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.     

Colonoscopic surveillance of patients with a family history of colon cancer and a history of normal colonoscopy: is a five-year interval between colonoscopies appropriate?

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with a family history of colon cancer are advised to undergo surveillance colonoscopy 5 years after a normal screening colonoscopy. No prospective study has evaluated the prevalence of adenomas found at surveillance colonoscopy in these patients. The aims of this trial were (1) to determine the percentage of these patients with adenomas; (2) to determine the percentage of these patients with advanced adenomas (i.e., villous adenomas, adenomas > or = 10 mm, adenomas with high grade dysplasia); and (3) to assess risk factors for adenomas in these patients. METHODS: Consecutive patients with a family history of colorectal cancer and a normal screening colonoscopy 5 years earlier were offered a surveillance colonoscopy. Patients also completed a questionnaire about potential risk factors for adenomas. Multiple logistic regression analysis assessed associations between risk factors and adenomas. RESULTS: One hundred patients completed the trial. The male/female ratio was 54/46, the mean age was 56.2 +/- 8.8 years, and 91% were white. Eight percent (8 of 100) of patients had advanced adenomas at surveillance colonoscopy, and 33% (33 of 100) had adenomas. Among patients with adenomas, 39% (13 of 33) had no adenomas in the left side of the colon (i.e., distal to the splenic flexure). Among patients with advanced adenomas, 25% (2 of 8) had no adenomas in the left side of the colon. Multiple logistic regression analysis showed a significant negative association between adenomas and NSAID use (odds ratio, 0.26 [95% confidence interval, 0.09-0.79]), and male gender had a positive association with adenomas (odds ratio, 2.79 [95% confidence interval, 1.01-7.74]). CONCLUSIONS: These data support a 5-year interval between screening and surveillance colonoscopy for patients with a family history of colorectal cancer and a normal screening colonoscopy.     

Risk factors for colorectal adenomas among immediate family members of patients with colorectal cancer in Taiwan: a case-control study

OBJECTIVES: The incidence of colorectal cancer or adenoma among first-degree relatives of patients with colorectal cancer is significantly high. However, a well defined screening and surveillance consensus has not been developed for these families in Taiwan. We conducted this study to evaluate the colorectal adenoma prevalence pattern in screened immediate family members in Taiwan, and to derive implications for future screening programs. METHODS: A total of 234 immediate family members (aged 51.6 +/- 21.5 yr) of 186 patients with colorectal cancer were offered a colonoscopy. Each relative examined was then paired with two control subjects for age, sex, and symptoms. The prevalence of colorectal adenomas was then compared using multiple logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: The estimated risk of developing adenomas among immediate family members of patients with colorectal cancer was significantly increased (OR = 2.33; 95% CI, 1.43-3.78; p < 0.001). This trend was more striking for men (OR = 2.46; 95% CI, 1.40-4.31; p = 0.001). Immediate family members were at an increased risk for high-risk adenomas (> or = 1.0 cm, with a villous component, and/or with severe dysplasia) (OR = 4.5; 95% CI, 1.91-10.60; p = 0.002), and developed adenomas at an earlier age than did controls. Individuals with index cancer relatives diagnosed at < 50 yr of age or male relatives posed a higher risk of developing colorectal adenomas. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of colorectal adenoma in persons with a colorectal cancer family history in Taiwan is similar to that reported in Western countries. This high-risk population should be offered a screening colonoscopy beginning at 40 yr of age.     

Folic acid supplementation inhibits recurrence of colorectal adenomas： A randomized chemoprevention trial

AIM： To determine whether folic acid supplementation will reduce the recurrence of colorectal adenomas, the precursors of colorectal cancer, we performed a double-blind placebo-controlled trial in patients with adenomatous polyps.
METHODS： In the current double-blind, placebocontrolled trial at this VA Medical Center, patients with colorectal adenomas were randomly assigned to receive either a daily 5 mg dose of folic acid or a matched identical placebo for 3 years. All polyps were removed at baseline colonoscopy and each patient had a follow up colonoscopy at 3 years. The primary endpoint was a reduction in the number of recurrent adenomas at 3 years.
RESULTS： Of 137 subjects, who were eligible after confirmation of polyp histology and run-in period to conform compliance, 94 completed the study; 49 in folic acid group and 45 in placebo group. Recurrence of adenomas at 3-year was compared between the two groups. The mean number of recurrent polyps at 3-year was 0.36 （SD, 0.69） for folic acid treated patients compared to 0.82 （SD, 1.17） for placebo treated subjects, resulting in a 3-fold increase in polyp recurrence in the placebo group. Patients below 70 years of age and those with left-sided colonic adenomas or advanced adenomas responded better to folic acid supplementation.
CONCLUSION： High dose folic acid supplementation is associated with a significant reduction in the recurrence of colonic adenomas suggesting that folic acid may be an effective chemopreventive agent for colorectal neoplasia.     

