Endoscopic detection of proximal serrated lesions and pathologic identification of sessile serrated adenomas/polyps vary on the basis of center

Variation in Colonoscopy Performance Measures According to Procedure Indication

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Most fulfillment and benchmarking information for colonoscopy quality indicators has been obtained from studies of primary screening colonoscopies. We analyzed differences in the fulfillment of colonoscopy quality indicators based on the indication for endoscopy.

METHODS

We performed an observational, multicenter, cross-sectional study of 14,867 patients who underwent endoscopy procedures for gastrointestinal symptoms (40.3%), a positive result from a fecal immunochemical test (36.0%), postpolypectomy surveillance (15.3%), or primary screening (8.4%), from February 2016 through December 2017 at 14 centers in Spain. We evaluated rates of adequate colon cleansing, cecal intubation, adenoma detection, and colorectal cancer detection, among others. We used findings from primary screening colonoscopies as the reference standard.

RESULTS

Fewer than 90% of patients had adequate bowel preparation; 83.1% of patients with gastrointestinal symptoms had adequate bowel preparation (odds ratio [OR] compared with patients with primary screening colonoscopies, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.49-0.78) and 85.3% of patients receiving postpolypectomy surveillance had adequate bowel preparation (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.55-0.91). The cecal intubation rate was also lower in patients with gastrointestinal symptoms (93.1%) (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.22-0.52). The adenoma detection rate was higher in patients with a positive result from a fecal immunochemical test (46.4%) (OR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.71-2.35) and in patients undergoing postpolypectomy surveillance (48.2%) (OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.20-1.67). The highest proportion of patients with colorectal cancer was in the gastrointestinal symptom group (5.1%) (OR, 5.24; 95% CI, 2.30-11.93) and the lowest was in patients undergoing surveillance (0.8%) (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.32-2.14).

CONCLUSIONS

Fulfillment of colonoscopy performance measures varies substantially by indication. Policies addressing performance measures beyond colonoscopy screening procedures should be developed. Benchmarking recommendations could be adjusted according to colonoscopy indication.

Agrin in the Muscularis Mucosa Serves as a Biomarker Distinguishing Hyperplastic Polyps from Sessile Serrated Lesions

PURPOSE

Sessile serrated lesions (SSL) are precursors to colon carcinoma, and their distinction from other polyps, in particular hyperplastic polyps (HP), presents significant diagnostic challenges. We evaluated expression patterns in colonic polyps of previously identified colon carcinoma-associated extracellular matrix (ECM) proteins to identify markers distinguishing SSLs from other polyps.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Gene-expression analyses of ECM proteins were performed using publicly available data on preneoplastic colonic polyps. In parallel, we evaluated by IHC the expression of agrin (AGRN) in over 400 colonic polyps, including HP, SSL with and without dysplasia, traditional serrated adenomas (TSA), and tubular adenomas (TA), and compared the consistency of standard histologic diagnosis of SSLs by experienced gastrointestinal pathologists with that of AGRN IHC.

RESULTS

Differential gene expression analysis and IHC identified AGRN, serine peptidase inhibitor (SERPINE2), and TIMP metallopeptidase inhibitor 1 (TIMP1) elevated in SSLs and HPs but decreased in TAs and absent in normal colon. AGRN-positive basal laminae were noted in all TA, TSA, HP, and SSL in distinguishable patterns, whereas other polyps and normal mucosa were negative. SSL with or without dysplasia consistently showed IHC staining for AGRN in the muscularis mucosae, which was absent in HP, TSA, TA, and other polyps. In contrast, histologic evaluation showed only weak interobserver agreement (kappa value = 0.493) in distinguishing SSLs.

CONCLUSIONS

Muscularis mucosae-based AGRN immunostaining is a novel biomarker to distinguish SSL from HP, TSA, and TA, with a specificity of 97.1% and sensitivity of 98.9% and can assist in diagnosis of morphologically challenging colonic polyps.

Association of Adenoma and Proximal Sessile Serrated Polyp Detection Rates With Endoscopist Characteristics

Importance

Research demonstrates adenoma detection rate (ADR) and proximal sessile serrated polyp detection rate (pSSPDR) are associated with endoscopist characteristics including sex, specialty, and years in practice. However, many studies have not adjusted for other risk factors associated with colonic neoplasia.

Objective

To assess the association between endoscopist characteristics and polyp detection after adjusting the factors included in previous studies as well as other factors.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study was conducted in the Cleveland Clinic health system with data from individuals undergoing screening colonoscopies between January 2015 and June 2017. The study analyzed data using methods from previous studies that have demonstrated significant associations between endoscopist characteristics and ADR or pSSPDR. Multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression was performed to examine 7 endoscopist characteristics associated with ADRs and pSSPDRs after controlling for patient demographic, clinical, and colonoscopy-associated factors.

Exposures

Seven characteristics of endoscopists performing colonoscopy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The ADR and pSSPDR, with a hypothesis created after data collection began.

Results

A total of 16 089 colonoscopies were performed in 16 089 patients by 56 clinicians. Of these, 8339 patients were male (51.8%), and the median (range) age of the cohort was 59 (52-66) years. Analyzing the data by the methods used in 4 previous studies yielded an association between endoscopist and polyp detection; surgeons (OR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.28-0.83]) and nongastroenterologists (OR, 0.50 [95% CI 0.29-0.85]) had reduced odds of pSSPDR, which was similar to results in previous studies. In a multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression analysis, ADR was not significantly associated with any endoscopist characteristic, and pSSPDR was only associated with years in practice (odds ratio, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.83-0.89] per increment of 10 years; P < .001) and number of annual colonoscopies performed (odds ratio, 1.05 [95% CI, 1.01-1.09] per 50 colonoscopies/year; P = .02).

Conclusions and Relevance

The differences in ADRs that were associated with 7 of 7 endoscopist characteristics and differences in pSSPDRs that were associated with 5 of 7 endoscopist characteristics in previous studies may have been associated with residual confounding, because they were not replicated in this analysis. Therefore, these characteristics should not influence the choice of endoscopist for colorectal cancer screening. However, clinicians further from their training and those with lower colonoscopy volumes have lower adjusted pSSPDRs and may need additional training to help increase pSSPDRs.

Polyp Detection Rate as a Surrogate for Adenoma and Sessile Serrated Adenoma/Polyp Detection Rates

Introduction

Quality measures for colonoscopy such as adenoma detection rate (ADR) have been proposed to be surveilled for ensuring minimum standards. However, its direct measurement is time consuming and often neglected. Extrapolating ADR and other quality measures from polyp detection rate (PDR) can be a pragmatic alternative.

Objective

To determine quotients for estimating ADR and sessile serrated adenoma/polyp detection rate (SSA/P-DR) from PDR in an Australian cohort.

Methods

Consecutive adult patient colonoscopies during a 1-year period were retrospectively assessed in a single Australian tertiary endoscopy center. Adenoma detection quotient (ADQ) and SSA/P detection quotient (SSA/P-DQ) were defined as the division of ADR and SSA/P-DR by PDR, respectively. The primary outcome was the number of procedures to achieve a stable cumulative ADQ and SSA/P-DQ. Secondary outcomes included evaluation of ADQ and SSA/P-DQ in different subsets.

Results

In total, 2,657 colonoscopies were performed by 15 endoscopists in 2016. The ADR, SSA/P-DR, and PDR found were 32.2, 6.7, and 47.3%, respectively. The ADQ and SSA/P-DQ values found were 0.68 and 0.14, respectively. After approximately 500 procedures, both ADQ and SSA/P-DQ became stable. Interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for the prediction of ADR from ADQ was excellent for all endoscopists that performed >177 procedures in that year (ICC 0.84).

Conclusions

ADQ and SSA/P-DQ values were consistent when over 500 procedures were analyzed. ADQ had an excellent correlation with ADR when >177 procedures per endoscopist were evaluated.

Colorectal sessile serrated lesion with large size or synchronous neoplasm: a prospective study

BACKGROUND

Colorectal sessile serrated lesion (SSL) with synchronous neoplasm or large size are linked to higher risk of cancer, but their characteristics are unclear.

