would have detected 21 of 24 (87.5% [CI, 68% to 97%]) advanced neoplasms.

LIMITATIONS

Split-sample validation; results apply to first-time screening.

CONCLUSION

This index stratifies risk for advanced neoplasia among average-risk persons by identifying lower-risk groups for which noncolonoscopy strategies may be effective and efficient and a higher-risk group for which colonoscopy may be preferred.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Cancer Institute, Walther Cancer Institute, Indiana University Simon Cancer Center, and Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute.

Prediction of proximal advanced neoplasia: a comparison of four existing sigmoidoscopy-based strategies in a Chinese population

OBJECTIVE

To compare the performance of existing sigmoidoscopy-based strategies in predicting advanced proximal neoplasia (APN) in an asymptomatic Chinese cohort.

DESIGN

We included all screening participants aged 50-70 years who received colonoscopy between 2008 and 2014 in Hong Kong. Sigmoidoscopy yield was estimated from the colonoscopic findings based on the: (1) UK flexible sigmoidoscopy; (2) Screening for COlon REctum (SCORE); (3) NORwegian Colorectal Cancer Prevention (NORCCAP) trials and (4) US clinical index based on age, gender and distal findings. The sensitivity, specificity, the number of subjects needed to screen (NNS) and the number of subjects needed to refer (NNR) for colonoscopy to detect one APN were evaluated. Binary logistic regression modelling identified the distal findings associated with APN.

RESULTS

From 5879 eligible subjects, 132 (2.2%) had APN. The US strategy achieved the highest sensitivity for APN detection (42.0%) and the UK criteria attained the highest specificity (96%). The US criteria led to the lowest NNS (92 vs 103-267) and the UK criteria required the least NNR (12 vs 16-21). Using the US strategy, the rates of APN detected were 1.4% (low-risk group), 2.2% (intermediate risk) and 5.9% (high risk). The c-statistics of the UK, SCORE, NORCCAP and the US criteria were 0.55±0.03; 0.59±0.03; 0.59±0.03 and 0.62±0.05 respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The US criteria had the highest sensitivity for detection of APN and lowest NNS and the UK score had the highest specificity and the lowest NNR. The performance of all these four criteria to predict APN is limited, highlighting an urgent need to devise a novel APN prediction system for Asian subjects.

Assessing individual risk for high-risk colorectal adenoma at first-time screening colonoscopy

Assessing risk of colorectal adenoma at first-time colonoscopy that are of higher likelihood of developing advanced neoplasia during surveillance could help tailor first-line colorectal cancer screening. We developed prediction models for high-risk colorectal adenoma (at least one adenoma ≥1 cm, or with advanced histology, or ≥3 adenomas) among 4,881 asymptomatic white men and 17,970 women who underwent colonoscopy as their first-time screening for colorectal cancer in two prospective US studies using logistic regressions. C-statistics and Hosmer-Lemeshow tests were used to evaluate discrimination and calibration. Ten-fold cross-validation was used for internal validation. A total of 330 (6.7%) men and 678 (3.8%) women were diagnosed with high-risk adenoma at first-time screening colonoscopy. The model for men included age, family history of colorectal cancer, BMI, smoking, sitting watching TV/VCR, regular aspirin/NSAID use, physical activity, and a joint term of multivitamin and alcohol. For women, the model included age, family history of colorectal cancer, BMI, smoking, alcohol, beef/pork/lamb as main dish, regular aspirin/NSAID, calcium, and oral contraceptive use. The C-statistic of the model for men was 0.67 and 0.60 for women (0.64 and 0.57 in cross-validation). Both models calibrated well. The predicted risk of high-risk adenoma for men in the top decile was 15.4% vs. 1.8% for men in the bottom decile (Odds Ratio [OR] = 9.41), and 6.6% vs. 2.1% for women (OR = 3.48). In summary, we developed and internally validated an absolute risk assessment tool for high-risk colorectal adenoma among the US population that may provide guidance for first-time colorectal cancer screening.