Number of aberrant crypt foci in the rectum is a useful surrogate marker of colorectal adenoma recurrence

Aim: Endoscopic screening and removal of colorectal adenomas can reduce the incidence of colorectal cancer. However, given the possibility of adenoma recurrence, surveillance colonoscopy is currently recommended after the initial screening and removal of colorectal adenomas. Aberrant crypt foci (ACF) have been shown to serve as a reliable surrogate marker of colorectal carcinogenesis. In this study, the relationship between the number of ACF at the initial endoscopic polypectomy and the likelihood of colorectal adenoma recurrence after polypectomy were investigated. Methods: High‐magnification chromoscopic colonoscopy was performed in 82 subjects who underwent endoscopic polypectomy to identify ACF in the lower rectum. Surveillance colonoscopy was then performed 3 years after the baseline polypectomy at Yokohama City University Hospital. Results: The number of ACF was greater in patients who showed adenoma recurrence (7.88 ± 6.35) than in those who did not (2.19 ± 2.95) (P < 0.001). Receiver–operating curve analysis showed that the number of ACF was a highly specific predictor of the risk of adenoma recurrence. Conclusions: This is the first study conducted to investigate the relationship between the number of ACF after endoscopic polypectomy and the likelihood of recurrence of colorectal adenomas. These results suggest that the number of ACF is a useful predictor of the likelihood of colorectal adenoma recurrence.     

The association between location,age and advanced colorectal adenoma characteristics: a propensity-matched analysis

Purpose: Evidence supports an association between certain colorectal adenoma characteristics and predisposition to cancer. The association between anatomical location of colorectal adenoma, age and advanced adenomas needs attention. The objective of this study was to evaluate the possible association between occurrence of sporadic advanced adenomas with location and age.

Materials and methods: A cross-sectional study using baseline data from index colonoscopy from a randomized controlled trial evaluating chemopreventive treatment against recurrence of colorectal adenomas was performed. Inclusion criteria for patients were one adenoma of >1?cm in diameter or multiple adenomas of any size, or an adenoma of any size and familial disposition for colorectal cancer. Multivariate regression and propensity score-matched analyses were used to correlate location of adenomas and age with advanced adenoma features.

Results: In this study, 2149 adenomas were removed in 1215 patients. Advanced colorectal adenomas primarily occurred in the anal part of the colon. Older age was associated with more adenomas and more oral occurrence of adenomas, as well as a higher risk of advanced adenomas. Surprisingly, specifically for the oral adenomas the risk of advanced adenoma seems to be lower for older patients compared with younger.

Conclusions: This study presents new results with regard to association between age, location of adenomas and risk of advanced adenomas. The results indicate that sigmoidoscopy for screening purposes may be obsolete, and add to the existing literature on which future guidelines for screening may be based.     

Body mass index: a marker for significant colorectal neoplasia in a screening population

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Although some studies suggest a positive association between increasing body mass index (BMI) and risk for colorectal neoplasia, the impact on screening has not been examined. We performed a cross-sectional study to examine the association of BMI and colorectal neoplasia in a screening population. METHODS: Data collected for 2493 patients presenting for screening colonoscopy included known risk factors for colorectal neoplasia, demographic information, and lifestyle factors. Our outcome was the endoscopic detection of significant colorectal neoplasia which included adenocarcinoma, high-grade dysplasia, villous tissue, adenomas 1 cm or greater and multiple (>2) adenomas of any size. RESULTS: Overall, we observed an increased risk and prevalence for significant colorectal neoplasia in women as BMI increased (P value for trend <0.002). This relationship was the strongest for the women with a BMI > or =40 (odds ratios=4.26; 95% confidence intervals=2.00-9.11). There was no such relationship in our male population. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing BMI, in our population, was associated with an increase risk for colorectal neoplasia in female patients. This study reinforces the importance of screening colonoscopy especially in obese women.     

