伺机性筛查新模式在结直肠肿瘤患者配偶的探索性研究

目的探究结直肠病房筛查新模式在结直肠肿瘤患者配偶筛查的有效性。 方法采用结直肠肿瘤风险问卷调查、粪便潜血免疫化学检测（FIT）以及粪便多靶点FIT-DNA检测对2019年10月至2021年7月在中国医学科学院肿瘤医院结直肠外科就诊的结直肠癌及进展期腺瘤患者的配偶进行检测,根据检测结果将配偶的筛查风险以及肠镜检查推荐分为A、B、C、D四类,分析不同分类后配偶肠镜依从率与病变检出率。 结果共206名受试者被纳入本研究。总体配偶人群肠镜依从率为29.6%（61/206）,肠镜病变检出率为9.8%（6/61）;A类至D类推荐人群肠镜依从率分别为90.9%（10/11）、53.5%（23/43）、20.5%（23/112）和12.5%（5/40）,肠镜病变检出率分别为30.0%（3/10）、8.7%（2/23）、4.3%（1/23）和0（0/5）。 结论三种筛查方法联合使用可以高效精准地区分配偶的筛查风险,此方案是一个可以在病房开展的有效可行的结直肠肿瘤患者配偶人群的伺机性筛查新模式。     

基于多靶点粪便FIT-DNA联合检测技术的结直肠癌早期筛查结果分析

目的探索利用创新的结直肠癌无创筛查手段以提高大肠癌筛查的效率，为今后在我国开展结直肠癌早筛项目奠定基础。 方法在2016年12月~2017年12月哈尔滨医科大学附属肿瘤医院的体检人群中，开展基于多靶点粪便FIT-DNA联合检测技术的结直肠癌早期筛查，并对筛查结果进行分析和总结。 结果共有594名体检人群进行多靶点粪便FIT-DNA联合检测技术，61人检测为阳性，总体阳性率为10.27%（61/594），其中32人进行了肠镜检查，肠镜依从率为52.46%（32/61）；31人具有肠镜检查结果，其中肠镜异常21人，异常检出率为67.74%（21/31），肠镜未见异常10人；男性和女性的肠镜异常率分别为64.29%（18/28）和100.00%（3/3）。此外，对已确诊的结直肠癌及腺瘤患者进行了多靶点粪便FIT-DNA联合检测，检测的敏感性分别为92.31%（24/26）和42.86%（12/28）。 结论本研究数据初步提示了在体检人群中结合一定新型技术可能对于提高肠镜依从性和检出率具有一定促进作用。     

多靶点粪便FIT-DNA检测技术在结直肠癌患者、配偶及一级亲属筛查中的应用研究

目的 初步探究多靶点粪便FIT-DNA检测技术对结直肠癌筛查的有效性,同时探索结直肠癌患者配偶及其一级亲属的结直肠癌及癌前病变发病风险.方法 采用新型多靶点粪便FIT-DNA联合检测技术对于2017年4月至2019年3月全国八家医院的结直肠外科或普外科就诊的结直肠癌患者、患者配偶及一级亲属进行检测,并结合肠镜结果评价其...     

大肠癌患者一级亲属的电子肠镜与粪便潜血试验的筛查结果分析

目的研究大肠癌先证患者的一级亲属的电子肠镜和粪便潜血试验（faecal occult blood testing, FOBT）筛查的临床意义。方法前瞻性分析大肠癌先证患者的一级亲属186例的电子肠镜和FOBT的筛查结果。FOBT应用试纸免疫法和氨基比林化学法。结果在186例亲属的肠镜检查中阳性病变检出率高达80．1％，其中癌前病变占41．1％，恶性疾病占23．6％。而FOBT的检出率只有22．3％，明显低于肠镜的检出率（P〈0．001）。大肠息肉、息肉癌变和大肠癌在一级亲属的检出率分别为56．5％、6．5％和17．2％，在对照组分别为25．7％、0．5％和6．5％，两组比较，P均小于0．001。本组小于40岁的患者占阳性病变的20．1％和恶性病变的17．1％。肠镜检查检出Dukes A期大肠癌18例，占56．3％，B期12例，占37．5％，C期2例，占6．3％，D期0例。所有大肠癌患者均可进行根治性手术切除。结论在大肠癌先证患者的一级亲属中进行结肠镜筛查明显优于FOBT，具有较高的检出率，并可预防大肠癌和早期诊断大肠癌和提高根治手术率。     

