Clinical investigation of colorectal cancer detected by follow-up colonoscopy after endoscopic polypectomy

Frequency and Characteristics of Interval Colorectal Cancer in Actual Clinical Practice: A KASID Multicenter Study

Background/Aims

The aims of the present study were to determine the frequency of interval colorectal cancers (CRCs) after surveillance colonoscopy and to compare the clinicopathologic features and survival outcomes with those of non-interval CRCs.

Methods

From January 2003 to December 2013, 66,016 follow-up colonoscopies for 38,412 patients performed within recommended time were reviewed retrospectively based on data from 11 tertiary hospitals in South Korea. To compare clinicopathologic features and survival rates for interval CRC, 106 patients with non-interval CRC matched in age and gender were included.

Results

Among the 66,016 colonoscopies performed within the surveillance period, 63 cases (63/66,016) of interval CRC were detected, and 53 were finally included in the analysis. The mean age was 69.9±8.8 years, and the male to female ratio was 1.94:1. Although the occurrence rate of cancer in the right side colon was higher than that of non-interval CRC, interval CRCs were predominantly left sided. Other clinicopathologic features and overall survival were not significantly different between the two groups. Missed lesion was suspected to be the most common cause (29 cases, 54.7%).

Conclusions

The frequency of interval CRC among patients who had undergone a surveillance colonoscopy was 0.095%. While sharing some similar clinical features and survival outcomes, interval CRCs in Korea developed more often in males and on the left side in contrast to results from Western studies.

Risk of Colorectal Cancer following Colonoscopic Polypectomy

Aims and Background

To follow a cohort of patients who had undergone polypectomies in order to assess the overall risk of subsequent colorectal cancer in relation with various adenomas characteristics.

Methods

A total of 1,063 patients with adenomatous polyps of the large intestine were treated between 1979 and 1996 at the National Cancer Institute of Milan, during a screening program for colorectal carcinoma. Data on patients who had undergone colonoscopies were collected prospectively. The relation between colorectal cancer and adenomas characteristics was assessed by computing the hazard ratio (HR) values and corresponding confidence intervals (95% CI), according to Cox.

Results

Of the 1,063 patients who met the eligibility requirements, 672 had single adenomas (63.2%) and 391 had multiple adenomas (36.8%). Histological examination revealed 743 cases of tubular adenoma, 196 cases of tubulo-villous adenoma, and 96 cases of villous adenoma. High-grade dysplasia was found in 3.1% of the cases. During the 8,906 persons/year of follow-up, adenocarcinomas of the large bowel developed in 11 patients. Several adenomas’ characteristics at index polypectomy were significant predictors of colorectal cancer occurrence. In univariate analysis the risk of colon cancer was significantly related with multiple adenomas (HR 4.2, 95% CI 1.1-6.5), high-grade dysplasia adenomas (HR 10.0, 95% CI 2.6-38.1) and with adenomas larger than 2 cm (HR 5.0, 95% CI 1.2-20.4). A multivariate stepwise procedure confirmed that the presence of multiple adenomas and presence of high-grade dysplasia are the most important predictors of carcinomas. Hazard ratios for colorectal cancer occurrence, from multivariate Cox's model, were 5.1 (95% CI 1.2-19.9) for multiple compared to single adenomas, and 13.0 (95% CI 3.6-50.7) for adenomas with high-grade dysplasia compared to those with low-grade dysplasia.

Conclusions

High-grade dysplasia, number and size of adenomas were confirmed as the major cancer predictors. Based on this conclusion, a subgroup of patients, who may benefit from intensive surveillance colonoscopy, can be identifiable.

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for management of colorectal polyps

BACKGROUND

Recently in Japan, the morbidity of colorectal polyp has been increasing. As a result, a large number of cases of colorectal polyps that are diagnosed and treated using colonoscopy has now increased, and clinical guidelines are needed for endoscopic management and surveillance after treatment.

METHODS

Three committees [the professional committee for making clinical questions (CQs) and statements by Japanese specialists, the expert panelist committee for rating statements by the modified Delphi method, and the evaluating committee by moderators] were organized. Ten specialists for colorectal polyp management extracted the specific clinical statements from articles published between 1983 and September 2011 obtained from PubMed and a secondary database, and developed the CQs and statements. Basically, statements were made according to the GRADE system. The expert panel individually rated the clinical statements using a modified Delphi approach, in which a clinical statement receiving a median score greater than seven on a nine-point scale from the panel was regarded as valid.