METHODS

We prospectively included consecutive colorectal hyperplasic polyp and SSL collected at our institution from August 2011 to August 2012. The following data were collected and analyzed: age, gender, polyp site, aggregated polyp size, history of polyp, and synchronous neoplasm.

RESULTS

We collected 437 specimens including 353 (80.8%) hyperplasic polyp and 84 (19.2%) SSL. Compared with hyperplasic polyp, SSL was independently associated with proximal colon [odds ratio (OR) 3.61, P< 0.001], larger size (OR 3.98, P< 0.001), but not history of polyp, age or gender. Large SSL (≥1 vs <1 cm) was associated with polyp site (P= 0.035) and synchronous advanced adenoma and cancer (P< 0.001). SSL with synchronous adenoma and cancer were more likely found in males (OR 1.91, P= 0.001), elderly (OR 1.02, P= 0.033), and patients with the index polyp in proximal colon (OR 1.32, P= 0.022), but not related to history of adenoma and cancer. Moreover, synchronous adenoma, SSL and cancer were independently associated with male gender (OR 1.90, P< 0.001), but surprisingly not older age, histology of index polyp (SSL vs hyperplasic polyp), index-polyp site or history of adenoma and cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

This prospective study shows male gender is associated with both synchronous adenoma and cancer, and synchronous adenoma, SSL and cancer, while index polyp site is associated with synchronous adenoma and cancer.

An update on the morphology and molecular pathology of serrated colorectal polyps and associated carcinomas

Our understanding of serrated colorectal polyps has increased dramatically over the past two decades and has led to a modern classification scheme for these lesions. Sessile serrated polyps with dysplasia represent the most clinically significant serrated polyp; however, the morphologic heterogeneity of dysplasia in sessile serrated polyps has only recently been recognized and correlated with MLH1 immunohistochemistry. Detailed morphologic analysis of traditional serrated adenomas has led to the recognition of flat and early forms of this polyp. Robust data on the risk of metachronous lesions in patients with serrated polyps are also beginning to emerge. This review will summarize our current understanding of serrated polyps and associated carcinomas with a focus on diagnostic criteria, morphologic heterogeneity, molecular findings, and natural history. Controversial issues in the diagnosis and classification of these polyps are also discussed.

Terminology, Molecular Features, Epidemiology, and Management of Serrated Colorectal Neoplasia

In addition to the adenoma to carcinoma sequence, colorectal carcinogenesis can occur via the serrated pathway. Studies have focused on clarification of categories and molecular features of serrated polyps, as well as endoscopic detection and risk assessment. Guidelines from the World Health Organization propose assigning serrated polyps to categories of hyperplastic polyps, traditional serrated adenomas, and sessile serrated lesions (SSLs). Traditional serrated adenomas and SSLs are precursors to colorectal cancer. The serrated pathway is characterized by mutations in RAS and RAF, disruptions to the Wnt signaling pathway, and widespread methylation of CpG islands. Epidemiology studies of serrated polyps have been hampered by inconsistencies in terminology and reporting, but the prevalence of serrated class polyps is 20%-40% in average-risk individuals; most serrated polyps detected are hyperplastic. SSLs, the most common premalignant serrated subtype, and are found in up to 15% of average-risk patients by high-detecting endoscopists. Variations in rate of endoscopic detection of serrated polyps indicate the need for careful examination, with adequate bowel preparation and sufficient withdrawal times. Risk factors for SSLs include white race, family history of colorectal cancer, smoking, and alcohol intake. Patients with serrated polyps, particularly SSLs and traditional serrated adenomas, have an increased risk of synchronous and metachronous advanced neoplasia. Surveillance guidelines vary among countries, but SSLs and proximal hyperplastic polyps require special attention in assignment of surveillance interval-especially in light of concerns regarding incomplete detection and resection.

Serrated lesions of the colon A window on a more clear classification

Serrated polyps evaluation represents a challenge for pathologists for lacking of univocal criteria that leads to different inter -individual interpretation. The aim of our review is to offer an alternative simpler histologic and endoscopic approach to these lesions for a more correct relationship between endoscopists and pathologists.

Efficacy of Per-oral Methylene Blue Formulation for Screening Colonoscopy

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Topically applied methylene blue dye chromoendoscopy is effective in improving detection of colorectal neoplasia. When combined with a pH- and time-dependent multimatrix structure, a per-oral methylene blue formulation (MB-MMX) can be delivered directly to the colorectal mucosa.

METHODS

We performed a phase 3 study of 1205 patients scheduled for colorectal cancer screening or surveillance colonoscopies (50-75 years old) at 20 sites in Europe and the United States, from December 2013 through October 2016. Patients were randomly assigned to groups given 200 mg MB-MMX, placebo, or 100 mg MB-MMX (ratio of 2:2:1). The 100-mg MB-MMX group was included for masking purposes. MB-MMX and placebo tablets were administered with a 4-L polyethylene glycol-based bowel preparation. The patients then underwent colonoscopy by an experienced endoscopist with centralized double-reading. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with 1 adenoma or carcinoma (adenoma detection rate [ADR]). We calculated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for differences in detection between the 200-mg MB-MMX and placebo groups. False-positive (resection rate for non-neoplastic polyps) and adverse events were assessed as secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

The ADR was higher for the MB-MMX group (273 of 485 patients, 56.29%) than the placebo group (229 of 479 patients, 47.81%) (OR 1.46; 95% CI 1.09-1.96). The proportion of patients with nonpolypoid lesions was higher in the MB-MMX group (213 of 485 patients, 43.92%) than the placebo group (168 of 479 patients, 35.07%) (OR 1.66; 95% CI 1.21-2.26). The proportion of patients with adenomas ≤5 mm was higher in the MB-MMX group (180 of 485 patients, 37.11%) than the placebo group (148 of 479 patients, 30.90%) (OR 1.36; 95% CI 1.01-1.83), but there was no difference between groups in detection of polypoid or larger lesions. The false-positive rate did not differ significantly between groups (83 [23.31%] of 356 patients with non-neoplastic lesions in the MB-MMX vs 97 [29.75%] of 326 patients with non-neoplastic lesions in the placebo group). Overall, 0.7% of patients had severe adverse events but there was no significant difference between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In a phase 3 trial of patients undergoing screening or surveillance colonoscopies, we found MB-MMX led to an absolute 8.5% increase in ADR, compared with placebo, without increasing the removal of non-neoplastic lesions. Clinicaltrials.gov no: NCT01694966.

Adenoma detection rates in colonoscopies for positive fecal immunochemical tests versus direct screening colonoscopies

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Recent guidelines propose higher adenoma detection rate (ADR) benchmarks for colonoscopies performed for positive results for fecal immunochemical tests (FIT), but this is based on low-quality evidence. We aimed to compare ADR, advanced ADR (AADR), and number of adenomas per colonoscopy (APC) in direct screening colonoscopy (DSC) versus FIT-positive colonoscopy (FITC) in a multicenter Asia-Pacific cohort to justify differential targets.

METHODS

Asymptomatic average-risk patients ≥50 years of age who underwent screening colonoscopy directly or as follow-up for positive OC-Sensor FIT results were identified from 8 sites across the Asia-Pacific region. Overall, sex-specific ADR, overall AADR, and overall APC were compared between the 2 screening methods. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to adjust for confounding by differences in patient characteristics. Linear regression was used to correlate ADR with APC and to propose APC benchmarks.

RESULTS

A total of 2901 (mean age, 60.1 years; 57% men) individuals had DSC, and 2485 (mean age, 62.8 years; 57% men) underwent FITC. Overall ADR (53.6% vs 37.5%; odds ratio [OR], 1.93; P < .001), male-specific ADR (61.6% vs 44.6%; OR, 2; P < .001), female-specific ADR (43.2% vs 28.2%; OR, 1.94; P < .001) and overall AADR (29.9% vs 4.9%; OR, 8.2; P < .001) in FITC were significantly higher than the corresponding values for DSC. Differences remained significant after adjustment for patient characteristics. ADR was strongly and positively correlated to APC, with an ADR of 45% and 35% correlating to an APC of ∼1 and ∼0.65.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from this international multicenter cohort study provide early evidence that newly proposed higher ADR targets are justified as quality indicators for FITC.

