Interval colorectal cancers: what and why

Prevalence and Endoscopic Features of Colorectal Non-Polypoid Lesions: A Single-Center Retrospective Study from a Large Cohort of Fecal Immunochemical Test-Positive Screening Patients in Northern Italy

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal non-polypoid lesions (NPLs) are flat, hard-to-detect, and mainly right-sided lesions. We aimed to assess the prevalence and endoscopic features of NPL lesions in a large cohort of screening patients in Northern Italy.

METHODS

Fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-positive subjects between 50 and 69 years old who had undergone at least a screening colonoscopy from March 2005 to December 2017 at the Endoscopy Unit of Ferrara were included. We selected only non-diminutive (>5 mm) and neoplastic polyps (i.e., adenomas, serrated adenomas, and carcinomas). Patients' demographics and polyps' endoscopic-histopathological data were collected. Categorical variables were compared using the Pearson's χ2 test and Fisher's exact test, while odd ratios and confidence intervals were estimated with univariate analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 6,676 FIT-positive subjects underwent 7,616 colonoscopies during the study period. Total lesions were 3,231, of which 133 were NPLs and among these 123 were neoplastic. The prevalence of NPLs among total lesions was 4.1%, while prevalence of neoplastic NPLs among total neoplastic lesions was 4.6%. The prevalence of NPLs and neoplastic NPLs among total colonoscopies was 1.7% and 1.6%, respectively. Neoplastic NPLs were more frequent between 60 and 64 years old (p = 0.03) and associated with other colonic polyps in subjects older than 60 years (p = 0.016). Cancerized NPLs were more likely in younger patients (50-59 years old, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Prevalence of NPLs is low among the screening population, but NPLs are frequently associated with other colorectal polyps in patients older than 60 years and carry a higher risk of cancer in patients younger than 60 years old.

Postcolonoscopy Colorectal Cancer in a Referral Center for Colorectal Cancer: Prevalence and Risk Factors

Background and Aims

Colonoscopy is effective to detect and remove colorectal lesions. However, after a negative colonoscopy, cancers could be detected during the interval follow-up. This study was designed to identify characteristics and risk factors for postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer - interval type.

Methods

Medical records of individuals who were newly diagnosed with colorectal cancer between January 2018 and December 2019 were reviewed. Clinical, demographic, and endoscopic variables were analyzed. Those with the diagnosis of colorectal cancer between two consecutive colonoscopies performed within the appropriated surveillance range were considered to have postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer - interval type. A comparison between the group of patients with non-postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer - interval type and the group of patients with postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer - interval type was then performed.

Results

During the study period, 491 patients were newly diagnosed with colorectal cancer. Among them, 61 (12.4%) had postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer - interval subtype. Postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer - interval type was three times more prevalent on the proximal colon (p = 0.014) and was associated with the presence of two or more cardiovascular risk factors (aOR = 4.25; p = 0.016), cholecystectomy in the past (aOR = 10.09; p = 0.019), and family history of colorectal cancer on a first-degree relative (aOR = 4.25; p = 0.006). Moreover, isolated cardiovascular risk factors revealed a protective effect for the absence of all cardiovascular risk factors (aOR = 20; p = 0.034). The ROC curve associated with the multivariate model revealed a predictive power of 77.8% (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer - interval type is more common in the proximal colon and in patients with a family history (first-degree relative) of colorectal cancer, two or more cardiovascular risk factors, and a history of cholecystectomy. All of these are easily detectable in clinical practice and may be of extreme importance in the control of postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer in the near future.

Sensitivity of fecal immunochemical test and risk factors for interval colorectal cancer in a French population

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening using fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) aims to detect pre-symptomatic colorectal lesions and reduce CRC mortality.

AIMS

The objectives of this study were to determine the FIT sensitivity for diagnosis of CRC, the impact of diagnostic circumstances on treatment and survival, and risk factors for interval cancer (IC).

METHODS

This population-based study evaluated the 2016-2017 CRC screening campaign in Finistère, France. CRCs were classified according to diagnostic circumstances: screen-detected CRC (SD-CRC), CRC with delayed diagnosis, IC after negative FIT (FIT-IC), post-colonoscopy CRC, CRC in non-responders and CRC in the excluded population.