非酒精性脂肪性肝病并发结直肠粘膜癌变的临床特征

目的探讨NAFLD患者并发结直肠粘膜病变的临床特征.方法在201例NAFLD患者和861例接受肠镜检查者,观察结直肠粘膜病变的病理类型与临床特征.结果 NAFLD患者结直肠病变的检出率为42.8%,显著高于对照组32.9%（P〈0.01）;其中管状腺瘤及伴中度以上不典型增生者均较对照组升高（P〈0.01或P〈0.05）,女性发病年龄高峰较男性提前.结论 NAFLD患者易并发结直肠粘膜病变,应定期进行全结肠镜筛查.     

结直肠癌筛查对结直肠肿瘤早期诊断的意义

背景：我国结直肠癌（CRC）发病率和死亡率呈上升趋势,发病年龄趋于年轻化。目的：分析CRC筛查初筛阳性人群的结肠镜检查结果,探讨高危问卷联合粪便隐血试验的CRC筛查模式对于结直肠肿瘤早期诊断的意义。方法：连续纳入2013年5月—2019年10月参与上海市黄浦区社区CRC筛查,因初筛结果阳性至瑞金医院卢湾分院接受结肠镜检查的高危个体,内镜检查发现病变者取活检或摘除送病理检查。同期因排便习惯改变行结肠镜检查的患者作为对照组。分析两组结直肠肿瘤检出情况以及筛查阳性组的病变特征。结果：共1 329例初筛阳性者纳入研究,结肠镜检查病变总体检出率为63.3%,CRC、息肉和腺瘤性息肉检出率分别为2.6%(34例)、60.7%(807例)和35.2%(468例),均显著高于对照组（n=22 438）的43.6%、1.8%、41.5%和21.6%(P均<0.05)。筛查阳性组病变检出率男性显著高于女性（73.7%对54.2%, P<0.05）,且随年龄增长呈增高趋势（P<0.05）。CRC主要分布于60～79岁年龄组,无性别分布差异,病变直径均≥1 cm;发生异型增生的腺瘤直径亦多≥...     

结直肠癌筛查发现的7 408例肠道病变临床特征及病理类型分析

目的 探讨结直肠病变患者临床与病理特征，为结直肠癌早期临床诊断与干预提供依据。 方法 基于2007至2012年海宁市32万余40～74岁目标人群结直肠癌筛查结果，对筛查检出的肠道病变进行临床特征（包括性别、年龄、大小、部位、形态、数目）及病理类型等分析探讨。 结果 共完成初筛286 470例，顺应率88.96％；完成结肠镜检查29 069例，检出肠道病变7 408例，检出率25.48％；男性检出率高于女性（32.62%比19.48%，P＜0.001）；40～49岁组检出率18.30％，70～74岁组检出率35.06％，显示年龄越大检出率越高（P＜0.001）。7 408例肠道病变中，左半结肠约占69.40%，多发性病变占37.23％，＞1.0 cm病变占19.60％。检出结直肠癌205例（早期癌161例、中晚期癌44例），进展期腺瘤1 365例，早诊率为97.20％。手术切除的5 030例病变病理提示腺瘤型及以上病变所占比重最大（63.00％）。直径＞1.5 cm病变癌变率为34.08%。 结论 在高危人群中男性肠道病变检出率明显高于女性，年龄越大检出率越高；病理类型以腺瘤所占比重最高。     

粪便隐血试验联合结肠镜序贯筛查社区结直肠癌的流行病学分析

背景:近年随着人们生活、饮食、环境等改变,结直肠癌的发病率在我国呈明显升高的趋势,部分地区已开展结直肠癌筛查。目的:探讨粪便隐血试验联合结肠镜的序贯检查对筛查社区结直肠癌的作用。方法:选择2014年6月—2014年10月奉贤区多个社区40~79岁、连续2次粪便隐血试验阳性并行结肠镜筛查的无症状人群作为筛查对象,分析结直肠息肉、结直肠癌的流行病学情况。结果:共2 251名无症状人群完成粪便隐血试验和结肠镜的序贯筛查,结直肠息肉检出率为19.5%,结直肠癌检出率为0.8%。不同性别和年龄者的结直肠息肉检出率相比差异均有统计学意义(P0.05),而结直肠癌检出率无明显差异(P0.05)。结直肠息肉和结直肠癌多位于直肠和乙状结肠,息肉病理类型以腺瘤性息肉为主。结论:社区粪便隐血试验阳性无症状人群的结直肠息肉检出率高,可能与其性别、年龄、部位有关。50岁以上需重视结直肠癌筛查,可早期发现和治疗癌前疾病和结直肠癌。     