Endoscopic diagnosis of sessile serrated polyp: A systematic review

The aim of the present review was to clarify how we should detect and diagnose sessile serrated polyps (SSP) endoscopically. A systematic search was conducted of MEDLINE from January 2004 through March 2018. Nine findings: (i) proximal location; (ii) size >10 mm; (iii) irregular shape; (iv) indistinctive border; (v) cloud-like surface; (vi) mucus cap; (vii) rim of debris in white-light endoscopy; (viii) dilated vessels; and (ix) dilated crypts (pits) in image-enhanced endoscopy were considered to be candidate discriminators of SSP from hyperplastic polyps. Prospective studies in a general setting are warranted to validate the above-mentioned endoscopic features of SSP during real-time colonoscopy and to determine whether these features are useful for the differential diagnosis of SSP.

The dark side of the colon: current issues surrounding the significance, prevalence, detection, diagnosis and management of serrated polyps

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Hyperplastic polyps, once considered to have no malignant potential, are now recognized to be part of a larger group of polyps known as serrated polyps. Serrated polyps can progress to CRC through an epigenetic pathway known as CpG Island Methylator Phenotype (CIMP), characterized by hypermethylation of specific DNA regions such as the promoter regions of the DNA mismatch repair genes like MLH1. The CIMP pathway is tightly linked with mutations of the oncogene BRAF. There are three subtypes of serrated polyps - hyperplastic polyps, sessile serrated polyps (SSPs) and traditional serrated adenomas (TSAs). TSAs harbor cytologic dysplasia whereas hyperplastic polyps and SSPs are nondysplastic lesions. Currently, only SSPs and TSAs are believed to progress to CRC whereas hyperplastic polyps are thought to be benign with no malignant potential. This article will review the current evidence while highlighting some of the issues regarding serrated polyps.

RECENT FINDINGS

One challenge has been pathologically distinguishing hyperplastic polyps from SSPs, which is an important distinction, given the potential for progression of SSPs to CRC. Other challenges regarding serrated polyps include adequate detection and resection. Surveillance guideline recommendations for some serrated polyps have been changed in current guidelines to reflect the malignant potential, recommending closer surveillance intervals than the 10-year follow-up that has been traditionally provided for hyperplastic polyps.

SUMMARY

Given the difficulties in diagnosing as well as resecting, it is important for endoscopists to know how to detect, resect and manage follow-up in patients with serrated polyps.

A Retrospective Analysis of Colorectal Serrated Lesions from 2005 to 2014 in a Single Center: Importance of the Establishment of Diagnostic Patterns

Background

Serrated colorectal lesions are increasingly recognized as an important process in the development of colorectal cancer. Endoscopic and histological diagnosis may be difficult, and knowledge of the serrated lesions is important for the establishment of strategies for treating colorectal lesions. We aimed to analyze serrated lesions diagnosed at a single center and evaluate if there was an increase in their identification over the years.

Design and Setting

A retrospective analysis of colonoscopy reports was performed at a specialized center from 2005 to 2014.

Methods

Colonoscopy reports about any resected endoscopic lesions were reviewed and subjected to histological diagnosis from 2005 to 2014. Then, serrated lesions were evaluated based on morphological characterization, location, size, occurrence of synchronous lesions, and the patient's history of colorectal cancer and polyps.

Results

A total of 2126 colonoscopy examination reports were reviewed, and 3494 lesions were analyzed. On histopathological examination, 1089 (31.2%) were classified as hyperplastic polyps, 22 (0.6%) as sessile serrated adenomas, and 21 (0.6%) as traditional serrated adenomas. There was an increase in the number of cases of sessile and traditional serrated adenomas diagnosed after 2010. Before 2010, two cases of sessile serrated adenomas and seven cases of traditional serrated adenomas were diagnosed; after 2010, 20 cases of sessile serrated adenoma and 14 cases of traditional serrated adenomas were diagnosed.

Conclusion

There was an increase in the diagnosis of sessile serrated adenomas over the years, which can be attributed to better accuracy in colonoscopy and histological classification.

Sessile Serrated Adenomas: How to Detect, Characterize and Resect

Serrated polyps are important contributors to the burden of colorectal cancers (CRC). These lesions were once considered to have no malignant potential, but currently up to 30% of all CRC are recognized to arise from the serrated neoplasia pathway. The primary premalignant lesions are sessile serrated adenomas/polyps (SSA/Ps), although traditional serrated adenomas are relatively uncommon. Compared to conventional adenomas, SSA/Ps are morphologically subtle with indistinct borders, may be difficult to detect endoscopically, are more prevalent than previously thought, are associated with synchronous and metachronous advanced neoplasia, and have a higher risk of incomplete resection. Although many lesions remain “dormant,” progressive disease is associated with the development of dysplasia and more rapid progression to CRC. As a result, SSA/Ps are strongly implicated in the development of interval cancers. These factors represent unique challenges that require a meticulous approach to their management. In this review, we summarize the contemporary literature on the characterization, detection and resection of SSA/Ps.

Patients with small and diminutive proximal hyperplastic polyps have higher rates of synchronous advanced neoplasia compared with patients without serrated lesions

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The association of proximal small and diminutive hyperplastic polyps (HPs) with synchronous advanced neoplasia is not well-defined. However, sessile serrated polyps (SSPs), even when small, are known to portend a risk of synchronous neoplasia. Currently, the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer does not recommend a change in the surveillance interval when proximal small HPs are detected. We aimed to compare the rates of synchronous advanced neoplasia in a screening colonoscopy cohort of patients with small and then diminutive proximal HPs in comparison, first to a cohort absent any serrated or proximal HPs and then in comparison with a cohort with small proximal SSPs.

METHODS

Consecutive screening colonoscopies were recorded between 2005 and 2010 at an academic medical center. Patients were divided into 3 mutually exclusive groups. Group 1 consisted of patients with at least 1 HP that was proximal to the sigmoid colon, <1 cm in endoscopic size, and up to 3 total HPs in number. Group 2 included patients without any proximal HPs or SSPs. Group 3 consisted of patients with 1 to 2 SSPs, with at least 1 being proximal to the sigmoid colon, that were <1 cm in endoscopic size and without dysplasia. Rates of synchronous advanced neoplasia in patients with small (<1 cm) and diminutive (≤5 mm) proximal HPs were compared with the rates for the other 2 groups.

RESULTS

There were 482 of 2569 patients (18.8%) with a small proximal HP who met the criteria for Group 1. The rate of synchronous advanced neoplasia in patients with a small proximal HP (61/482, 12.7%) was significantly greater compared with the average risk in the non-serrated cohort (Group 2, 133/1878, 7.1%; P < .001). There was no significant difference in the rate of synchronous advanced neoplasia when the small proximal HP group was subdivided by size (≤5 mm, 51/404, 12.6% vs 6-9 mm, 10/78, 12.8%; P = 1.00). The rate of synchronous advanced neoplasia in patients with diminutive (≤5 mm) proximal HPs (51/404, 12.6%) was not significantly different from the rate observed with proximal SSPs of similar size (17/113, 15.0%; P = .529).

CONCLUSION

Patients with small and diminutive proximal HPs tend to harbor higher rates of synchronous advanced neoplasia compared with those without any serrated lesions detected on screening colonoscopy. Surveillance outcomes for metachronous advanced neoplasia for patients with small proximal HPs deserves further study. The synchronous advanced neoplasia rate in patients with proximal diminutive HPs is similar to that of proximal diminutive SSPs and could have implications in a resect and discard strategy.

Endoscopic detection rate of sessile serrated lesions in Lynch syndrome patients is comparable with an age- and gender-matched control population: case-control study with expert pathology review

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Carcinogenesis in Lynch syndrome involves fast progression of adenomas to colorectal cancer (CRC) because of microsatellite instability. The role of sessile serrated lesions (SSLs) and the serrated neoplasia pathway in these patients is unknown. The aim of this matched case-control study was to compare endoscopic detection rates and distribution of SSLs in Lynch syndrome patients with a matched control population.