Development and validation of a clinical score for predicting risk of adenoma at screening colonoscopy

BACKGROUND

Currently, no clinical tools use demographic and risk factor information to predict the risk of finding an adenoma in individuals undergoing colon cancer screening. Such a tool would be valuable for identifying those who would most benefit from screening colonoscopy.

METHODS

We used baseline data from men and women who underwent screening colonoscopy from the randomized, multicenter National Colonoscopy Study (NCS) to develop and validate an adenoma risk model. The study, conducted at three sites in the United States (Minneapolis, MN; Seattle, WA; and Shreveport, LA) asked all participants to complete baseline questionnaires on clinical risk factors and family history. Model parameters estimated from logistic regression yielded an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROCC) used to assess prediction.

RESULTS

Five hundred forty-one subjects were included in the development model, and 1,334 in the validation of the risk score. Variables in the prediction of adenoma risk for colonoscopy screening were age (likelihood ratio test for overall contribution to model, P < 0.001), male sex (P < 0.001), body mass index (P < 0.001), family history of at least one first-degree relative with colorectal cancer (P = 0.036), and smoking history (P < 0.001). The adjusted AUROCC of 0.67 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.61-0.74] for the derivation cohort was not statistically significantly different from that in the validation cohort. The adjusted AUROCC for the entire cohort was 0.64 (95% CI, 0.60-0.67).

CONCLUSION

We developed and validated a simple well-calibrated risk score.

IMPACT

This tool may be useful for estimating risk of adenomas in screening eligible men and women.

Do recent epidemiologic observations impact who and how we should screen for CRC?

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is recommended to begin at age 50 for those patients with no significant family history of CRC. However, even within this group of average-risk patients, there is data to suggest that there may be variation in CRC risk. These observations suggest that perhaps CRC screening should be tailored to target those patients at higher risk for earlier or more invasive screening as compared to those individuals at lower risk. The strategy of how to identify those higher-risk patients may not be straightforward. One method might be to use single risk factors such as smoking or elevated BMI as has been suggested in the recent American College of Gastroenterology CRC screening guidelines. Another paradigm involves the use of models which incorporate several risk factors to stratify patients by risk. This article will highlight recent large studies that examine recognized CRC risk factors as well as review recently developed CRC risk models. There will also be a discussion of the application of these factors and models in an effort to make CRC screening more efficient.

Independent validation of six melanoma risk prediction models

Identifying people at high risk of melanoma is important for targeted prevention activities and surveillance. Several tools have been developed to classify melanoma risk, but few have been independently validated. We assessed the discriminatory performance of six melanoma prediction tools by applying them to individuals from two independent data sets, one comprising 762 melanoma cases and the second a population-based sample of 42,116 people without melanoma. We compared the model predictions with actual melanoma status to measure sensitivity and specificity. The performance of the models was variable with sensitivity ranging from 97.7 to 10.5% and specificity from 99.6 to 1.3%. The ability of all the models to discriminate between cases and controls, however, was generally high. The model developed by MacKie et al. (1989) had higher sensitivity and specificity for men (0.89 and 0.88) than women (0.79 and 0.72). The tool developed by Cho et al. (2005) was highly specific (men, 0.92; women, 0.99) but considerably less sensitive (men, 0.64; women, 0.37). Other models were either highly specific but lacked sensitivity or had low to very low specificity and higher sensitivity. Poor performance was partly attributable to the use of non-standardized assessment items and various differing interpretations of what constitutes "high risk".

Should prior FIT results be incorporated as an additional variable to estimate risk of colorectal neoplasia? A prospective study of 5,813 screening colonoscopies

Background

Recent studies showed that previous negative results from faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening was associated with lower risk of advanced neoplasia (AN). We evaluated whether prior FIT results should be included to estimate the risk of AN in 2008–2012.

Methods

A community-based screening practice recruited 5,813 asymptomatic residents aged 50 to 70 years in Hong Kong for CRC screening. We included study participants who had (1). positive FIT with subsequent colonoscopy workup (FIT+ group; n = 356); (2). negative FIT in three consecutive years and received a colonoscopy (FIT- group; n = 857); (3). received colonoscopy without FIT (colonoscopy group; n = 473); and (4). received both colonoscopy and FIT at the same time (combined group; n = 4,127). One binary logistic regression model evaluated whether prior FIT results were associated with colonoscopy findings of AN.

