Literature DB >> 22826281

Risk of colorectal cancer after detection and removal of adenomas at colonoscopy: population-based case-control study.

Hermann Brenner1, Jenny Chang-Claude, Alexander Rickert, Christoph M Seiler, Michael Hoffmeister.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Empirical evidence for recommendations of surveillance intervals after detection and removal of adenomas at colonoscopy is still sparse and mostly based on observations of adenoma recurrence. We aimed to assess risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) according to time since polypectomy and factors that might be relevant for risk stratification.
METHODS: In a population-based case-control study conducted in Germany, detailed history and results of previous large-bowel endoscopies were obtained by interview and from medical records. Risk of CRC among participants with detection of at least one adenoma at a preceding colonoscopy compared with participants without previous large-bowel endoscopy was assessed according to time since polypectomy among 2,582 cases with CRC and 1,798 matched controls.
RESULTS: Adjusted odds ratios (95% CIs) of CRC for participants with polypectomy less than 3, 3 to 5, and 6 to 10 years ago (using participants without previous endoscopy as reference group) were 0.2 (0.2 to 0.3), 0.4 (0.3 to 0.6), and 0.9 (0.5 to 1.5), respectively. Strong, significant risk reduction within 5 years was consistently seen for women and men, younger and older participants, patients with and without high-risk polyps (three or more polyps, at least one polyp ≥ 1 cm, at least one polyp with villous components), and those with and without polypectomy in the right colon. With adjusted odds ratios of 0.1 (0.1 to 0.2), 0.3 (0.2 to 0.5) and 0.4 (0.2 to 0.8) for patients with polypectomy less than 3, 3 to 5, and 6 to 10 years ago, risk reduction was particularly strong for left-sided CRC.
CONCLUSION: Extension of surveillance intervals to 5 years should be considered, even after detection and removal of high-risk polyps.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22826281     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2011.41.3377

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  35 in total

1.  Genome-wide DNA methylation differences according to oestrogen receptor beta status in colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Sonja Neumeyer; Odilia Popanda; Dominic Edelmann; Katja Butterbach; Csaba Toth; Wilfried Roth; Hendrik Bläker; Ruijingfang Jiang; Esther Herpel; Cornelia Jäkel; Peter Schmezer; Lina Jansen; Elizabeth Alwers; Axel Benner; Barbara Burwinkel; Michael Hoffmeister; Hermann Brenner; Jenny Chang-Claude
Journal:  Epigenetics       Date:  2019-03-30       Impact factor: 4.528

Review 2.  Risk of Advanced Adenoma, Colorectal Cancer, and Colorectal Cancer Mortality in People With Low-Risk Adenomas at Baseline Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Catherine Dubé; Mafo Yakubu; Bronwen R McCurdy; Andrea Lischka; Anna Koné; Meghan J Walker; Leslea Peirson; Jill Tinmouth
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-10-31       Impact factor: 10.864

3.  Associations of red and processed meat intake with major molecular pathological features of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Prudence R Carr; Lina Jansen; Stefanie Bienert; Wilfried Roth; Esther Herpel; Matthias Kloor; Hendrik Bläker; Jenny Chang-Claude; Hermann Brenner; Michael Hoffmeister
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2017-06-23       Impact factor: 8.082

4.  Proposal of high-risk adenoma detection rate as an impactful, complementary quality indicator of colonoscopy.

Authors:  Vaibhav Wadhwa; Yash Jobanputra; Haider Al Taii; Prashanthi N Thota; Rocio Lopez; Suryakanth R Gurudu; Madhusudhan R Sanaka
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-03-29       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Incremental benefits of screening colonoscopy over sigmoidoscopy in average-risk populations: a model-driven analysis.

Authors:  Jihyoun Jeon; Rafael Meza; William D Hazelton; Andrew G Renehan; E Georg Luebeck
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2015-03-18       Impact factor: 2.506

6.  Multiple behavioral factors are associated with occurrence of large, flat colorectal polyps.

Authors:  Tianzuo Zhan; Felix Hahn; Thomas Hielscher; Asmé Bilge; Jürgen Grüger; Jürgen Weers; Johannes Betge; Timo Gaiser; Georg Kähler; Matthias P Ebert; Sebastian Belle
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2016-11-28       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  Five common errors to avoid in clinical practice: the Italian Association of Hospital Gastroenterologists and Endoscopists (AIGO) Choosing Wisely Campaign.

Authors:  Elisa Stasi; Andrea Michielan; Gaetano Cristian Morreale; Alessandro Tozzi; Ludovica Venezia; Francesco Bortoluzzi; Omero Triossi; Marco Soncini; Gioacchino Leandro; Giuseppe Milazzo; Andrea Anderloni
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2018-11-29       Impact factor: 3.397

8.  Deliberative and intuitive risk perceptions as predictors of colorectal cancer screening over time.

Authors:  Jennifer L Hay; Marcel Ramos; Yuelin Li; Susan Holland; Debra Brennessel; M Margaret Kemeny
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2015-08-18

9.  High-quality Bowel Preparation Is Required for Detection of Sessile Serrated Polyps.

Authors:  Brian T Clark; Loren Laine
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2016-04-07       Impact factor: 11.382

10.  Distinct patterns of DNA methylation in conventional adenomas involving the right and left colon.

Authors:  Devin C Koestler; Jing Li; John A Baron; Gregory J Tsongalis; Lynn F Butterly; Martha Goodrich; Corina Lesseur; Margaret R Karagas; Carmen J Marsit; Jason H Moore; Angeline S Andrew; Amitabh Srivastava
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2013-07-19       Impact factor: 7.842

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.