Screening for Colorectal Cancer in Asymptomatic Average-Risk Adults: A Guidance Statement From the American College of Physicians (Version 2)

Harnessing Artificial Intelligence for the Detection and Management of Colorectal Cancer Treatment

Currently, eight million people in the United States suffer from cancer and it is a major global health concern. Early detection and interventions are urgently needed for all cancers, including colorectal cancer. Colorectal cancer is the third most common type of cancer worldwide. Based on the diagnostic efforts to general awareness and lifestyle choices, it is understandable why colorectal cancer is so prevalent today. There is a notable lack of awareness concerning the impact of this cancer and its connection to lifestyle elements, as well as people sometimes mistaking symptoms for a different gastrointestinal condition. Artificial intelligence (AI) may assist in the early detection of all cancers, including colorectal cancer. The usage of AI has exponentially grown in healthcare through extensive research, and since clinical implementation, it has succeeded in improving patient lifestyles, modernizing diagnostic processes, and innovating current treatment strategies. Numerous challenges arise for patients with colorectal cancer and oncologists alike during treatment. For initial screening phases, conventional methods often result in misdiagnosis. Moreover, after detection, determining the course of which colorectal cancer can sometimes contribute to treatment delays. This article touches on recent advancements in AI and its clinical application while shedding light on why this disease is so common today.

Plasma proteomic and polygenic profiling improve risk stratification and personalized screening for colorectal cancer

This study aims to identify colorectal cancer (CRC)-related proteomic profiles and develop a prediction model for CRC onset by integrating proteomic profiles with genetic and non-genetic factors (QCancer-15) to improve the risk stratification and estimate of personalized initial screening age. Here, using a two-stage strategy, we prioritize 15 protein biomarkers as predictors to construct a protein risk score (ProS). The risk prediction model integrating proteomic profiles with polygenic risk score (PRS) and QCancer-15 risk score (QCancer-S) shows improved performance (C-statistic: 0.79 vs. 0.71, P = 4.94E-03 in training cohort; 0.75 vs 0.69, P = 5.49E-04 in validation cohort) and net benefit than QCancer-S alone. The combined model markedly stratifies the risk of CRC onset. Participants with high ProS, PRS, or combined risk score are proposed to start screening at age 46, 41, or before 40 years old. In this work, the integration of blood proteomics with PRS and QCancer-15 demonstrates improved performance for risk stratification and clinical implication for the derivation of risk-adapted starting ages of CRC screening, which may contribute to the decision-making process for CRC screening.

Comparative Performance of Common Fecal Immunochemical Tests : A Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Despite widespread use of fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, data to guide test selection are limited.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the performance characteristics of 5 commonly used FITs, using colonoscopy as the reference standard.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03264898).

SETTING

Three U.S. academic medical centers and affiliated endoscopy units.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged 50 to 85 years undergoing screening or surveillance colonoscopy.

INTERVENTION

Participants completed 5 different FITs before their colonoscopy, including 4 qualitative tests (Hemoccult ICT, Hemosure iFOB, OC-Light S FIT, QuickVue iFOB) and 1 quantitative test (OC-Auto FIT, which was run at the manufacturer's threshold for positivity of >100 ng/mL).

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was test performance (sensitivity and specificity) for each of the 5 FITs for advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACN), defined as advanced polyps or CRC. Positivity rates, positive and negative predictive values, and rates of unevaluable tests were compared. Multivariable models were used to identify factors affecting sensitivity.

RESULTS

A total of 3761 participants were enrolled, with a mean age of 62.1 years (SD, 7.8); 63.2% of participants were female, 5.7% were Black, 86.4% were White, and 28.7% were Hispanic. There were 320 participants with ACN (8.5%), including 9 with CRC (0.2%). The test positivity rate varied 4-fold (3.9% to 16.4%) across FITs. Rates of unevaluable FITs ranged from 0.2% to 2.5%. The sensitivity for ACN varied from 10.1% to 36.7%, and specificity varied from 85.5% to 96.6%. Differences in sensitivity between FITs were all statistically significantly different except between Hemosure iFOB and QuickVue iFOB, and specificity differences were all statistically significantly different from one another. In addition to FIT brand, distal location of ACN was also associated with higher FIT sensitivity.