Results

The proportion of participants having AN/CRC was 18.0% (FIT+), 5.5% (FIT-), 8.0% (colonoscopy group), and 4.3% (combined group), respectively. When compared with the colonoscopy group, those in the FIT- group were not significantly more or less likely to have AN/CRC (AOR  = 0.77, 95% C.I. = 0.51 to 1.18, p  = 0.230). Having one (AOR = 0.73, 95% C.I. 0.48–1.12, p = 0.151) or three consecutive negative FIT result (AOR = 0.98, 95% C.I. 0.60–1.62, p = 0.944) were not associated with lower risks of AN/CRC. Subjects in the FIT+ group was 3.32-fold (95% C.I. 2.07 to 5.32, p<0.001) more likely to have AN/CRC.

Conclusions

These findings indicated that subjects with negative FIT findings could be risk stratified similarly as those who had not previously received FIT.

Identification of subjects at risk of proximal advanced neoplasia for colorectal cancer screening

Flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) and colonoscopy are two commonly used screening tools for colorectal cancer (CRC), and FS mainly detects distal lesions. Colonoscopy resource is limited, yet there is no definite evidence on when flexible sigmoidoscopy is suitable as a screening alternative. This study evaluated the optimal cut-off score from a validated risk stratification system which best predicts proximal advanced neoplasia (PAN) by comparing the sensitivity, specificity and relative risk of PAN according to various cut-off scores. 5819 asymptomatic subjects aged between 50 and 70years (average age 57.7years, standard deviation (SD) 4.9) received colonoscopy between 2008 and 2014 in Hong Kong. Their prevalence of PAN was evaluated according to a prediction tool for colorectal neoplasia based on age, gender, smoking status, family history of CRC, body mass index (BMI) and diabetes (ranging from 0 to 6). One binary logistic regression model was performed with PAN as the outcome variable and the risk score as the variable tested for association. In multivariate regression analysis, risk score ⩾3 was associated with significantly higher risk of PAN (3.4-9.1%; AOR=3.18-8.09, p<0.001) when compared with those scoring 0. Risk scores 0-2 were associated with either insignificant or lower risks of PAN compared to the overall risk. Applying FS for screening those who scored 0-2 and colonoscopy for those who scored ⩾3 led to a very small proportion of PAN being missed (1.60%), whilst maintaining a high level of specificity (81.9%). Clinicians may use this scoring system to inform subjects and facilitate their choice between colonoscopy and FS.

Predicting melanoma risk: theory, practice and future challenges

The incidence of melanoma continues to rise in most fair-skinned populations. Strategies to curb the toll from melanoma include targeting the patients who are at highest risk with the aim of either preventing the onset of cancer or intervening early in order to improve survival. The challenge has been to synthesize the available information on risk factors into prediction tools with clinical utility, such that 'high-risk' patients can be identified with accuracy. While a number of risk prediction tools for melanoma have been developed, few have undergone rigorous evaluation of their performance in order to assess calibration or discrimination, and even fewer have been validated in independent populations. Future research should assess the validity of existing tools and seek to integrate the increasing volumes of data being generated by genomic studies.

Personalizing colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review of models to predict risk of colorectal neoplasia

BACKGROUND & AIMS

A valid risk prediction model for colorectal neoplasia would allow patients to be screened for colorectal cancer (CRC) on the basis of risk. We performed a systematic review of studies reporting risk prediction models for colorectal neoplasia.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases from January 1990 through March 2013 and of references in identified studies. Case-control, cohort, and cross-sectional studies that developed or attempted to validate a model to predict risk of colorectal neoplasia were included. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed model quality. Model quality was considered to be good for studies that included external validation, fair for studies that included internal validation, and poor for studies with neither.

