Long-term Risk of Colorectal Cancer and Related Deaths After a Colonoscopy With Normal Findings

Duration of risk reduction in colorectal cancer incidence and mortality after a complete colonoscopy in Ontario, Canada: a population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer guidelines recommend screening colonoscopy every 10 years after a negative procedure. If risk reduction extends past 10 years, the recommended interval could be extended, reducing the burden on the individual and health-care system. We aimed to estimate the duration that patients remain at reduced risk of colorectal cancer incidence and mortality after a complete colonoscopy.

METHODS

We did a population-based cohort study of individuals aged 50-65 years between Jan 1, 1994, to Dec 31, 2017. We excluded individuals with previous exposure to colonoscopy or colorectal surgery, those previously diagnosed with colorectal cancer, or a history of hereditary or other bowel disorders. We followed up participants until Dec 31, 2018, and identified all colonoscopies performed in this time period. We used a 9-level time-varying measure of exposure, capturing time since last complete colonoscopy (no complete colonoscopy, ≤5 years, >5-10 years, >10-15 years, and >15 years) and whether an intervention was performed (biopsy or polypectomy). A Cox proportional hazards regression model adjusting for age, sex, comorbidity, residential income quintile, and immigration status was used to estimate the association between exposure to a complete colonoscopy and colorectal cancer incidence and mortality.

FINDINGS

5 298 033 individuals (2 609 060 [49·2%] female and 2 688 973 [50·8%] male; no data on ethnicity were available) were included in the cohort, with a median follow-up of 12·56 years (IQR 6·26-20·13). 90 532 (1·7%) individuals were diagnosed with colorectal cancer and 44 088 (0·8%) died from colorectal cancer. Compared with those who did not have a colonoscopy, the risk of colorectal cancer in those who had a complete negative colonoscopy was reduced at all timepoints, including when the procedure occurred more than 15 years earlier (hazard ratio [HR] 0·62 [95% CI 0·51-0·77] for female individuals and 0·57 [0·46-0·70] for male individuals. A similar finding was observed for colorectal cancer mortality, with lower risk at all timepoints, including when the procedure occurred more than 15 years earlier (HR 0·64 [95% CI 0·49-0·83] for female participants and 0·65 [0·50-0·83] for male participants). Those who had a colonoscopy with intervention had a significantly lower colorectal cancer incidence than those who did not undergo colonoscopy if the procedure occurred within 10 years for females (HR 0·70 [95% CI 0·63-0·77]) and up to 15 years for males (0·62 [(0·53-0·72]).

INTERPRETATION

Compared with those who do not receive colonoscopy, individuals who have a negative colonoscopy result remain at lower risk for colorectal cancer incidence and mortality more than 15 years after the procedure. The current recommendation of repeat screening at 10 years in these individuals should be reassessed.

FUNDING

Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

Longer Interval Between First Colonoscopy With Negative Findings for Colorectal Cancer and Repeat Colonoscopy

Importance

For individuals without a family history of colorectal cancer (CRC), colonoscopy screening every 10 years is recommended to reduce CRC incidence and mortality. However, debate exists about whether and for how long this 10-year interval could be safely expanded.

Objective

To assess how many years after a first colonoscopy with findings negative for CRC a second colonoscopy can be performed.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study leveraged Swedish nationwide register-based data to examine CRC diagnoses and CRC-specific mortality among individuals without a family history of CRC. The exposed group included individuals who had a first colonoscopy with findings negative for CRC at age 45 to 69 years between 1990 and 2016. The control group included individuals matched by sex, birth year, and baseline age (ie, the age of their matched exposed individual when the exposed individual's first colonoscopy with findings negative for CRC was performed). Individuals in the control group either did not have a colonoscopy during the follow-up or underwent colonoscopy that resulted in a CRC diagnosis. Up to 18 controls were matched with each exposed individual. Individuals were followed up from 1990 to 2018, and data were analyzed from November 2022 to November 2023.

Exposure

A first colonoscopy with findings negative for CRC, defined as a first colonoscopy without a diagnosis of colorectal polyp, adenoma, carcinoma in situ, or CRC before or within 6 months after screening.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcomes were CRC diagnosis and CRC-specific death. The 10-year standardized incidence ratio and standardized mortality ratio were calculated to compare risks of CRC and CRC-specific death in the exposed and control groups based on different follow-up screening intervals.

Results

The sample included 110 074 individuals (65 147 females [59.2%]) in the exposed group and 1 981 332 (1 172 646 females [59.2%]) in the control group. The median (IQR) age for individuals in both groups was 59 (52-64) years. During up to 29 years of follow-up of individuals with a first colonoscopy with findings negative for CRC, 484 incident CRCs and 112 CRC-specific deaths occurred. After a first colonoscopy with findings negative for CRC, the risks of CRC and CRC-specific death in the exposed group were significantly lower than those in their matched controls for 15 years. At 15 years after a first colonoscopy with findings negative for CRC, the 10-year standardized incidence ratio was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.54-0.94) and the 10-year standardized mortality ratio was 0.55 (95% CI, 0.29-0.94). In other words, the 10-year cumulative risk of CRC in year 15 in the exposed group was 72% that of the 10-year cumulative risk of CRC in the control group. Extending the colonoscopy screening interval from 10 to 15 years in individuals with a first colonoscopy with findings negative for CRC could miss the early detection of only 2 CRC cases and the prevention of 1 CRC-specific death per 1000 individuals, while potentially avoiding 1000 colonoscopies.

Conclusions and Relevance

This cohort study found that for the population without a family history of CRC, the 10-year interval between colonoscopy screenings for individuals with a first colonoscopy with findings negative for CRC could potentially be extended to 15 years. A longer interval between colonoscopy screenings could be beneficial in avoiding unnecessary invasive examinations.

The impact of EndoCuff-assisted colonoscopy on the polyp detection rate: A cross-over randomized back-to-back study

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common cancers worldwide, and most CRCs develop from polyps with malignant potential. We aimed to study the difference in polyp detection rate between EndoCuff-assisted colonoscopies (EAC) and standard colonoscopy (SC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study was conducted at Cairo University Hospitals on patients referred for screening or diagnostic colonoscopy from July 2018 to August 2020. All included patients underwent back-to-back standard colonoscopy (SC) and ENDOCUFF VISION-assisted colonoscopies (EAC).

RESULTS

214 patients were included in this study. In comparison between EAC and SC, EAC increased the polyp detection rate (69 (32.24 %) vs. 57(26.64 %) (p < 0.05), EAC increased the detection of diminutive polyps ≤ 5 mm (104 vs. 81) (p < 0.05), and small polyps 6-9 mm (12 vs. 10) while there was no difference in large polyps ≥ 10 mm. EAC increased the adenoma detection rate (ADR) (37 (17.2 %) vs. 32(14.9 %) (p < 0.05). The findings detected by EAC shortened the interval of surveillance determined by SC findings. EndoCuff caused six mucosal erosions (2.8 %) in patients.

CONCLUSION

EAC increases the number of detected colonic polyps, primarily small polyps on the left and right sides of the colon.

Interval post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer following a negative colonoscopy in a fecal immunochemical test-based screening program

BACKGROUND

 In the Dutch colorectal (CRC) screening program, fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-positive individuals are referred for colonoscopy. If no relevant findings are detected at colonoscopy, individuals are reinvited for FIT screening after 10 years. We aimed to assess CRC risk after a negative colonoscopy in FIT-positive individuals.

METHODS

 In this cross-sectional cohort study, data were extracted from the Dutch national screening information system. Participants with a positive FIT followed by a negative colonoscopy between 2014 and 2018 were included. A negative colonoscopy was defined as a colonoscopy during which no more than one nonvillous, nonproximal adenoma < 10 mm or serrated polyp < 10 mm was found. The main outcome was interval post-colonoscopy CRC (iPCCRC) risk. iPCCRC risk was reviewed against the risk of interval CRC after a negative FIT (FIT IC) with a 2-year screening interval.

RESULTS

 35 052 FIT-positive participants had a negative colonoscopy and 24 iPCCRCs were diagnosed, resulting in an iPCCRC risk of 6.85 (95 %CI 4.60-10.19) per 10 000 individuals after a median follow-up of 1.4 years. After 2.5 years of follow-up, age-adjusted iPCCRC risk was approximately equal to FIT IC risk at 2 years.

CONCLUSION

 Risk of iPCCRC within a FIT-based CRC screening program was low during the first years after colonos-copy but, after 2.5 years, was the same as the risk in FIT-negative individuals at 2 years, when they are reinvited for screening. Colonoscopy quality may therefore require further improvement and FIT screening interval may need to be reduced after negative colonoscopy.

Low Incidence of Colorectal Advanced Neoplasia During Surveillance in Individuals with a Family History of Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Family history of colorectal cancer (CRC) is used to stratify individuals into risk categories which determine timing of initial screening and ongoing CRC surveillance. Evidence for long-term CRC risk following a normal index colonoscopy in family history populations is limited.

AIMS

To assess the incidence of advanced neoplasia and associated risk factors in a population undergoing surveillance colonoscopies due to family history of CRC.