RESULTS

The professional committee created 91CQs and statements for the current concept and diagnosis/treatment of various colorectal polyps including epidemiology, screening, pathophysiology, definition and classification, diagnosis, treatment/management, practical treatment, complications and surveillance after treatment, and other colorectal lesions (submucosal tumors, nonneoplastic polyps, polyposis, hereditary tumors, ulcerative colitis-associated tumor/carcinoma).

CONCLUSIONS

After evaluation by the moderators, evidence-based clinical guidelines for management of colorectal polyps have been proposed for 2014.

Colorectal cancer incidence is low in patients following a colonoscopy

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Colonoscopy has been proven a valuable tool in preventing colorectal cancer in controlled studies; we conducted a longitudinal confirmation study in everyday clinical practice.

METHODS

In a retrospective study, we monitored the outcome of patients with a total colonoscopy at our hospital between 1994 and 2007. We analysed the data of in-house follow-up colonoscopies, a national person registry and the morphological tumour registry centralizing all histopathological data at a national level. Patients with a particular colorectal cancer risk were excluded.

RESULTS

8950 patients were included in our study. 2032 (22.7%) patients had at least one colorectal adenoma at index colonoscopy. Adenoma prevalence was significantly higher in men than in women (27.9% vs. 17.4%, p<0.001) and was increasing with age in both sexes. Patients were followed for a mean of 5.2 years and 19 had invasive colorectal cancer detected over 47,725 person years of follow-up. The incidence rate was 0.40 cases/1000 person years of follow-up (95% confidence interval, 0.25-0.62), and the standardized incidence ratio was 0.37 (95% confidence interval, 0.24-0.58).

CONCLUSION

Incidence rates of colorectal cancer are low in the follow-up of patients having undergone a total colonoscopy in everyday practice. After standard therapy of colorectal adenomas at colonoscopy, there is little evidence for excess colorectal cancer incidence in this subgroup.

Associations of Ki-ras proto-oncogene mutation and p53 gene overexpression in sporadic colorectal adenomas with demographic and clinicopathologic characteristics

In colorectal tumorigenesis, Ki-ras proto-oncogene mutation often occurs early in the adenoma-adenocarcinoma sequence, whereas mutation of the p53 gene is associated with late progression to carcinoma. We evaluated the relationship of demographic and clinicopathologic characteristics to Ki-ras mutation and p53 gene product overexpression in 1,093 baseline sporadic colorectal adenomas from 926 individuals enrolled in a phase III recurrence prevention trial. Ki-ras mutation was found in 14.7% of individuals and p53 overexpression was found in 7.0% of those tested. Multivariate analysis found older age, rectal location, and villous histology to be independently associated with Ki-ras mutation. Individuals with an advanced adenoma (>or=1 cm or high-grade dysplasia or villous histology) had a 4-fold higher likelihood of Ki-ras mutation [odds ratios (OR), 3.96; 95% confidence intervals (CI), 2.54-6.18]. Ki-ras mutations in codon 12 and of the G-to-A transition type were more frequent in older individuals, whereas G-to-T transversion was more frequent in rectal adenomas than in the colon. Multivariate analysis showed that previous history of a polyp (P = 0.03) was inversely associated with p53 overexpression. Large adenoma size (>or=1 cm), high-grade dysplasia, and villous histology were independently associated with p53 overexpression, with the strongest association for advanced adenomas (OR, 7.20; 95% CI, 3.01-17.22). Individuals with a Ki-ras mutated adenoma were more likely to overexpress p53 (OR, 2.46; 95% CI, 1.36-4.46), and 94.8% of adenomas with both alterations were classified as advanced (P <or= 0.0001). Our large cross-sectional study supports the role of both Ki-ras and p53 in the progression of adenomas and shows that their molecular pathogenesis differs by anatomic location, age, and mucosal predisposition as evidenced by previous history of a polyp.

Endoscopic follow-up of 383 patients with colorectal adenoma: an observational study in daily practice