RESULTS

Nine studies developed a new prediction model, and 2 tested existing models. The models varied with regard to population, predictors, risk tiers, outcomes (CRC or advanced neoplasia), and range of predicted risk. Several included age, sex, smoking, a measure of obesity, and/or family history of CRC among the predictors. Quality was good for 6 models, fair for 2 models, and poor for 1 model. The tier with the largest population fraction (low, intermediate, or high risk) depended on the model. For most models that defined risk tiers, the risk difference between the highest and lowest tier ranged from 2-fold to 4-fold. Two models reached the 0.70 threshold for the C statistic, typically considered to indicate good discriminatory power.

CONCLUSIONS

Most current colorectal neoplasia risk prediction models have relatively weak discriminatory power and have not demonstrated generalizability. It remains to be determined how risk prediction models could inform CRC screening strategies.

Advanced proximal neoplasia of the colon in average-risk adults

BACKGROUND

Estimating risk for advanced proximal neoplasia (APN) based on distal colon findings can help identify asymptomatic persons who should undergo examination of the proximal colon after flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to determine the risk of APN by most advanced distal finding among an average-risk screening population.

DESIGN

Prospective, cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Teaching hospital and colorectal cancer screening center.

PATIENTS

A total of 4651 asymptomatic persons at average risk for colorectal cancer aged 50 to 74 years (54.4% women [n = 2529] with a mean [± standard deviation] age of 58.4 ± 6.2 years).

INTERVENTIONS

All participants underwent a complete colonoscopy, including endoscopic removal of all polyps.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

We explored associations between several risk factors and APN. Logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of APN.

RESULTS

A total of 142 persons (3.1%) had APN, of whom 85 (1.8%) had isolated APN (with no distal findings). APN was associated with older age, a BMI >27 kg/m(2), smoking, distal advanced adenoma and/or cancer, and distal non-advanced tubular adenoma. Those with a distal advanced neoplasm were more than twice as likely to have APN compared with those without distal lesions.

LIMITATIONS

Distal findings used to estimate risk of APN were derived from colonoscopy rather than FS itself.

CONCLUSION

In persons at average risk for colorectal cancer, the prevalence of isolated APN was low (1.8%). Use of distal findings to predict APN may not be the most effective strategy. However, incorporating factors such as age (>65 years), sex, BMI (>27 kg/m(2)), and smoking status, in addition to distal findings, should be considered for tailoring colonoscopy recommendations. Further evaluation of risk stratification approaches in other asymptomatic screening populations is warranted.

A risk index for advanced neoplasia on the second surveillance colonoscopy in patients with previous adenomatous polyps

BACKGROUND

Predicting the risk of advanced colorectal neoplasia on the second surveillance colonoscopy could help tailor surveillance.

OBJECTIVE

To derive and validate a risk index for advanced neoplasia on the second surveillance colonoscopy.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

SETTING

Single-specialty practice; Veterans Affairs Medical Center.

PATIENTS

A total of 965 patients with baseline adenomatous polyps, 2 surveillance colonoscopies, and no reported family history of colorectal cancer; validation cohort of 372.

INTERVENTIONS

Multivariable logistic regression including demographics and previous colonoscopy results; derivation and validation of a risk index.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Advanced adenoma (≥1 cm in size, villous histology, or high-grade dysplasia) on the second surveillance colonoscopy.

RESULTS

Mean age was 57.8 ± 9.8 years, 62% were men, and 36% had an advanced adenoma on the index colonoscopy. Associated with advanced adenoma on the second surveillance colonoscopy were age at index colonoscopy (scored 0 for younger than 55 years of age, 1 for 55-59 years of age, 2 for 60-64 years of age, and 3 for older than 65 years of age) and previous findings (non-neoplastic, nonadvanced, advanced [scored 0, 1, and 2, respectively]) on index colonoscopy and the first surveillance colonoscopy, with scores ranging from 1 to 7. Risks of advanced adenoma on the second surveillance colonoscopy with scores of 5 or less and more than 5 were 4.8% (95% confidence interval, 3.5%-6.4%) and 14.9% (95% confidence interval, 7.4%-25.7%), respectively, comprising 93% and 7%, respectively, of the cohort. Corresponding results in the validation cohort were 5.6% and 19.2%, respectively, comprising 86.1% and 13.9%, respectively, of the cohort.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective study with potential for selection bias.