Five-year colon surveillance after screening colonoscopy

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Outcomes of colon surveillance after colorectal cancer screening with colonoscopy are uncertain. We conducted a prospective study to measure incidence of advanced neoplasia in patients within 5.5 years of screening colonoscopy. METHODS: Three thousand one hundred twenty-one asymptomatic subjects, age 50 to 75 years, had screening colonoscopy between 1994 and 1997 in the Department of Veterans Affairs. One thousand one hundred seventy-one subjects with neoplasia and 501 neoplasia-free controls were assigned to colonoscopic surveillance over 5 years. Cohorts were defined by baseline findings. Relative risks for advanced neoplasia within 5.5 years were calculated. Advanced neoplasia was defined as tubular adenoma greater than > or =10 mm, adenoma with villous histology, adenoma with high-grade dysplasia, or invasive cancer. RESULTS: Eight hundred ninety-five (76.4%) patients with neoplasia and 298 subjects (59.5%) without neoplasia at baseline had colonoscopy within 5.5 years; 2.4% of patients with no neoplasia had interval advanced neoplasia. The relative risk in patients with baseline neoplasia was 1.92 (95% CI: 0.83-4.42) with 1 or 2 tubular adenomas <10 mm, 5.01 (95% CI: 2.10-11.96) with 3 or more tubular adenomas <10 mm, 6.40 (95% CI: 2.74-14.94) with tubular adenoma > or =10 mm, 6.05 (95% CI: 2.48-14.71) for villous adenoma, and 6.87 (95% CI: 2.61-18.07) for adenoma with high-grade dysplasia. CONCLUSIONS: There is a strong association between results of baseline screening colonoscopy and rate of serious incident lesions during 5.5 years of surveillance. Patients with 1 or 2 tubular adenomas less than 10 mm represent a low-risk group compared with other patients with colon neoplasia.     

Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer and the American Cancer Society

Adenomatous polyps are the most common neoplastic findings discovered in people who undergo colorectal screening or who have a diagnostic work-up for symptoms. It was common practice in the 1970s for these patients to have annual follow-up surveillance examinations to detect additional new adenomas and missed synchronous adenomas. As a result of the National Polyp Study report in 1993, which showed clearly in a randomized design that the first postpolypectomy examination could be deferred for 3 years, guidelines published by a gastrointestinal consortium in 1997 recommended that the first follow-up surveillance take place 3 years after polypectomy for most patients. In 2003 these guidelines were updated and colonoscopy was recommended as the only follow-up examination, stratification at baseline into low risk and higher risk for subsequent adenomas was suggested. The 1997 and 2003 guidelines dealt with both screening and surveillance. However, it has become increasingly clear that postpolypectomy surveillance is now a large part of endoscopic practice, draining resources from screening and diagnosis. In addition, surveys have shown that a large proportion of endoscopists are conducting surveillance examinations at shorter intervals than recommended in the guidelines. In the present report, a careful analytic approach was designed to address all evidence available in the literature to delineate predictors of advanced pathology, both cancer and advanced adenomas, so that patients can be stratified more definitely at their baseline colonoscopy into those at lower risk or increased risk for a subsequent advanced neoplasia. People at increased risk have either 3 or more adenomas, high-grade dysplasia, villous features, or an adenoma 1 cm or larger in size. It is recommended that they have a 3-year follow-up colonoscopy. People at lower risk who have 1 or 2 small (<1 cm) tubular adenomas with no high-grade dysplasia can have a follow-up evaluation in 5-10 years, whereas people with hyperplastic polyps only should have a 10-year follow-up evaluation, as for average-risk people. There have been recent studies that have reported a significant number of missed cancers by colonoscopy. However, high-quality baseline colonoscopy with excellent patient preparation and adequate withdrawal time should minimize this and reduce clinicians concerns. These guidelines were developed jointly by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer and the American Cancer Society to provide a broader consensus and thereby increase the use of the recommendations by endoscopists. The adoption of these guidelines nationally can have a dramatic impact on shifting available resources from intensive surveillance to screening. It has been shown that the first screening colonoscopy and polypectomy produces the greatest effects on reducing the incidence of colorectal cancer in patients with adenomatous polyps.     