METHODS

We collected data of Lynch syndrome patients with a proven germline mutation who underwent colonoscopy between January 2011 and April 2016 in 2 tertiary referral hospitals. Control subjects undergoing elective colonoscopy from 2011 and onward for symptoms or surveillance were selected from a prospectively collected database. Patients were matched 1:1 for age, gender, and index versus surveillance colonoscopy. An expert pathology review of serrated polyps was performed. The primary outcomes included the detection rates and distribution of SSLs.

RESULTS

We identified 321 patients with Lynch syndrome who underwent at least 1 colonoscopy. Of these, 223 Lynch syndrome patients (mean age, 49.3; 59% women; index colonoscopy, 56%) were matched to 223 control subjects. SSLs were detected in 7.6% (95% confidence interval, 4.8-11.9) of colonoscopies performed in Lynch syndrome patients and in 6.7% (95% confidence interval, 4.1-10.8) of control subjects (P = .86). None of the detected SSLs in Lynch syndrome patients contained dysplasia.

CONCLUSIONS

The detection rate of SSLs in Lynch syndrome patients undergoing colonoscopy is comparable with a matched population. These findings suggest that the role of the serrated neoplasia pathway in CRC development in Lynch syndrome seems to be comparable with that in the general population.

Sessile serrated adenoma detection rate is correlated with adenoma detection rate

AIM

To investigated the association between adenoma detection rate (ADR) and sessile serrated ADR (SSADR) and significant predictors for sessile serrated adenomas (SSA) detection.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective, single-center analysis. Total colonoscopies performed by the gastroenterologists at the University of Tokyo Hospital between January and December 2014 were retrospectively identified. Polyps were classified as low-grade or high-grade adenoma, cancer, SSA, or SSA with cytological dysplasia, and the prevalence of each type of polyp was investigated. Predictors of adenoma and SSA detection were examined using logistic generalized estimating equation models. The association between ADR and SSADR for each gastroenterologist was investigated by calculating a correlation coefficient weighted by the number of each gastroenterologist's examination.

RESULTS

A total of 3691 colonoscopies performed by 35 gastroenterologists were assessed. Overall, 978 (26.5%) low- and 84 (2.2%) high-grade adenomas, 81 (2.2%) cancers, 66 (1.8%) SSAs, and 2 (0.1%) SSAs with cytological dysplasia were detected. Overall ADR was 29.5% (men 33.2%, women 23.8%) and overall SSADR was 1.8% (men 1.7%, women 2.1%). In addition, 672 low-grade adenomas (68.8% of all the detected low-grade adenomas), 58 (69.9%) high-grade adenomas, 29 (34.5%) cancers, 52 (78.8%) SSAs, and 2 (100%) SSAs with cytological dysplasia were found in the proximal colon. Adenoma detection was the only significant predictor of SSA detection (adjusted OR: 2.53, 95%CI: 1.53-4.20; P < 0.001). The correlation coefficient between ADR and SSADR weighted by the number of each gastroenterologist's examinations was 0.606 (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our results demonstrated that ADR is correlated to SSADR. In addition, patients with adenomas had a higher prevalence of SSAs than those without adenomas.

Diagnosis and predictors of sessile serrated adenoma after educational training in a large, community-based, integrated healthcare setting

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Sessile serrated adenomas (SSAs) are precursors of 15% to 30% of colorectal cancers but are frequently underdiagnosed. We sought to measure the SSA detection rate (SDR) and predictors of SSA detection after educational training for community gastroenterologists and pathologists.

METHODS

Colonoscopy and pathology data (2010-2014) from 3 medical centers at Kaiser Permanente Northern California were accessed electronically. Gastroenterologists and pathologists attended a training session on SSA diagnosis in 2012. Mean SDRs and patient-level predictors of SSA detection post-training (2013-2014) were investigated.

RESULTS

Mean SDRs increased from .6% in 2010-2012 to 3.7% in 2013-2014. The increase in the detection of proximal SSAs was accompanied by a decrease in the detection of proximal hyperplastic polyps (HPs). Among 34,161 colonoscopies performed in 2013 to 2014, SDRs for screening, fecal immunochemical test positivity, surveillance, and diagnostic indication were 4.2%, 4.5%, 4.9%, and 3.0%, respectively. SSA detection was lower among Asians (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], .46; 95% confidence interval [CI], .31-.69) and Hispanics (aOR, .59; 95% CI, .36-.95) compared with non-Hispanic whites and higher among patients with synchronous conventional adenoma (aOR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.15-1.86), HP (aOR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.30-2.34), and current smokers (aOR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.17-2.72). SDRs varied widely among experienced gastroenterologists, even after training (1.1%-8.1%). There was a moderately strong correlation between adenoma detection rate (ADR) and SDR for any SSA (r = .64, P = .0003) and for right-sided SSAs (r = .71, P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Educational training significantly increased the detection of SSA, but a wide variation in SDR remained across gastroenterologists. SSA detection was inversely associated with Asian and Hispanic race/ethnicity and positively associated with the presence of conventional adenoma, HP, and current smoking. There was a moderately strong correlation between ADR and SDR.

Variation in Pathologist Classification of Colorectal Adenomas and Serrated Polyps

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopist quality measures such as adenoma detection rate (ADR) and serrated polyp detection rates (SPDRs) depend on pathologist classification of histology. Although variation in pathologic interpretation is recognized, we add to the literature by quantifying the impact of pathologic variability on endoscopist performance.

METHODS

We used natural language processing to abstract relevant data from colonoscopy and related pathology reports performed over 2 years at four clinical sites. We quantified each pathologist's likelihood of classifying polyp specimens as adenomas or serrated polyps. We estimated the impact on endoscopists' ADR and SPDR of sending their specimens to pathologists with higher or lower classification rates.

RESULTS

We observed 85,526 colonoscopies performed by 119 endoscopists; 50,453 had a polyp specimen, which were analyzed by 48 pathologists. There was greater variation across pathologists in classification of serrated polyps than in classification of adenomas. We estimate the endoscopist's average SPDR would be 0.5% if all their specimens were analyzed by the pathologist in our sample with the lowest classification rate and 12.0% if all their specimens were analyzed by the pathologist with the highest classification rate. In contrast, the endoscopist's average ADR would be 28.5% and 42.4% if their specimens were analyzed by the pathologist with lowest and highest classification rate, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

There is significant variation in pathologic interpretation, which more substantially affects endoscopist SPDR than ADR.

Management of Serrated Polyps of the Colon

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to summarize the management of serrated colorectal polyps (SPs), with a particular focus on the most common premalignant SP, sessile serrated adenoma or polyp (SSA/P). These lesions present a challenge for endoscopists with respect to detection and resection, and are also susceptible to pathologic misdiagnosis.

RECENT FINDINGS

Patients with SSA/Ps are at an increased risk of future colorectal neoplasia, including advanced polyps and cancer. Reasonable benchmarks for SP detection rates are 5-7% for SSA/Ps and 10-12% for proximal SPs. Certain endoscopic techniques such as chromoendoscopy, narrow band imaging, water immersion, and wide-angle viewing may improve SSA/P detection. Emerging endoscopic techniques such as underwater polypectomy, suction pseudopolyp technique, and piecemeal cold snare polypectomy are helpful tools for the endoscopist's armamentarium for removing SSA/Ps. Proper orientation of SSA/P specimens can improve the accuracy of pathology readings. Patients with confirmed SSA/Ps and proximal HPs should undergo surveillance at intervals similar to what is recommended for patients with conventional adenomas. Patients with SSA/Ps may also be able to lower their risk of future polyps by targeting modifiable risk factors including tobacco and alcohol use and high-fat diets. NSAIDs and aspirin appear to be protective agents. SPs and SSA/Ps in particular are important colorectal cancer precursors that merit special attention to ensure adequate detection, resection, and surveillance.