RESULTS

This study included 909 CRCs: 248 SD-CRCs (6% of positive FIT) and 60 FIT-ICs (0.07% of negative FIT). The FIT sensitivity for CRC was 80.5% (CI95%: 76.1-84.9) at the threshold of 30 µg hemoglobin/g feces used in France. In multivariate analysis, proximal (OR:6.73) and rectal locations (OR:7.52) were associated with being diagnosed with FIT-IC rather than SD-CRC. The FIT positivity threshold maximizing the sum of sensitivity and specificity was found to be 17 µg/g, with 14 additional CRCs diagnosed compared to the current threshold.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study confirms the good sensitivity of FIT. A decrease of the FIT detection threshold could optimize sensitivity.

Molecular pathways in post-colonoscopy versus detected colorectal cancers: results from a nested case-control study

BACKGROUND

Post-colonoscopy colorectal cancers (PCCRCs) pose challenges in clinical practice. PCCRCs occur due to a combination of procedural and biological causes. In a nested case-control study, we compared clinical and molecular features of PCCRCs and detected CRCs (DCRCs).

METHODS

Whole-genome chromosomal copy number changes and mutation status of genes commonly affected in CRC were examined by low-coverage WGS and targeted sequencing, respectively. MSI and CIMP status was also determined.

RESULTS

In total, 122 PCCRCs and 98 DCRCs with high-quality DNA were examined. PCCRCs were more often located proximally (P < 0.001), non-polypoid appearing (P = 0.004), early stage (P = 0.009) and poorly differentiated (P = 0.006). PCCRCs showed significantly less 18q loss (FDR < 0.2), compared to DCRCs. No significant differences in mutations were observed. PCCRCs were more commonly CIMP high (P = 0.014) and MSI (P = 0.029). After correction for tumour location, only less 18q loss remained significant (P = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Molecular features associated with the sessile serrated lesions (SSLs) and non-polypoid colorectal neoplasms (CRNs) are more commonly seen in PCCRCs than in DCRCs. These together with the clinical features observed support the hypothesis that SSLs and non-polypoid CRNs are contributors to the development of PCCRCs. The future focus should be directed at improving the detection and endoscopic removal of these non-polypoid CRN and SSLs.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NTR3093 in the Dutch trial register ( www.trialregister.nl ).

Detection of flat colorectal neoplasia by artificial intelligence: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

This study review focuses on a deep learning method for the detection of colorectal lesions in colonoscopy and AI support for detecting colorectal neoplasia, especially in flat lesions.

DATA SOURCES

We performed a systematic electric search with PubMed by using "colonoscopy", "artificial intelligence", and "detection". Finally, nine articles about development and validation study and eight clinical trials met the review criteria.

RESULTS

Development and validation studies showed that trained AI models had high accuracy-approximately 90% or more for detecting lesions. Performance was better in elevated lesions than in superficial lesions in the two studies. Among the eight clinical trials, all but one trial showed a significantly high adenoma detection rate in the CADe group than in the control group. Interestingly, the CADe group detected significantly high flat lesions than the control group in the seven studies.

CONCLUSION

Flat colorectal neoplasia can be detected by endoscopists who use AI.

Rates and characteristics of postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer in the Swedish IBD population: what are the differences from a non-IBD population?

OBJECTIVE

The rate of postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC) is considered a key quality indicator of colonoscopy; little is known about PCCRC in IBD.

DESIGN

A population-based cohort study of colonoscopies in Sweden from 2001 to 2010 was conducted. Individuals with a colorectal cancer (CRC) detected within 36 months after a colonoscopy were identified and stratified on UC, Crohn's disease (CD) or non-IBD. The CRCs were classified as detected CRCs (dCRC) (0-6 months) or as PCCRCs (6-36 months). PCCRC rates were calculated by the number of false negative/(the number of true positive+the number of false negative) colonoscopies. Poisson regression analysis was employed to examine the association between PCCRC and IBD (CD and UC) diagnosis, age, gender, location, time period and comorbidities.

RESULTS

We identified 348 232 colonoscopies in 270 918 individuals. Of these, 27 123 were performed on 14 597 individuals with CD, and 51 572 were performed on 26 513 individuals with UC. There were 13 317 CRCs in the non-IBD group, 133 in the CD group and 281 in the UC group. The PCCRC rate in the CD group was 28.3% and 41.0% in the UC group. The RR for a PCCRC was 3.82 (95% CI 2.94 to 4.96) in CD and 5.89 (95% CI 5.10 to 6.80) in UC, compared with non-IBD. The highest risk was observed among rectal cancer location in CD and in younger individuals with UC.

