Surveillance Colonoscopy Findings in Older Adults With a History of Colorectal Adenomas.

Importance: Postpolypectomy surveillance is a common colonoscopy indication in older adults; however, guidelines provide little direction on when to stop surveillance in this population. Objective: To estimate surveillance colonoscopy yields in older adults. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cross-sectional study included individuals 70 to 85 years of age who received surveillance colonoscopy at a large, community-based US health care system between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2019; had an adenoma detected 12 or more months previously; and had at least 1 year of health plan enrollment before surveillance. Individuals were excluded due to prior colorectal cancer (CRC), hereditary CRC syndrome, inflammatory bowel disease, or prior colectomy or if the surveillance colonoscopy had an inadequate bowel preparation or was incomplete. Data were analyzed from September 1, 2022, to February 22, 2024. Exposures: Age (70-74, 75-79, or 80-85 years) at surveillance colonoscopy and prior adenoma finding (ie, advanced adenoma vs nonadvanced adenoma). Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were yields of CRC, advanced adenoma, and advanced neoplasia overall (all ages) by age group and by both age group and prior adenoma finding. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with advanced neoplasia detection at surveillance. Results: Of 9740 surveillance colonoscopies among 9601 patients, 5895 (60.5%) were in men, and 5738 (58.9%), 3225 (33.1%), and 777 (8.0%) were performed in those aged 70-74, 75-79, and 80-85 years, respectively. Overall, CRC yields were found in 28 procedures (0.3%), advanced adenoma in 1141 (11.7%), and advanced neoplasia in 1169 (12.0%); yields did not differ significantly across age groups. Overall, CRC yields were higher for colonoscopies among patients with a prior advanced adenoma vs nonadvanced adenoma (12 of 2305 [0.5%] vs 16 of 7435 [0.2%]; P = .02), and the same was observed for advanced neoplasia (380 of 2305 [16.5%] vs 789 of 7435 [10.6%]; P < .001). Factors associated with advanced neoplasia at surveillance were prior advanced adenoma (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.65; 95% CI, 1.44-1.88), body mass index of 30 or greater vs less than 25 (AOR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.03-1.44), and having ever smoked tobacco (AOR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.01-1.30). Asian or Pacific Islander race was inversely associated with advanced neoplasia (AOR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.67-0.99). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of surveillance colonoscopy yield in older adults, CRC detection was rare regardless of prior adenoma finding, whereas the advanced neoplasia yield was 12.0% overall. Yields were higher among those with a prior advanced adenoma than among those with prior nonadvanced adenoma and did not increase significantly with age. These findings can help inform whether to continue surveillance colonoscopy in older adults.

Predicting Risk of Colorectal Cancer After Adenoma Removal in a Large Community-Based Setting.

INTRODUCTION: Colonoscopy surveillance guidelines categorize individuals as high or low risk for future colorectal cancer (CRC) based primarily on their prior polyp characteristics, but this approach is imprecise, and consideration of other risk factors may improve postpolypectomy risk stratification. METHODS: Among patients who underwent a baseline colonoscopy with removal of a conventional adenoma in 2004-2016, we compared the performance for postpolypectomy CRC risk prediction (through 2020) of a comprehensive model featuring patient age, diabetes diagnosis, and baseline colonoscopy indication and prior polyp findings (i.e., adenoma with advanced histology, polyp size ≥10 mm, and sessile serrated adenoma or traditional serrated adenoma) with a polyp model featuring only polyp findings. Models were developed using Cox regression. Performance was assessed using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and calibration by the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test. RESULTS: Among 95,001 patients randomly divided 70:30 into model development (n = 66,500) and internal validation cohorts (n = 28,501), 495 CRC were subsequently diagnosed; 354 in the development cohort and 141 in the validation cohort. Models demonstrated adequate calibration, and the comprehensive model demonstrated superior predictive performance to the polyp model in the development cohort (AUC 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68-0.74 vs AUC 0.61, 95% CI 0.58-0.64, respectively) and validation cohort (AUC 0.70, 95% CI 0.65-0.75 vs AUC 0.62, 95% CI 0.57-0.67, respectively). DISCUSSION: A comprehensive CRC risk prediction model featuring patient age, diabetes diagnosis, and baseline colonoscopy indication and polyp findings was more accurate at predicting postpolypectomy CRC diagnosis than a model based on polyp findings alone.