Platform-independent gene expression signature differentiates sessile serrated adenomas/polyps and hyperplastic polyps of the colon

Background

Sessile serrated adenomas/polyps are distinguished from hyperplastic colonic polyps subjectively by their endoscopic appearance and histological morphology. However, hyperplastic and sessile serrated polyps can have overlapping morphological features resulting in sessile serrated polyps diagnosed as hyperplastic. While sessile serrated polyps can progress into colon cancer, hyperplastic polyps have virtually no risk for colon cancer. Objective measures, differentiating these types of polyps would improve cancer prevention and treatment outcome.

Methods

RNA-seq training data set and Affimetrix, Illumina testing data sets were obtained from Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO). RNA-seq single-end reads were filtered with FastX toolkit. Read mapping to the human genome, gene abundance estimation, and differential expression analysis were performed with Tophat-Cufflinks pipeline. Background correction, normalization, and probe summarization steps for Affimetrix arrays were performed using the robust multi-array method (RMA). For Illumina arrays, log₂-scale expression data was obtained from GEO. Pathway analysis was implemented using Bioconductor package GSAR. To build a platform-independent molecular classifier that accurately differentiates sessile serrated and hyperplastic polyps we developed a new feature selection step. We also developed a simple procedure to classify new samples as either sessile serrated or hyperplastic with a class probability assigned to the decision, estimated using Cantelli’s inequality.

Results

The classifier trained on RNA-seq data and tested on two independent microarray data sets resulted in zero and three errors. The classifier was further tested using quantitative real-time PCR expression levels of 45 blinded independent formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded specimens and was highly accurate. Pathway analyses have shown that sessile serrated polyps are distinguished from hyperplastic polyps and normal controls by: up-regulation of pathways implicated in proliferation, inflammation, cell-cell adhesion and down-regulation of serine threonine kinase signaling pathway; differential co-expression of pathways regulating cell division, protein trafficking and kinase activities.

Conclusions

Most of the differentially expressed pathways are known as hallmarks of cancer and likely to explain why sessile serrated polyps are more prone to neoplastic transformation than hyperplastic. The new molecular classifier includes 13 genes and may facilitate objective differentiation between two polyps.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12920-017-0317-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Utility of the multitarget stool DNA test for detection of colorectal neoplasia

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is an ideal target for screening because it and its precursor lesions are prevalent and can be detected at curable stages among asymptomatic persons. Different screening strategies have been shown to reduce CRC incidence and mortality; therefore, CRC screening is widely recommended. However, despite these demonstrated benefits, a large percentage of the population remains unscreened and efforts are underway in multiple countries to improve screening participation. The multitarget stool DNA test (MT-sDNA) is a new noninvasive option for CRC screening that is a now recommended as a primary CRC screening strategy in the updated guidelines by the US Preventive Services Task Force, American Cancer Society and National Comprehensive Cancer Network. MT-sDNA has high accuracy for detection of both CRC and polyps at the greatest risk of progression, and has potential to improve screening uptake and effectiveness. This review provides a summary of MT-sDNA performance for detection of colorectal neoplasia and a perspective on the value it adds to our screening tool kit.

Carbon dioxide insufflation is associated with increased serrated polyp detection rate when compared to room air insufflation during screening colonoscopy

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Sessile serrated adenomas (SSA) and traditional serrated adenomas (TSA) have been increasingly recognized as precursors of colorectal cancer. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of carbon dioxide insufflation (CO ₂ I) vs. room air insufflation (AI) on serrated polyp detection rate (SPDR) and to identify factors associated with SPDR.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Single-center retrospective cohort study of 2083 screening colonoscopies performed with AI (November 2011 through January 2013) or CO ₂ I (February 2013 to June 2015). Data on demographics, procedure characteristics and histology results were obtained from a prospectively maintained endoscopy database and chart review. SPDR was defined as proportion of colonoscopies in which ≥ 1 SSA, TSA or hyperplastic polyp (HP) ≥ 10 mm in the right colon was detected. Multi-variate analysis (MVA) was performed to identify predictors of SPDR.

RESULTS

A total of 131 histologically confirmed serrated polyps (129 SSA, 2 TSA and 0 HP ≥ 10 mm) were detected. SPDR was higher with CO ₂ I vs. AI (4.8 % vs. 1.4 %; P  < 0.0001). On MVA, CO ₂ I was associated with higher SPDR when compared to AI (OR: 9.52; 95 % CI: 3.05 - 30.3). Both higher body mass index (OR 1.05; 95 % CI:1.02 - 1.09) and longer colonoscope withdrawal time (OR 1.11; 95 % CI: 1.07 - 1.16) were also associated with higher SPDR.

CONCLUSION

CO ₂ I is associated with higher SPDR when compared to AI during screening colonoscopy. While the mechanism remains unknown, we speculate that the favorable gas characteristics of CO ₂ compared to room air results in improved polyp detection by optimizing bowel insufflation. These findings suggest an additional reason to prefer the use of CO ₂ I over AI during colonoscopy.

Colorectal Cancer Screening: Recommendations for Physicians and Patients From the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer

This document updates the colorectal cancer (CRC) screening recommendations of the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force of Colorectal Cancer (MSTF), which represents the American College of Gastroenterology, the American Gastroenterological Association, and The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. CRC screening tests are ranked in 3 tiers based on performance features, costs, and practical considerations. The first-tier tests are colonoscopy every 10 years and annual fecal immunochemical test (FIT). Colonoscopy and FIT are recommended as the cornerstones of screening regardless of how screening is offered. Thus, in a sequential approach based on colonoscopy offered first, FIT should be offered to patients who decline colonoscopy. Colonoscopy and FIT are recommended as tests of choice when multiple options are presented as alternatives. A risk-stratified approach is also appropriate, with FIT screening in populations with an estimated low prevalence of advanced neoplasia and colonoscopy screening in high prevalence populations. The second-tier tests include CT colonography every 5 years, the FIT-fecal DNA test every 3 years, and flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5 to 10 years. These tests are appropriate screening tests, but each has disadvantages relative to the tier 1 tests. Because of limited evidence and current obstacles to use, capsule colonoscopy every 5 years is a third-tier test. We suggest that the Septin9 serum assay (Epigenomics, Seattle, Wash) not be used for screening. Screening should begin at age 50 years in average-risk persons, except in African Americans in whom limited evidence supports screening at 45 years. CRC incidence is rising in persons under age 50, and thorough diagnostic evaluation of young persons with suspected colorectal bleeding is recommended. Discontinuation of screening should be considered when persons up to date with screening, who have prior negative screening (particularly colonoscopy), reach age 75 or have <10 years of life expectancy. Persons without prior screening should be considered for screening up to age 85, depending on age and comorbidities. Persons with a family history of CRC or a documented advanced adenoma in a first-degree relative age <60 years or 2 first-degree relatives with these findings at any age are recommended to undergo screening by colonoscopy every 5 years, beginning 10 years before the age at diagnosis of the youngest affected relative or age 40, whichever is earlier. Persons with a single first-degree relative diagnosed at ≥60 years with CRC or an advanced adenoma can be offered average-risk screening options beginning at age 40 years.

British Society of Gastroenterology position statement on serrated polyps in the colon and rectum

Serrated polyps have been recognised in the last decade as important premalignant lesions accounting for between 15% and 30% of colorectal cancers. There is therefore a clinical need for guidance on how to manage these lesions; however, the evidence base is limited. A working group was commission by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) Endoscopy section to review the available evidence and develop a position statement to provide clinical guidance until the evidence becomes available to support a formal guideline. The scope of the position statement was wide-ranging and included: evidence that serrated lesions have premalignant potential; detection and resection of serrated lesions; surveillance strategies after detection of serrated lesions; special situations-serrated polyposis syndrome (including surgery) and serrated lesions in colitis; education, audit and benchmarks and research questions. Statements on these issues were proposed where the evidence was deemed sufficient, and re-evaluated modified via a Delphi process until >80% agreement was reached. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) tool was used to assess the strength of evidence and strength of recommendation for finalised statements. Key recommendation: we suggest that until further evidence on the efficacy or otherwise of surveillance are published, patients with sessile serrated lesions (SSLs) that appear associated with a higher risk of future neoplasia or colorectal cancer (SSLs ≥10 mm or serrated lesions harbouring dysplasia including traditional serrated adenomas) should be offered a one-off colonoscopic surveillance examination at 3 years (weak recommendation, low quality evidence, 90% agreement).

