Although colonoscopy is widely used as a screening test to detect colorectal cancer, its effect on the risks of colorectal cancer and related death is unclear.
We performed a pragmatic, randomized ...trial involving presumptively healthy men and women 55 to 64 years of age drawn from population registries in Poland, Norway, Sweden, and the Netherlands between 2009 and 2014. The participants were randomly assigned in a 1:2 ratio either to receive an invitation to undergo a single screening colonoscopy (the invited group) or to receive no invitation or screening (the usual-care group). The primary end points were the risks of colorectal cancer and related death, and the secondary end point was death from any cause.
Follow-up data were available for 84,585 participants in Poland, Norway, and Sweden - 28,220 in the invited group, 11,843 of whom (42.0%) underwent screening, and 56,365 in the usual-care group. A total of 15 participants had major bleeding after polyp removal. No perforations or screening-related deaths occurred within 30 days after colonoscopy. During a median follow-up of 10 years, 259 cases of colorectal cancer were diagnosed in the invited group as compared with 622 cases in the usual-care group. In intention-to-screen analyses, the risk of colorectal cancer at 10 years was 0.98% in the invited group and 1.20% in the usual-care group, a risk reduction of 18% (risk ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval CI, 0.70 to 0.93). The risk of death from colorectal cancer was 0.28% in the invited group and 0.31% in the usual-care group (risk ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.64 to 1.16). The number needed to invite to undergo screening to prevent one case of colorectal cancer was 455 (95% CI, 270 to 1429). The risk of death from any cause was 11.03% in the invited group and 11.04% in the usual-care group (risk ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.04).
In this randomized trial, the risk of colorectal cancer at 10 years was lower among participants who were invited to undergo screening colonoscopy than among those who were assigned to no screening. (Funded by the Research Council of Norway and others; NordICC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00883792.).
This Guideline is an official statement of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE). It addresses the choice amongst regimens available for cleansing the colon in preparation for ...colonoscopy.
This Guideline is based on a targeted literature search to evaluate the evidence supporting the use of bowel preparation for colonoscopy. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system was adopted to define the strength of recommendation and the quality of evidence.
The main recommendations are as follows. (1) The ESGE recommends a low-fiber diet on the day preceding colonoscopy (weak recommendation, moderate quality evidence). (2) The ESGE recommends a split regimen of 4 L of polyethylene glycol (PEG) solution (or a same-day regimen in the case of afternoon colonoscopy) for routine bowel preparation. A split regimen (or same-day regimen in the case of afternoon colonoscopy) of 2 L PEG plus ascorbate or of sodium picosulphate plus magnesium citrate may be valid alternatives, in particular for elective outpatient colonoscopy (strong recommendation, high quality evidence). In patients with renal failure, PEG is the only recommended bowel preparation. The delay between the last dose of bowel preparation and colonoscopy should be minimized and no longer than 4 hours (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). (3) The ESGE advises against the routine use of sodium phosphate for bowel preparation because of safety concerns (strong recommendation, low quality evidence).
While colonoscopy screening is widely used in several European countries and the United States, there are no randomized trials to quantify its benefits. The Nordic-European Initiative on Colorectal ...Cancer (NordICC) is a multinational, randomized controlled trial aiming at investigating the effect of colonoscopy screening on colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality. This paper describes the rationale and design of the NordICC trial.
Men and women aged 55 to 64 years are drawn from the population registries in the participating countries and randomly assigned to either once-only colonoscopy screening with removal of all detected lesions, or no screening (standard of care in the trial regions). All individuals are followed for 15 years after inclusion using dedicated national registries. The primary end points of the trial are cumulative CRC-specific death and CRC incidence during 15 years of follow-up. POWER ANALYSIS: We hypothesize a 50 % CRC mortality-reducing efficacy of the colonoscopy intervention and predict 50 % compliance, yielding a 25 % mortality reduction among those invited to screening. For 90 % power and a two-sided alpha level of 0.05, using a 2:1 randomization, 45 600 individuals will be randomized to control, and 22 800 individuals to the colonoscopy group. Interim analyses of the effect of colonoscopy on CRC incidence and mortality will be performed at 10-year follow-up.