Predictors of advanced proximal neoplasia in persons with abnormal screening flexible sigmoidoscopy.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The relationship between distal and proximal colonic findings is uncertain. Thus, there is no consensus on which findings on screening flexible sigmoidoscopy should trigger colonoscopy. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial to assess the relationship between distal and proximal colonic findings. RESULTS: A total of 8802 subjects had an abnormal baseline sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy follow-up. Subjects with <10-mm single or multiple tubular adenomas had similar risks for advanced proximal neoplasia as subjects with hyperplastic polyps or other benign lesions (3%-5%). Subjects with large (>or=10 mm), villous, or severely dysplastic distal adenomas had similarly elevated risks for advanced proximal neoplasia (11%-12%). Multivariate logistic modeling showed a significantly increased risk for advanced proximal neoplasia associated with the presence of a large tubular (odds ratio [OR], 2.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.0-3.4) or villous distal adenoma (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 2.1-3.5) but not with the presence of one (OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.8-1.3) or multiple (OR, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.5-1.2) <10-mm tubular distal adenomas. CONCLUSIONS: Among subjects with a polypoid lesion on screening flexible sigmoidoscopy, those with small tubular distal adenomas are at similar risk for advanced proximal neoplasia as those without distal adenomas. Subjects with a large, villous, or dysplastic distal adenoma are at increased risk. A strategy that encourages individuals with small tubular adenomas on sigmoidoscopy to undergo follow-up colonoscopy and excludes those with nonadenomatous lesions is of questionable validity, because both groups are at similar risk for advanced proximal neoplasia.     

Incidence and recurrence rates of colorectal adenomas in first-degree asymptomatic relatives of patients with colon cancer

OBJECTIVES: Subjects with one first-degree relative affected with colorectal cancer are considered to be at increased risk of colorectal adenomas. We compared the recurrence and incidence rates of colorectal adenomas among subjects with one first-degree relative with colorectal cancer and those without family history. METHODS: A series of consecutive asymptomatic subjects successfully underwent a colonoscopy, were found to have either normal results or at least one adenoma, provided a detailed family history, and were offered a second colonoscopy 3 yr later; 190 out of 436 subjects accepted, 134/172 with one or more adenomas and 56/264 with no abnormalities at the initial examination. A first-degree family history was reported by 43/134 and 26/56, respectively. RESULTS: By multivariate analysis, the presence of adenomas at follow-up examination was significantly associated with a positive family history of colorectal cancer in both subgroups, those with a previously resected adenoma (odds ratio = 2.23, 95% CI = 1.04-4.79) and those without (odds ratio = 8.95, CI = 1.29-62.22). CONCLUSION: A history of one first-degree relative with colorectal cancer is associated with a significant increase in 3-yr cumulative incidence and recurrence rates of adenomas.     

Risk of colorectal adenomas in patients with a family history of colorectal cancer: some implications for screening programmes.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Most colorectal cancers (CRC) arise in colorectal adenomas. A case-control study was conducted to see whether a family history of CRC is associated with a higher prevalence of colorectal adenomas. SUBJECTS: Subjects were drawn from all patients who underwent colonoscopy at the Royal Brisbane Hospital between 1980-1982 and 1985, and included 141 cases with colorectal adenomas diagnosed at colonoscopy and 882 controls who were free of polyps at colonoscopy. METHODS: The prevalence of family history of CRC was compared between patients with adenomas and negative colonoscopy controls. RESULTS: Overall, patients with one first degree relative with CRC were at no greater risk for adenomas at colonoscopy than patients with no family history (odds ratio (OR) = 0.8, 95% confidence intervals (CI) = 0.4, 1.5). Patients with two or more affected first degree relatives had a more than doubled risk for adenomas (OR = 2.3, 95% CI = 0.5, 8.2), and were also more likely to carry moderately or severely dysplastic adenomas (OR = 14.1, 95% CI = 2.0, 62.9). CONCLUSIONS: These findings are consistent with the hypothesis that some families, in addition to those with familial adenomatous polyposis, have an increased susceptibility to develop colorectal adenomas, and that adenomas in such families may have a greater tendency to undergo malignant transformation.     