LIMITATION

The study did not assess the programmatic sensitivity of annual FIT.

CONCLUSION

Although considered a single class, FITs have varying test performance for detecting ACN and should not be considered interchangeable.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Institutes of Health.

Screening and Surveillance of Colorectal Cancer: A Review of the Literature

Colorectal cancer (CRC) has the highest mortality rate among men and is the second highest among women under fifty, with incidence and mortality rates rising in younger populations. Studies indicate that up to one-third of patients diagnosed before fifty have a family history or genetic factors, highlighting the need for earlier screening. Contrariwise, diagnosis in healthy subjects through screening strategies enables early-stage detection of the tumor and better clinical outcomes. In recent years, mortality rates of CRC in Western countries have been on a steady decline, which is largely attributed to widespread screening programs and advancements in treatment modalities. Indeed, early detection through screening significantly improves prognosis, with stark differences in survival rates between localized and metastatic disease. This article aims to provide a comprehensive review of the existing literature, delving into the performance and efficacy of various CRC screening strategies. It navigates through available screening tools, evaluating their efficacy and cost-effectiveness. The discussion extends to delineating target populations for screening, emphasizing the importance of tailored approaches for individuals at heightened risk.

Risk factors for early-onset colorectal cancer: A Canadian prospective cohort study

PURPOSE

The incidence of early-onset (<50 years of age) colorectal cancer (eoCRC) has been steadily increasing in high-income countries including Canada. Despite this increase in incidence, the etiology of eoCRC remains unclear and prospective cohort studies of potential risk factors are limited.

METHODS

We examined two prospective cohorts of healthy individuals (<50 years of age) who completed baseline questionnaires in the Ontario Health Study and Alberta's Tomorrow Project. We examined the associations between demographic characteristics, chronic health conditions, and lifestyle behaviours with the development of eoCRC using Cox proportional hazard models. Cohorts were analyzed separately and hazard ratios for each risk factor were pooled with random effects meta-analyses.

RESULTS

During an average follow-up of 6.63 years, 98 eoCRC cases occurred among study participants (n=127,852). A family history of CRC alone or with a history of other cancer types was associated with an increased risk of developing eoCRC (HR: 2.76, 95% CI: 1.43-5.32), but a family history of a non-CRC cancer only was not (HR: 1.18, 95% CI: 0.61-2.30). Heavy smokers (≥ 10 pack-years) at baseline had a higher risk of eoCRC compared to non-smokers (HR: 1.87, 95% CI: 1.00-3.52). Sex, socioeconomic factors, diabetes, alcohol consumption, among other factors were not significantly associated with the risk of eoCRC.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that specific CRC risk factors are also associated with developing eoCRC. The data in the study offers valuable insights that could be integrated in future meta-analyses. Additional prospective cohort studies are required to understand the etiology of eoCRC.

Adenomas and Sessile Serrated Lesions in 45- to 49-Year-Old Individuals Undergoing Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is now recommended at the age of 45 years in the United States. However, information regarding the adenomas detection rate (ADR) and sessile serrated lesions (SSLs) in 45- to 49-year-old individuals is limited. In addition, the impact of lowering the screening age to 45 years on the ADR and the detection rate of SSLs is not well elucidated. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to report the overall ADR and SSL detection rate in 45- to 49-year-old individuals undergoing colonoscopy.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov , and the Cochrane database from inception through October 2022 to identify studies reporting on ADR and SSL detection rates in 45- to 49-year-old individuals undergoing colonoscopies for all indications. This approach acknowledges the possibility of including individuals undergoing diagnostic colonoscopies or those with increased risk factors for CRC. We also conducted a separate analysis examining ADR in average-risk individuals undergoing screening colonoscopy. The pooled rates with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were generated using the fixed-effects model. I2 was used to adjudicate heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria. All studies were retrospective except one; 3 had data from national/local registries. There were 41,709 adenomas detected across 150,436 colonoscopies. The pooled overall ADR was 23.1% (95% CI 19.7%-27.0%, I2 = 98.6%). The pooled ADR in individuals with average risk of CRC from 7 studies was 28.2% (95% CI 24.6%-32.0%, I2 = 96.5%). The pooled overall SSL detection rate from 6 studies was 6.3% (95% CI 3.8%-10.5%, I2 = 97%). The included studies were heterogeneous because of differences in the inclusion and exclusion criteria and patient population.

