BACKGROUND: Individuals with first degree relatives affected with colorectal cancer (CRC) at a young age, or more than one relative affected but who do not fulfil the Amsterdam criteria for a diagnosis of hereditary non-polyposis colon cancer (HNPCC), are believed to be at an increased risk of CRC. However, there is a paucity of prospective data on the potential benefit of colonoscopic surveillance in such groups categorised by empiric family history criteria. We report a prospective study of 448 individuals seeking counselling about their perceived family history of CRC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Following pedigree tracing, verification, and risk assignment by genetic counsellors, colonoscopy was undertaken for those at a moderate or high risk (HNPCC). Those classified as low risk were reassured and discharged without surveillance. Here we report our findings at the prevalence screen in the 176 patients of the 448 assessed who underwent colonoscopy. RESULTS: Fifty three individuals had a family history that met Amsterdam criteria (median age 43 years) and 123 individuals were classed as moderate risk (median age 43 years). No cancers were detected at colonoscopy in any group. Four individuals (8% (95% confidence limits (CL) 0.4-15%)) in the high risk group had an adenoma detected at a median age of 46 years and all four were less than 50 years of age. Five (4% (95% CL 0.6- 8%)) of the moderate risk individuals had an adenoma at a median age of 54 years, two of whom were less than 50 years of age. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that the prevalence of significant neoplasia in groups defined by family history is low, particularly in younger age groups. These prospective data call into question the value of colonoscopy before the age of 50 years in moderate risk individuals.
BACKGROUND: Individuals with first degree relatives affected with colorectal cancer (CRC) at a young age, or more than one relative affected but who do not fulfil the Amsterdam criteria for a diagnosis of hereditary non-polyposis colon cancer (HNPCC), are believed to be at an increased risk of CRC. However, there is a paucity of prospective data on the potential benefit of colonoscopic surveillance in such groups categorised by empiric family history criteria. We report a prospective study of 448 individuals seeking counselling about their perceived family history of CRC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Following pedigree tracing, verification, and risk assignment by genetic counsellors, colonoscopy was undertaken for those at a moderate or high risk (HNPCC). Those classified as low risk were reassured and discharged without surveillance. Here we report our findings at the prevalence screen in the 176 patients of the 448 assessed who underwent colonoscopy. RESULTS: Fifty three individuals had a family history that met Amsterdam criteria (median age 43 years) and 123 individuals were classed as moderate risk (median age 43 years). No cancers were detected at colonoscopy in any group. Four individuals (8% (95% confidence limits (CL) 0.4-15%)) in the high risk group had an adenoma detected at a median age of 46 years and all four were less than 50 years of age. Five (4% (95% CL 0.6- 8%)) of the moderate risk individuals had an adenoma at a median age of 54 years, two of whom were less than 50 years of age. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that the prevalence of significant neoplasia in groups defined by family history is low, particularly in younger age groups. These prospective data call into question the value of colonoscopy before the age of 50 years in moderate risk individuals.
Authors: H J Järvinen; M Aarnio; H Mustonen; K Aktan-Collan; L A Aaltonen; P Peltomäki; A De La Chapelle; J P Mecklin Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2000-05 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Thomas F Imperiale; David R Wagner; Ching Y Lin; Gregory N Larkin; James D Rogge; David F Ransohoff Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-06-06 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: S J Winawer; A G Zauber; M N Ho; M J O'Brien; L S Gottlieb; S S Sternberg; J D Waye; M Schapiro; J H Bond; J F Panish Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1993-12-30 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: J G Williams; S E Roberts; M F Ali; W Y Cheung; D R Cohen; G Demery; A Edwards; M Greer; M D Hellier; H A Hutchings; B Ip; M F Longo; I T Russell; H A Snooks; J C Williams Journal: Gut Date: 2007-02 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Kevin J Monahan; Nicola Bradshaw; Sunil Dolwani; Bianca Desouza; Malcolm G Dunlop; James E East; Mohammad Ilyas; Asha Kaur; Fiona Lalloo; Andrew Latchford; Matthew D Rutter; Ian Tomlinson; Huw J W Thomas; James Hill Journal: Gut Date: 2019-11-28 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: In Ja Park; Hee Cheol Kim; Yong Sik Yoon; Chang Sik Yu; Se Jin Jang; Jin Cheon Kim Journal: J Korean Med Sci Date: 2007-09 Impact factor: 2.153
Authors: Enrique Quintero; Marta Carrillo; Maria-Liz Leoz; Joaquin Cubiella; Carla Gargallo; Angel Lanas; Luis Bujanda; Antonio Z Gimeno-García; Manuel Hernández-Guerra; David Nicolás-Pérez; Inmaculada Alonso-Abreu; Juan Diego Morillas; Francesc Balaguer; Alfonso Muriel Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2016-05-03 Impact factor: 11.069