Identification of patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer in an open access endoscopy center

Patients with breast cancer may be at higher risk of colorectal neoplasia

Background

The risk of colorectal neoplasia in breast cancer survivors is unclear. This study aimed to determine the colonic adenoma detection rate (ADR) in patients with breast cancer.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study of patients with breast cancer who underwent a colonoscopy between 2000 and 2017. A control group (n=3295), comprising cancer-free patients undergoing their first screening colonoscopy, was used for comparison.

Results

Of 62,820 breast cancer patients, 3304 met the inclusion criteria. The mean age at the time of first colonoscopy was 59 years. ADR was 55%; 1803 patients had adenomas. High-grade dysplasia was evident in 28% of polyps and invasive adenocarcinoma was detected in 172 patients (5%). The median time from breast cancer diagnosis to adenoma detection was 3 years. The ADR was 21% in patients aged <40 years (n=63) and 39% in patients aged 40-50 years (n=314). The ADR was 26% in patients <50 years with a body mass index (BMI) lower than 30 kg/m² or no family history of colorectal cancer. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the following independent factors were associated with a greater risk of colon adenoma: older age, higher BMI, family history of colorectal cancer, and personal history of breast cancer.

Conclusions

In patients with breast cancer, the ADR was higher than the reported rates for the general population. Screening colonoscopy should be considered soon after breast cancer diagnosis in patients <50 years of age. Further prospective studies investigating our findings are warranted.

Open-Access Single Balloon Enteroscopy: A Tertiary Care Experience

OBJECTIVES

To compare single balloon enteroscopy (SBE) between patients seen in consultation by a member of our gastroenterology team with those performed as open-access cases.

METHODS

Retrospective study of all patients who underwent SBE at a single tertiary care center from April 2008 to January 2012. Open- and closed-access procedures were compared in terms of diagnostic and therapeutic yield, adverse events, and procedural success.

RESULTS

A total of 125 SBEs were performed on 125 patients. The mean age was 63.1 (53% men) years. In all, 43 procedures were performed open access and 82 after face-to-face consultation. Indications included anemia/gastrointestinal bleeding (110), abdominal pain (8), and other (7). Diagnostic yield for open- and closed-access procedures was 53% and 60%, respectively (P = 0.501) and therapeutic yield was 37% and 52%, respectively (P = 0.11). Overall technical success was 91% with no difference between the groups (P = 0.27). There were no major adverse events in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

SBE can be performed as an open-access procedure without compromise to safety or diagnostic yield.

Practical opportunities to improve early detection and prevention of colorectal cancer (CRC) in members of high-risk families

Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality are steadily declining and CRC screening rates are increasing in the United States. Although this a very good news, several definable groups still have very low screening rates including younger (under age 50) members of high-risk CRC families. This opinion piece describes five strategies that could be incorporated into routine practice to improve identification and guideline-based screening in members of high-risk families. Routine incorporation of a simple family history screening tool and outreach to high-risk family members could substantially improve guideline-based screening in this population. Identification of CRCs and advanced adenomas in the endoscopy suite defines another group of high-risk families for similar outreach. Lynch syndrome families can be identified by testing CRCs and selected adenomas for microsatellite instability or loss of DNA repair protein expression. Finally, selective addition of aspirin to surveillance endoscopy can decrease the risk of new adenomas and CRCs. The rationale for these strategies as well as mechanisms for their implementation and evaluation in clinical practice is described.

Screening for Familial Colorectal Cancer Risk amongst Colonoscopy Patients New to an Open-Access Endoscopy Center

Purpose. We evaluated a questionnaire to aid in the recognition of CRC risk, as well as patient interest in their risk status within an open-access endoscopy center. Methods. A questionnaire was administered to new patients presenting for colonoscopy from May 2007 to February 2008. 287 patients were enrolled. Family history was evaluated using Amsterdam 1, II, and Revised Bethesda criteria. Recognition of risk and referral for counseling was assessed. Patients' interest to be contacted by a genetic counselor was also assessed. Results. 13.2 % (38/287) of patients met Revised Bethesda criteria. Of these, 18 (47.4 %) were previously told about their increased risk for CRC. Only 1 patient who met Revised Bethesda criteria (2.6 %) was previously referred for genetics, whereas none of the 3 patients who met Amsterdam I or II criteria were referred. 23.7 % of high-risk patients did not want to be contacted if found to be at increased risk for cancer. Conclusion. In our open-access endoscopy system, a significant number of high-risk patients remain unidentified and underreferred for genetic counseling due to numerous barriers. Our findings lend support to taking a public health approach to identifying those at risk for Lynch syndrome by implementing universal screening of all CRC specimens.

Who is being referred to cancer genetic counseling? Characteristics of counselees and their referral

Both physician and patient play a role in the referral process for cancer genetic counseling. Access to such counseling is not optimal because some eligible patients are not being reached by current referral practice. We aimed to identify factors associated with the initiator of referral. During a 7-month period, we recorded demographic characteristics like gender, personal and family history of cancer, ethnicity and eligibility for genetic testing for 406 consecutive counselees using a specially designed questionnaire. Counselees were seen in a university hospital or a community hospital (n = 7) in the Netherlands. We also recorded educational level of each counselee, clinical setting and who initiated referral. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the counselees' general characteristics. We analysed the association between counselee characteristics and the initiator of referral by logistic regression. The majority of counselees seemed to have initiated referral themselves but were indeed eligible for genetic testing. In comparison to the general population in the Netherlands, the counselees had a higher level of education, and there were fewer immigrants, although a higher level of education was not found to be a facilitating factor for referral. The clinical setting where a counselee was seen was associated with initiator of referral, although this relationship was not straightforward. There is a complex interaction between clinical setting and initiator of referral, which warrants further research to elucidate the factors involved in this relationship. Patients seen in cancer genetic counseling do not reflect the general population in terms of educational level or ethnicity.

Building a tool to identify risk for Lynch syndrome among individuals presenting for screening colonoscopy

The goal of this work was to build and pilot-test a user-friendly Lynch syndrome risk assessment tool among individuals presenting for routine screening colonoscopy. Participants included adults presenting to a private practice-based, open-access endoscopy unit. Working with health literacy experts and gastroenterologists, and based on established criteria, we developed a simplified tool to assess Lynch syndrome risk, pre-procedure. A pilot-test of the tool assessed its: 1) clinical utility; 2) patient-reported usability; and 3) feasibility. The tool, in paper format, was written at a 9th grade reading level and included instructions for use followed by seven Lynch syndrome risk-related questions, structured such that one "Yes" response signified potential risk. A pilot-test of the tool among 334 patients revealed that 29 met criteria for Lynch syndrome risk. Of these, following telephone review of their responses, risk was confirmed in 9 patients (3% of total). The tool was reported as easy-to-use and was seen as feasible for use. Limitations include: 1) the need for infrastructure to distribute and collect the tool and 2) the availability of knowledgeable staff to review tool responses, confirm risk, and facilitate appropriate referral for genetic counseling. These data suggest that the tool affects assessment of Lynch syndrome risk among the routine colon cancer screening population.