METHODS

Surveillance colonoscopy findings were examined in 425 individuals with a family history of CRC, a normal index colonoscopy and a minimum of 10 years of follow-up colonoscopies. Advanced neoplasia risk was determined for three CRC family history categories (near-average, medium and high-risk), accounting for demographics and time after the first colonoscopy.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 13.5 years (IQR 11.5-16.0), with an incidence of advanced neoplasia of 14.35% (61/425). The number of affected relatives and age of CRC diagnosis in the youngest relative did not predict the risk of advanced neoplasia (p > 0.05), with no significant differences in advanced neoplasia incidence between the family history categories (p = 0.16). Patients ≥ 60 years showed a fourfold (HR 4.14, 95% CI 1.33-12.89) higher advanced neoplasia risk during surveillance than those < 40 years at index colonoscopy. With each subsequent negative colonoscopy, the risk of advanced neoplasia at ongoing surveillance was reduced.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of advanced neoplasia was low (14.35%), regardless of the family history risk category, with older age being the main risk for advanced neoplasia. Delaying onset of colonoscopy or lengthening surveillance intervals could be a more efficient use of resources in this population.

Future cancer risk after urgent suspected cancer referral in England when cancer is not found: a national cohort study

BACKGROUND

Following referral for investigation of urgent suspected cancer within the English National Health Service referral system, 7% of referred individuals are diagnosed with cancer. This study aimed to investigate the risk of cancer occurrence within 1-5 years of finding no cancer following an urgent suspected cancer referral.

METHODS

This national cohort study used urgent suspected cancer referral data for England from the Cancer Waiting Times dataset and linked it with cancer diagnosis data from the National Cancer Registration dataset. Data were extracted for the eight most commonly referred to urgent suspected cancer referral pathways (breast, gynaecological, head and neck, lower and upper gastrointestinal, lung, skin, and urological) for the period April 1, 2013, to March 31, 2014, with 5-year follow-up for individuals with no cancer diagnosis within 1 year of referral. The primary objective was to investigate the occurrence and type of subsequent cancer in years 1-5 following an urgent suspected cancer referral when no cancer was initially found, both overall and for each of the eight referral pathways. The numbers of subsequent cancers were compared with expected cancer incidence in years 1-5 following referral, using standardised incidence ratios (SIRs) based on matched age-gender distributions of expected cancer incidence in England for the same time period. The analysis was repeated, stratifying by referral group, and by calculating the absolute and expected rate of all cancers and of the same individual cancer as the initial referral.

FINDINGS

Among 1·18 million referrals without a cancer diagnosis in years 0-1, there were 63 112 subsequent cancers diagnosed 1-5 years post-referral, giving an absolute rate of 1338 (95% CI 1327-1348) cancers per 100 000 referrals per year (1038 [1027-1050] in females, 1888 [1867-1909] in males), compared with an expected rate of 1054 (1045-1064) cancers per 100 000 referrals per year (SIR 1·27 [95% CI 1·26-1·28]). The absolute rate of any subsequent cancer diagnosis 1-5 years after referral was lowest following suspected breast cancer referral (746 [728-763] cancers per 100 000 referrals per year) and highest following suspected urological (2110 [2070-2150]) or lung cancer (1835 [1767-1906]) referral. For diagnosis of the same cancer as the initial referral pathway, the highest absolute rates were for the urological and lung pathways (1011 [984-1039] and 638 [598-680] cancers per 100 000 referrals per year, respectively). The highest relative risks of subsequent diagnosis of the same cancer as the initial referral pathway were for the head and neck pathway (SIR 3·49 [95% CI 3·22-3·78]) and lung pathway (3·00 [2·82-3·20]).

INTERPRETATION

Cancer risk was higher than expected in the 5 years following an urgent suspected cancer referral. The potential for targeted interventions, such as proactive monitoring, safety-netting, and cancer awareness or risk reduction initiatives should be investigated.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK.

Risk of Colorectal Cancer and Colorectal Cancer Mortality Beginning One Year after a Negative Fecal Occult Blood Test, among Screen-Eligible 76- to 85-Year-Olds

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer screening is universally recommended for adults ages 45 to 75 years. Noninvasive fecal occult blood tests are effective screening tests recommended by guidelines. However, empirical evidence to inform older adults' decisions about whether to continue screening is sparse, especially for individuals with prior screening.

METHODS

This study used a retrospective cohort of older adults at three Kaiser Permanente integrated healthcare systems (Northern California, Southern California, Washington) and Parkland Health. Beginning 1 year following a negative stool-based screening test, cumulative risks of colorectal cancer incidence, colorectal cancer mortality (accounting for deaths from other causes), and non-colorectal cancer mortality were estimated.

RESULTS

Cumulative incidence of colorectal cancer in screen-eligible adults ages 76 to 85 with a negative fecal occult blood test 1 year ago (N = 118,269) was 0.23% [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.20%-0.26%] after 2 years and 1.21% (95% CI, 1.13%-1.30%) after 8 years. Cumulative colorectal cancer mortality was 0.03% (95% CI, 0.02%-0.04%) after 2 years and 0.33% (95% CI, 0.28%-0.39%) after 8 years. Cumulative risk of death from non-colorectal cancer causes was 4.81% (95% CI, 4.68%-4.96%) after 2 years and 28.40% (95% CI, 27.95%-28.85%) after 8 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Among 76- to 85-year-olds with a recent negative stool-based test, cumulative colorectal cancer incidence and mortality estimates were low, especially within 2 years; death from other causes was over 100 times more likely than death from colorectal cancer.

IMPACT

These findings of low absolute colorectal cancer risk, and comparatively higher risk of death from other causes, can inform decision-making regarding whether and when to continue colorectal cancer screening beyond age 75 among screen-eligible adults.

Role of colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening: Available evidence

Colonoscopy is the cornerstone examination for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and it is recommended as the first examination in the context of individuals with high risk of CRC development. Thereby, this examination is of choice in the setting of patients with hereditary CRC syndromes or in patients with long-standing inflammatory bowel disease with colon involvement. However, its role is less clear in the average risk-risk population and in patients with family history of CRC not linked to hereditary CRC syndromes. Despite this, current guidelines, include colonoscopy as alternative for CRC screening either in average risk population with the same evidence level that other screening strategies or in the familial risk population. The present manuscript reviews the clinical evidence on the role of colonoscopy in preventing CRC in different screening settings.

Colorectal cancer screening-what does the recent NordICC trial mean for the U.S. population?

The incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) has declined over time, though it remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in the U.S. It has the third highest incidence in incidence among all cancers and is the second leading cause of cancer death in both men and women. Screening reduces the incidence and mortality from CRC. There are several modalities for CRC screening, but the most common ones are a choice between a non-invasive stool-based test, such as fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) or an invasive endoscopic modality, such as colonoscopy. In the U.S. colonoscopy is the predominant CRC screening modality, with observational studies reporting large reductions in CRC incidence and mortality. Recently, a large randomized controlled trial (RCT) on effectiveness of colonoscopy reported smaller than expected reduction in CRC incidence and no reduction in CRC mortality with colonoscopy screening. Explanations of the lower than expected benefit include low uptake of colonoscopy, short follow-up for mortality endpoints and quality indicators (QIs) for some of the endoscopists participating in the screening colonoscopies. The findings of the study need to be taken in context with other literature on effectiveness of colonoscopy, with the overall message of reassuring patients of the benefits of screening, and colonoscopy. Here, we discuss the latest evidence on colonoscopy screening and it in the context of other screening modalities and the landscape.

Impact of Epic Smartlist and Lumens Software in Improving OP-29 Compliance at a Tertiary Health Care Network

Background OP-29 is a Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services (CMS) measure to ensure that endoscopists recommend appropriate follow-up intervals after normal colonoscopy in average risk patients. Failure to report OP-29 compliance can adversely affect hospital quality star rating as well as reimbursement for health care. The aim of our quality improvement project was to improve OP-29 compliance to the top decile over three years. Methodology Our sample included patients between 50-75 years of age who received average risk screening colonoscopies with normal findings. We provided intensive education to endoscopists about the importance of OP-29 compliance, developed an Epic Smartlist that directs our endoscopists to list an appropriate reason for colonoscopy intervals other than 10 years, and monitored OP-29 compliance monthly. We became the first health network in the United States to implement the Lumens endoscopy report writing software (Epic Systems Corporation, Verona, USA) and added the OP-29-related Epic Smartlist to the Lumens colonoscopy note template. All statistical analyses were conducted in SPSS version 26 (IBM Corp., Armonk, USA) to compute the means and frequencies of outcomes. Results Our sample included 2,171 patients with a mean age of 60.5 years of whom the majority were female (57.2%) and Caucasians (90%). Our OP-29 score increased from 87.47% to 100% over the course of three years, and this steady improvement was seen broadly across our network. We compared our network score averages to our state and national averages and consistently demonstrated higher compliance rates while reaching the top decile by 2020. Conclusion We believe our improved OP-29 compliance has reduced colonoscopy overutilization, improved health care quality, and reduced health care costs for our patients and health network. To our knowledge, this is the first reported project towards improving OP-29 compliance utilizing the Epic Lumens software. Epic Lumens (Epic Systems Corporation, Verona, USA) added this Smartlist as quick buttons in the standard colonoscopy procedure note templates they built for other organizations to improve health care quality and cost nationally.