Impact of a scalable training program on the quality of colonoscopy performance and risk of postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopist adenoma detection rates (ADRs) vary widely and are associated with patients' risk of postcolonoscopy colorectal cancers (PCCRCs). However, few scalable physician-directed interventions demonstrably both improve ADR and reduce PCCRC risk. METHODS: Among patients undergoing colonoscopy, we evaluated the influence of a scalable online training on individual-level ADRs and PCCRC risk. The intervention was a 30-minute, interactive, online training, developed using behavior change theory, to address factors that potentially impede detection of adenomas. Analyses included interrupted time series analyses for pretraining versus posttraining individual-physician ADR changes (adjusted for temporal trends) and Cox regression for associations between ADR changes and patients' PCCRC risk. RESULTS: Across 21 endoscopy centers and all 86 eligible endoscopists, ADRs increased immediately by an absolute 3.13% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.31-4.94) in the 3-month quarter after training compared with .58% per quarter (95% CI, .40-.77) and 0.33% per quarter (95% CI, .16-.49) in the 3-year pretraining and posttraining periods, respectively. Posttraining ADR increases were higher among endoscopists with pretraining ADRs below the median. Among 146,786 posttraining colonoscopies (all indications), each 1% absolute increase in screening ADR posttraining was associated with a 4% decrease in their patients' PCCRC risk (hazard ratio, .96; 95% CI, .93-.99). An ADR increase of ≥10% versus <1% was associated with a 55% reduced risk of PCCRC (hazard ratio, .45; 95% CI, .24-.82). CONCLUSIONS: A scalable, online behavior change training intervention focused on modifiable factors was associated with significant and sustained improvements in ADR, particularly among endoscopists with lower ADRs. These ADR changes were associated with substantial reductions in their patients' risk of PCCRC.

Validation of a Genetic-Enhanced Risk Prediction Model for Colorectal Cancer in a Large Community-Based Cohort.

BACKGROUND: Polygenic risk scores (PRS) which summarize individuals' genetic risk profile may enhance targeted colorectal cancer screening. A critical step towards clinical implementation is rigorous external validations in large community-based cohorts. This study externally validated a PRS-enhanced colorectal cancer risk model comprising 140 known colorectal cancer loci to provide a comprehensive assessment on prediction performance. METHODS: The model was developed using 20,338 individuals and externally validated in a community-based cohort (n = 85,221). We validated predicted 5-year absolute colorectal cancer risk, including calibration using expected-to-observed case ratios (E/O) and calibration plots, and discriminatory accuracy using time-dependent AUC. The PRS-related improvement in AUC, sensitivity and specificity were assessed in individuals of age 45 to 74 years (screening-eligible age group) and 40 to 49 years with no endoscopy history (younger-age group). RESULTS: In European-ancestral individuals, the predicted 5-year risk calibrated well [E/O = 1.01; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.91-1.13] and had high discriminatory accuracy (AUC = 0.73; 95% CI, 0.71-0.76). Adding the PRS to a model with age, sex, family and endoscopy history improved the 5-year AUC by 0.06 (P < 0.001) and 0.14 (P = 0.05) in the screening-eligible age and younger-age groups, respectively. Using a risk-threshold of 5-year SEER colorectal cancer incidence rate at age 50 years, adding the PRS had a similar sensitivity but improved the specificity by 11% (P < 0.001) in the screening-eligible age group. In the younger-age group it improved the sensitivity by 27% (P = 0.04) with similar specificity. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed PRS-enhanced model provides a well-calibrated 5-year colorectal cancer risk prediction and improves discriminatory accuracy in the external cohort. IMPACT: The proposed model has potential utility in risk-stratified colorectal cancer prevention.