Endoscopic removal of colorectal adenomas reduces the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer (CRC), but follow-up surveillance is recommended. Compliance with the Dutch surveillance guidelines and detection of neoplasia during follow-up has been evaluated in daily practice. From 1987 to 1996, 383 consecutive patients with colorectal adenomas (56.4% male, 61.8+/-11.3 years) were included and followed until December 2000. The mean follow-up was 80.5+/-42.5 months with 2.2+/-0.9 follow-up endoscopies. A total of 32.5 and 27.3% of follow-up endoscopies were performed >25% (time between advised and actual endoscopy) too late or too early, respectively. At the end of follow-up, 33.4% of patients had left the follow-up (two-thirds died) and 60.1% were known with co-morbidity. A first, second, third, fourth and fifth follow-up endoscopy had been performed in 327, 238, 132, 64 and 35 patients, respectively. Adenomatous polyps (with high-risk polyps) were detected in 100% (42.6%) of the index endoscopies and in 25.1% (17.4%), 23.9% (10.5%), 28.0% (12.1%), 34.4% (25.0%) and 37.1% (17.1%) of the first to fifth follow-up endoscopy, respectively. CRC was diagnosed in seven patients (46.1+/-22.9 months after index endoscopy), resulting in a standardized incidence ratio of 1.4 (confidence interval 0.6-3.0, P=0.4) compared to the general population. In this daily practice, high numbers of total and high-risk adenomatous polyps were found during follow-up surveillance. The incidence of CRC was not significantly different from the general population, which might be due to the intensive follow-up and removal of polyps. These findings support the importance of follow-up surveillance. However, the high overall morbidity and mortality should be taken into account when selecting patients for an intensive follow-up programme.

Colorectal cancers found after a complete colonoscopy

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The incidence of colorectal cancer in patients undergoing colonoscopic surveillance is higher than previously thought. A better understanding of interval cancers is needed to improve surveillance strategies. The objectives of this study were to determine whether interval colorectal cancers were associated with an inadequate earlier colonoscopy, incomplete polypectomy, or aggressive biologic behavior.

METHODS

We searched our institution's cancer registry. Interval cancers were defined as colorectal cancers that developed within 5 years of a complete colonoscopy. These were frequency matched in a 1:2 ratio to patients with sporadic cancers, which were defined as colorectal cancers diagnosed on a patient's first recorded colonoscopy. Patient, colonoscopy, and tumor characteristics of interval and sporadic cancers were compared.

RESULTS

Of the 830 colorectal cancers diagnosed during the study period, 45 patients developed an interval cancer (5.4%; 95% confidence interval, 4.1%-7.2%). Twenty-seven percent of interval cancers developed at previous polypectomy segments, and location of polypectomy segments was predictive of the location of subsequent interval cancers. Interval cancers were 3 times more likely to occur in the right colon and were smaller in size than sporadic cancers. Quality of bowel preparation, individual endoscopist, endoscopist experience, and trainee involvement were not associated with interval cancers. No difference in TNM stage at diagnosis, histologic type or grade, carcinoembryonic antigen level, or 5-year survival was found between interval and sporadic cancers.

CONCLUSIONS

Incomplete polypectomy might play an important role in the development of interval colorectal cancer. No association between other colonoscopy-related factors or tumor characteristics and interval cancers was found.

Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer and the American Cancer Society

Adenomatous polyps are the most common neoplastic findings discovered in people who undergo colorectal screening or who have a diagnostic work-up for symptoms. It was common practice in the 1970s for these patients to have annual follow-up surveillance examinations to detect additional new adenomas and missed synchronous adenomas. As a result of the National Polyp Study report in 1993, which showed clearly in a randomized design that the first postpolypectomy examination could be deferred for 3 years, guidelines published by a gastrointestinal consortium in 1997 recommended that the first follow-up surveillance take place 3 years after polypectomy for most patients. In 2003 these guidelines were updated and colonoscopy was recommended as the only follow-up examination, stratification at baseline into low risk and higher risk for subsequent adenomas was suggested. The 1997 and 2003 guidelines dealt with both screening and surveillance. However, it has become increasingly clear that postpolypectomy surveillance is now a large part of endoscopic practice, draining resources from screening and diagnosis. In addition, surveys have shown that a large proportion of endoscopists are conducting surveillance examinations at shorter intervals than recommended in the guidelines. In the present report, a careful analytic approach was designed to address all evidence available in the literature to delineate predictors of advanced pathology, both cancer and advanced adenomas, so that patients can be stratified more definitely at their baseline colonoscopy into those at lower risk or increased risk for a subsequent advanced neoplasia. People at increased risk have either 3 or more adenomas, high-grade dysplasia, villous features, or an adenoma 1 cm or larger in size. It is recommended that they have a 3-year follow-up colonoscopy. People at lower risk who have 1 or 2 small (<1 cm) tubular adenomas with no high-grade dysplasia can have a follow-up evaluation in 5-10 years, whereas people with hyperplastic polyps only should have a 10-year follow-up evaluation, as for average-risk people. There have been recent studies that have reported a significant number of missed cancers by colonoscopy. However, high-quality baseline colonoscopy with excellent patient preparation and adequate withdrawal time should minimize this and reduce clinicians concerns. These guidelines were developed jointly by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer and the American Cancer Society to provide a broader consensus and thereby increase the use of the recommendations by endoscopists. The adoption of these guidelines nationally can have a dramatic impact on shifting available resources from intensive surveillance to screening. It has been shown that the first screening colonoscopy and polypectomy produces the greatest effects on reducing the incidence of colorectal cancer in patients with adenomatous polyps.

