Prevalence and Predictors of Young-Onset Colorectal Neoplasia: Insights From a Nationally Representative Colonoscopy Registry

Diagnostic yield from symptomatic lower gastrointestinal endoscopy in the UK: A British Society of Gastroenterology analysis using data from the National Endoscopy Database

BACKGROUND

The value of lower gastrointestinal endoscopy (LGIE; colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy) relates to its ability to detect clinically relevant findings, predominantly cancers, preneoplastic polyps or inflammatory bowel disease. There are concerns that many LGIEs are performed on low-risk patients with limited benefit.

AIMS

To determine the diagnostic outcomes of LGIE for common symptoms.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional study of diagnostic LGIE between March 2019 and February 2020 using the UK National Endoscopy Database. We used mixed-effects logistic regression models, incorporating random (endoscopist) and fixed (symptoms, patient age, and sex) effects upon two dependent variables (large polyp [≥10 mm] and cancer diagnosis). Adjusted positive predictive values (aPPVs) were calculated.

RESULTS

We analysed 384,510 LGIEs; 33.2% were performed on patients aged under 50 and 53.6% on women. Regarding colonoscopies, the unadjusted PPV for cancer was 1.5% (95% CI: 1.4-1.5); higher for men than women (1.9% vs. 1.1%, p < 0.01). The PPV for large polyps was 3.2% (95% CI: 3.1-3.2). The highest colonoscopy cancer aPPVs were in the over 50s (1.9%) and in those with rectal bleeding (2.5%) or anaemia (2.1%). Cancer aPPVs for other symptoms were <1% despite representing 54.3% of activity. In patients under 50, aPPVs were 0.4% for cancer and 1.6% for large polyps. Results were similar for sigmoidoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

Most colonoscopies were performed on patients with low-risk symptoms, where cancer risk was similar to the general population. Cancer and large polyp yield was highest in elderly patients with rectal bleeding or anaemia, although still fell short of FIT-based screening yields.

Follow-Up Colonoscopy for Detection of Missed Colorectal Cancer After Diverticulitis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Colonoscopy often is recommended after an episode of diverticulitis to exclude missed colorectal cancer (CRC). This is a controversial recommendation based on limited evidence. We estimated the prevalence and odds of CRC and advanced colorectal neoplasia on colonoscopy in patients with diverticulitis compared with CRC screening.

METHODS

Using data from the Gastrointestinal Quality Improvement Consortium registry, we performed a cross-sectional study with patients ≥40 years old undergoing outpatient colonoscopy for an indication of diverticulitis follow-up evaluation or CRC screening. The primary outcome was CRC. The secondary outcome was advanced colorectal neoplasia. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs were calculated.

RESULTS

We identified 4,591,921 outpatient colonoscopies performed for screening and 91,993 colonoscopies for diverticulitis follow-up evaluation. CRC prevalence was 0.33% in colonoscopies for screening and 0.31% in colonoscopies for diverticulitis. Compared with screening, patients with diverticulitis were less likely to have CRC (adjusted OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.74-0.94). CRC prevalence decreased to 0.17% in colonoscopies performed for diverticulitis only. Compared with screening, patients with diverticulitis as the only indication were less likely to have CRC (adjusted OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.36-0.68). CRC prevalence increased to 1.43% in patients with complicated diverticulitis. Compared with screening, patients with complicated diverticulitis were more likely to have CRC (adjusted OR, 3.57; 95% CI, 1.59-8.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of CRC cancer is low in most patients with diverticulitis. Patients with complicated diverticulitis are the exception. Our results suggest that colonoscopy to detect missed CRC should include diverticulitis patients with a complication and those not current with CRC screening.

Pediatric endoscopy: how can we improve patient outcomes and ensure best practices?

INTRODUCTION

Strategies to promote high-quality endoscopy in children require consensus around pediatric-specific quality standards and indicators. Using a rigorous guideline development process, the international Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network (PEnQuIN) was developed to support continuous quality improvement efforts within and across pediatric endoscopy services.

AREAS COVERED

This review presents a framework, informed by the PEnQuIN guidelines, for assessing endoscopist competence, granting procedural privileges, audit and feedback, and for skill remediation, when required. As is critical for promoting quality, PEnQuIN indicators can be benchmarked at the individual endoscopist, endoscopy facility, and endoscopy community levels. Furthermore, efforts to incorporate technologies, including electronic medical records and artificial intelligence, into endoscopic quality improvement processes can aid in creation of large-scale networks to facilitate comparison and standardization of quality indicator reporting across sites.