The aim of the NordICC trial is to quantify the effectiveness of population-based colonoscopy screening. This will allow development of evidence-based guidelines for CRC screening in the general population.
The role of serrated polyps (SPs) as colorectal cancer precursor is increasingly recognised. However, the true prevalence SPs is largely unknown. We aimed to evaluate the detection rate of SPs ...subtypes as well as serrated polyposis syndrome (SPS) among European screening cohorts.
Prospectively collected screening cohorts of ≥1000 individuals were eligible for inclusion. Colonoscopies performed before 2009 and/or in individuals aged below 50 were excluded. Rate of SPs was assessed, categorised for histology, location and size. Age-sex-standardised number needed to screen (NNS) to detect SPs were calculated. Rate of SPS was assessed in cohorts with known colonoscopy follow-up data. Clinically relevant SPs (regarded as a separate entity) were defined as SPs ≥10 mm and/or SPs >5 mm in the proximal colon.
Three faecal occult blood test (FOBT) screening cohorts and two primary colonoscopy screening cohorts (range 1.426-205.949 individuals) were included. Rate of SPs ranged between 15.1% and 27.2% (median 19.5%), of sessile serrated polyps between 2.2% and 4.8% (median 3.3%) and of clinically relevant SPs between 2.1% and 7.8% (median 4.6%). Rate of SPs was similar in FOBT-based cohorts as in colonoscopy screening cohorts. No apparent association between the rate of SP and gender or age was shown. Rate of SPS ranged from 0% to 0.5%, which increased to 0.4% to 0.8% after follow-up colonoscopy.
The detection rate of SPs is variable among screening cohorts, and standards for reporting, detection and histopathological assessment should be established. The median rate, as found in this study, may contribute to define uniform minimum standards for males and females between 50 and 75 years of age.
Adenoma detection rate and risk of colorectal cancer Wieszczy, P.; Regula, J.; Kaminski, M.F.
Baillière's best practice & research. Clinical gastroenterology,
August 2017, 2017-Aug, 2017-08-00, 20170801, Letnik:
31, Številka:
4
Journal Article
Recenzirano
The aim of this paper was to discuss association between adenoma detection rate (ADR) and interval colorectal cancer risk.
Adenoma detection rate is being used as a benchmark quality measure for ...colonoscopy. There are three studies showing inverse association between ADR and interval colorectal cancer risk. One recent study reports significant impact of increased ADR on decreasing interval colorectal cancer risk.
We discussed evidence for using ADR as a quality measures in colonoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy. We revised three studies (Kaminski et al., N Engl J Med 2010; Corley et al., N Engl J Med 2014 and Rogal et al., Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2013) analyzing association between ADR and interval colorectal cancer. We collated strengths and weaknesses of these studies with the perspective of clinical impact of their results.
Kaminski et al. and Corley et al. reported inverse association between ADR at colonoscopy and interval colorectal cancer. Kaminski et al. showed that patients examined by endoscopists with ADR of less than 20% had over 10 times greater risk of interval colorectal cancer during the follow-up time than those examined by endoscopists with ADR ≥20%. Additionally, Corley et al. showed that ADR ≥28% resulted in a significantly lower risk of colorectal cancer death than ADR of less than 19%. In parallel, Rogal et al. reported similar association for flexible sigmoidoscopy, with 2.4 higher odds of interval colorectal cancer diagnosis during follow-up time in patients examined by endoscopists with distal ADR <7.2% than those with distal ADR ≥7.2%.
Apart from inevitable clinical importance of the studies, they are not without disadvantages. In Kaminski et al. study cohort and study endpoint are well defined, but there is lack of statistical power to provide more robust results. In Rogal et al. study cohort is well defined, but approximation of the study endpoint was used. Finally, Corley et al. study has both poorly defined study cohort and study endpoint, but has the highest statistical power of all three to detect the differences for both interval colorectal cancer and colorectal cancer death.
Both, inverse relationship between ADR and ADR improvement and colorectal cancer risk and death reaffirm ADR as a crucial quality control parameter.