Prevalence of Colorectal Neoplasia 10 or More Years After a Negative Screening Colonoscopy in 120 000 Repeated Screening Colonoscopies

Importance

Screening colonoscopy to prevent and early detect colorectal cancer is recommended to be repeated in 10-year intervals, which goes along with high demands of capacities and costs. Evidence of findings at screening colonoscopies conducted 10 or more years after a negative colonoscopy result is sparse, and it remains unclear whether screening colonoscopy intervals could possibly be prolonged.

Objective

To assess the prevalence of advanced colorectal neoplasms (ADNs) at least 10 years after a negative screening colonoscopy in a very large cohort of repeated screening colonoscopy participants in Germany.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This registry-based cross-sectional study on screening colonoscopy findings reported to the German screening colonoscopy registry during January 2013 to December 2019 included data on screening colonoscopies that were offered to the German general population 55 years or older since 2002; virtually all screening colonoscopies among individuals covered by Statutory Health Insurance (approximately 90% of eligible adults) are reported to the national registry. A total of 120 298 repeat screening colonoscopy participants 65 years or older were identified who had a previous negative screening colonoscopy at least 10 years prior. The findings were compared with all screening colonoscopies conducted at 65 years or older during the same period (1.25 million). The data were analyzed from March to July 2022.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Prevalence of colorectal cancers and ADNs (advanced adenomas and cancers).

Results

Of 120 298 participants, 72 349 (60.1%) were women. Prevalence of ADN was 3.6% and 5.2% among women and men 10 years after a negative screening colonoscopy and gradually increased to 4.9% and 6.6%, respectively, among those who had a negative colonoscopy 14 years or longer prior compared with 7.1% and 11.6% among all screening colonoscopies. Sex-specific and age-specific prevalence of ADNs at repeated colonoscopies conducted 10 or more years after a negative colonoscopy were consistently at least 40% lower among women than among men, lower at younger vs older ages, and much lower than among all screening colonoscopies (standardized prevalence ratios for cancers: 0.22-0.38 among women, 0.15-0.24 among men; standardized prevalence ratios for ADNs: 0.49-0.62 among women, 0.50-0.56 among men).

Conclusions and Relevance

The results of this cross-sectional study suggest that ADN prevalence at screening colonoscopies conducted 10 or more years after a negative screening colonoscopy is low. Extension of the currently recommended 10-year screening intervals may be warranted, especially for female and younger participants without gastrointestinal symptoms.

Long-term risk of inflammatory bowel disease after endoscopic biopsy with normal mucosa: A population-based, sibling-controlled cohort study in Sweden

BACKGROUND

Although evidence suggests a persistently decreased risk of colorectal cancer for up to 10 years among individuals with a negative endoscopic biopsy result (i.e., normal mucosa), concerns have been raised about other long-term health outcomes among these individuals. In this study, we aimed to explore the long-term risk of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) after an endoscopic biopsy with normal mucosa.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

In the present nationwide cohort study, we identified all individuals in Sweden with a lower or upper gastrointestinal (GI) biopsy of normal mucosa during 1965 to 2016 (exposed, n = 200,495 and 257,192 for lower and upper GI biopsy, respectively), their individually matched population references (n = 989,484 and 1,268,897), and unexposed full siblings (n = 221,179 and 274,529). Flexible parametric model estimated hazard ratio (HR) as an estimate of the association between a GI biopsy of normal mucosa and IBD as well as cumulative incidence of IBD, with 95% confidence interval (CI). The first 6 months after GI biopsy were excluded to avoid detection bias, surveillance bias, or reverse causation. During a median follow-up time of approximately 10 years, 4,853 individuals with a lower GI biopsy of normal mucosa developed IBD (2.4%) compared to 0.4% of the population references. This corresponded to an incidence rate (IR) of 20.39 and 3.39 per 10,000 person-years in the respective groups or 1 extra estimated IBD case among 37 exposed individuals during the 30 years after normal GI biopsy. The exposed individuals had a persistently higher risk of overall IBD (average HR = 5.56; 95% CI: 5.28 to 5.85), ulcerative colitis (UC, average HR = 5.20; 95% CI: 4.85 to 5.59) and Crohn's disease (CD, average HR = 6.99; 95% CI: 6.38 to 7.66) than their matched population references. In the sibling comparison, average HRs were 3.27 (3.05 to 3.51) for overall IBD, 3.27 (2.96 to 3.61) for UC, and 3.77 (3.34 to 4.26) for CD. For individuals with an upper GI biopsy of normal mucosa, the average HR of CD was 2.93 (2.68 to 3.21) and 2.39 (2.10 to 2.73), compared with population references and unexposed full siblings, respectively. The increased risk of IBD persisted at least 30 years after cohort entry. Study limitations include lack of data on indications for biopsy and potential residual confounding from unmeasured risk or protective factors for IBD.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic biopsy with normal mucosa was associated with an elevated IBD incidence for at least 30 years. This may suggest a substantial symptomatic period of IBD and incomplete diagnostic examinations in patients with early IBD.

Risk of Colorectal Cancer and Colorectal Cancer Mortality Beginning Ten Years after a Negative Colonoscopy, among Screen-Eligible Adults 76 to 85 Years Old

BACKGROUND

Few empirical data are available to inform older adults' decisions about whether to screen or continue screening for colorectal cancer based on their prior history of screening, particularly among individuals with a prior negative exam.

METHODS

Using a retrospective cohort of older adults receiving healthcare at three Kaiser Permanente integrated healthcare systems in Northern California (KPNC), Southern California (KPSC), and Washington (KPWA), we estimated the cumulative risk of colorectal cancer incidence and mortality among older adults who had a negative colonoscopy 10 years earlier, accounting for death from other causes.

RESULTS

Screen-eligible adults ages 76 to 85 years who had a negative colonoscopy 10 years earlier were found to be at a low risk of colorectal cancer diagnosis, with a cumulative incidence of 0.39% [95% CI, 0.31%-0.48%) at 2 years that increased to 1.29% (95% CI, 1.02%-1.61%) at 8 years. Cumulative mortality from colorectal cancer was 0.04% (95% CI, 0.02%-0.08%) at 2 years and 0.46% (95% CI, 0.30%-0.70%) at 8 years.

CONCLUSIONS

These low estimates of cumulative colorectal cancer incidence and mortality occurred in the context of much higher risk of death from other causes.

IMPACT

Knowledge of these results could bear on older adults' decision to undergo or not undergo further colorectal cancer screening, including choice of modality, should they decide to continue screening. See related commentary by Lieberman, p. 6.

At What Age Should We Stop Colorectal Cancer Screening? When Is Enough, Enough?

There is strong evidence that colorectal cancer screening can reduce both colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. Guidelines recommend screening for individuals age 45 to 75 years, but are less certain about the benefits after age 75 years. Dalmat and colleagues provide evidence that individuals with a prior negative colonoscopy 10 years or more prior to reaching age 76 to 85 years, had a low risk of colorectal cancer, and would be less likely to benefit from further screening. It is important to note that this study population did not include individuals with a family history of colon cancer or a personal history of having high-risk adenomas. These data suggest that a negative colonoscopy can be an effective risk-stratification tool when discussing further screening with elderly patients. See related article by Dalmat et al., p. 37.

The Risk of Metachronous Advanced Neoplasia After Colonoscopy in Patients Aged 40-49 Years Compared With That in Patients Aged 50-59 Years

INTRODUCTION

This study investigated the risk of metachronous advanced neoplasia (AN) after colonoscopy in individuals aged 40-49 years compared with that in individuals aged 50-59 years.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed among Kaiser Permanente Northern California members aged 40-59 years who had their first (index) colonoscopy in 2010-2013. Participants were followed up until death, disenrollment, AN on surveillance colonoscopy, or December 31, 2018. The risk for the development of AN was estimated using the Cox regression, adjusted for confounders.

RESULTS

The study included 11,374 patients (2,396 aged 40-49 years and 8,978 aged 50-59 years). When comparing the 40-49 years group with the 50-59 years group, AN was detected in 2.2% vs 4.4% ( P = 0.0003) on surveillance colonoscopy after index colonoscopy finding of no adenoma, in 4.6% vs 7.0% ( P = 0.03) after a finding of nonadvanced adenoma (NAA), and in 7.9% vs 11.7% ( P = 0.06) after a finding of advanced adenoma (AA), respectively. Compared with the 50-59 years group, the 40-49 years group had a lower risk of metachronous AN when no adenoma was detected on index colonoscopy (hazard ratio [HR] 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39-0.83) and no difference when NAA (HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.54-1.24) or AA (HR 0.83; 95% CI 0.51-1.31) was detected.

DISCUSSION

Compared with patients aged 50-59 years, patients aged 40-49 years may have a lower risk of developing metachronous AN when no adenoma is detected on index colonoscopy and a similar risk when NAA or AA is detected. These data suggest current surveillance colonoscopy guidelines may be applicable to patients aged 40-49 years who undergo colonoscopy.

Third Asia-Pacific consensus recommendations on colorectal cancer screening and postpolypectomy surveillance

The Asia-Pacific region has the largest number of cases of colorectal cancer (CRC) and one of the highest levels of mortality due to this condition in the world. Since the publishing of two consensus recommendations in 2008 and 2015, significant advancements have been made in our knowledge of epidemiology, pathology and the natural history of the adenoma-carcinoma progression. Based on the most updated epidemiological and clinical studies in this region, considering literature from international studies, and adopting the modified Delphi process, the Asia-Pacific Working Group on Colorectal Cancer Screening has updated and revised their recommendations on (1) screening methods and preferred strategies; (2) age for starting and terminating screening for CRC; (3) screening for individuals with a family history of CRC or advanced adenoma; (4) surveillance for those with adenomas; (5) screening and surveillance for sessile serrated lesions and (6) quality assurance of screening programmes. Thirteen countries/regions in the Asia-Pacific region were represented in this exercise. International advisors from North America and Europe were invited to participate.