CONCLUSION

This index stratifies the risk of advanced adenoma on the second surveillance colonoscopy. If validated independently, it may be useful for tailoring surveillance.

A risk prediction model for smoking experimentation in Mexican American youth

BACKGROUND

Smoking experimentation in Mexican American youth is problematic. In light of the research showing that preventing smoking experimentation is a valid strategy for smoking prevention, there is a need to identify Mexican American youth at high risk for experimentation.

METHODS

A prospective population-based cohort of 1,179 adolescents of Mexican descent was followed for 5 years starting in 2005-06. Participants completed a baseline interview at a home visit followed by three telephone interviews at intervals of approximately 6 months and additional interviews at two home visits in 2008-09 and 2010-11. The primary endpoint of interest in this study was smoking experimentation. Information about social, cultural, and behavioral factors (e.g., acculturation, susceptibility to experimentation, home characteristics, and household influences) was collected at baseline using validated questionnaires.

RESULTS

Age, sex, cognitive susceptibility, household smoking behavior, peer influence, neighborhood influence, acculturation, work characteristics, positive outcome expectations, family cohesion, degree of tension, ability to concentrate, and school discipline were found to be associated with smoking experimentation. In a validation dataset, the proposed risk prediction model had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.719 (95% confidence interval, 0.637-0.801) for predicting absolute risk for smoking experimentation within 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed risk prediction model is able to quantify the risk of smoking experimentation in Mexican American adolescents.

IMPACT

Accurately identifying Mexican American adolescents who are at higher risk for smoking experimentation who can be intervened will substantially reduce the incidence of smoking and thereby subsequent health risks.

A validated tool to predict colorectal neoplasia and inform screening choice for asymptomatic subjects

OBJECTIVE

We aim to develop and validate a clinical scoring system to predict the risks of colorectal neoplasia to better inform screening participants and facilitate their screening test choice.

DESIGN

We recruited 5220 Chinese asymptomatic screening participants who underwent colonoscopy in Hong Kong during 2008-2012. From random sampling of 2000 participants, independent risk factors were evaluated for colorectal neoplasia, defined as adenoma, advanced neoplasia, colorectal cancer or any combination thereof using binary regression analysis. The ORs for significant risk factors were used to develop a scoring system ranging from 0 to 6: 0-2 'average risk' (AR) and 3-6 'high risk' (HR). The other 3220 screening participants prospectively enrolled between 2008 and 2012 for screening colonoscopy formed an independent validation cohort. The performance of the scoring system for predicting colorectal neoplasia was evaluated.

RESULTS

The prevalence of colorectal neoplasia in the derivation and validation cohorts was 31.4% and 30.8%, respectively. Using the scoring system developed, 78.9% and 21.1% in the validation cohort were classified as AR and HR, respectively. The prevalence of colorectal neoplasia in the AR and HR groups was 27.1% and 44.6%, respectively. The subjects in the HR group had 1.65-fold (95% CI 1.49 to 1.83) increased prevalence of colorectal neoplasia than the AR group.

CONCLUSIONS

The scoring system based on age, gender, smoking, family history, Body Mass Index and self-reported diabetes is useful in predicting the risk of colorectal neoplasia.

Predictive factors of proximal advanced neoplasia in the large bowel

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of sex, age, family history and distal findings on the risk of proximal advanced neoplasia (cancer or advanced adenoma) in the large bowel.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Records for 10 111 asymptomatic participants of the Colonoscopy Screening Program (CSP), recruited from the Warsaw region between 2000 and 2004, were analyzed. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to estimate the impact of sex, age, family history and most advanced distal lesions on the occurrence of proximal advanced neoplasia. To enhance comparability of the study two definitions of the proximal colon were applied - either the splenic flexure (1(st)) or the bend between the descending and sigmoid colon (2(nd) definition) represented the boundary.