DISCUSSION

In 45- to 49-year-old individuals undergoing a colonoscopy for any indication, the ADR and SSL detection rates were 23.1% and 6.3%, respectively. We conclude that these outcomes in 45- to 49-year-olds are comparable with individuals aged 50-54 years.

Screening of colorectal cancer: Methods and strategies

Colorectal cancer (CRC) has high incidence and mortality rates, and the emergence and application of CRC screening have helped us effectively control the occurrence and development of CRC. Currently, common international screening methods include tests based on feces and blood, and examination methods that allow for visualization, such as sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy. Some methods have been widely used, whereas others such as multi-target stool RNA test are still being explored and developed, and are expected to become front-line screening methods for CRC in the future. The choice of screening method is affected by external conditions and the patients' situation, and the clinician must choose an appropriate strategy according to the actual situation and the patient's wishes. This article introduces various CRC screening methods and analyzes the factors relevant to the screening strategy.

The underestimated preventive effects of flexible sigmoidoscopy screening: re-analysis and meta-analysis of randomized trials

Flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS), which is less invasive, resource intensive and costly than colonoscopy, is among the recommended screening options for colorectal cancer (CRC). Four large randomized trials consistently reported statistically significant, albeit modest effects of screening by FS on CRC incidence. However, their effect estimates included cancers that were already prevalent at recruitment and could not have been prevented by screening. We performed a re-analysis and meta-analysis of two of the trials (including the largest one) to estimate reduction of truly incident cases by a single FS offered between 55 and 64 years of age among the "at risk study population" without prevalent CRC at recruitment. In meta-analyses of data reported after more than 15 years of follow-up, relative risk (95% CI) in intention-to-screen and per-protocol analyses were 0.71 (0.66-0.76) and 0.59 (0.55-0.65) for any CRC, and 0.52 (0.47-0.57) and 0.34 (0.30-0.39) for distal CRC, respectively. These results indicate much stronger effects than those suggested by the original reports and imply that a single screening FS can prevent approximately two out of three distal incident CRC cases within 15 + years of follow-up.

Liver Disease as a Potential Risk Factor for Colorectal Cancer: A Community Hospital Experience

BACKGROUND

Liver disease (LD) is a common pathology worldwide. Many patients remain asymptomatic and undiagnosed. Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a prevalent neoplasm and a leading cause of cancer-related deaths globally. Multiple studies suggest that inflammation in the liver could drive the initiation of colorectal cancer.

METHODS

This five-year (2018-2022) case-control study included 274 patients diagnosed with CRC and adenomas at a community hospital in Houston, Texas. Each patient's medical record was reviewed for pre-existing LD, including steatosis, cirrhosis, primary biliary cirrhosis, and Hepatitis B and C infections. This study aims to investigate the association between LD and CRC risk and assess differences by gender, race, and ethnicity. The study cohort comprised 124 (45.3%) women and 150 (54.7%) men. Data were compared and analyzed using a Chi-squared test for independence and binomial logistic regression. A p-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.  Results: Patients with LD had a two-fold increase in the odds of developing CRC compared to those without LD, in both univariate and multivariate analyses (OR 2.13 {95% CI 1.30-3.49}, p = 0.003 / OR 2.30 {95% CI 1.37-3.87}, p = 0.002, respectively). The chi-square test revealed that the association between CRC and LD was stronger in women than in men (p = 0.018 and p = 0.056, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Our study establishes a positive correlation between LD and CRC development, suggesting LD is a potential risk factor for CRC, particularly in women. Future research directions include exploring the underlying mechanisms of this association, evaluating the utility of early CRC screening in individuals with LD, and assessing the impact of interventions targeting LD on CRC incidence and mortality.