CONCLUSION

The high rates of PCCRC in young patients with UC and for rectal cancer location in CD might affect future performance of IBD surveillance.

Clinicopathologic and genetic characteristics of interval colorectal carcinomas favor origin from missed or incompletely excised precursors

Interval colorectal cancers may arise from missed or incompletely excised precursors or from a unique rapid progression pathway. We compared the clinicopathologic and molecular profiles of interval and matched non-interval colorectal cancer to determine whether interval colorectal cancers harbor any unique genetic characteristics. Fifty one of 982 colorectal cancer (5.2%) were categorized as interval colorectal cancer, defined as colorectal cancer detected in a diagnostic examination prior to the next recommended colonoscopy and at least 1 year after the last colonoscopy. Clinicopathologic characteristics of interval colorectal cancer were compared to non-interval colorectal cancer matched 1:1 on age, gender, and tumor location. Molecular profile of a subset of interval colorectal cancer (n = 20) and matched (1:2) non-interval colorectal cancer (n = 40) were evaluated using next generation sequencing. Interval colorectal cancer were more likely to occur in the right colon (55% vs. 35%; p = 0.02) and in patients > 70 years of age (55% vs. 34%; p = 0.002). Clinicopathologic features and aberrant DNA mismatch repair protein expression were not significantly different between interval and matched non-interval colorectal cancer. The frequency and spectrum of genetic alterations was also similar in interval and matched non-interval colorectal cancer. Similar findings were seen when analysis was restricted to interval colorectal cancer diagnosed <5 years after last colonoscopy (n = 42). Interval and non-interval colorectal cancers share similar clinicopathologic and genetic profiles when matched for tumor location. Interval colorectal cancers and are more likely to develop from missed or incompletely excised precursors rather than a unique rapid progression pathway.

Index colonoscopy-related risk factors for postcolonoscopy colorectal cancers

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Postcolonoscopy colorectal cancers (PCCRCs) are defined as those detected ≤10 years after an index colonoscopy negative for cancer, but modifiable risk factors are not well established in large, community-based populations.

METHODS

We evaluated risk factors from the index colonoscopy for PCCRCs diagnosed 1 to 10 years after an index colonoscopy using a case-control design. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were adjusted for potential confounders.

RESULTS

A proximal polyp ≥10 mm (OR, 8.18; 95% CI, 4.59-14.60), distal polyp ≥10 mm (OR, 3.30; 95% CI, 1.65-6.58), adenoma with (OR, 3.23; 95% CI, 1.83-5.68) and without advanced histology (OR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.37-2.55), and an incomplete colonoscopy (OR, 5.52; 95% CI, 2.98-10.21) were associated with PCCRC. Risk factors for early versus late cancers (12-36 months vs >36 months to 10 years after examination) included incomplete polyp excision in the colonic segment of the subsequent cancer (OR, 4.76; 95% CI, 2.35-9.65); failure to examine the segment (OR, 2.42; 95% CI, 1.27-4.60); and a polyp ≥10 mm in the segment (OR, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.53-3.70). A total of 559 of 1206 patients with PCCRC (46.4%) had 1 or more risk factors that were significant for PCCRC (incomplete examination, large polyp, or any adenoma).

CONCLUSIONS

In a large community-based study with comprehensive capture of PCCRCs, almost half of PCCRCs had potentially modifiable factors related to polyp surveillance or removal and examination completeness. These represent potential high-yield targets to further increase the effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening.

World Endoscopy Organization Consensus Statements on Post-Colonoscopy and Post-Imaging Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Colonoscopy examination does not always detect colorectal cancer (CRC)- some patients develop CRC after negative findings from an examination. When this occurs before the next recommended examination, it is called interval cancer. From a colonoscopy quality assurance perspective, that term is too restrictive, so the term post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC) was created in 2010. However, PCCRC definitions and methods for calculating rates vary among studies, making it impossible to compare results. We aimed to standardize the terminology, identification, analysis, and reporting of PCCRCs and CRCs detected after other whole-colon imaging evaluations (post-imaging colorectal cancers [PICRCs]).

METHODS

A 20-member international team of gastroenterologists, pathologists, and epidemiologists; a radiologist; and a non-medical professional met to formulate a series of recommendations, standardize definitions and categories (to align with interval cancer terminology), develop an algorithm to determine most-plausible etiologies, and develop standardized methodology to calculate rates of PCCRC and PICRC. The team followed the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II tool. A literature review provided 401 articles to support proposed statements; evidence was rated using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system. The statements were voted on anonymously by team members, using a modified Delphi approach.