RESULTS

One hundred and thirty-three (1(st)) and 167 patients (2(nd) definition) were found to have at least one advanced neoplastic lesion in the proximal part, respectively. Eleven and 14 patients were found to have carcinoma, while in 130 and 163 patients at least one proximal advanced adenoma appeared. Men were at twice as high risk of having advanced neoplasia in the proximal colon than women (OR = 1.94, 95% CI: 1.31-2.87, p = 0.001 or OR = 1.69, 95% CI: 1.20-2.40, p = 0.003, respectively). The presence of distal advanced neoplastic lesions was associated with 3.5 times higher risk of proximal advanced neoplasia (OR = 3.58, 95% CI: 2.00-6.43, p < 0.0001 or OR = 3.41, 95% CI: 1.95-5.96, p < 0.0001), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The results may confirm some limitation of flexible sigmoidoscopy in the screening settings in comparison with colonoscopy, at least in men and people with distal advanced neoplasia.

Screening participation for people at increased risk of colorectal cancer due to family history: a systematic review and meta-analysis

We conducted a systematic review and a meta-analysis of observational studies to identify and summarise the level of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening participation for people at increased risk due to family history of the disease. Medline, Cinhal, Embase and PsychInfo databases were comprehensively searched between January 1995 and May 2012 to identify relevant articles. To be included, studies had to report on screening for people who had at least one first-degree relative with CRC and no previous personal diagnosis of the disease. Pooled screening participation levels were calculated for each screening modality. Seventeen studies, accounting for a total of 13,269 subjects with a family history of CRC met the inclusion criteria. Seven studies, including a total of 6,901 subjects had a pooled faecal occult blood testing screening participation (at least once) of 25 % (95 % CI 12-38). Five studies including a total of 5,091 subjects had a pooled sigmoidoscopy-based screening participation (at least once) of 16 % (95 % CI 7-27). Seven studies including a total of 9,965 subjects had pooled participation colonoscopy-based screening (at least once) of 40 % (95 % CI 26-54). There was a significant level of screening heterogeneity between studies. This review identified a substantial underuse of CRC screening for people at increased risk of developing the disease. It highlights the potential opportunity that exists for increasing screening participation among this segment of the population and the need to adjust the current CRC screening policies towards that objective.

Cap-assisted gastroscope versus cap-assisted colonoscope for examination of difficult sigmoid colons in a nonsedated Asian population: a randomized study

BACKGROUND

Studies have estimated that cecal intubation failure occurs with conventional colonoscopy in about 10% of cases. Various methods have been adopted to improve the cecal intubation rate, including a transparent cap and special colonoscopes.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy of using a cap-assisted gastroscope (E-cap) compared with a cap-assisted colonoscope (C-cap) for the complete examination of the colon in nonsedated patients with technically difficult sigmoid colons.

DESIGN

Randomized, controlled study.

SETTING

Tertiary-care referral center.

PATIENTS

One hundred thirty-nine patients with technically difficult sigmoid colons were studied.

INTERVENTION

Colonoscopy with either an E-cap (n = 69) or a C-cap (n = 70).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Cecal intubation rate, cecal intubation time, patient-assessed pain score, and endoscopist-assessed pain score.

RESULTS

The cecal intubation rate was significantly higher in the E-cap (65/69, 94.2%) than in the C-cap group (50/70, 71.4%; P < .0001). Patient-assessed pain (moderate to severe) was more frequently reported in the C-cap (14/70, 20.0%) than in the E-cap group (5/69, 7.2%; P = .029). Endoscopist-assessed pain (moderate to severe) was more frequently reported in the C-cap (13/70, 18.6%) than in the E-cap group (3/69, 7.2%; P = .009). For patients with a low body mass index (≤ 22 kg/m(2)), the cecal intubation rate was significantly higher in the E-cap (37/38, 97.4%) than in the C-cap group (15/29, 51.7%; P < .0001).

LIMITATIONS

Single-center experience, lack of a gastroscope control group without a cap.

CONCLUSION

The cap-assisted gastroscope is more tolerable and effective than cap-assisted colonoscope for the complete examination of the colon in patients with technically difficult sigmoid colons. (

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

KCT0000744.).