EXPERT OPINION

PEnQuIN quality standards and indicators provide a framework for continuous quality improvement in pediatric endoscopy, benefiting individual endoscopists, endoscopy facilities, and the broader endoscopy community. Routine and reliable measurement of data, facilitated by technology, is required to identify and drive improvements in care. Engaging all stakeholders in endoscopy quality improvement processes is crucial to enhancing patient outcomes and establishing best practices for safe, efficient, and effective pediatric endoscopic care.

Field Synopsis of Environmental and Genetic Risk Factors of Sporadic Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer and Advanced Adenoma

BACKGROUND

To systematically appraise and synthesize available epidemiologic evidence on the associations of environmental and genetic factors with the risk of sporadic early-onset colorectal cancer (EOCRC) and early-onset advanced colorectal adenoma (EOCRA).

METHODS

Multiple databases were comprehensively searched to identify eligible observational studies. Genotype data from UK Biobank were incorporated to examine their associations with EOCRC in a nested case-control design. Meta-analyses of environmental risk factors were performed, and the strength of evidence was graded based on predefined criteria. Meta-analyses of genetic associations were conducted using the allelic, recessive, and dominant models, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 61 studies were included, reporting 120 environmental factors and 62 genetic variants. We found 12 risk factors (current overweight, overweight in adolescence, high waist circumference, smoking, alcohol, sugary beverages intake, sedentary behavior, red meat intake, family history of colorectal cancer, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and metabolic syndrome) and three protective factors (vitamin D, folate, and calcium intake) for EOCRC or EOCRA. No significant associations between the examined genetic variants and EOCRC risk were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Recent data indicate that the changing patterns of traditional colorectal cancer risk factors may explain the rising incidence of EOCRC. However, research on novel risk factors for EOCRC is limited; therefore, we cannot rule out the possibility of EOCRC having different risk factors than late-onset colorectal cancer (LOCRC).

IMPACT

The potential for the identified risk factors to enhance the identification of at-risk groups for personalized EOCRC screening and prevention and for the prediction of EOCRC risk should be comprehensively addressed by future studies.

Delphi Initiative for Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer (DIRECt) International Management Guidelines

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Patients with early-onset colorectal cancer (eoCRC) are managed according to guidelines that are not age-specific. A multidisciplinary international group (DIRECt), composed of 69 experts, was convened to develop the first evidence-based consensus recommendations for eoCRC.

METHODS

After reviewing the published literature, a Delphi methodology was used to draft and respond to clinically relevant questions. Each statement underwent 3 rounds of voting and reached a consensus level of agreement of ≥80%.

RESULTS

The DIRECt group produced 31 statements in 7 areas of interest: diagnosis, risk factors, genetics, pathology-oncology, endoscopy, therapy, and supportive care. There was strong consensus that all individuals younger than 50 should undergo CRC risk stratification and prompt symptom assessment. All newly diagnosed eoCRC patients should receive germline genetic testing, ideally before surgery. On the basis of current evidence, endoscopic, surgical, and oncologic treatment of eoCRC should not differ from later-onset CRC, except for individuals with pathogenic or likely pathogenic germline variants. The evidence on chemotherapy is not sufficient to recommend changes to established therapeutic protocols. Fertility preservation and sexual health are important to address in eoCRC survivors. The DIRECt group highlighted areas with knowledge gaps that should be prioritized in future research efforts, including age at first screening for the general population, use of fecal immunochemical tests, chemotherapy, endoscopic therapy, and post-treatment surveillance for eoCRC patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The DIRECt group produced the first consensus recommendations on eoCRC. All statements should be considered together with the accompanying comments and literature reviews. We highlighted areas where research should be prioritized. These guidelines represent a useful tool for clinicians caring for patients with eoCRC.

Risk and preventive factors of early-onset colorectal neoplasms: endoscopic and histological database analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The incidence of early-onset colorectal neoplasms has been increasing in both Western and Eastern countries. However, the risks and preventive factors for these neoplasms in Eastern countries remain unclear.