Complete colonoscopy rarely misses cancer

BACKGROUND

The assumption that colonoscopy is highly accurate for detecting colorectal cancer was tested by identifying cancer subsequent to colonoscopy in 2 cohorts of patients in which colonoscopy was reported as normal.

METHODS

A multicenter endoscopy database was used to identify all reportedly normal colonoscopies. One cohort was assessed 5 years after colonoscopy with the use of a population-based health services-linked database to link patient morbidity, cancer, and mortality data. The second cohort was assessed by identifying patients who had cancer on repeat colonoscopy.

RESULTS

Of 1047 patients with normal colonoscopies followed for 5 years or until death if earlier, 5 cancers (0.5%) were detected. This rate was not significantly different from that predicted by Australian statistics (risk = 1.0%, p > 0.1), but significantly lower compared with that for all patients presenting for colonoscopy during the study period (risk = 5.2%, p < 0.001). In another cohort of 8486 patients with reportedly normal colonoscopies, 496 patients underwent repeat colonoscopies during an average follow-up of 3.1 years; cancer was diagnosed at the subsequent procedure in 3 patients (0.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

The high accuracy of colonoscopy is demonstrated by the low risk of harboring an advanced neoplastic lesion after a normal examination.

Medical-legal risks of incident cancers after clearing colonoscopy

Colonoscopy and polypectomy effectively reduce the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer, but some patients present with fully developed cancers within 1-4 yr of a colonoscopy that apparently cleared the colon of neoplasia. These events may result in medical-legal action against colonoscopists, generally based on an assumption of negligent technical performance of the procedure. Alternative explanations for the development of interval cancers include variable growth rates of colorectal cancers, the inherent miss rate of the procedure even when optimal examination techniques are used, and the possibility of flat lesions that are not readily detected by standard colonoscopic techniques. This paper discusses issues relevant to reduction of medical-legal risks associated with interval cancers after clearing colonoscopy. These issues include informed consent, documentation of cecal intubation, appropriate description of preparation, documentation of examination time and technique, and attention to potential atypical neoplasms.

Endoscopic treatment of colorectal benign-appearing lesions 3 cm or larger: techniques and outcome

PURPOSE

Colonoscopic polypectomy is the preferred technique to remove the majority of polyps. The authors evaluate feasibility, safety, and the effectiveness of endoscopic treatment of colorectal benign-appearing polyps equal to or larger than 3 cm.

METHODS

Ninety-seven patients with 104 giant polyps underwent polypectomy within a nine-year period. The majority of these procedures were performed on an outpatient basis, all on unsedated patients. Gross appearance, size, location, histologic characteristics, synchronous lesions, modality, and adequacy of removal of giant polyps were analyzed. The follow-up was achieved in 89 percent of patients during a period ranging from 6 to 96 months (median, 38).

RESULTS

Of the 104 removed polyps, 75 (72 percent) were adenomatous, 2 (2 percent) were hyperplastic, and 27 (26 percent) were malignant polyps. Six patients had more than one giant polyp. Several additional smaller polyps were found in 52 patients and a synchronous cancer in 4. Twenty-one (20 percent) giant polyps were equal to or larger than 4 cm. Forty-nine were pedunculated, 20 were short-stalked, and 35 were sessile. Sixty-one polyps were excised in one piece, and forty-three were excised using a piecemeal technique. Only four complications (3.8 percent) were recorded; all cases were treated endoscopically. Fifty-eight (75 percent) adenomas and eighteen (67 percent) malignant polyps were completely excised. Surgery was performed in 7 of 27 patients (27 percent) with malignant polyps, where there was a doubtful, infiltrated margin or poorly differentiated cancer. Postpolypectomy surveillance permitted the detection and treatment of 25 metachronous or recurrent polyps and a metachronous cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that polypectomy of giant colorectal polyps, performed by an expert endoscopist, is feasible, effective, and safe, even on an outpatient basis. The authors confirm that malignant polyps with incomplete excision, lymphovascular invasion, and poor differentiation require bowel resection. Postpolypectomy surveillance is useful for all patients who have undergone colonoscopic resection of giant adenomatous or malignant polyps.