结肠镜检查者临床症状对结直肠息肉和癌的提示作用

背景:通过结肠镜检查发现并治疗结直肠息肉,对结直肠癌的预防至关重要。目的:分析结肠镜检查者的临床症状对结直肠息肉和癌的提示作用,为结肠镜筛查受检者的选择提供参考。方法:2366例接受结肠镜检查者纳入研究,采集其就诊时症状、病变部位、病变性质等信息,分析结直肠息肉和癌的检出率以及不同临床症状与疾病风险和病变部位的相关性。结果2 366例受检者中,结直肠息肉和癌的检出率分别为20.5%和5.4%,有临床症状者检出率显著高于无症状者(息肉:24.2%对4.5%,癌:6.4%对0.9%,P均=0.000)。以腹泻(OR=1.213)、便血(OR=2.076)、粪便性状改变(OR=1.503)为首要症状者的结直肠息肉检出率显著增高(P均0.05),以腹痛(OR=1.568)、便血(OR=2.837)、粪便性状改变(OR=2.206)、里急后重感(OR=1.735)为首要症状者的结直肠癌检出率显著增高(P均0.05)。以便血、粪便性状改变、里急后重感为首要症状者病变主要分布于直肠或左半结肠(P均0.05)。结论:腹泻、便血、粪便性状改变与结直肠息肉风险有关,腹痛、便血、粪便性状改变、里急后重感与结直肠癌风险有关,对有上述症状者强烈推荐行结肠镜检查。     

染色内镜在结直肠早期肿瘤性病变筛查中的应用

正随着社会经济的发展,我国结直肠癌的发病率逐年上升,但目前我国诊断的结直肠癌仍是以进展期为主,早期结直肠癌所占比例不到10%~([1])。结直肠肿瘤推荐筛查方法包括粪便隐血试验、乙状结肠镜、结肠镜检查等,结肠镜检查被视为其他结肠癌筛查方法可靠性的参考标准,但由于结直肠黏膜色泽单一,普通白光内镜下观察结直肠黏膜无法呈现良好的对比,对微小病变的筛查受到较大的限制,结直肠息肉的漏诊率高达20%~([2])。目前公认90%以上     

Colonic Neoplasms in Asymptomatic First-Degree Relatives of Colon Cancer Patients

First-degree relatives of colon cancer patients are at elevated risk for developing colorectal neoplasms. In order to assess the potential usefulness of screening by colonoscopy in this high-risk population, we reviewed the records of 48 colonoscopies performed on asymptomatic patients who were self- or physician-referred for colonoscopy because of a history of one or more first-degree relatives with colon cancer. Twelve (25%) had at least one adenomatous polyp, but no significant atypia was detected. No cancers were detected. One third of the lesions were beyond the reach of a flexible sigmoidoscope. This apparent increase in the prevalence of adenomas was most striking (46%) among men over the age of 50. These preliminary results demonstrate that colonoscopy is effective in detecting and removing adenomatous polyps in a substantial fraction of asymptomatic patients whose sole risk-factor is being a first-degree relative of a patient with colon cancer. Further studies in larger populations are warranted to determine the use of colonoscopy in screening these high-risk individuals.     

Colonoscopic screening of persons with suspected risk factors for colon cancer. I. Family history

A family history of colorectal cancer is believed to place persons at increased risk for development of the disease. It is unclear, however, how "strong" a family history must be to increase this risk or to make colonoscopic screening appropriate. We performed initial colonoscopy in 154 asymptomatic subjects whose only suspected risk factor was one or two first-degree relatives with colorectal cancer; 48 of these subjects also had affected second- and third-degree relatives. We found 45 adenomas in 28 subjects (18%). One subject had a 3-cm villous adenoma. In 6 subjects, the most advanced findings were tubular adenomas 5-9 mm in diameter; in 21 subjects, we found only tubular adenomas that were 2-4 mm in diameter. The prevalence of adenomas increased significantly with age of subjects (p less than 0.01). Although the overall prevalence of colorectal neoplasms in our group was no greater than might be expected in the general population, subjects with two first-degree relatives tended to have more diminutive adenomas than those with one such relative. Our findings suggest that colonoscopy is not an appropriate first step in screening persons with one affected first-degree relative. For those with more complex family histories, more data are needed--particularly on the prevalence of advanced neoplasms--to determine whether a screening technique that is less costly and less invasive than colonoscopy may be adequate.     