METHODS

The data of 5580 patients who underwent colonoscopy between 2016 and 2021 were retrospectively evaluated. The primary outcome was advanced colorectal neoplasm (ACRN), defined as advanced adenomas (adenoma ≥10 mm, or with high-grade dysplasia or villous component) or adenocarcinoma. The clinical factors associated with ACRNs were determined for each age category (≤50 and >50 years), and the differences between the two categories were assessed. Odds ratios adjusted for age and sex were calculated.

RESULTS

Among 1001 patients (age ≤50 years), ACRN was found in 94 (9.4%). In this younger category, male sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]:2.34, 95% confidence interval [CI]:1.51-3.63) and a family history of colorectal cancer (aOR:2.14, 95% CI:1.17-3.89) were significantly associated with higher odds of developing ACRNs. ACRNs were detected in 726 (15.9%) of 4579 patients (age >50 years). In the older age category, smoking (aOR:1.32, 95% CI:1.08-1.63) was significantly associated with a higher risk of ACRNs. Exercise of >3.5 metabolic equivalent of task (METs) (aOR,0.80; 95% CI:0.67-0.96) was significantly associated with a lower risk of ACRNs.

CONCLUSION

The development of early-onset ACRNs was primarily associated with congenital factors, whereas that of late-onset ACRNs was associated with acquired ones. Colonoscopy is recommended for young male patients, particularly for those with a family history of colorectal cancer.

Adenoma and Sessile Serrated Lesion Detection Rates at Screening Colonoscopy for Ages 45-49 Years vs Older Ages Since the Introduction of New Colorectal Cancer Screening Guidelines

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

All major U.S. guidelines now endorse average-risk colorectal cancer (CRC) screening at 45-49 years of age. Concerns exist that endoscopic capacity may be strained, that low-risk persons may self-select for screening, and that calculations of the adenoma detection rate may be diluted. We analyzed age-specific screening colonoscopy volumes and lesion detection rates before vs after the endorsement of CRC screening at 45-49 years of age.

METHODS

We compared colonoscopy volumes and lesion detection rates in our healthcare system during period 1 (October 2017 to December 2018), before the first change in guidelines, vs period 2 (January 2019 to August 2021), the era of new guidelines.

RESULTS

The proportion of first-time screening colonoscopies performed in 45- to 49-year-olds increased from 3.5% to 11.6% (relative risk, 3.36; 95% CI, 2.45-4.61). The period 2 detection rates for adenoma, advanced adenoma, sessile serrated lesion, advanced sessile serrated lesion, adenomas per colonoscopy, and lesions per colonoscopy were very similar for 45- to 49-year-olds (34.3%, 6.3%, 8.6%, 2.9%, 0.58, and 0.69, respectively) and 50- to 54-year-olds (38.2%, 5.8%, 9.4%, 3.0%, 0.63, and 0.76, respectively) at first-time screening, and for 60- to 64-year-olds at rescreening (33.4%, 6.1%, 7.2%, 2.3%, 0.61, and 0.70, respectively). All detection rates, adenomas per colonoscopy, and lesions per colonoscopy increased from period 1 to period 2 (eg, overall adenoma detection rate 35.1% vs 42.6%; P < .0001), without any decreases among 45- to 49-year-olds.

CONCLUSIONS

In our healthcare system, a lower CRC screening initiation age has modestly affected colonoscopy volume by age without compromising screening yield. Lesion detection rates, including for advanced adenomas, in average-risk 45- to 49-year-olds approximate those in 50- to 54-year-olds at first-time screening and 60- to 64-year-olds at rescreening. National monitoring is needed to assess fully the impact of lowering the CRC screening initiation age.

Age-Stratified Prevalence and Predictors of Neoplasia Among U.S. Adults Undergoing Screening Colonoscopy in a National Endoscopy Registry

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Several U.S. organizations now recommend starting average-risk colorectal cancer screening at age 45 years, but the prevalence of colonic neoplasia in individuals younger than 50 years has not been well characterized. We used a national endoscopic registry to calculate age-stratified prevalence and predictors of colorectal neoplasia.

METHODS

Outpatient screening colonoscopies performed during 2010-2020 in the GI Quality Improvement Consortium registry were analyzed. We measured the prevalence of advanced neoplasia and adenomas by age, sex, and race/ethnicity, as well as the prevalence ratio of neoplasia compared with the reference group of 50- to 54-year-olds. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify predictors of neoplasia.

