Literature DB >> 29800214

Association of Colonoscopy Adenoma Findings With Long-term Colorectal Cancer Incidence.

Benjamin Click1, Paul F Pinsky2, Tom Hickey3, Maryam Doroudi2, Robert E Schoen1,4.   

Abstract

Importance: Individuals with adenomatous polyps are advised to undergo repeated colonoscopy surveillance to prevent subsequent colorectal cancer (CRC), but the relationship between adenomas at colonoscopy and long-term CRC incidence is unclear. Objective: To compare long-term CRC incidence by colonoscopy adenoma findings. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter, prospective cohort study of participants in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer randomized clinical trial of flexible sigmoidoscopy (FSG) beginning in 1993 with follow-up for CRC incidence to 2013 across the United States. Participants included 154 900 men and women aged 55 to 74 years enrolled in PLCO of whom 15 935 underwent colonoscopy following their first positive FSG screening result. The final day of follow-up was December 31, 2013. Exposures: Enrolled participants had been randomized to FSG or usual care. Participants who underwent FSG and had abnormal findings were referred for follow-up. Subsequent colonoscopy findings were categorized as advanced adenoma (≥1 cm, high-grade dysplasia, or tubulovillous or villous histology), nonadvanced adenoma (<1 cm without advanced histology), or no adenoma. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was CRC incidence within 15 years of the baseline colonoscopy. The secondary outcome was CRC mortality.
Results: There were 15 935 participants who underwent colonoscopy (men, 59.7%; white, 90.7%; median age, 64 y [IQR, 61-68]). On initial colonoscopy, 2882 participants (18.1%) had an advanced adenoma, 5068 participants (31.8%) had a nonadvanced adenoma, and 7985 participants (50.1%) had no adenoma; median follow-up for CRC incidence was 12.9 years. CRC incidence rates per 10 000 person-years of observation were 20.0 (95% CI, 15.3-24.7; n = 70) for advanced adenoma, 9.1 (95% CI, 6.7-11.5; n = 55) for nonadvanced adenoma, and 7.5 (95% CI, 5.8-9.7; n = 71) for no adenoma. Participants with advanced adenoma were significantly more likely to develop CRC compared with participants with no adenoma (rate ratio [RR], 2.7 [95% CI, 1.9-3.7]; P < .001). There was no significant difference in CRC risk between participants with nonadvanced adenoma compared with no adenoma (RR, 1.2 [95% CI, 0.8-1.7]; P = .30). Compared with participants with no adenoma, those with advanced adenoma were at significantly increased risk of CRC death (RR, 2.6 [95% CI, 1.2-5.7], P = .01), but mortality risk in participants with nonadvanced adenoma was not significantly different (RR, 1.2 [95% CI, 0.5-2.7], P = .68). Conclusions and Relevance: Over a median of 13 years of follow-up, participants with an advanced adenoma at diagnostic colonoscopy prompted by a positive flexible sigmoidoscopy result were at significantly increased risk of developing colorectal cancer compared with those with no adenoma. Identification of nonadvanced adenoma may not be associated with increased colorectal cancer risk. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00002540.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29800214      PMCID: PMC6583246          DOI: 10.1001/jama.2018.5809

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  61 in total

Review 1.  Vitamin D and Gastrointestinal Cancers: A Narrative Review.

Authors:  Hemant Goyal; Abhilash Perisetti; M Rubayat Rahman; Avi Levin; Giuseppe Lippi
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2018-12-03       Impact factor: 3.199

2.  Does Colon Polyp Surveillance Improve Patient Outcomes?

Authors:  David Lieberman; Samir Gupta
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2019-10-12       Impact factor: 22.682

3.  Cecal Insertion Time and the ADR: Patience Is Good for Patients.

Authors:  Yu-Hsi Hsieh; Malcolm Koo
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 3.199

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.  Contribution of Surveillance Colonoscopy to Colorectal Cancer Prevention.

Authors:  Paul F Pinsky; Robert E Schoen
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2020-02-01       Impact factor: 11.382

6.  Real-life cost savings and capacity improvements on implementation of the new BSG post-polypectomy surveillance guideline.

Authors:  Benjamin Shandro; Vincent Chang; Jai Mathur; Parker O'Neill; Christopher Groves; Gareth Sadler; Andrew Poullis
Journal:  Clin Med (Lond)       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 2.659

7.  Colorectal cancer prevention by a CLEAR principles-based colonoscopy protocol: an observational study.

Authors:  Sudha Xirasagar; Yuqi Wu; Meng-Han Tsai; Jiajia Zhang; Stephanie Chiodini; Piet C de Groen
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2019-12-07       Impact factor: 9.427

8.  Thinking Big About Small Adenomas: Moving Toward "Precision Surveillance".

Authors:  Thomas F Imperiale
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-10-23       Impact factor: 10.864

9.  High-Intensity Versus Low-Intensity Surveillance for Patients With Colorectal Adenomas: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

Authors:  Reinier G S Meester; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Sidney J Winawer; Ann G Zauber; Amy B Knudsen; Uri Ladabaum
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2019-09-24       Impact factor: 25.391

10.  Risk of colorectal cancer incidence and mortality after polypectomy: a Swedish record-linkage study.

Authors:  Mingyang Song; Louise Emilsson; Soran R Bozorg; Long H Nguyen; Amit D Joshi; Kyle Staller; Jennifer Nayor; Andrew T Chan; Jonas F Ludvigsson
Journal:  Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2020-03-17
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.