Detection rate of serrated polyps and serrated polyposis syndrome in colorectal cancer screening cohorts: a European overview

OBJECTIVE

The role of serrated polyps (SPs) as colorectal cancer precursor is increasingly recognised. However, the true prevalence SPs is largely unknown. We aimed to evaluate the detection rate of SPs subtypes as well as serrated polyposis syndrome (SPS) among European screening cohorts.

METHODS

Prospectively collected screening cohorts of ≥1000 individuals were eligible for inclusion. Colonoscopies performed before 2009 and/or in individuals aged below 50 were excluded. Rate of SPs was assessed, categorised for histology, location and size. Age-sex-standardised number needed to screen (NNS) to detect SPs were calculated. Rate of SPS was assessed in cohorts with known colonoscopy follow-up data. Clinically relevant SPs (regarded as a separate entity) were defined as SPs ≥10 mm and/or SPs >5 mm in the proximal colon.

RESULTS

Three faecal occult blood test (FOBT) screening cohorts and two primary colonoscopy screening cohorts (range 1.426-205.949 individuals) were included. Rate of SPs ranged between 15.1% and 27.2% (median 19.5%), of sessile serrated polyps between 2.2% and 4.8% (median 3.3%) and of clinically relevant SPs between 2.1% and 7.8% (median 4.6%). Rate of SPs was similar in FOBT-based cohorts as in colonoscopy screening cohorts. No apparent association between the rate of SP and gender or age was shown. Rate of SPS ranged from 0% to 0.5%, which increased to 0.4% to 0.8% after follow-up colonoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

The detection rate of SPs is variable among screening cohorts, and standards for reporting, detection and histopathological assessment should be established. The median rate, as found in this study, may contribute to define uniform minimum standards for males and females between 50 and 75 years of age.

Detection rate and predictive factors of sessile serrated polyps in an organised colorectal cancer screening programme with immunochemical faecal occult blood test: the EQuIPE study (Evaluating Quality Indicators of the Performance of Endoscopy)

OBJECTIVES

To assess detection rate and predictive factors of sessile serrated polyps (SSPs) in organised colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes based on the faecal immunochemical test (FIT).

DESIGN

Data from a case series of colonoscopies of FIT-positive subjects were provided by 44 Italian CRC screening programmes. Data on screening history, endoscopic procedure and histology results, and additional information on the endoscopy centre and the endoscopists were collected, including the age-standardised and sex-standardised adenoma detection rate (ADR) of the individual endoscopists. The SSP detection rate (SSP-DR) was assessed for the study population. To identify SSP-predictive factors, multilevel analyses were performed according to patient/centre/endoscopist characteristics.

RESULTS

We analysed 72 021 colonoscopies, of which 1295 presented with at least one SSP (SSP-DR 1.8%; 95% CI 1.7% to 1.9%). At the per-patient level, SSP-DR was associated with males (OR 1.35; 95% CI 1.17 to 1.54) and caecal intubation (OR 3.75; 95% CI 2.22 to 6.34), but not with the FIT round. The presence of at least one advanced adenoma was more frequent among subjects with SSPs than those without (OR 2.08; 95% CI 1.86 to 2.33). At the per-endoscopist level, SSP-DR was associated with ADR (third vs first ADR quartile: OR 1.55; 95% CI 1.03 to 2.35; fourth vs first quartile: OR 1.89; 95% CI 1.24 to 2.90).

CONCLUSION

The low prevalence of SSPs and the lack of association with the FIT round argue against SSP as a suitable target for FIT-based organised programmes. Strict association of SSP-DR with the key colonoscopy quality indicators, namely caecal intubation rate and high ADR further marginalises the need for SSP-specific quality indicators in FIT-based programmes.

Colorectal Cancer Screening: Recommendations for Physicians and Patients from the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer

This document updates the colorectal cancer (CRC) screening recommendations of the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force of Colorectal Cancer (MSTF), which represents the American College of Gastroenterology, the American Gastroenterological Association, and The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. CRC screening tests are ranked in 3 tiers based on performance features, costs, and practical considerations. The first-tier tests are colonoscopy every 10 years and annual fecal immunochemical test (FIT). Colonoscopy and FIT are recommended as the cornerstones of screening regardless of how screening is offered. Thus, in a sequential approach based on colonoscopy offered first, FIT should be offered to patients who decline colonoscopy. Colonoscopy and FIT are recommended as tests of choice when multiple options are presented as alternatives. A risk-stratified approach is also appropriate, with FIT screening in populations with an estimated low prevalence of advanced neoplasia and colonoscopy screening in high prevalence populations. The second-tier tests include CT colonography every 5 years, the FIT-fecal DNA test every 3 years, and flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5 to 10 years. These tests are appropriate screening tests, but each has disadvantages relative to the tier 1 tests. Because of limited evidence and current obstacles to use, capsule colonoscopy every 5 years is a third-tier test. We suggest that the Septin9 serum assay (Epigenomics, Seattle, Wash) not be used for screening. Screening should begin at age 50 years in average-risk persons, except in African Americans in whom limited evidence supports screening at 45 years. CRC incidence is rising in persons under age 50, and thorough diagnostic evaluation of young persons with suspected colorectal bleeding is recommended. Discontinuation of screening should be considered when persons up to date with screening, who have prior negative screening (particularly colonoscopy), reach age 75 or have <10 years of life expectancy. Persons without prior screening should be considered for screening up to age 85, depending on age and comorbidities. Persons with a family history of CRC or a documented advanced adenoma in a first-degree relative age <60 years or 2 first-degree relatives with these findings at any age are recommended to undergo screening by colonoscopy every 5 years, beginning 10 years before the age at diagnosis of the youngest affected relative or age 40, whichever is earlier. Persons with a single first-degree relative diagnosed at ≥60 years with CRC or an advanced adenoma can be offered average-risk screening options beginning at age 40 years.

Providing data for serrated polyp detection rate benchmarks: an analysis of the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Similar to achieving adenoma detection rate (ADR) benchmarks to prevent colorectal cancer (CRC), achieving adequate serrated polyp detection rates (SDRs) may be essential to the prevention of CRC associated with the serrated pathway. Previous studies have been based on data from high-volume endoscopists at single academic centers. Based on a hypothesis that ADR is correlated with SDR, we stratified a large, diverse group of endoscopists (n = 77 practicing at 28 centers) into high performers and low performers, based on ADR, to provide data for corresponding target SDR benchmarks.

METHODS

By using colonoscopies in adults aged ≥50 years (4/09-12/14), we stratified endoscopists by high and low ADRs (<15%, 15%-<25%, 25%-<35%, ≥35%) to determine corresponding SDRs by using 2 SDR measures, for screening and surveillance colonoscopies separately: (1) Clinically significant SDR (CSSDR), meaning colonoscopies with any sessile serrated adenoma/polyp (SSA/P), traditional serrated adenoma (TSA), or hyperplastic polyp (HP) >1 cm anywhere in the colon or HP >5 mm in the proximal colon only divided by the total number of screening and surveillance colonoscopies, respectively. (2) Proximal SDR (PSDR) meaning colonoscopies with any serrated polyp (SSA/P, HP, TSA) of any size proximal to the sigmoid colon divided by the total number of screening and surveillance colonoscopies, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 45,996 (29,960 screening) colonoscopies by 77 endoscopists (28 facilities) were included. Moderately strong positive correlation coefficients were observed for screening ADR/CSSDR (P = .69) and ADR/PSDR (P = .79) and a strong positive correlation (P = .82) for CSSDR/PSDR (P < .0001 for all) was observed. For ADR ≥25%, endoscopists' median (interquartile range) screening CSSDR was 6.8% (4.3%-8.6%) and PSDR was 10.8% (8.6%-16.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Derived from ADR, the primary colonoscopy quality indicator, our results suggest potential SDR benchmarks (CSSDR = 7% and PSDR = 11%) that may guide adequate serrated polyp detection. Because CSSDR and PSDR are strongly correlated, endoscopists could use the simpler PSDR calculation to assess quality.