Abstract Currently curative treatment for esophageal squamous cell cancer (ESCC) is possible only in patients with early-stage, usually asymptomatic disease. In Western countries, where the incidence ...of ESCC is relatively low, a screening of asymptomatic, average-risk population is untenable. In order to detect early-stage ESCC or its precursor lesions it is important to identify high-risk patients and consider endoscopic surveillance in these groups. These high-risk groups include patients after curative treatment for head and neck cancer, previous endoscopic resection of ESCC, caustic injury, and patients with tylosis or achalasia. This paper discuss the evidence and proposed method of endoscopy surveillance of these high-risk patients.
The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and United European Gastroenterology present a short list of key performance measures for lower gastrointestinal endoscopy. We recommend that ...endoscopy services across Europe adopt the following seven key performance measures for lower gastrointestinal endoscopy for measurement and evaluation in daily practice at a center and endoscopist level:
Rate of adequate bowel preparation (minimum standard 90 %);
Cecal intubation rate (minimum standard 90 %);
Adenoma detection rate (minimum standard 25 %);
Appropriate polypectomy technique (minimum standard 80 %);
Complication rate (minimum standard not set);
Patient experience (minimum standard not set);
Appropriate post-polypectomy surveillance recommendations (minimum standard not set). Other identified performance measures have been listed as less relevant based on an assessment of their importance, scientific acceptability, feasibility, usability, and comparison to competing measures.
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).
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.
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.
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.
Mutations in the gene encoding ATP-binding cassette transporter 1 ( ABC1) have been reported in Tangier disease (TD), an autosomal recessive disorder that is characterized by almost complete absence ...of plasma high-density lipoprotein (HDL), deposition of cholesteryl esters in the reticulo-endothelial system (RES) and aberrant cellular lipid trafficking. We demonstrate here that mice with a targeted inactivation of Abc1 display morphologic abnormalities and perturbations in their lipoprotein metabolism concordant with TD. ABC1 is expressed on the plasma membrane and the Golgi complex, mediates apo-AI associated export of cholesterol and phospholipids from the cell, and is regulated by cholesterol flux. Structural and functional abnormalities in caveolar processing and the trans-Golgi secretory pathway of cells lacking functional ABC1 indicate that lipid export processes involving vesicular budding between the Golgi and the plasma membrane are severely disturbed.
Adults with end-stage renal disease are at increased risk of foot ulceration and lower extremity amputation. However, the central determinants of lower limb injury and loss are incompletely ...understood.
We conducted a systematic review of non-randomized studies that quantified the major risk factors for foot ulceration and amputation in adults treated with dialysis and analysed patient populations in which risks were greatest. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to generate summary estimates.
Thirty studies (48 566 participants) were identified. Risk factors for foot ulceration and amputation included previous foot ulceration (odds ratios, OR, 17.56 and 70.13), peripheral arterial disease (OR, 7.52 and 9.12), diabetes (OR, 3.76 and 7.48), peripheral neuropathy (OR, 3.24 and 3.36) and coronary artery disease (OR, 3.92 and 2.49). Participants with foot ulceration or amputation had experienced a longer duration of diabetes (mean difference, MD, 4.04 and 6.07 years) and had lower serum albumin levels (MD, -0.23 and -0.13 g/dL). Risk factors for foot ulceration also included retinopathy (OR, 3.03), previous amputation (OR, 15.50) and higher serum phosphorus levels (MD, 0.40 mg/dL), while risk factors for amputation also included male sex (OR, 1.50), current smoking (OR, 2.26) and higher glycated haemoglobin levels (MD, 0.75%).
Dialysis patients who have markedly higher risks of ulceration or amputation include those with previous foot ulceration or amputation, peripheral neuropathy, diabetes or macrovascular disease. The temporal relationship between these risk factors and the development of foot ulceration and/or limb loss is uncertain and requires further study. Stable estimates of the key risk factors for ulceration and amputation can inform the design of future trials investigating clinical interventions to reduce the burden of lower limb disease in the dialysis population.
PDF