The Present and Future of Colorectal Cancer Screening

There have been multiple recent updates for recommendations pertaining to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Among the most notable is the recommendation from several guideline-issuing bodies to initiate CRC screening examinations at 45 years of age for individuals at average risk for CRC. Current CRC screening methods include stool-based tests and colon visualization examinations. Currently recommended stool-based tests include fecal immunochemical testing, high-sensitivity guaiac-based fecal occult blood testing, and multitarget stool DNA testing. Visualization examinations include colonoscopy, computed tomography colonography, colon capsule endoscopy, and flexible sigmoidoscopy. Although these screening tests have shown encouraging results for CRC detection, there are important differences between these testing modalities for precursor lesion detection and management. In addition, emerging CRC screening methods are being developed and evaluated. However, additional large, multicenter clinical trials in diverse populations are needed to validate the diagnostic accuracy and generalizability of these new tests. This article reviews the recently updated CRC screening recommendations and current and emerging testing options.

Colorectal Cancer After Screening Colonoscopy: 10-Year Incidence by Site and Detection Rate at First Repeat Colonoscopy

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to describe cumulative colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence after screening colonoscopy stratified by tumor location, age, and sex as well as CRC detection rate at first repeat colonoscopy.

METHODS

Using the German Pharmacoepidemiological Research Database, we included persons with screening colonoscopy and assessed cumulative CRC incidence after baseline screening colonoscopy with snare polypectomy (cohort 1) and without polypectomy (cohort 2). We also determined the CRC detection rate at first repeat colonoscopy by time since screening colonoscopy.

RESULTS

Overall, 1,095,381 persons were included. The 10-year cumulative CRC incidence was 1.5% in cohort 1 and 0.6% in cohort 2. The proportion of proximal CRC increased with age: In women of cohort 1, 47% of CRCs in the age group 55-64 years were proximal (men: 42%) while in the age group 65-74 years, this proportion was 55% (men: 49%). In cohort 2, similar patterns were observed. In cohort 1, the CRC detection rate at first repeat colonoscopy among persons examined within 6-8 years after screening colonoscopy was more than twice as high compared with those examined within 4-6 years (1.7% vs 0.8%).

DISCUSSION

Among persons followed up after screening colonoscopy, we observed a steadily increasing predominance of proximal CRC, and this shift showed distinct patterns by age and sex. Because our study suggests higher CRC detection rates among persons with a later repeat colonoscopy, the role of delayed surveillance and the benefit of a reminder system should be explored.

A Novel Convolutional Neural Network Model as an Alternative Approach to Bowel Preparation Evaluation Before Colonoscopy in the COVID-19 Era: A Multicenter, Single-Blinded, Randomized Study

INTRODUCTION

Adequate bowel preparation is key to a successful colonoscopy, which is necessary for detecting adenomas and preventing colorectal cancer. We developed an artificial intelligence (AI) platform using a convolutional neural network (CNN) model (AI-CNN model) to evaluate the quality of bowel preparation before colonoscopy.

METHODS

This was a colonoscopist-blinded, randomized study. Enrolled patients were randomized into an experimental group, in which our AI-CNN model was used to evaluate the quality of bowel preparation (AI-CNN group), or a control group, which performed self-evaluation per routine practice (control group). The primary outcome was the consistency (homogeneity) between the results of the 2 methods. The secondary outcomes included the quality of bowel preparation according to the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS), polyp detection rate, and adenoma detection rate.

RESULTS

A total of 1,434 patients were enrolled (AI-CNN, n = 730; control, n = 704). No significant difference was observed between the evaluation results ("pass" or "not pass") of the groups in the adequacy of bowel preparation as represented by BBPS scores. The mean BBPS scores, polyp detection rate, and adenoma detection rate were similar between the groups. These results indicated that the AI-CNN model and routine practice were generally consistent in the evaluation of bowel preparation quality. However, the mean BBPS score of patients with "pass" results were significantly higher in the AI-CNN group than in the control group, indicating that the AI-CNN model may further improve the quality of bowel preparation in patients exhibiting adequate bowel preparation.

DISCUSSION

The novel AI-CNN model, which demonstrated comparable outcomes to the routine practice, may serve as an alternative approach for evaluating bowel preparation quality before colonoscopy.

Normal gastrointestinal mucosa at biopsy and subsequent cancer risk: nationwide population-based, sibling-controlled cohort study

Background

While individuals with normal gastrointestinal (GI) mucosa on endoscopy have a lower risk of colorectal cancer, risks of other cancers remain unexplored.

Methods

Through Sweden’s 28 pathology departments, we identified 415,092 individuals with a first GI biopsy with histologically normal mucosa during 1965–2016 and no prior cancer. These individuals were compared to 1,939,215 matched reference individuals from the general population. Follow-up began 6 months after biopsy, and incident cancer data were retrieved from the Swedish Cancer Register. Flexible parametric model was applied to estimate cumulative incidences and hazard ratios (HRs) for cancers. We also used full siblings (n = 441,534) as a secondary comparison group.

Results

During a median follow-up of 10.9 years, 40,935 individuals with normal mucosa (incidence rate: 82.74 per 10,000 person-years) and 177,350 reference individuals (incidence rate: 75.26) developed cancer. Restricting the data to individuals where follow-up revealed no cancer in the first 6 months, we still observed an increased risk of any cancer in those with a histologically normal mucosa (average HR = 1.07; 95%CI = 1.06–1.09). Although the HR for any and specific cancers decreased shortly after biopsy, we observed a long-term excess risk of any cancer, with an HR of 1.08 (95%CI = 1.05–1.12) and a cumulative incidence difference of 0.93% (95%CI = 0.61%-1.25%) at 30 years after biopsy. An elevated risk of gastric cancer, lung cancer, and hematological malignancy (including lymphoproliferative malignancy) was also observed at 20 or 30 years since biopsy. Sibling analyses confirmed the above findings.

Conclusion

Individuals with a histologically normal mucosa at biopsy and where follow-up revealed no cancer in the first 6 months, may still be at increased risk of cancer, although excess risks are small.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09992-5.

Implementing precision medicine in endoscopy practice

In contrast to the "one-size-fits-all" approach, precision medicine focuses on providing health care tailored to individual variabilities. Implementing precision medicine in endoscopy practice involves selecting the appropriate procedures among the endoscopic armamentarium in the diagnosis and management of patients in a logical sequence, jointly considering the pretest probabilities of possible diagnoses, patients' comorbidities and preference, and risk-benefit ratio of the individual procedures given the clinical scenario. The aim of this review is to summarize evidence-supported strategies and measures that may enhance precision medicine in general endoscopy practice.

Normal Gastrointestinal Mucosa at Biopsy and Overall Mortality: Nationwide Population-Based Cohort Study

Background

Normal gastrointestinal (GI) mucosa on endoscopy has been linked to a lower risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) but its association to overall death is unknown.

Methods

We identified 466,987 individuals with a first GI biopsy 1965–2016 with normal mucosa (60.6% upper GI and 39.4% lower GI) through all Swedish pathology departments (n = 28). They were individually matched to 2,321,217 reference individuals without a GI biopsy and also compared to 505,076 full siblings. Flexible parametric models were applied to estimate hazard ratio (HRs) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for death.

Results

During a median follow-up of ~11 years, 85,859 (18.39%) of individuals with normal mucosa and 377,653 (16.27%) of reference individuals died. This corresponded to incidence rates of 147.56/10,000 vs 127.90/10,000 person-years respectively (rate difference: 19.66/10,000 person-years), with the multivariable-adjusted HR of 1.21 (95% CI: 1.20–1.22). Excess mortality was seen for both upper and lower biopsy with normal mucosa. Particularly higher HRs for death were seen in males, individuals biopsied when aged <40 years, those without a prior record of GI disease, and those with high education. Mortality risk was most increased in the first five years after biopsy (HR = 1.34; 95% CI: 1.32–1.36) but decreased thereafter. Having a GI biopsy with normal mucosa was associated with excess mortality from cardiovascular (CVD)disease (HR = 1.02; 95% CI: 1.01–1.03), cancer (HR = 1.58; 95% CI: 1.56–1.61), GI disease (HR = 1.65; 95% CI: 1.58–1.71), and other causes (HR = 1.10; 95% CI: 1.08–1.11). Sibling comparisons yielded similar results.

Conclusion

Compared with individuals without a GI biopsy, those with a normal GI biopsy due to clinical symptoms had a higher mortality particularly in the first five years after biopsy, and especially from GI disease and cancer.

Screening for Colorectal Cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second-leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Screening reduces CRC incidence and mortality. 2021 US Preventive Service Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines and available evidence support routine screening from ages 45 to 75, and individualized consideration of screening ages 76 to 85. USPSTF guidelines recommend annual guaiac fecal occult blood testing, annual fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), annual to every 3-year multitarget stool DNA-FIT, every 5-year sigmoidoscopy, every 10-year sigmoidoscopy with annual FIT, every 5-year computed tomographic colonography, and every 10-year colonoscopy as options for screening. The "best test is the one that gets done."