Colorectal cancer screening: Results of a 5-year program in asymptomatic subjects at increased risk

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The province of Ferrara has one of the highest incidences of colorectal cancer (CRC) in Italy. In January 2000, we set up a colonoscopy screening program focussing on first-degree relatives of CRC patients. We now report the results 5 years after the beginning of the project. SCREENEES AND METHODS: In October 1999, we started a campaign stressing the usefulness of colonoscopy for the first-degree relatives of CRC patients. Subjects included in the screening program were aged between 45 and 75 years with at least one first-degree relative affected by CRC. They were invited to an interview where a physician suggested colonoscopy as a screening option. RESULTS: In 5 years, 776 subjects were interviewed and 733 (94.4%) agreed to an endoscopic examination (M/F:375/401; mean age 55 years): 562 colonoscopies were performed. Adenomas and cancers were found in 122 (21.7%) and 12 (2.1%) subjects, respectively. Histological examination in 181 persons with lesions (32.8%) showed (most serious lesion quoted) 47 hyperplastic polyps (26% of all lesions), 2 serrated adenomas (1.1%), 68 tubular adenomas (48%), 24 tubulovillous adenomas (13.3%), 9 adenomas with high grade dysplasia (5%) and 12 adenocarcinomas (6.6%). The majority of the cancers were at an early stage (8 Dukes A and 3 Dukes B). Sedation was used in only 42 colonoscopies (7.5%). CONCLUSIONS: A colonoscopy-based screening in this selected high-risk population is feasible. Even without sedation subjects readily agreed to the endoscopic procedure. We identified a significant number of advanced neoplasms and cancers at an early stage suggesting that this could be a useful tool in early identification of CRC.     

Potential effect of cyclooxygenase-2-specific inhibitors on the prevention of colorectal cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis

PURPOSE: To estimate the potential cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer chemoprevention with cyclooxygenase-2-specific inhibitors (COX-2 inhibitors). METHODS: Using a decision analytic Markov model, we estimated the discounted cost per life-year saved for three strategies: a COX-2 inhibitor alone; as an adjunct to colonoscopy every 10 years in persons at average risk of colorectal cancer; and as an adjunct to colonoscopy every 5 years in persons with first-degree relatives who had colorectal cancer. RESULTS: In the base case, the incremental cost per life-year saved with a COX-2 inhibitor alone compared with no screening was 233,300 dollars in persons at average risk of colorectal cancer and 56,700 dollars in persons with 2 first-degree relatives who had the disease. Chemoprevention was both less effective and more costly than screening. The incremental cost per life-year saved with a COX-2 inhibitor as an adjunct to screening was 823,800 dollars in persons at average risk and 404,700 dollars in persons with 2 first-degree relatives who had colorectal cancer. Combining a COX-2 inhibitor with less frequent screening was not as cost-effective as screening at currently recommended intervals. Cost-effectiveness estimates were highly sensitive to the cost of COX-2 inhibitors and their effect on the risk of cancer. CONCLUSION: Chemoprevention of colorectal cancer with COX-2 inhibitors is likely to incur substantially higher costs per life-year saved than are currently recommended screening strategies. COX-2 inhibitor use as an adjunct to screening may increase life expectancy, although at prohibitive costs, and is unlikely to result in less frequent screening.     

Is colonoscopic screening appropriate in asymptomatic patients with family history of colon cancer?

Colonoscopy has been advocated by some investigators as the most appropriate means of screening asymptomatic patients with a positive family history of colorectal cancer. However, results of such screening have been widely disparate. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the yield of colonoscopy in a cohort of completely asymptomatic individuals with one or two first-degree relatives with a history of colorectal cancer and to compare this yield with that of colonoscopy in a group of patients with apparent anal bleeding. Patients with possible genetic disorders, such as familial polyposis, were excluded. A total of 160 asymptomatic patients and a comparison group of 137 patients with nonacute anorectal bleeding underwent colonoscopy. Colonoscopy was completed in 143 of the 160 study patients (89 percent) and in all of the comparison patients and did not result in any complications. Twenty-two adenomas were found in 17 study patients (10.6 percent); 16 of the 22 adenomas were less than 1 cm in size. In the comparison group, eight adenomas were identified (5.8 percent of patients). No cancers were identified. The difference in polyp frequency between groups was not significant. The relatively low yield of colorectal neoplasms discovered at colonoscopy in this study may in part be due to the small sample size or to the strict criteria used to define these asymptomatic patients but does not lend strong support to the notion that colonoscopy is an appropriate first step in screening the asymptomatic patient with one or two first-degree relatives with colon cancer.     