RESULTS

We identified 3,928,727 screening colonoscopies, of which 129,736 (3.3%) were performed on average-risk individuals younger than 50 years. The prevalence of advanced neoplasia was 6.2% for 50- to 54-year-olds and 5.0% (prevalence ratio, 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-0.83) for average-risk 45- to 49-year-olds. Men had higher prevalence of neoplasia than women for all age groups. White individuals had higher prevalence of advanced neoplasia than persons of other racial/ethnic groups in most age groups, which was partially driven by serrated lesions. On multivariable regression, White individuals had higher odds of advanced neoplasia than Black, Hispanic, and Asian individuals in both younger and older age groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In a large U.S. endoscopy registry, the prevalence of advanced neoplasia in 45- to 49-year-olds was substantial and supports beginning screening at age 45 years. White individuals had higher risk of advanced neoplasia than Black, Hispanic, and Asian individuals across the age spectrum. These findings may inform adenoma detection benchmarks and risk-based screening strategies.

Nomogram Predicting the Survival of Young-Onset Patients with Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases

Background: Although the global prevalence of colorectal cancer (CRC) is decreasing, there has been an increase in incidence among young-onset individuals, in whom the disease is associated with specific pathological characteristics, liver metastases, and a poor prognosis. Methods: From 2010 to 2016, 1874 young-onset patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database were randomly allocated to training and validation cohorts. Multivariate Cox analysis was used to identify independent prognostic variables, and a nomogram was created to predict cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, C-index, area under the curve (AUC), and calibration curve analyses were used to determine nomogram accuracy and reliability. Results: Factors independently associated with young-onset CRLM CSS included primary tumor location, the degree of differentiation, histology, M stage, N stage, preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen level, and surgery (all p < 0.05). The C-indices of the CSS nomogram for the training and validation sets (compared to TNM stage) were 0.709 and 0.635, and 0.735 and 0.663, respectively. The AUC values for 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS were 0.707, 0.708, and 0.755 in the training cohort and 0.765, 0.735, and 0.737 in the validation cohort, respectively; therefore, the nomogram had high sensitivity, and was superior to TNM staging. The calibration curves for the training and validation sets were relatively consistent. In addition, a similar result was observed with OS. Conclusions: We developed a unique nomogram incorporating clinical and pathological characteristics to predict the survival of young-onset patients with CRLM. This may serve as an early warning system allowing doctors to devise more effective treatment regimens.

Risk of Colorectal Cancer in Patients With Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis of Population-Based Observational Studies

Background and Aims

Evidence on the association between irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and colorectal cancer (CRC) risk is inconsistent. Therefore, we aimed to examine whether IBS leads to an increased risk for CRC using a systematic review and meta-analysis approach.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were systematically searched to identify all relevant literature published through July 30, 2021. The pooled risk ratios (RRs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for CRC after diagnosis of IBS were computed using random-and fixed-effects models and stratified by age, follow-up time, gender, and study design. The quality of included studies was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.

Results

We included six studies consisting of 1,085,024 participants. Overall, the risk of detecting CRC after the initial IBS diagnosis was significantly higher than non-IBS controls (RR = 1.52, 95% CI: 1.04-2.22, P = 0.032). The peak of elevated risk occurred within the first year of IBS diagnosis (RR = 6.84, 95% CI: 3.70-12.65, P < 0.001), and after 1 year, the risk of CRC was similar to that of the general population (RR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.88-1.18, P = 0.813). Notably, we found that the RR of CRC was more significant in IBS patients younger than 50 years compared to those older than 50 years (RR = 2.03, 95% CI: 1.17-3.53, P = 0.012 vs. 1.28, 95%CI: 0.94-1.75, P = 0.118, respectively). Gender and study design did not affect the results.

Conclusion

The risk of CRC within one year of the initial IBS diagnosis was increased approximately six-fold, whereas the long-term risk was not increased. However, current evidence does not support that IBS leads to an increased incidence of CRC, and the early excess risk is more likely attributable to misclassification resulting from overlapping symptoms rather than causation. Clinicians must remain vigilant for the CRC risk in patients younger than 50 years with IBS-like symptoms to avoid delaying necessary screening.

Tumor redox microenvironment modulating composite hydrogels for enhanced sonodynamic therapy of colorectal cancer

Effective treatment of colorectal cancer is important to improve the quality of life for patients, which however remains a great challenge in the clinic. Herein, we report the construction of...