Colorectal cancer surveillance by colonoscopy in a prospective, population-based long-term Swiss screening study - outcomes, adherence, and costs

Background The success of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening depends mainly on screening quality, patient adherence to surveillance, and costs. Consequently, it is essential to assess the performance over time.

Methods In 2000, a closed cohort study on CRC screening in individuals aged 50 to 80 was initiated in Uri, Switzerland. Participants who chose to undergo colonoscopy were followed over 18 years. We investigated the adherence to recommended surveillance and collected baseline characteristics and colonoscopy data. Risk factors at screening for the development of advanced adenomas were analyzed. Costs for screening and follow-up were evaluated retrospectively.

Results 1278 subjects with a screening colonoscopy were included, of which 272 (21.3%; 69.5% men) had adenomas, and 83 (6.5%) had advanced adenomas. Only 59.8% participated in a follow-up colonoscopy, half of them within the recommended time interval. Individuals with advanced adenomas at screening had nearly five times the risk of developing advanced adenomas compared to individuals without adenomas (24.3% vs. 5.0%, OR 4.79 CI 2.30–9.95). Individuals without adenomas developed advanced adenomas in 4.9%, including four cases of CRC; three of them without control colonoscopy. The villous component in adenomas smaller than 10 mm was not an independent risk factor. Costs for screening and follow-up added up to CHF 1’934’521 per 1’000 persons screened, almost half of them for follow-up examinations; 60% of these costs accounted for low-risk individuals.

Conclusion Our findings suggest that follow-up of screening colonoscopy should be reconsidered in Switzerland; in particular, long-term adherence is critical. Costs for follow-up could be substantially reduced by adopting less expensive long-term screening methods for low-risk individuals.

Non-compliance with colonoscopy after a positive faecal immunochemical test doubles the risk of dying from colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) among subjects with a positive faecal immunochemical test (FIT) who do not undergo a colonoscopy is unknown. We estimated whether non-compliance with colonoscopy after a positive FIT is associated with increased CRC incidence and mortality.

METHODS

The FIT-based CRC screening programme in the Veneto region (Italy) invited persons aged 50 to 69 years with a positive FIT (>20 µg Hb/g faeces) for diagnostic colonoscopy at an endoscopic referral centre. In this retrospective cohort study, we compared the 10-year cumulative CRC incidence and mortality among FIT positives who completed a diagnostic colonoscopy within the programme (compliers) and those who did not (non-compliers), using the Kaplan-Meier estimator and Cox-Aalen models.

RESULTS

Some 88 013 patients who were FIT positive complied with colonoscopy (males: 56.1%; aged 50-59 years: 49.1%) while 23 410 did not (males: 54.6%; aged 50-59 years: 44.9%).The 10-year cumulative incidence of CRC was 44.7 per 1000 (95% CI, 43.1 to 46.3) among colonoscopy compliers and 54.3 per 1000 (95% CI, 49.9 to 58.7) in non-compliers, while the cumulative mortality for CRC was 6.8 per 1000 (95% CI, 5.9 to 7.6) and 16.0 per 1000 (95% CI, 13.1 to 18.9), respectively. The risk of dying of CRC among non-compliers was 103% higher than among compliers (adjusted HR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.68 to 2.44).

CONCLUSION

The excess risk of CRC death among those not completing colonoscopy after a positive faecal occult blood test should prompt screening programmes to adopt effective interventions to increase compliance in this high-risk population.

Incidence and Mortality in Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer After Negative Endoscopy for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is associated with an increased risk of cancer of the upper gastrointestinal tract. This study aimed to assess whether and to what extent a negative upper endoscopy in patients with GERD is associated with decreased incidence and mortality in upper gastrointestinal cancer (ie, esophageal, gastric, or duodenal cancer).

METHODS

We conducted a population-based cohort study of all patients with newly diagnosed GERD between July 1, 1979 and December 31, 2018 in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. The exposure, negative upper endoscopy, was examined as a time-varying exposure, where participants contributed unexposed person-time from GERD diagnosis until screened and exposed person-time from the negative upper endoscopy. The incidence and mortality in upper gastrointestinal cancer were assessed using parametric flexible models, providing adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Among 1,062,740 patients with GERD (median age 58 years; 52% were women) followed for a mean of 7.0 person-years, 5324 (0.5%) developed upper gastrointestinal cancer and 4465 (0.4%) died from such cancer. Patients who had a negative upper endoscopy had a 55% decreased risk of upper gastrointestinal cancer compared with those who did not undergo endoscopy (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.43-0.48), a decrease that was more pronounced during more recent years (HR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.30-0.38 from 2008 onward), and was otherwise stable across sex and age groups. The corresponding reduction in upper gastrointestinal mortality among patients with upper endoscopy was 61% (adjusted HR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.37-0.42). The risk reduction after a negative upper endoscopy in incidence and mortality lasted for 5 and at least 10 years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Negative upper endoscopy is associated with strong and long-lasting decreases in incidence and mortality in upper gastrointestinal cancer in patients with GERD.

Opportunistic Colonoscopy Cancer Screening Pays off in Romania-A Single-Centre Study

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most diagnosed cancer in men (after prostate and lung cancers) and in women (after breast and lung cancer). It is the second cause of cancer death in men (after lung cancer) and the third one in women (after breast and lung cancers). It is estimated that, in EU-27 countries in 2020, colorectal cancer accounted for 12.7% of all new cancer diagnoses and 12.4% of all deaths due to cancer. Our study aims to assess the opportunistic colorectal cancer screening by colonoscopy in a private hospital. A secondary objective of this study is to analyse the adenoma detection rate (ADR), polyp detection rate (PDR), and colorectal cancer (CRC) detection rate. We designed a retrospective single-centre study in the Gastroenterology Department of Saint Mary Hospital. The study population includes all individuals who performed colonoscopies in 2 years, January 2019–December 2020, addressed to our department by their family physician or came by themselves for a colonoscopy. One thousand seven hundred seventy-eight asymptomatic subjects underwent a colonoscopy for the first time. The mean age was 59.0 ± 10.9, 59.5% female. Eight hundred seventy-three polyps were found in 525 patients. Five hundred and twenty-five had at least one polyp, 185 patients had two polyps, 87 had three polyps, and 40 patients had more than three polyps. The PDR was 49.1%, ADR 39.0%, advanced adenomas in 7.9%, and carcinomas were found in 5.4% of patients. In a country without any colorectal cancer screening policy, polyps were found in almost half of the 1778 asymptomatic patients evaluated in a single private center, 39% of cases adenomas, and 5.4% colorectal cancer. Our study suggests starting screening colonoscopy at the age of 45. A poor bowel preparation significantly impacted the adenoma detection rate.

Cohort profile: The National Colorectal Cancer Cohort (NCRCC) study in China

PURPOSE

The National Colorectal Cancer Cohort (NCRCC) study aims to specifically assess risk factors and biomarkers related to endpoints across the colorectal cancer continuum from the aetiology through survivorship.

PARTICIPANTS

The NCRCC study includes the Colorectal Cancer Screening Cohort (CRCSC), which recruited individuals who were at high risk of CRC between 2016 and 2020 and Colorectal Cancer Patients Cohort (CRCPC), which recruited newly diagnosed patients with CRC between 2015 and 2020. Data collection was based on questionnaires and abstraction from electronic medical record. Items included demographic and lifestyle factors, clinical information, survivorship endpoints and other information. Multiple biospecimens including blood, tissue and urine samples were collected. Participants in CRCSC were followed by a combination of periodic survey every 5 years and annual linkage with regional or national cancer and death registries for at least 10 years. In CRCPC, follow-up was conducted with both active and passive approaches at 6, 12, 18, 24, 36, 48 and 60 months after surgery.

FINDINGS TO DATE

A total of 19 377 participants and 15 551 patients with CRC were recruited in CRCSC and in CRCPC, respectively. In CRCSC, 48.0% were men, and the average age of participants at enrolment was 58.7±8.3 years. In CRCPC, 61.4% were men, and the average age was 60.3±12.3 years with 18.9% of participants under 50 years of age.

FUTURE PLANS

Longitudinal data and biospecimens will continue to be collected. Based on the cohorts, several studies to assess risk factors and biomarkers for CRC or its survivorship will be conducted, ultimately providing research evidence from Chinese population and optimising evidence-based guidelines across the CRC continuum.

Colorectal cancer risk following polypectomy in a multicentre, retrospective, cohort study: an evaluation of the 2020 UK post-polypectomy surveillance guidelines

OBJECTIVE

Colonoscopy surveillance aims to reduce colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence after polypectomy. The 2020 UK guidelines recommend surveillance at 3 years for 'high-risk' patients with ≥2 premalignant polyps (PMPs), of which ≥1 is 'advanced' (serrated polyp (or adenoma) ≥10 mm or with (high-grade) dysplasia); ≥5 PMPs; or ≥1 non-pedunculated polyp ≥20 mm; 'low-risk' patients without these findings are instead encouraged to participate in population-based CRC screening. We examined the appropriateness of these risk classification criteria and recommendations.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of patients who underwent colonoscopy and polypectomy mostly between 2000 and 2010 at 17 UK hospitals, followed-up through 2017. We examined CRC incidence by baseline characteristics, risk group and number of surveillance visits using Cox regression, and compared incidence with that in the general population using standardised incidence ratios (SIRs).

