Uri Ladabaum1,2, Ashley Patel1,2, Ajitha Mannalithara1,2, Vandana Sundaram2,3, Aya Mitani2,3, Manisha Desai2,3. 1. Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California. 2. Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California. 3. Quantitative Sciences Unit, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tailoring screening to colorectal cancer (CRC) risk could improve screening effectiveness. Most CRCs arise from advanced neoplasia (AN) that dwells for years. To date, no available colorectal neoplasia risk score has been validated externally in a diverse population. The authors explored whether the National Cancer Institute (NCI) CRC risk-assessment tool, which was developed to predict future CRC risk, could predict current AN prevalence in a diverse population, thereby allowing its use in risk stratification for screening. METHODS: This was a prospective examination of the relation between predicted 10-year CRC risk and the prevalence of AN, defined as advanced or multiple (≥3 adenomatous, ≥5 serrated) adenomatous or sessile serrated polyps, in individuals undergoing screening colonoscopy. RESULTS: Among 509 screenees (50% women; median age, 58 years; 61% white, 5% black, 10% Hispanic, and 24% Asian), 58 (11%) had AN. The prevalence of AN increased progressively from 6% in the lowest risk-score quintile to 17% in the highest risk-score quintile (P = .002). Risk-score distributions in individuals with versus without AN differed significantly (median, 1.38 [0.90-1.87] vs 1.02 [0.62-1.57], respectively; P = .003), with substantial overlap. The discriminatory accuracy of the tool was modest, with areas under the curve of 0.61 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-0.69) overall, 0.59 (95% CI, 0.49-0.70) for women, and 0.63 (95% CI, 0.53-0.73) for men. The results did not change substantively when the analysis was restricted to adenomatous lesions or to screening procedures without any additional incidental indication. CONCLUSIONS: The NCI CRC risk-assessment tool displays modest discriminatory accuracy in predicting AN at screening colonoscopy in a diverse population. This tool may aid shared decision-making in clinical practice. Cancer 2016.
BACKGROUND: Tailoring screening to colorectal cancer (CRC) risk could improve screening effectiveness. Most CRCs arise from advanced neoplasia (AN) that dwells for years. To date, no available colorectal neoplasia risk score has been validated externally in a diverse population. The authors explored whether the National Cancer Institute (NCI) CRC risk-assessment tool, which was developed to predict future CRC risk, could predict current AN prevalence in a diverse population, thereby allowing its use in risk stratification for screening. METHODS: This was a prospective examination of the relation between predicted 10-year CRC risk and the prevalence of AN, defined as advanced or multiple (≥3 adenomatous, ≥5 serrated) adenomatous or sessile serrated polyps, in individuals undergoing screening colonoscopy. RESULTS: Among 509 screenees (50% women; median age, 58 years; 61% white, 5% black, 10% Hispanic, and 24% Asian), 58 (11%) had AN. The prevalence of AN increased progressively from 6% in the lowest risk-score quintile to 17% in the highest risk-score quintile (P = .002). Risk-score distributions in individuals with versus without AN differed significantly (median, 1.38 [0.90-1.87] vs 1.02 [0.62-1.57], respectively; P = .003), with substantial overlap. The discriminatory accuracy of the tool was modest, with areas under the curve of 0.61 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-0.69) overall, 0.59 (95% CI, 0.49-0.70) for women, and 0.63 (95% CI, 0.53-0.73) for men. The results did not change substantively when the analysis was restricted to adenomatous lesions or to screening procedures without any additional incidental indication. CONCLUSIONS: The NCI CRC risk-assessment tool displays modest discriminatory accuracy in predicting AN at screening colonoscopy in a diverse population. This tool may aid shared decision-making in clinical practice. Cancer 2016.
Authors: Watcharaporn Boonyasiriwat; Man Hung; Shirley D Hon; Philip Tang; Lisa M Pappas; Randall W Burt; Marc D Schwartz; Antoinette M Stroup; Anita Y Kinney Journal: Ann Behav Med Date: 2014-06
Authors: Thomas F Imperiale; David F Ransohoff; Steven H Itzkowitz; Theodore R Levin; Philip Lavin; Graham P Lidgard; David A Ahlquist; Barry M Berger Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-03-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Jane A Driver; J Michael Gaziano; Rebecca P Gelber; I-Min Lee; Julie E Buring; Tobias Kurth Journal: Am J Med Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: Michal F Kaminski; Marcin Polkowski; Ewa Kraszewska; Maciej Rupinski; Eugeniusz Butruk; Jaroslaw Regula Journal: Gut Date: 2014-01-02 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: B Joseph Elmunzer; Rodney A Hayward; Philip S Schoenfeld; Sameer D Saini; Amar Deshpande; Akbar K Waljee Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2012-12-04 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Shakira Milton; Jon D Emery; Jane Rinaldi; Joanne Kinder; Adrian Bickerstaffe; Sibel Saya; Mark A Jenkins; Jennifer McIntosh Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2022-05-12 Impact factor: 7.960
Authors: Madhav Desai; Joseph C Anderson; Michael Kaminski; Viveksandeep Thoguluva Chandrasekar; Jihan Fathallah; Cesare Hassan; David Lieberman; Prateek Sharma Journal: Endosc Int Open Date: 2021-04-13
Authors: Alexander Semaan; Anne van Ellen; Sebastian Meller; Dominik Bergheim; Vittorio Branchi; Philipp Lingohr; Diane Goltz; Jörg C Kalff; Glen Kristiansen; Hanno Matthaei; Dimitrios Pantelis; Dimo Dietrich Journal: Clin Epigenetics Date: 2016-09-20 Impact factor: 6.551
Authors: Laura W Musselwhite; Thomas S Redding; Kellie J Sims; Meghan C O'Leary; Elizabeth R Hauser; Terry Hyslop; Ziad F Gellad; Brian A Sullivan; David Lieberman; Dawn Provenzale Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2019-11-12 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Ala I Sharara; Ali El Mokahal; Ali H Harb; Natalia Khalaf; Fayez S Sarkis; Mustapha M El-Halabi; Nabil M Mansour; Ahmad Malli; Robert Habib Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2020-10-07 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Shravani Reddy; Awf Mouchli; Lindsey Bierle; Miranda Gerrard; Chirstopher Walsh; Adil Mir; David P Lebel; Christopher Mason; Douglas Grider; Marrieth Rubio Journal: Cureus Date: 2021-07-02