Endoscopic mucosal resection for large serrated lesions in comparison with adenomas: a prospective multicentre study of 2000 lesions

OBJECTIVE

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is effective for large laterally spreading flat and sessile lesions (LSLs). Sessile serrated adenomas/polyps (SSA/Ps) are linked to the relative failure of colonoscopy to prevent proximal colorectal cancer. We aimed to examine the technical success, adverse events and recurrence following EMR for large SSA/Ps in comparison with large conventional adenomas.

DESIGN

Over 74 months till August 2014, prospective multicentre data of LSLs ≥20 mm were analysed. A standardised dye-based conventional EMR technique followed by scheduled surveillance colonoscopy was used.

RESULTS

From a total of 2000 lesions, 323 SSA/Ps in 246 patients and 1527 adenomas in 1425 patients were included for analysis. Technical success for EMR was superior in SSA/Ps compared with adenomas (99.1% vs 94.5%, p<0.001). Significant bleeding and perforation were similar in both cohorts. The cumulative recurrence rates for adenomas after 6, 12, 18 and 24 months were 16.1%, 20.4%, 23.4% and 28.4%, respectively. For SSA/Ps, they were 6.3% at 6 months and 7.0% from 12 months onwards (p<0.001). Following multivariable adjustment, the HR of recurrence for adenomas versus SSA/Ps was 1.7 (95% CI 0.9 to 3.0, p=0.097). Subgroup analysis by lesion size revealed an eightfold increased risk of recurrence for 20-25 mm adenomas versus SSA/Ps, but no significantly different risk between lesion types in larger lesion groups.

CONCLUSION

Recurrence after EMR of 20-25 mm LSLs is significantly less frequent in SSA/Ps compared with adenomatous lesions. SSA/Ps can be more effectively removed than adenomatous LSLs with equivalent safety. Ensuring complete initial resection is imperative for avoiding recurrence.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01368289.

Detection of Sessile Serrated Adenomas in the Proximal Colon Using Wide-Field Fluorescence Endoscopy

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Many cancers in the proximal colon develop via from sessile serrated adenomas (SSAs), which have flat, subtle features that are difficult to detect with conventional white-light colonoscopy. Many SSA cells have the V600E mutation in BRAF. We investigated whether this feature could be used with imaging methods to detect SSAs in patients.

METHODS

We used phage display to identify a peptide that binds specifically to SSAs, using subtractive hybridization with HT29 colorectal cancer cells containing the V600E mutation in BRAF and Hs738.St/Int cells as a control. Binding of fluorescently labeled peptide to colorectal cancer cells was evaluated with confocal fluorescence microscopy. Rats received intra-colonic 0.0086 mg/kg, 0.026 mg/kg, or 0.86 mg/kg peptide or vehicle and morbidity, mortality, and injury were monitored twice daily to assess toxicity. In the clinical safety study, fluorescently labeled peptide was topically administered, using a spray catheter, to the proximal colon of 25 subjects undergoing routine outpatient colonoscopies (3 subjects were given 2.25 μmol/L and 22 patients were given 76.4 μmol/L). We performed blood cell count, chemistry, liver function, and urine analyses approximately 24 hours after peptide administration. In the clinical imaging study, 38 subjects undergoing routine outpatient colonoscopies, at high risk for colorectal cancer, or with a suspected unresected proximal colonic polyp, were first evaluated by white-light endoscopy to identify suspicious regions. The fluorescently labeled peptide (76.4 μmol/L) was administered topically to proximal colon, unbound peptide was washed away, and white-light, reflectance, and fluorescence videos were recorded digitally. Fluorescence intensities of SSAs were compared with those of normal colonic mucosa. Endoscopists resected identified lesions, which were analyzed histologically by gastrointestinal pathologists (reference standard). We also analyzed the ability of the peptide to identify SSAs vs adenomas, hyperplastic polyps, and normal colonic mucosa in specimens obtained from the tissue bank at the University of Michigan.

RESULTS

We identified the peptide sequence KCCFPAQ and measured an apparent dissociation constant of Kd = 72 nM and an apparent association time constant of K = 0.174 min-1 (5.76 minutes). During fluorescence imaging of patients during endoscopy, regions of SSA had 2.43-fold higher mean fluorescence intensity than that for normal colonic mucosa. Fluorescence labeling distinguished SSAs from normal colonic mucosa with 89% sensitivity and 92% specificity. The peptide had no observed toxic effects in animals or patients. In the analysis of ex vivo specimens, peptide bound to SSAs had significantly higher mean fluorescence intensity than to hyperplastic polyps.

CONCLUSIONS

We have identified a fluorescently labeled peptide that has no observed toxic effects in animals or humans and can be used for wide-field imaging of lesions in the proximal colon. It distinguishes SSAs from normal colonic mucosa with 89% sensitivity and 92% specificity. This targeted imaging method might be used in early detection of premalignant serrated lesions during routine colonoscopies. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02156557.

Prevalence of sessile serrated adenoma/polyp in hyperplastic-appearing diminutive rectosigmoid polyps

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy recommends that distal colon hyperplastic lesions can be left in place without resection if adenomatous histology can be excluded with >90% negative predictive value. However, some lesions could be sessile serrated adenomas/polyps (SSA/Ps), which is also precancerous. The aim of this study was to describe the prevalence of SSA/Ps in hyperplastic-appearing diminutive rectosigmoid polyps.

METHODS

We prospectively placed 513 consecutive diminutive rectosigmoid polyps that appeared hyperplastic to an expert endoscopist in individual bottles for pathologic. Each polyp was examined by 3 expert GI pathologists.

RESULTS

The prevalence of SSA/P in the study polyps ranged from .6% to 2.1%. The lowest negative predictive value found by the endoscopist for the combination of adenomas plus SSA/Ps was 96.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of SSA/Ps in diminutive rectosigmoid hyperplastic-appearing polyps is very low. These results support the safety and feasibility of a "do not resect" policy for diminutive hyperplastic-appearing rectosigmoid polyps.

Detection Rate, Distribution, Clinical and Pathological Features of Colorectal Serrated Polyps

Background:

Colorectal serrated polyp is considered as histologically heterogeneous lesions with malignant potential in western countries. However, few Asian studies have investigated the comprehensive clinical features of serrated polyps in symptomatic populations. The aim of the study was to evaluate the features of colorectal serrated polyps in a Chinese symptomatic population.

Methods:

Data from all consecutive symptomatic patients were documented from a large colonoscopy database and were analyzed. Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test and logistic regression analysis were used for the data processing.

Results:

A total of 9191 (31.7%) patients were detected with at least one colorectal polyp. The prevalence of serrated polyps was 0.53% (153/28,981). The proportions of hyperplastic polyp (HP), sessile serrated adenoma/polyp (SSA/P), and traditional serrated adenoma (TSA) of all serrated polyps were 41.2%, 7.2%, and 51.6%, respectively, which showed a lower proportion of HP and SSA/P and a higher proportion of TSA. Serrated polyps appeared more in males and elder patients while there was no significant difference in the subtype distribution in gender and age. The proportions of large and proximal serrated polyps were 13.7% (21/153) and 46.4% (71/153), respectively. In total, 98.9% (89/90) serrated adenomas were found with dysplasia. Moreover, 14 patients with serrated polyps were found with synchronous advanced colorectal neoplasia, and large serrated polyps (LSPs) (odds ratio: 3.446, 95% confidence interval: 1.010–11.750, P < 0.05), especially large HPs, might have an association with synchronous advanced neoplasia (AN).

Conclusions:

The overall detection rate of colorectal serrated polyps in Chinese symptomatic patient population was low, and distribution pattern of three subtypes is different from previous reports. Moreover, LSPs, especially large HPs, might be associated with an increased risk of synchronous AN.