RESULTS

The team produced 21 statements that provide comprehensive guidance on PCCRCs and PICRCs. The statements present standardized definitions and terms, as well as methods for qualitative review, determination of etiology, calculation of PCCRC rates, and non-colonoscopic imaging of the colon.

CONCLUSIONS

A 20-member international team has provided standardized methods for analysis of etiologies of PCCRCs and PICRCs and defines its use as a quality indicator. The team provides recommendations for clinicians, organizations, researchers, policy makers, and patients.

Serrated neoplasia pathway as an alternative route of colorectal cancer carcinogenesis

In the past two decades, besides conventional adenoma pathway, a subset of colonic lesions, including hyperplastic polyps, sessile serrated adenoma/polyps, and traditional serrated adenomas have been suggested as precancerous lesions via the alternative serrated neoplasia pathway. Major molecular alterations of sessile serrated neoplasia include BRAF mutation, high CpG island methylator phenotype, and escape of cellular senescence and progression via methylation of tumor suppressor genes or mismatch repair genes. With increasing information of the morphologic and molecular features of serrated lesions, one major challenge is how to reflect this knowledge in clinical practice, such as pathologic and endoscopic diagnosis, and guidelines for treatment and surveillance.

Interval colorectal cancer: a challenging field in colorectal cancer

Accumulated evidence has shown that colonoscopy may not be a perfect tool in screening and reducing the incidence of the colorectal cancer (CRC), because interval CRC (I-CRC), a specific subgroup of CRCs, has been challenging the traditional detection technology in recent years. I-CRC is accounting for an increasing proportion in CRCs. However, the effective procedures to prevent and supervise I-CRC need to be explored. In this review, we summarized the incidence, causes, risk factors, characteristics and management of I-CRC. It would promote the awareness of the special value in the education and training for the gastroenterologists, which plays an important role in conquering CRC.

Interval Colorectal Cancer Incidence Among Subjects Undergoing Multiple Rounds of Fecal Immunochemical Testing

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Among subjects screened for colorectal cancer (CRC) by the guaiac fecal occult blood test, interval cancers develop in 48% to 55% of the subjects. Data are limited on how many persons screened by fecal immunochemical tests (FIT), over multiple rounds, develop interval cancers. In the Netherlands, a pilot FIT-based biennial CRC screening program was conducted between 2006 and 2014. We collected and analyzed data from the program on CRCs detected during screening (SD-CRC) and CRCs not detected within the screening program (non-SD-CRC; such as FIT interval cancers, colonoscopy interval cancers, and cancer in nonparticipants).

METHODS

Screenees with a negative FIT result received a letter explaining that no blood had been detected in the stool sample and were re-invited, if eligible, for screening biennially. Screenees with a positive FIT result (hemoglobin concentration of 10 μg Hb/g feces) were invited for consultation and scheduled for colonoscopy; results were collected. After the fourth round of FIT screening, the cohort was linked to the Netherlands Cancer Registry, through March 31, 2015; participant characteristics, data on tumor stage, location (at time of resection), and survival status were collected for all identified CRC cases. A reference group comprised all persons with CRC diagnosed in the Netherlands general population during the same period, in the same age range (50-76 years), who had not been offered CRC screening. The median time between invitations (2.37 years) was used as a cutoff to categorize participants within the FIT interval cancer category. We compared participant characteristics, tumor characteristics, and mortality among subjects with SD-CRC and with non-SD-CRC.

RESULTS

A total of 27,304 eligible individuals were invited for FIT screening, of whom 18,716 (69%) participated at least once. Of these, 3005 (16%) had a positive result from the FIT in 1 of the 4 screening rounds. In total, CRC was detected in 261 participants: 116 SD-CRCs and 145 non-SD-CRCs (27 FIT interval cancers, 9 colonoscopy interval cancers, and 109 CRCs in nonparticipants). The FIT interval cancer proportion after 3 completed screening rounds was 23%. Participants with SD-CRC had more early-stage tumors than participants with non-SD-CRCs (P < .001). Of persons with SD-CRC and FIT interval cancers, significantly higher proportions survived (89% and 81%, respectively) compared with persons with colonoscopy interval cancers (44% survival) and nonparticipants with CRC (60% survival) (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

In an analysis of data from a pilot FIT-based biennial screening program, we found that among persons screened by FIT, 23% developed FIT interval cancer. FIT therefore detects CRC with 77% sensitivity. The proportion of FIT interval cancers in FIT screening appears to be lower than that with guaiac fecal occult blood testing. Clinical trial registry: yes, www.trialregister.nl, trial number: NTR5385.