Follow-up of a cohort of 2604 colorectal adenomas treated in 1991 and 1992. Search for parameters related to adenomatous recurrence

AIM: To evaluate the recurrence of colorectal neoplasia after endoscopic resection of adenomas. METHODS: The establishment of a register of colorectal cancers and pre-cancerous lesions for Loire-Atlantique (a French administrative division) led to the recording of files for all subjects with colorectal adenomas. The files for the cohort followed up for the years 1991 and 1992 were re-examined at the end of 1998 to determine the risk factors for recurrence. Data from control colonoscopies were recorded. RESULTS: The files of 2 208 (84.9%) of the 2 604 subjects included in the study were examined in 1998. One thousand and four hundred fifty- two subjects had at least one control colonoscopy after a mean period of 28 months: 743 (28.5%) had colorectal neoplasia recurrence, including 18 with a cancer and 50 (2%) with high-grade dysplasia adenomas. The parameters related to recurrence risk were: polyp size, number and topographic distribution of adenomas, pedunculated type, histopathological classification, especially the degree of dysplasia. CONCLUSION: Recurrence of neoplasic lesions (cancer, high grade dysplasia adenomas) may be observed after adenoma resection.     

Incidence of advanced adenomas at surveillance colonoscopy in patients with a personal history of colon adenomas: a meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines stratify patients with a personal history of adenomas as low risk (ie, 1-2 small [<10 mm] adenomas at index colonoscopy) or high risk (> or =3 small adenomas or advanced adenoma at index colonoscopy) for recurrent advanced adenomas. Guidelines recommend longer intervals between surveillance colonoscopies for low-risk patients, but physicians frequently perform surveillance colonoscopy at shorter intervals for these patients. OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to perform a meta-analysis about the incidence of advanced adenomas at 3-year surveillance colonoscopy among high- and low-risk patients. METHODS: Computer searches of MEDLINE, PREMEDLINE, and EMBASE were performed to identify appropriate studies. Study selection criteria were (1) study design--prospective or registry-based study, (2) study population--patients with a personal history of adenomas, and (3) intervention--completion of surveillance colonoscopy at an interval of > or =2 years. Data were extracted on (1) incidence of advanced adenomas at surveillance colonoscopy, (2) interval between colonoscopies, and (3) risk factors associated with recurrent adenomas. After the validity of study design was assessed and independent, duplicate data extraction was performed from selected trials, summary relative risks (RR) for the incidence of advanced adenomas at 3-year colonoscopy were calculated. RESULTS: Fifteen studies met study selection criteria, but only 5 studies stratified surveillance colonoscopy results according to findings at the index colonoscopy. Patients with > or =3 adenomas at index colonoscopy were more likely to have recurrent advanced adenomas than were patients with 1 to 2 adenomas: RR 2.52, 95% CI 1.07-5.97. Patients with adenomas with high-grade dysplasia at index colonoscopy were also at increased risk for recurrent advanced adenomas: RR 1.84, 95% CI 1.06-3.19. In the individual studies, increasing size of adenomas and increasing number of adenomas at index colonoscopy were the most commonly reported risk factors associated with recurrent advanced adenomas. No studies stratified surveillance colonoscopy results according to the definitions of low risk and high risk used in current guidelines. CONCLUSION: Few published studies stratify the incidence of advanced adenomas at surveillance colonoscopy according to index colonoscopy findings. In the future, large prospective studies or studies using pooled data from existing randomized controlled trial databases or polyp registries should be used to better define which patients are at low risk for advanced adenoma recurrence.     