RESULTS

Among 21 318 patients, 368 CRCs occurred during follow-up (median: 10.1 years). Baseline CRC risk factors included age ≥55 years, ≥2 PMPs, adenomas with tubulovillous/villous/unknown histology or high-grade dysplasia, proximal polyps and a baseline visit spanning 2-90 days. Compared with the general population, CRC incidence without surveillance was higher among those with adenomas with high-grade dysplasia (SIR 1.74, 95% CI 1.21 to 2.42) or ≥2 PMPs, of which ≥1 was advanced (1.39, 1.09 to 1.75). For low-risk (71%) and high-risk (29%) patients, SIRs without surveillance were 0.75 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.88) and 1.30 (1.03 to 1.62), respectively; for high-risk patients after first surveillance, the SIR was 1.22 (0.91 to 1.60).

CONCLUSION

These guidelines accurately classify post-polypectomy patients into those at high risk, for whom one surveillance colonoscopy appears appropriate, and those at low risk who can be managed by non-invasive screening.

Detection of Postcolonoscopy Colorectal Neoplasia by Multi-target Stool DNA

INTRODUCTION

Significant variability between colonoscopy operators contributes to postcolonoscopy colorectal cancers (CRCs). We aimed to estimate postcolonoscopy colorectal neoplasia (CRN) detection by multi-target stool DNA (mt-sDNA), which has not previously been studied for this purpose.

METHODS

In a retrospective cohort of patients with +mt-sDNA and completed follow-up colonoscopy, positive predictive value (PPV) for endpoints of any CRN, advanced adenoma, right-sided neoplasia, sessile serrated polyps (SSP), and CRC were stratified by the time since previous colonoscopy (0-9, 10, and ≥11 years). mt-sDNA PPV at ≤9 years from previous average-risk screening colonoscopy was used to estimate CRN missed at previous screening colonoscopy.

RESULTS

Among the 850 studied patients with +mt-sDNA after a previous negative screening colonoscopy, any CRN was found in 535 (PPV 63%). Among 107 average-risk patients having +mt-sDNA ≤9 years after last negative colonoscopy, any CRN was found in 67 (PPV 63%), advanced neoplasia in 16 (PPV 15%), right-sided CRN in 48 (PPV 46%), and SSP in 20 (PPV 19%). These rates were similar to those in 47 additional average risk persons with previous incomplete colonoscopy and in an additional 68 persons at increased CRC risk. One CRC (stage I) was found in an average risk patient who was mt-sDNA positive 6 years after negative screening colonoscopy.

DISCUSSION

The high PPV of mt-sDNA 0-9 years after a negative screening colonoscopy suggests that lesions were likely missed on previous examination or may have arisen de novo. mt-sDNA as an interval test after negative screening colonoscopy warrants further study.

Multidisciplinary prevention and management strategies for colorectal cancer and cardiovascular disease

Colorectal cancer (CRC) and cardiovascular disease (CVD) are leading causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Their numerous shared and modifiable risk factors underscore the importance of effective prevention strategies for these largely preventable diseases. Conventionally regarded as separate disease entities, clear pathophysiological links and overlapping risk factors represent an opportunity for synergistic collaborative efforts of oncologists and cardiologists. In addition, current CRC treatment approaches can exert cardiotoxicity and thus increase CVD risk. Given the complex interplay of both diseases and increasing numbers of CRC survivors who are at increased risk for CVD, multidisciplinary cardio-oncological approaches are warranted for optimal patient care from primary prevention to acute disease treatment and long-term surveillance.

Colonoscopy screening and surveillance guidelines

The Colonoscopy Screening and Surveillance Guidelines were developed by the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society as basic guidelines based on the scientific methods. The importance of endoscopic screening and surveillance for both detection and post-treatment follow-up of colorectal cancer has been recognized as essential to reduce disease mortality. There is limited high-level evidence in this field; therefore, we had to focus on the consensus of experts. These clinical practice guidelines consist of 20 clinical questions and eight background knowledge topics that have been determined as the current guiding principles.

Long-Term Colorectal Cancer Incidence and Mortality After Colonoscopy Screening According to Individuals' Risk Profiles

BACKGROUND

It remains unknown whether the benefit of colonoscopy screening against colorectal cancer (CRC) and the optimal age to start screening differ by CRC risk-profile.

METHODS

Among 75,873 women and 42,875 men, we defined a CRC risk score (0-8) based on family history, aspirin, height, body mass index, smoking, physical-activity, alcohol, and diet. We calculated colonoscopy screening-associated hazard ratios (HRs) and absolute risk reductions (ARRs) for CRC incidence and mortality and age-specific CRC cumulative incidence according to risk score. All statistical tests were 2-sided.

RESULTS

During a median of 26 years' follow-up, we documented 2,407 CRC cases and 874 CRC deaths. While the screening-associated hazard ratio did not vary by risk score, the absolute risk reductions in multivariable-adjusted 10-year CRC incidence more than doubled for individuals with score 6-8 (ARR = 0.34%, 95% CI = 0.26% to 0.42%) compared to 0-2 (ARR = 0.15%, 95% CI = 0.12% to 0.18%; Ptrend<0.001). Similar results were found for CRC mortality (ARR = 0.22% [95% CI = 0.21% to 0.24%] vs. 0.08% [95% CI = 0.07% to 0.08%]; Ptrend<0.001). The absolute risk reduction in mortality of distal-colon and rectal cancers was four-fold higher for score 6-8 than 0-2 (distal-colon cancer: ARR = 0.08% [95% CI = 0.07% to 0.08%] vs. 0.02% [95% CI = 0.02% to 0.02%], Ptrend <0.001; rectal cancer: ARR = 0.08% [95% CI = 0.08% to 0.09%] vs. 0.02% [95% CI = 0.02% to 0.03%], Ptrend <0.001). When using age 45 years as the benchmark to start screening, individuals with risk score of 0-2, 3, 4, 5, and 6-8 attained the threshold CRC risk level (10-year cumulative risk of 0.47%) at age 51, 48, 45, 42, and 38 years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The absolute benefit of colonoscopy screening is more than twice higher for individuals with the highest than lowest CRC risk profile. Individuals with a high and low risk profile may start screening up to 6-7 years earlier and later, respectively, than the recommended age 45 years.

ACG Clinical Guidelines: Colorectal Cancer Screening 2021

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

CCNI2 plays a promoting role in the progression of colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common malignancies and most of the patients diagnosed with advanced CRC have unsatisfactory treatment effect and poor prognosis. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of CCNI2 on the development of CRC. In this sutdy, immunohistochemical staining was used to detect CCNI2 expression levels in clinical samples, meanwhile, the Kaplan‐Meier survival analysis was conducted. Celigo cell counting assay was used for screening shCCNI2s. QPCR and WB were performed to verify knockdown efficiency of CCNI2. Cell proliferation, colony formation, cell cycle, apoptosis, and mechanism investigation of CCNI2 knockdown were investigated by MTT assay, colony formation assay, fluorescence‐activated cell sorting, and human apoptosis antibody array, respectively. Otherwise, the mouse model of CCNI2 knockdown was also constructed. The results of immunohistochemical staining and qPCR indicated that CCNI2 had a high expression level in the CRC tissues and cell lines. Kaplan‐Meier survival analysis manifested that the high expression of CCNI2 suggested poor prognosis. The expression of CCNI2 was significantly reduced by CCNI2‐siRNAs, and the downregulated expression level of CCNI2 inhibited CRC cell proliferation and colony formation, arrested cell cycle in G2 phase, as well as promoted cell apoptosis. The various indexes of solid tumor in mice models indicated that CCNI2 knockdown could suppress the growth of CRC tumor. Based on the comprehensive analysis of the above results, CCNI2 was contributed to the progression of CRC and could serve as a prognostic marker for CRC.

Long-Term Incidence and Mortality of Colorectal Cancer After Endoscopic Biopsy With Normal Mucosa: A Swedish-Matched Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic screening reduces colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality. Individuals with a negative result are recommended to undergo rescreening within a 10-year interval, but evidence supporting this advice is limited.

METHODS

We performed a matched cohort study using prospectively collected data from 88,798 individuals in Sweden with normal mucosa at the first colorectal biopsy (aged ≥50 years) in the nationwide gastrointestinal epidemiology strengthened by histopathology reports (ESPRESSO) (1965-2016) and 424,150 matched reference individuals from the general population. Cox proportional hazards regression estimated multivariable hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of CRC incidence and mortality of incident CRCs up to 44 years of follow-up.

RESULTS

In the normal biopsy and reference groups, respectively, the 20-year incidences of CRC were 3.03% and 4.53% and the 20-year mortalities of incident CRC were 0.89% and 1.54%. The multivariable hazard ratio comparing the normal biopsy and reference groups was 0.62 for CRC incidence (95% CI = 0.58-0.66, P < 0.001) and 0.56 for mortality of incident CRC (95% CI = 0.49-0.64, P < 0.001). When assessed by time interval after biopsy, lower CRC incidence and mortality were observed throughout the follow-up. The association seemed weaker for proximal colon cancer than for rectal and distal colon cancer.