The incidence of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer: a retrospective long-term cohort study using a colonoscopy database

PURPOSE

The cumulative incidence of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer remains unclear. Our aims were to estimate the incidence of and identify risk factors associated with post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the colonoscopy database of the Department of Gastroenterology, the University of Tokyo Hospital Records from1995-2012. A cohort of 2544 patients, who received multiple colonoscopies without colorectal cancer findings at first colonoscopy, was selected. The primary outcome was post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer; data were censored at the date of final colonoscopy. We assessed patients' background characteristics, colonoscopy findings, and cancer characteristics, including location and size. The cumulative incidence of colorectal cancer was evaluated, and a Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs).

RESULTS

Colorectal cancer was identified in seven (0.77/1000 person-years) patients during the mean follow-up period of 3.6 years (maximum, 17 years). The cumulative incidence of colorectal cancer was 0, 0.47, 0.62, and 0.62% at 1, 5, 10, and 15 years, respectively. Cancer was identified in the rectum in five of seven patients. Polyp size >10 mm (HR 5.7, p = 0.023) and intubation time >30 min (HR 11.6, p = 0.003) at first colonoscopy were associated significantly with an increased incidence of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Although several factors were associated with an increased risk of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer, the incidence of this disease might be low in patients who received at least twice colonoscopy. High proportion of rectal cancer in post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer should be noted.

Metachronous colorectal cancers result from missed lesions and non-compliance with surveillance

BACKGROUND

Several studies examined the rate of colorectal cancer (CRC) developed during colonoscopy surveillance after CRC resection (ie, metachronous CRC [mCRC]), yet the underlying etiology is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the rate and likely etiology of mCRCs.

DESIGN

Population-based, multicenter study. Review of clinical and histopathologic records, including data of the national pathology database and The Netherlands Cancer Registry.

SETTING

National cancer databases reviewed at 3 hospitals in South-Limburg, The Netherlands.

PATIENTS

Total CRC population diagnosed in South-Limburg from January 2001 to December 2010.

INTERVENTIONS

Colonoscopy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

We defined an mCRC as a second primary CRC, diagnosed >6 months after the primary CRC. By using a modified algorithm to ascribe likely etiology, we classified the mCRCs into cancers caused by non-compliance with surveillance recommendations, inadequate examination, incomplete resection of precursor lesions (CRC in same segment as previous advanced adenoma), missed lesions, or newly developed cancers.

RESULTS

We included a total of 5157 patients with CRC, of whom 93 (1.8%) had mCRCs, which were diagnosed on an average of 81 months (range 7-356 months) after the initial CRC diagnosis. Of all mCRCs, 43.0% were attributable to non-compliance with surveillance advice, 43.0% to missed lesions, 5.4% to incompletely resected lesions, 5.4% to newly developed cancers, and 3.2% to inadequate examination. Age-adjusted and sex-adjusted logistic regression analyses showed that mCRCs were significantly smaller in size (odds ratio [OR] 0.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.7-0.9) and more often poorly differentiated (OR 1.7; 95% CI, 1.0-2.8) than were solitary CRCs.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective evaluation of clinical data.

CONCLUSION

In this study, 1.8% of all patients with CRC developed mCRCs, and the vast majority were attributable to missed lesions or non-compliance with surveillance advice. Our findings underscore the importance of high-quality colonoscopy to maximize the benefit of post-CRC surveillance.

Serrated neoplasia-role in colorectal carcinogenesis and clinical implications

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is considered a heterogeneous disease, both regarding pathogenesis and clinical behaviour. Four decades ago, the adenoma-carcinoma pathway was presented as the main pathway towards CRC, a conclusion that was largely based on evidence from observational morphological studies. This concept was later substantiated at the genomic level. Over the past decade, evidence has been generated for alternative routes in which CRC might develop, in particular the serrated neoplasia pathway. Providing indisputable evidence for the neoplastic potential of serrated polyps has been difficult. Reasons include the absence of reliable longitudinal observations on individual serrated lesions that progress to cancer, a shortage of available animal models for serrated lesions and challenging culture conditions when generating organoids of serrated lesions for in vitro studies. However, a growing body of circumstantial evidence has been accumulated, which indicates that ≥15% of CRCs might arise through the serrated neoplasia pathway. An even larger amount of post-colonoscopy colorectal carcinomas (carcinomas occurring within the surveillance interval after a complete colonoscopy) have been suggested to originate from serrated polyps. The aim of this Review is to assess the current status of the serrated neoplasia pathway in CRC and highlight clinical implications.