First-degree relatives of patients with advanced colorectal adenomas have an increased prevalence of colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The risk of colorectal cancer in relatives of patients with adenomatous colonic polyps is not well defined. This study assessed whether finding colonic neoplasia during screening colonoscopy was related to the family history of colorectal cancer among the participants' parents and siblings. METHODS: Self-reported family history of colorectal cancer was recorded for all participants in a screening colonoscopy study. The size and location of all polyps were recorded before their removal and histologic examination. Participants were grouped according to the most advanced lesion detected. RESULTS: Three thousand one hundred twenty-one patients underwent complete colonoscopic examination. Subjects with adenomas were more likely to have a family history of colorectal cancer than were subjects without polyps (odds ratio [OR], 1.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-1.70). The finding of a small (<1 cm) tubular adenoma as the most advanced lesion was associated with only a modest increase in the OR of colorectal cancer in family members (OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.99-1.61), but the presence of an advanced adenoma was associated with a higher OR (OR, 1.62;5% CI, 1.16-2.26). Younger age of adenoma diagnosis was not related to a higher prevalence of a family history of colorectal cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Relatives patients with advanced colorectal adenomas have an increased risk of colorectal cancer. Individuals with advanced colorectal adenomas should be counseled about the increased risk of colorectal cancer among their relatives.     

Prevalence of colorectal neoplasia in smokers

OBJECTIVES: Smoking has been linked with colorectal neoplasia. Previous colonoscopy screening studies have omitted smoking and have examined only gender, age, and family history. Our aim was to use a screening population to measure the prevalence of neoplasia in smokers, the anatomic location of these lesions, and the strength of this association relative to other risk factors. METHODS: Data collected from the charts of 1988 screening colonoscopy patients included colonic findings, histology, risk factors for colorectal neoplasia, and smoking pattern. Current smokers were defined as those who had smoked more than 10 pack-years and were currently smoking or who had quit within the past 10 yr. Our outcomes were any adenomatous lesion and significant colonic neoplasia, which included adenocarcinoma, high grade dysplasia, villous tissue, large (>1 cm) adenomas, and multiple (more than two) adenomas. RESULTS: Multivariate analysis revealed that current smokers were more likely to have any adenomatous lesion (odds ratio [OR] = 1.89; 95% CI = 1.42-2.51; p < 0.001) as well as significant neoplasia (OR = 2.26; 95% CI = 1.56-3.27; p < 0.001) than those who had never smoked. The increased risk for smokers was predominantly for left-sided neoplasia. The risk for significant neoplasia was greater for smokers than for patients with a family history of colorectal cancer (OR = 1.20; 95% CI = 0.75-1.92; p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Smoking is a significant risk factor for colorectal neoplasia in a screening population, especially for significant left-sided lesions. In our sample population, smoking posed a greater risk than family history of colorectal cancer.     

Incidence and recurrence rates of colorectal adenomas estimated by annually repeated colonoscopies on asymptomatic Japanese

BACKGROUND: Whereas high recurrence rates of colorectal adenomas after polypectomy are widely recognised, little is known of the natural incidence in those with no neoplastic lesions initially. It is also known that single colonoscopy has a significant miss rate. AIMS: To elucidate the incidence and recurrence rates of colorectal neoplasms from a large cohort of asymptomatic Japanese patients on the basis of annually repeated colonoscopies. METHODS: A total of 6225 subjects (4659 men and 1566 women) participating in an annual colonoscopic screening programme and completing three or more colonoscopies were analysed during the 14 year period between 1988 and 2002. Patients were divided into three groups according to the findings of the initial two colonoscopies: 4084 subjects with no neoplasm, 1818 with small adenomas <10 mm, and 323 with advanced lesions, including carcinoma in situ, severe dysplasia, or large adenomas > or =10 mm. Mean age at the second colonoscopy was 48.8 years. RESULTS: For all types of colorectal neoplasms, the incidence rate in those with no initial neoplasm was 7.2%/year whereas recurrence rates in those with small adenomas and advanced lesions were 19.3% and 22.9%/year, respectively. For advanced colorectal lesions, the incidence rate was 0.21%/year whereas recurrence rates in those with small adenomas and advanced lesions were 0.64% and 1.88%/year, respectively. Colorectal neoplasms were in general more likely to develop in males and older subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Although recurrence rates after polypectomy were elevated, the incidence rates in subjects with no neoplastic lesions initially were quite high.     