DISCUSSION

A normal colorectal biopsy was associated with lower CRC incidence and mortality for at least 20 years after the examination. Our findings confirm previous data and suggest that the screening intervals after a normal colonoscopy could be longer than the commonly recommended 10 years. It may be time to open the discussion for a revision of the international guidelines.

Effects of transcutaneous electrical acupuncture point stimulation on peripheral capillary oxygen saturation in elderly patients undergoing colonoscopy with sedation: a prospective randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

This study investigated whether transcutaneous electrical acupuncture point stimulation (TEAS) at PC6 can reduce the proportion of elderly patients experiencing a drop of ⩾4% in peripheral capillary oxygen saturation (SpO₂) while undergoing colonoscopy under sedation.

METHODS

A total of 32 elderly patients (aged ⩾ 65 years) scheduled for colonoscopy were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either real or sham TEAS (treatment or control groups, respectively). Each patient received oxygen (2 L/min) delivered routinely via nasal cannula. The treatment group was given TEAS at PC6 for 20 min at 2 Hz frequency and 6 mA intensity; the control group underwent the same procedures but with zero frequency/intensity. SpO₂ and other physiological parameters were measured prior to sedation and colonoscopy (baseline) and at seven other timepoints through departure from recovery. Depth of anesthesia was measured using a Narcotrend monitor.

RESULTS

Significantly fewer patients in the treatment group experienced a ⩾4% decrease from baseline SpO₂ (2/16) than patients in the control group (10/16; p = 0.004). The two groups were comparable with regard to respiratory rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressures, mean arterial pressure, and heart rate.

CONCLUSION

TEAS applied at PC6 with 2 Hz frequency was feasible and may be helpful in reducing the rate of hypoxia in elderly patients during colonoscopy.Trial registration number: NCT03775122 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

AGA White Paper: Roadmap for the Future of Colorectal Cancer Screening in the United States

The American Gastroenterological Association's Center for Gastrointestinal Innovation and Technology convened a consensus conference in December 2018, entitled, "Colorectal Cancer Screening and Surveillance: Role of Emerging Technology and Innovation to Improve Outcomes." The goal of the conference, which attracted more than 60 experts in screening and related disciplines, including the authors, was to envision a future in which colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and surveillance are optimized, and to identify barriers to achieving that future. This White Paper originates from that meeting and delineates the priorities and steps needed to improve CRC outcomes, with the goal of minimizing CRC morbidity and mortality. A one-size-fits-all approach to CRC screening has not and is unlikely to result in increased screening uptake or desired outcomes owing to barriers stemming from behavioral, cultural, and socioeconomic causes, especially when combined with inefficiencies in deployment of screening technologies. Overcoming these barriers will require the following: efficient utilization of multiple screening modalities to achieve increased uptake; continued development of noninvasive screening tests, with iterative reassessments of how best to integrate new technologies; and improved personal risk assessment to better risk-stratify patients for appropriate screening testing paradigms.

Use of Polygenic Risk Scores to Select Screening Intervals After Negative Findings From Colonoscopy

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Polygenic risk scores (PRSs) could help to define starting ages for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. However, the role of PRS in determining the length of screening interval after negative findings from colonoscopies is unclear. We aimed to evaluate CRC risk according to PRS and time since last negative colonoscopy.

METHODS

We collected data from 3827 cases and 2641 CRC-free controls in a population-based case-control study in Germany. We constructed a polygenic risk scoring system, based on 90 single-nucleotide polymorphisms, associated with risk of CRC in people of European descent. Participants were classified as having low, medium, or high genetic risk according to tertiles of PRSs among controls. Multiple logistic regression models were used to assess CRC risk according to PRS and time since last negative colonoscopy.

RESULTS

Compared to individuals without colonoscopy in the low PRS category, a 42%-85% lower risk of CRC was observed for individuals who had a negative finding from colonoscopy within 10 years. Beyond 10 years after a negative finding from colonoscopy, significantly lower risk only persisted for the low and medium PRS groups, but not for the high PRS group. Adjusted odds ratios were 0.44 (95% CI, 0.29-0.68), 0.51 (95% CI, 0.34-0.77), and 0.85 (95% CI, 0.58-1.23) in the low, medium, and high PRS group, respectively. Within any time interval, risks were lower for distal than for proximal CRCs.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on findings from a population-based case-control study, the recommended 10-year screening interval for colonoscopy may not need to be shortened among people with high PRSs, but could potentially be prolonged for people with low and medium PRSs. Studies are needed to address personalized time intervals for repeat colonoscopies in average-risk screening cohorts.

Validation of an Algorithm to Identify Patients at Risk for Colorectal Cancer Based on Laboratory Test and Demographic Data in Diverse, Community-Based Population

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Approximately 30%-40% of screening-eligible adults in the United States are not up to date with colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. We aimed to validate a predictive score, generated by a machine learning algorithm with common laboratory test data, to identify patients at high risk for CRC in a large, community-based, ethnically diverse cohort.

METHODS

We performed a nested case-control study using data from members of Kaiser Permanente Northern California (1996-2015). Cases were cohort members who received a complete blood cell count at ages 50-75 y, did not have a prior or current diagnosis of CRC diagnosis at the time of the blood cell count, and were subsequently diagnosed with CRC. We used data from the cohort to validate the ability of an algorithm that uses laboratory and demographic information to identify patients at increased risk for CRC. Test performance was evaluated using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and odds ratios (OR) with 95% CI values to compare high (defined as 97% specificity or more) vs low scores.

RESULTS

A high score from the algorithm identified patients with a CRC diagnosis within the next 6 months with 35.4% sensitivity (95% CI, 33.8-36.7) and an AUROC of 0.78 (95% CI, 0.77-0.78). Patients with a high score had an increased risk of diagnosis with early-stage CRC (OR, 13.1; 95% CI, 11.8-14.3) and advanced stage CRC (OR, 24.8; 95% CI, 22.4-27.3) within the next 6 months. In patients with high scores, the ORs for proximal and distal cancers were 34.7 (95% CI, 31.5-37.7) and 12.1 (95% CI, 10.1-13.9), respectively. The algorithm's accuracy decreased with the time interval between blood test result and CRC diagnosis; performance did not differ by sex or race.

CONCLUSIONS

We validated a predictive model that uses complete blood cell count and demographic data to identify patients at high risk of CRC. The algorithm identified 3% of the population who require an investigation and identified 35% of patients who received a diagnosis of CRC within the next 6 months.

Colonoscopic screening is associated with reduced Colorectal Cancer incidence and mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis

It is the great priority to detect colorectal cancer (CRC) as early as possible, finally to reduce the incidence and mortality of CRC. However, although colonoscopy is recommended in many consensuses, yet no one systematic review is conducted to figure out how colonoscopy could change the incidence and mortality. In our study, we conducted a comprehensive meta-analysis to evaluate the association between colonoscopy screening and the incidence or mortality of CRC. PubMed, EMBASE, and PMC database were systematically searched from their inception to June 2020. A total of 13 cohort and 16 case-control studies comprising 4,713,778 individuals were obtained in this review. Our results showed that colonoscopy was associated with a 52% RR reduction in incidence of CRC (RR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.46-0.49) and 62% RR reduction in mortality of CRC (RR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.36-0.40). Subgroup analysis of different interventions, study design, country, sample size, age or sex showed that the incidence and mortality reduction remained consistent, and colonoscopy screening had the same effect on people below and above 50. Our study indicated that colonoscopy could significantly reduce the incidence and mortality of CRC.

Long-Term Colorectal Cancer Incidence and Mortality After a Single Negative Screening Colonoscopy

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend a 10-year interval between screening colonoscopies, but evidence is limited.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the long-term risk for colorectal cancer (CRC) and death from CRC after a high- and low-quality single negative screening colonoscopy.

DESIGN

Observational study.

SETTING

Polish Colonoscopy Screening Program.

PARTICIPANTS

Average-risk individuals aged 50 to 66 years who had a single negative colonoscopy (no neoplastic findings).

MEASUREMENTS

Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) and standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) of CRC after high- and low-quality single negative screening colonoscopy. High-quality colonoscopy included a complete examination, with adequate bowel preparation, performed by endoscopists with an adenoma detection rate of 20% or greater.

RESULTS

Among 165 887 individuals followed for up to 17.4 years, CRC incidence (0.28 [95% CI, 0.25 to 0.30]) and mortality (0.19 [CI, 0.16 to 0.21]) were 72% and 81% lower, respectively, than in the general population. High-quality examination resulted in 2-fold lower CRC incidence (SIR, 0.16 [CI, 0.13 to 0.20]) and mortality (SMR, 0.10 [CI, 0.06 to 0.14]) than low-quality examination (SIR, 0.32 [CI, 0.29 to 0.35]; SMR, 0.22 [CI, 0.18 to 0.25]). In multivariable analysis, the hazard ratios for CRC incidence after high-quality versus low-quality colonoscopy were 0.55 (CI, 0.35 to 0.86) for 0 to 5 years, 0.54 (CI, 0.38 to 0.77) for 5.1 to 10 years, and 0.46 (CI, 0.25 to 0.86) for 10 to 17.4 years. Only after high-quality colonoscopy did the SIR and SMR for 10.1 to 17.4 years of follow-up not differ compared with earlier observation periods.

LIMITATION

The general population was used as the comparison group.