Second-Look Colonoscopies and the Impact on Capacity in FIT-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening

OBJECTIVES

Fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) and colonoscopy are tandem procedures in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. A positive FIT predicts advanced neoplasia (AN) that requires endoscopic detection and removal. En bloc or piecemeal resection of AN is associated with a significant rate of residual or recurrent neoplasia. Second-look colonoscopies are indicated to assess completeness of removal of AN. These colonoscopies can make a substantial demand on colonoscopy capacity and health-care system. This study is the first to evaluate the demand and risk factors for second-look colonoscopy in FIT CRC screening.

METHODS

All colonoscopies after a positive FIT, in subjects aged 50-74 years approached for 3 rounds of FIT screening, were prospectively registered. Second-look colonoscopies were defined as any colonoscopy within 1 year following a colonoscopy after positive FIT.

RESULTS

Out of 1,215 FIT-positive screenees undergoing colonoscopy, 105 (8.6%) patients underwent a second-look colonoscopy, of whom 30 (2.5%) underwent more than one colonoscopy (range 2-9), leading to a total of 149 (12.3%) additional colonoscopies. Main reasons for second-look colonoscopies were assessment of complete AN removal (41.9%) and need for additional polypectomy (34.3%). Risk factors were advanced adenomas and poor bowel preparation (P<0.001). High fecal hemoglobin concentration was the only predictor of a second-look colonoscopy before index colonoscopy (P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Second-look colonoscopies have substantial impact on colonoscopy resources, increasing the demand with 12%. The main reasons for these second-look colonoscopies were previous incomplete polypectomy and control of completeness of removal of neoplastic lesions. A high fecal hemoglobin concentration as measured by FIT can help to identify patients at risk of a second-look colonoscopy.

Activation of intestinal human pregnane X receptor protects against azoxymethane/dextran sulfate sodium-induced colon cancer

The role of intestinal human pregnane X receptor (PXR) in colon cancer was determined through investigation of the chemopreventive role of rifaximin, a specific agonist of intestinal human PXR, toward azoxymethane (AOM)/dextran sulfate sodium (DSS)-induced colon cancer. Rifaximin treatment significantly decreased the number of colon tumors induced by AOM/DSS treatment in PXR-humanized mice, but not wild-type or Pxr-null mice. Additionally, rifaximin treatment markedly increased the survival rate of PXR-humanized mice, but not wild-type or Pxr-null mice. These data indicated a human PXR-dependent therapeutic chemoprevention of rifaximin toward AOM/DSS-induced colon cancer. Nuclear factor κ-light-chain-enhancer of activated B cells-mediated inflammatory signaling was upregulated in AOM/DSS-treated mice, and inhibited by rifaximin in PXR-humanized mice. Cell proliferation and apoptosis were also modulated by rifaximin treatment in the AOM/DSS model. In vitro cell-based assays further revealed that rifaximin regulated cell apoptosis and cell cycle in a human PXR-dependent manner. These results suggested that specific activation of intestinal human PXR exhibited a chemopreventive role toward AOM/DSS-induced colon cancer by mediating anti-inflammation, antiproliferation, and proapoptotic events.

[Incidental findings in gastroscopy and colonoscopy]

For many specific and nonspecific gastrointestinal symptoms, endoscopic diagnostic procedures play an important role. Gastroscopy and colonoscopy are easily available diagnostic and interventional procedures with low risk. The technical development of gastrointestinal endoscopy has led to an improvement in diagnostics and therapy. In addition to frequent and expected findings, incidental findings may occur. The incidental findings can distinguish rare diseases of unexpected diagnoses. Rare diagnoses usually require an individualized therapy. Unexpected diagnoses can take place during (not properly detected) or after an endoscopy (overlooked or newly appeared) occur. This overview deals with the question of how to minimize unexpected diagnoses and how to diagnose and treat incidental findings.