Optimal timing of a colonoscopy screening schedule depends on adenoma detection, adenoma risk, adherence to screening and the screening objective: A microsimulation study

Colonoscopy-based screening provides protection against colorectal cancer (CRC), but the optimal starting age and time intervals of screening colonoscopies are unknown. We aimed to determine an optimal screening schedule for the US population and its dependencies on the objective of screening (life years gained or incidence, mortality, or cost reduction) and the setting in which screening is performed. We used our established open-source microsimulation model CMOST to calculate optimized colonoscopy schedules with one, two, three or four screening colonoscopies between 20 and 90 years of age. A single screening colonoscopy was most effective in reducing life years lost from CRC when performed at 55 years of age. Two, three and four screening colonoscopy schedules saved a maximum number of life years when performed between 49-64 years; 44-69 years; and 40-72 years; respectively. However, for maximum incidence and mortality reduction, screening colonoscopies needed to be scheduled 4-8 years later in life. The optimum was also influenced by adenoma detection efficiency with lower values for these parameters favoring a later starting age of screening. Low adherence to screening consistently favored a later start and an earlier end of screening. In a personalized approach, optimal screening would start earlier for high-risk patients and later for low-risk individuals. In conclusion, our microsimulation-based approach supports colonoscopy screening schedule between 45 and 75 years of age but the precise timing depends on the objective of screening, as well as assumptions regarding individual CRC risk, efficiency of adenoma detection during colonoscopy and adherence to screening.

A critical appraisal of clinical practice guidelines on surgical treatments for spinal metastasis

PURPOSE

As an important treatment for spinal metastasis, surgery has strict applicable conditions. Although various organizations have formulated different guidelines on surgical treatment for spinal metastasis (SM), there are certain differences in the content, standardization and quality of the guidelines and it is necessary to make a critical appraisal of them. We aim to systematically review and appraise the current guidelines on surgical treatments of SM and summarize the related recommendations with the quality evaluation of supporting evidence, as to provide a reference for the standardization of surgical treatment plans, and help clinical front-line medical workers can make safe and effective clinical decisions faster.

METHODS

We searched Pubmed, Web of Science, and Embase for three major databases and online guideline databases. According to certain inclusion and exclusion criteria, the latest guidelines on the surgical treatment of SM were sorted out. AGREE II was used to evaluated the guideline's quality, and we extracted and compared the recommended treatment content of each guideline with evaluating by the evidence-grading scale.

RESULTS

Eight guidelines from 2013 to 2019 were included. Seven guidelines are comprehensive guidelines and one related to the reconstructive surgery of SM. Five guidelines were evaluated as "recommended," and three guidelines were evaluated as "recommended with modifications." Regarding the indications of surgery with SM, four guidelines, seven guidelines, seven guidelines, three guidelines and three guidelines recommended surgical treatment for patients with SM with intractable pain, mechanical instability, metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC), recurrent spinal metastasis (RSM), and survival predication, respectively. Regarding the surgical strategies, three guidelines recommended minimally invasive therapy but had strict indications. Six guidelines and five guidelines recommend palliative surgery and with receiving radiation therapy, respectively. For the aggressive surgery, only one guideline recommended to apply to patients in good general conditions who has isolated symptomatic SM. Regarding the surgical reconstructions, one guideline didn't recommend iliac bone graft and three guidelines recommended PMMA bone cement.

CONCLUSION

Most of the guidelines do not provide clear criteria for surgical application and provide more of a basic framework. The level of evidence for these surgical recommendations ranges from LOE B to D, and almost all guidelines recommend vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty, but for palliative and more aggressive surgery, which recommended to personalize specific surgical strategies with multidisciplinary collaboration.