CONCLUSION

A single negative screening colonoscopy was associated with reduced CRC incidence and mortality for up to 17.4 years. Only high-quality colonoscopy yielded profound and stable reductions in CRC incidence and mortality throughout the entire follow-up.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Polish Ministry of Health.

Multitarget Stool DNA for Average Risk Colorectal Cancer Screening: Major Achievements and Future Directions

After 2 screen-setting studies showing high sensitivity for colorectal cancer and advanced precancerous lesions, multitarget stool DNA testing was endorsed by the US Preventative Services Task Force as a first-line colorectal cancer screening test. Uptake has increased exponentially since approval by the US Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Adherence to testing is approximately 70%. Patients with positive results have high diagnostic colonoscopy completion rates in single-center studies. The positive predictive value for colorectal neoplasia in postapproval studies is high. Next-generation test prototypes show promise to extend specificity gains while maintaining high sensitivity.

Increased risk of high-grade dysplasia and colorectal cancer in inflammatory bowel disease patients with recurrent low-grade dysplasia

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The impact of recurrent low-grade dysplasia (LGD) on the risk of advanced neoplasia (high-grade dysplasia and colorectal cancer) in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients is unknown. In addition, it is unclear how a neoplasia-free period after index LGD impacts this risk. We aimed to determine whether recurrent LGD is a risk factor for advanced neoplasia development and to evaluate the impact of a neoplasia-free time period after initial LGD diagnosis on the advanced neoplasia risk.

METHODS

This is a nationwide cohort study using data from the Dutch National Pathology Registry to identify all IBD patients with LGD and ≥1 follow-up colonoscopy between 1991 and 2010 in the Netherlands. Follow-up data were collected until January 2016. We compared the cumulative advanced neoplasia incidence between patients with and without recurrent LGD at first follow-up colonoscopy using log-rank analysis. We subsequently studied the impact of a neoplasia-free period after initial LGD on the advanced neoplasia incidence.

RESULTS

We identified 4284 IBD patients with colonic LGD with a median follow-up of 6.4 years. Recurrent LGD was a risk factor for advanced neoplasia (hazard ratio, 1.66; 95% confidence interval, 1.22-2.25; P = .001). A neoplasia-free period of at least 3 years after LGD protected against advanced neoplasia.

CONCLUSIONS

Recurrent LGD at follow-up colonoscopy after initial LGD was a risk factor for advanced neoplasia. A neoplasia-free period of at least 3 years after initial LGD was associated with a reduced subsequent risk of advanced neoplasia.

A survey on colonoscopy shows poor understanding of its protective value and widespread misconceptions across Europe

Background

Colonoscopy is a valuable screening tool for colorectal cancer. However, patients experience anxiety when faced with attending a first colonoscopy, and negative attitudes may contribute to non-attendance. Few studies in Europe have explored these attitudes, despite increasing colorectal cancer incidence.

Study aim

We conducted an online survey of the public in five European Union countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK), with the aim of understanding public knowledge of, perceptions of, and attitudes towards, colonoscopy and bowel preparation, amongst colonoscopy-naïve respondents. Attitudes towards colonoscopy were also gathered from colonoscopy-experienced patients.

Methods

Survey answers were gathered from 2,500 colonoscopy-naïve respondents and 500 colonoscopy-experienced patients, divided equally between countries.

Results

Across Europe, 72% of colonoscopy-naïve respondents showed receptiveness to colonoscopy if advised by their doctor to receive one, but only 45% understood its use to prevent colorectal cancer. Forty-three percent of colonoscopy-experienced respondents would still be embarrassed about having another colonoscopy, although 59% said that the experience had been better than expected. Colonoscopy-experienced respondents had greater aversion to bowel preparation than colonoscopy-naïve respondents (47% vs 26%), and 67% of colonoscopy-naïve respondents thought that only 1 litre of bowel preparation or less is required. Italians and the Spanish wanted more information than on average in Europe, while Germans had more realistic expectations of bowel preparation.

Discussion

There are perceptual gaps amongst the public around the purpose of colonoscopies, the subjective experience of the colonoscopy procedure, and the quantity of bowel preparation needed. These concerns could be mitigated by better education and using lower-volume bowel preparation techniques.

Conclusion

Europeans would have a colonoscopy, but its preventive medical purpose is poorly understood and there are misconceptions around the process. Further education about the procedure, its benefits and bowel preparation is vital to improve understanding and compliance.

Colorectal cancer prevention by a CLEAR principles-based colonoscopy protocol: an observational study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention by colonoscopy has been lower than expected. We studied CRC prevention outcomes of a colonoscopy protocol based on Clean the colon, Look Everywhere, and complete Abnormality Removal (CLEAR) principles.

METHODS

This observational follow-up study studied patients provided screening colonoscopy at a free-standing private ambulatory surgery center in South Carolina by 80 endoscopists from October 2001 to December 2014, followed through December 2015. The colonoscopy protocol, optimized for polyp clearance, featured in-person bowel preparation instructions reinforced by phone, polyp search and removal throughout insertion and gradual withdrawal with circumferential tip movements, and a team approach using all personnel present to maximize polyp detection, patient safety, and clear-margin polypectomy including requesting repeat inspection or additional tissue removal. Outcome measures were postscreening lifetime CRC risk relative to Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-18 and interval cancer rate (postcolonoscopy CRCs among cancer-free patients at screening).

RESULTS

Of 25,862 patients (mean age, 58.1 years; 52% black; 205,522 person-years of observation), 159 had CRC at screening and 67 patients developed interval CRC. The interval CRC rate was 3.34 per 10,000 person-years of observation, 5.79 and 2.24 among patients with and without adenomas, respectively. The rate was similar among older patients (mean age 68.5 years at screening) and with prolonged follow-up. Postscreening lifetime CRC risk was 1.6% (bootstrap 95% confidence interval, 1.3%-1.8%) versus 4.7% in SEER-18, 67% lower. Subgroups with mean screening ages of 50 and 68.5 years showed risk reductions of 80% and 72%, respectively. The adverse event rate was less than usually reported rates: perforation 2.6 per 10,000, bleeding with hospitalization 2.4 per 10,000, and no deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

A colonoscopy protocol optimized for polyp clearance prevented 67% of CRC compared with a SEER-18 population given ongoing population screening.

Multitarget Stool DNA Screening in Clinical Practice: High Positive Predictive Value for Colorectal Neoplasia Regardless of Exposure to Previous Colonoscopy

OBJECTIVES

Multitarget stool DNA (MT-sDNA) testing has grown as a noninvasive screening modality for colorectal cancer (CRC), but real-world clinical data are limited in the post-FDA approval setting. The effect of previous colonoscopy on MT-sDNA performance is not known. We aimed to evaluate findings of colorectal neoplasia (CRN) at diagnostic colonoscopy in patients with positive MT-sDNA testing, stratified by patient exposure to previous colonoscopy.

METHODS

We identified consecutive patients completing MT-sDNA testing over a 39-month period and reviewed the records of those with positive tests for neoplastic findings at diagnostic colonoscopy. MT-sDNA test positivity rate, adherence to diagnostic colonoscopy, and the positive predictive value (PPV) of MT-sDNA for any CRN and neoplastic subtypes were calculated.

RESULTS

Of 16,469 MT-sDNA tests completed, testing returned positive in 2,326 (14.1%) patients. After exclusion of patients at increased risk for CRC, 1,801 patients remained, 1,558 (87%) of whom underwent diagnostic colonoscopy; 918 of 1,558 (59%) of these patients had undergone previous colonoscopy, whereas 640 (41%) had not. Any CRN was found in 1,046 of 1,558 patients (PPV = 67%). More neoplastic lesions were found in patients without previous colonoscopy (73%); however, the rates remained high among those who had undergone previous colonoscopy (63%, P < 0.0001). The large majority (79%) of patients had right-sided neoplasia.

DISCUSSION

MT-sDNA has a high PPV for any CRN regardless of exposure to previous colonoscopy. Right-sided CRN was found at colonoscopy in most patients with positive MT-sDNA testing, representing a potential advantage over other currently available screening modalities for CRC.

Multi-Target Stool DNA Testing for Colorectal Cancer Screening: Emerging Learning on Real-world Performance

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Multi-target stool DNA (MT-sDNA) was approved in 2014 for use in screening average-risk patients for colorectal cancer (CRC). Here, we highlight recent literature from post-market studies to provide an update on clinical use and utility not possible from pre-approval studies.

RECENT FINDINGS

MT-sDNA has been included in major society guidelines as an option for colorectal cancer screening, and has seen exponentially increasing use in clinical practice. MT-sDNA appears to be attracting new patients to CRC screening, and patient adherence to diagnostic colonoscopy after a positive MT-sDNA test is high. Approximately two-thirds of these patients are found to have colorectal neoplasia (CRN), 80% of whom have at least one right-sided lesion; 1 in 3 will have advanced CRN. High yield of CRN is due not only to post-screening increase in probability but also likely improved endoscopist attention. In those with a negative high-quality colonoscopy after positive MT-sDNA test ("false positive MT-sDNA"), further interventions do not appear to be necessary.

SUMMARY

MT-sDNA is a promising tool to improve rates and quality of CRC screening. Further investigation should examine MT-sDNA performance in populations at increased risk for CRC, and as an interval test after colonoscopy to detect potentially missed lesions.