A Comprehensive Model of Colorectal Cancer by Risk Factor Status and Subsite Using Data From the Nurses' Health Study

We expanded and updated our colon cancer risk model to evaluate colorectal cancer (CRC) and whether subsite-specific risk models are warranted. Using data from 1980-2010 for 90,286 women enrolled in the Nurses' Health Study, we performed competing-risks regression and tests for subsite heterogeneity (proximal colon: n = 821; distal colon: n = 521; rectum: n = 376). Risk factors for CRC were consistent with those in our colon cancer model. Processed meat consumption was associated with a higher risk of distal (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.45; P = 0.02) but not proximal (HR = 0.95; P = 0.72) colon cancer. Smoking was associated with both colon (HR = 1.21) and rectal (HR = 1.27) cancer and was more strongly associated with proximal (HR = 1.31) than with distal (HR = 1.04) colon cancer (P = 0.029). We observed a significant trend of cancer risk for smoking in subsites from the cecum (HR = 1.41) to the proximal colon (excluding the cecum; HR = 1.27) to the distal colon (HR = 1.04; P for trend = 0.040). The C statistics for colorectal (C = 0.607), colon (C = 0.603), and rectal (C = 0.639) cancer were similar, although C was slightly higher for rectal cancer. Despite evidence for site-specific differences for several risk factors, overall our findings support the application of risk prediction models for colon cancer to CRC.

Expert opinions and scientific evidence for colonoscopy key performance indicators

Colonoscopy is a widely performed procedure with procedural volumes increasing annually throughout the world. Many procedures are now performed as part of colorectal cancer screening programmes. Colonoscopy should be of high quality and measures of this quality should be evidence based. New UK key performance indicators and quality assurance standards have been developed by a working group with consensus agreement on each standard reached. This paper reviews the scientific basis for each of the quality measures published in the UK standards.

Interendoscopist variability in proximal colon polyp detection is twice higher for serrated polyps than adenomas

AIM

To assess the interendoscopist variability in the detection of colorectal polyps according to their location and histological type.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from a regional colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program; 2979 complete colonoscopies from 18 endoscopists were included. Variability in performance between endoscopists for detection of at least one adenoma (A), one proximal adenoma (PA), one distal adenoma (DA), and one proximal serrated polyp (PSP) was assessed by using multilevel logistic regression models.

RESULTS

The observed detection rates among the 18 endoscopists ranged from 24.6% to 47.6% (mean = 35.7%) for A, from 19.1% to 39.0% (mean = 29.4%) for DA, from 6.0% to 22.9% (mean = 12.4%) for PA, and from 1.3% to 19.3% (mean = 6.9%) for PSP. After adjusting for patient-level variables (sex, age), the interendoscopist detection rates variability achieved a significant level for A, PA, and PSP but not for DA (P = 0.03, P = 0.02, P = 0.02 and P = 0.08, respectively). This heterogeneity, as measured by the variance partition coefficient, was approximately threefold higher for PA (6.6%) compared with A (2.1%), and twofold higher for PSP (12.3%) compared with PA.

CONCLUSION

These results demonstrate significant interendoscopist variability for proximal polyp particularly for serrated polyps, but not for distal adenoma detection. These findings contribute to explain the decreased effectiveness of complete colonoscopies at preventing proximal CRCs and the need to carefully assess the proximal colon during scope procedure.

High-quality Bowel Preparation Is Required for Detection of Sessile Serrated Polyps

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The effect of bowel preparation quality has been well-characterized for detection of adenomas but not for detection of sessile serrated adenomas/polyps (SSPs). We performed a prospective study to determine proportions of patients in whom SSPs were detected at different levels of bowel preparation quality, using common validated scoring systems.

METHODS

Our study enrolled 749 male veterans 50-75 years old undergoing screening or surveillance colonoscopy. Proportions of patients in whom SSP were detected were calculated for each level of preparation quality based on the Aronchick scale (poor = low quality, fair = intermediate quality, and good or excellent = high quality) and the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS; scores of 0-3 for right, transverse, and left colon segments). We compared SSP detection among different levels of preparation quality using multivariate logistic regression, adjusting for age, indication, and endoscopist. Our primary hypothesis was that SSP detection would not be significantly lower with intermediate-quality than with high-quality preparations.

RESULTS

SSPs were detected in a significantly smaller proportion of patients with intermediate-quality preparation than high-quality preparation, for the entire colon (4.6% vs 12.0%; odds ratio [OR], 0.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.15-0.87) and right colon (1.5% vs 7.9%; OR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.05-0.81). SSPs were detected in smaller proportions of patients with total colon BBPS scores <7 than in patients with BBPS scores of 7-9 (4.7% vs 12.6%; OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.19-0.67). SSPs were detected in right colons of a smaller percentage of patients with BBPS scores of 2 than scores of 3 (4.7% vs 9.5%; OR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.26-0.94).

CONCLUSIONS

Any bowel preparation quality below high quality is associated with a significant decrease in the detection of SSPs. Although intermediate-quality preparation and BBPS segment scores of 2 seem to be adequate for detection of adenomas, these levels of preparation quality may not be adequate for detection of SSPs.

Presence of small sessile serrated polyps increases rate of advanced neoplasia upon surveillance compared with isolated low-risk tubular adenomas

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The U.S. Multi-Society Task Force (USMSTF) stratifies patients with sessile serrated polyps (SSPs) without cytologic dysplasia of <10 mm in size as at low risk for metachronous advanced neoplasia and recommends management similar to low-risk conventional tubular adenomas. Evidence supporting the recommended surveillance interval for these low-risk SSPs is limited. We aimed to assess rates of metachronous advanced neoplasia based on the presence of an initial low-risk SSP compared with isolated low-risk tubular adenomas.

METHODS

Colonoscopy data were retrieved for 2260 patients found to have an adenoma or SSP on pathology records between 2005 and 2011 at an academic medical center. The 788 patients who met study design criteria were stratified into 4 groups based on the presence of a high- or low-risk adenoma (HRA or LRA) and of a synchronous SSP on initial colonoscopy. The rates of advanced neoplasia at surveillance colonoscopy were then compared between groups.

RESULTS

The rate of advanced neoplasia at surveillance in the LRA inclusive of SSP group (12/66, 18.2%) was greater than in the LRA without any SSP group (29/370, 7.8%; P = .019). The rate of advanced neoplasia at surveillance in patients with isolated low-risk SSP (10/56, 17.9%) remained significantly greater than those with isolated low-risk tubular adenomas (29/370, 7.8%; P = .024). The rate of advanced neoplasia upon surveillance in the LRA inclusive of SSP group (18.2%) was comparable with the rate observed in the index HRA without any SSP group (15.9%) (40/252, P = .709).

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of advanced neoplasia upon surveillance in patients with initial low-risk SSPs is higher than in patients with initial isolated low-risk tubular adenomas and more similar to patients with initial high-risk tubular adenomas. These findings suggest that the rate of metachronous advanced neoplasia in patients with what are considered by USMSTF as "low-risk" SSPs is higher than in those without SSPs. Therefore, a surveillance interval that accounts for the presence of SSPs even in small lesions without cytologic dysplasia should be considered.

Optical diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia: A Western perspective

Optical diagnosis is an emerging paradigm in Western endoscopic practice for the colonoscopic management of diminutive polyps, and includes two complementary clinical strategies: 'resect and discard', in which diminutive high-confidence adenomas are identified, and then removed and discarded without pathological assessment; and 'diagnose and leave', where diminutive high-confidence hyperplastic polyps are identified in the rectosigmoid and then left without resection or biopsy. Like other aspects of colonoscopy performance, adoption of optical diagnosis in Western practice is limited by operator dependency and variation in clinical effectiveness. There is substantial potential for optical diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia during colonoscopy to alleviate the rising costs of health care in the West. However, operator dependence in diagnostic performance together with critical system factors such as informed consent, credentialing, medical legal support and reimbursement incentives must be overcome before optical diagnosis of diminutive lesions is considered for widespread adoption in Western clinical practice.