National Trends in the Incidence of Sporadic Malignant Colorectal Polyps in Young Patients (20-49 Years): An 18-Year SEER Database Analysis

Background and Objectives: Conflicting guidelines exist for initiating average-risk colorectal cancer screening at the age of 45 years. The United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) changed its guidelines in 2021 to recommend initiating screening at 45 years due to an increasing incidence of young-onset colorectal cancer. However, the American College of Physicians (ACP) recently recommended not screening average-risk individuals between 45 and 49 years old. We aim to study the national trends in the incidence of sporadic malignant polyps (SMP) in patients from 20 to 49 years old. Materials and Methods: We analyzed the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2000-2017) on patients aged 20-49 years who underwent diagnostic colonoscopy with at least a single malignant sporadic colorectal polyp. Results: Of the 10,742 patients diagnosed with SMP, 42.9% were female. The mean age of incidence was 43.07 years (42.91-43.23, 95% CI). Approximately 50% of malignant polyps were diagnosed between 45 and 49 years of age, followed by 25-30% between 40 and 45. There was an upward trend in malignant polyps, with a decreased incidence of malignant villous adenomas and a rise in malignant adenomas and tubulovillous adenomas. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that almost half of the SMPs under 50 years occurred in individuals under age 45, younger than the current screening threshold recommended by the ACP. There has been an upward trend in malignant polyps in the last two decades. This reflects changes in tumor biology, and necessitates further research and support in the USPSTF guidelines to start screening at the age of 45 years.

Colorectal Cancer: Epidemiology, Risk Factors, and Prevention

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer and the second most common cause of cancer mortality worldwide. There are disparities in the epidemiology of CRC across different populations, most probably due to differences in exposure to lifestyle and environmental factors related to CRC. Prevention is the most effective method for controlling CRC. Primary prevention includes determining and avoiding modifiable risk factors (e.g., alcohol consumption, smoking, and dietary factors) as well as increasing protective factors (e.g., physical activity, aspirin). Further studies, especially randomized, controlled trials, are needed to clarify the association between CRC incidence and exposure to different risk factors or protective factors. Detection and removal of precancerous colorectal lesions is also an effective strategy for controlling CRC. Multiple factors, both at the individual and community levels (e.g., patient preferences, availability of screening modalities, costs, benefits, and adverse events), should be taken into account in designing and implementing CRC screening programs. Health policymakers should consider the best decision in identifying the starting age and selection of the most effective screening strategies for the target population. This review aims to present updated evidence on the epidemiology, risk factors, and prevention of CRC.

Social Determinants of Health and the Link to Colorectal Cancer Outcomes

OPINION  STATEMENT: Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains the second most deadly cancer in the United States, behind only lung cancer. Despite improvements in incidence due to screening and mortality in part due to better treatments, there are some groups that have not seen these promising changes. American Indian/Alaska Native and non-Hispanic Black individuals, certain geographic regions, and lower socioeconomic groups have all been shown to have worse CRC outcomes. A significant body of evidence has linked these disparities in outcomes to social determinants of health (SDH). SDH are defined by the WHO as "the non-medical factors that influence health outcomes." These factors include but are not limited to income, education, social support, neighborhood of residence, and access to healthcare. Individuals who are negatively impacted by SDH have been shown to have a higher incidence of CRC. These individuals are also less likely to receive adequate CRC screening, are less likely to receive appropriate treatment, and have increased CRC mortality. Interventions that target different SDH domains have been shown to lead to increased rates of CRC screening and receipt of appropriate treatment while simultaneously improving CRC mortality. The aim of this review is to highlight the connection between SDH and CRC outcomes while also exploring interventions that target SDH and thereby improve CRC outcomes.

Screening for Colorectal Cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer death. Screening has been proven to reduce both cancer incidence and cancer-related mortality. Various screening tests are available, each with their own advantages and disadvantages and varying levels of evidence to support their use. Clinicians should offer CRC screening to average-risk persons aged 50 to 75 years; starting screening at age 45 years remains controversial. Screening may be beneficial in select persons aged 76 to 85 years, based on their overall health and screening history. Offering a choice of screening tests or sequentially offering an alternate test for those who do not complete screening can significantly increase participation.