Prevalence and risk of colorectal neoplasia in consumers of alcohol in a screening population

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Although studies suggest a positive association between alcohol consumption and risk for colorectal neoplasia, the impact on screening has not been fully examined. It is also unclear whether all types of alcohol are associated with an increased risk. We performed a cross-sectional study to examine the impact of regular alcohol consumption on the detection of significant colorectal neoplasia in a screening population. METHODS: Data collected for 2,291 patients presenting for screening colonoscopy: known risk factors for colorectal neoplasia and alcohol drinking pattern. Our outcome was the endoscopic detection of significant colorectal neoplasia, which included adenocarcinoma, high-grade dysplasia, villous tissue, adenomas 1 cm or greater and multiple (>2) adenomas of any size. RESULTS: When compared to abstainers, we found an increased risk for significant neoplasia in those patients who consumed more than eight drinks of spirits alcohol (26.3%; OR = 2.53; 95% CI = 1.10-4.28; p < 0.01) and those who drank more than eight servings of beer per week (21.7%; OR = 2.43; 95% CI = 1.11-5.32; p= 0.02). Consuming one to eight glasses of wine per week was associated with a decreased risk for significant neoplasia (OR = 0.55; 95% CI = 0.34-0.87; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: While there was a more than twofold increased risk of significant colorectal neoplasia in people who drink spirits and beer, people who drank wine had a lower risk. In our sample, people who drank more than eight servings of beer or spirits per week had at least a one in five chance of having significant colorectal neoplasia detected by screening colonoscopy.     

Daily soluble aspirin and prevention of colorectal adenoma recurrence: one-year results of the APACC trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Epidemiologic and experimental studies have suggested that aspirin intake reduces the risk for colorectal carcinogenesis. However, the available data are not sufficient to serve as the basis for firm recommendations. METHODS: We randomly assigned 272 patients with a history of colorectal adenomas (at least one more than 5 mm in diameter, or more than 3) to daily lysine acetylsalicylate (160 or 300 mg/day) or placebo for 4 years. The primary end points were adenoma recurrence after 1 and 4 years. These results are those of the year 1 colonoscopy. RESULTS: Among the 238 patients who completed the year 1 colonoscopy, at least one adenoma was observed in 38 patients of the 126 (30%) in the aspirin group and in 46 of the 112 (41%) in the placebo group; relative risk was 0.73 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.52-1.04; P = 0.08). At least one adenoma of more than 5 mm diameter was observed in 13 patients (10%) in the aspirin group and 26 (23%) in the placebo group (P = 0.01). The corresponding numbers for adenomas more than 10 mm in diameter were one (1%) and 7 (6%) (P = 0.05). Stepwise regression showed that independent factors associated with lower adenoma recurrence are aspirin treatment (adenoma >5 mm, P = 0.01), absence of personal history of adenoma before the entry colonoscopy (P = 0.01), and initial adenomatous polyp burden less than 10 mm (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Daily soluble aspirin is associated with a reduction in the risk for recurrent adenomas found at colonoscopy 1 year after starting treatment.     

Identification of acromegalic patients at risk of developing colonic adenomas

BACKGROUND: Acromegaly seems to be associated with an increased prevalence of colonic adenomas, although factors affecting their development and recurrence of the latter are not fully known. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Seventy-nine patients with active acromegaly were prospectively followed up for 5 yr. Two hundred eighty healthy subjects served as controls. Colonoscopy and assessment of acromegaly activity were performed at 1-yr intervals. Acromegaly was defined as controlled if serum IGF-I levels were within the normal age-adjusted range. RESULTS: Colonic adenomas were found in 26 of 79 acromegalic patients (32.9%) and 60 of 280 controls (21.4%) at baseline (P = 0.035, adjusted for age and sex, odds ratio 1.82, 95% confidence interval, 1.02-3.25). Seven patients had hyperplastic polyps; the remaining 46 acromegalic patients had no detectable lesions at baseline and did not develop adenomas during the study period. Of the 26 patients with colonic adenomas at baseline, 16 (61.5%) had at least one recurrence of colonic adenomas (P < 0.0001 vs. patients without colonic lesions at baseline), and multiple recurrences were more frequent in patients with uncontrolled acromegaly (66.7% vs. 17.6% in patients with controlled acromegaly, P = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: The first colonoscopy helps to identify acromegalic patients at high risk of developing colonic adenomas. If colonic adenomas are not present initially, it is unlikely that they develop thereafter, independently of metabolic control of acromegaly. Conversely, new lesions are frequent (and often multiple) in patients who already have colonic adenomas at baseline, particularly if acromegalic disease is poorly controlled by treatment.