The role of colonoscopy in screening persons with family history of colorectal cancer

Abstract First-degree relatives of colorectal cancer patients are at increased risk for developing colorectal neoplasms. In order to assess the potentiality of colonoscopy screening in this high-risk population, 213 asymptomatic family members (age range 30-69 years, mean 42.8 years) of those patients with colorectal cancer received colonoscopic examination at Chang-Gung Memorial Hospital from April 1992 to May 1994. Twenty-eight persons with 42 lesions (polyps or cancer) were identified, including 28 adenomas, nine hyperplastic polyps and five adenocarcinomas. The positive detection rate was 9.9% for adenoma and 2.3% for cancer. Colorectal neoplasms afflicted males more frequently than females (16.7 vs 5.7%, P < 0.05) and occurred less frequently in those < 40 years of age (5.5 vs 17.2%, P < 0.05). Forty-two per cent of the detected neoplastic lesions were beyond the reach of 60 cm flexible sigmoidoscopy and 36% of adenomas were < 0.5 cm in size and would be missed if patients were screened by air contrast barium enema. Cost analysis revealed that the charges of both screening colonoscopy and screening flexible sigmoidoscopy/air contrast barium enema were approximate. Colonoscopy also has a high acceptability and safety. It appears appropriate to use colonoscopy, rather than flexible sigmoidoscopy or air contrast barium enema, as an initial screening procedure for persons with a family history of colorectal cancer, especially those > 40 years of age.     

Colonoscopic screening of first-degree relatives of patients with large adenomas: increased risk of colorectal tumors

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The risk of developing colorectal neoplasia is not well established among family members of individuals with large adenomas, and screening strategies remain under debate in this population. This study aimed at quantifying the risk of colorectal adenomas and cancers using colonoscopic screening in first-degree relatives of patients with large adenomas. METHODS: This case-control study was performed in 18 endoscopic units of French nonuniversity hospitals. A colonoscopy was offered to first-degree relatives of 306 index cases with adenomas > or =10 mm if they were alive, aged 40-75 years, and could be contacted by the index case. Among them, 168 were examined and matched for age, sex, and geographical area with 2 controls (n = 307). Controls were randomly selected from 1362 consecutive patients aged 40-75 years having undergone a colonoscopy for minor symptoms. RESULTS: The prevalence of large adenomas and cancers was 8.4% and 4.2%, in relatives and controls, respectively. Odds ratios (ORs) associated with a history of large adenomas in relatives were 2.27 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-5.09) for cancers or large adenomas, 1.21 (95% CI, 0.68-2.15) for small adenomas, and 1.56 (95% CI, 0.96-2.53) for all colorectal neoplasia. The risk of large adenomas and cancers was higher in relatives of index cases younger than 60 years (OR, 3.82; 95% CI, 0.92-15.87) and when the index case had large distal adenomas (OR, 3.14; 95% CI, 1.27-7.73). CONCLUSIONS: First-degree relatives of patients with large adenomas are at increased risk of developing colorectal cancers or large adenomas. This result has implications for screening in this high-risk population.     

Should relatives of patients with colorectal cancer be screened?

PURPOSE: The objective of our investigation was to attempt to address the controversial issue concerning index screening and surveillance of relatives of patients with colorectal cancer and to identify those areas of research that should be considered in future studies. METHODS: Relevant literature was reviewed concerning the screening of asymptomatic first-degree relatives of patients with colorectal cancer not associated with the rare autosomal dominant inherited colorectal cancer syndromes. RESULTS: The data reviewed suggest that there is an increased risk of colorectal neoplasia in this population and a significantly higher yield of adenomas and carcinomas when colonoscopy is used for index screening. However, significant variability in study design and screening protocols and inconsistencies in data presentation make clinical interpretation and data analysis confusing and difficult. CONCLUSIONS: There is a critical need for standardization in future studies. Furthermore, as there are no studies that document decreased overall mortality from colorectal cancer in first-degree relatives as a result of screening, the decision as to whether to screen this population needs to be based on future prospective controlled trials.