Stage-Stratified Incidence Rates of Colorectal Adenocarcinoma Among Patients Aged 46 to 49 in the United States

This cross-sectional study uses Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry data to analyze colorectal adenocarcinoma staging incidence of patients aged 46 to 49 years from 2000 to 2020.

The Subjective Interpretation of the Medical Evidence

This Viewpoint discusses whether commonly occuring, sometimes divergent interpretations of new evidence’s validity and usefulness should be explained when experts and guideline committees provide recommendations for screening or treatment.

Colorectal Cancer Prevention: Is Chat Generative Pretrained Transformer (Chat GPT) ready to Assist Physicians in Determining Appropriate Screening and Surveillance Recommendations?

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether a publicly available advanced language model could help determine appropriate colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and surveillance recommendations.

BACKGROUND

Poor physician knowledge or inability to accurately recall recommendations might affect adherence to CRC screening guidelines. Adoption of newer technologies can help improve the delivery of such preventive care services.

METHODS

An assessment with 10 multiple choice questions, including 5 CRC screening and 5 CRC surveillance clinical vignettes, was inputted into chat generative pretrained transformer (ChatGPT) 3.5 in 4 separate sessions. Responses were recorded and screened for accuracy to determine the reliability of this tool. The mean number of correct answers was then compared against a control group of gastroenterologists and colorectal surgeons answering the same questions with and without the help of a previously validated CRC screening mobile app.

RESULTS

The average overall performance of ChatGPT was 45%. The mean number of correct answers was 2.75 (95% CI: 2.26-3.24), 1.75 (95% CI: 1.26-2.24), and 4.5 (95% CI: 3.93-5.07) for screening, surveillance, and total questions, respectively. ChatGPT showed inconsistency and gave a different answer in 4 questions among the different sessions. A total of 238 physicians also responded to the assessment; 123 (51.7%) without and 115 (48.3%) with the mobile app. The mean number of total correct answers of ChatGPT was significantly lower than those of physicians without [5.62 (95% CI: 5.32-5.92)] and with the mobile app [7.71 (95% CI: 7.39-8.03); P < 0.001].

CONCLUSIONS

Large language models developed with artificial intelligence require further refinements to serve as reliable assistants in clinical practice.

Recent American College of Physicians Guidance Statement for Screening Average-risk, Asymptomatic Adults for Colorectal Cancer

The American College of Physicians (ACP) update of their standing guidance statement for colorectal-cancer screening in asymptomatic average-risk adults was recently published to assist clinicians with implementing evidence-based patient care. After assessing existing guideline literature, the ACP recommended five actions: consider not screening adults ages 45 to 49 years; stop screening adults older than 75 years; discuss benefits, harms, costs, availability, frequency, and patient values/preferences with patients prior to choosing a screening method; and when choosing, recommend biennial rather than annual use of a fecal immunochemical test or a guaiac fecal occult blood test and avoid recommending computed tomography colonography or stool DNA tests. While the ACP guidelines are rigorous, well-intended, and considerate of patients' input, their greatest impact may result from highlighting the need for researchers to help frontline clinicians to describe the risk, costs, and benefits/harms of various colorectal-cancer screening strategies in an effective, yet time-efficient, manner given the all-too-brief annual patient encounters. In the United States, reimbursement is still dependent on U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendations which are somewhat more liberal in contrast to the ACP's approach which strongly favors randomized, controlled trial evidence to guide the delivery of prevention and screening services to asymptomatic average-risk patients.

Screening for Colorectal Cancer: The Role of Clinical Laboratories

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer incidence and mortality. Screening can result in reductions in incidence and mortality, but there are many challenges to uptake and follow-up.

CONTENT

Here, we will review the changing epidemiology of CRC, including increasing trends for early and later onset CRC; evidence to support current and emerging screening strategies, including noninvasive stool and blood-based tests; key challenges to ensuring uptake and high-quality screening; and the critical role that clinical laboratories can have in supporting health system and public health efforts to reduce the burden of CRC on the population.

SUMMARY

Clinical laboratories have the opportunity to play a seminal role in optimizing early detection and prevention of CRC.