Association of Physician Adenoma Detection Rates With Postcolonoscopy Colorectal Cancer.

Importance: Although colonoscopy is frequently performed in the United States, there is limited evidence to support threshold values for physician adenoma detection rate as a quality metric. Objective: To evaluate the association between physician adenoma detection rate values and risks of postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer and related deaths. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study in 3 large integrated health care systems (Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, and Kaiser Permanente Washington) with 43 endoscopy centers, 383 eligible physicians, and 735 396 patients aged 50 to 75 years who received a colonoscopy that did not detect cancer (negative colonoscopy) between January 2011 and June 2017, with patient follow-up through December 2017. Exposures: The adenoma detection rate of each patient's physician based on screening examinations in the calendar year prior to the patient's negative colonoscopy. Adenoma detection rate was defined as a continuous variable in statistical analyses and was also dichotomized as at or above vs below the median for descriptive analyses. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome (postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer) was tumor registry-verified colorectal adenocarcinoma diagnosed at least 6 months after any negative colonoscopy (all indications). The secondary outcomes included death from postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer. Results: Among 735 396 patients who had 852 624 negative colonoscopies, 440 352 (51.6%) were performed on female patients, median patient age was 61.4 years (IQR, 55.5-67.2 years), median follow-up per patient was 3.25 years (IQR, 1.56-5.01 years), and there were 619 postcolonoscopy colorectal cancers and 36 related deaths during more than 2.4 million person-years of follow-up. The patients of physicians with higher adenoma detection rates had significantly lower risks for postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer (hazard ratio [HR], 0.97 per 1% absolute adenoma detection rate increase [95% CI, 0.96-0.98]) and death from postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer (HR, 0.95 per 1% absolute adenoma detection rate increase [95% CI, 0.92-0.99]) across a broad range of adenoma detection rate values, with no interaction by sex (P value for interaction = .18). Compared with adenoma detection rates below the median of 28.3%, detection rates at or above the median were significantly associated with a lower risk of postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer (1.79 vs 3.10 cases per 10 000 person-years; absolute difference in 7-year risk, -12.2 per 10 000 negative colonoscopies [95% CI, -10.3 to -13.4]; HR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.52-0.73]) and related deaths (0.05 vs 0.22 cases per 10 000 person-years; absolute difference in 7-year risk, -1.2 per 10 000 negative colonoscopies [95%, CI, -0.80 to -1.69]; HR, 0.26 [95% CI, 0.11-0.65]). Conclusions and Relevance: Within 3 large community-based settings, colonoscopies by physicians with higher adenoma detection rates were significantly associated with lower risks of postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer across a broad range of adenoma detection rate values. These findings may help inform recommended targets for colonoscopy quality measures.

Natural Language Processing for the Accurate Identification of Colorectal Cancer Mismatch Repair Status in Lynch Syndrome Screening.

Lynch syndrome (LS) is the most common type of hereditary colorectal cancer (CRC) syndrome caused by pathogenic variants in mismatch repair (MMR) genes.1 Current multisociety guidelines recommend screening all CRC tumors for LS.2,3 The most widely adopted screening method is MMR immunohistochemistry (IHC) followed by germline analysis if indicated.2,3 However, the text-based nature of pathology and IHC reports used for LS screening results impedes creation of an efficient tracking system for identifying affected patients and screening outcomes.4 In this study, we developed and validated a natural language processing (NLP) tool for extracting MMR IHC results in LS screening in a large, diverse, multicenter, community-based setting.5.

Validation of an Algorithm to Identify Patients at Risk for Colorectal Cancer Based on Laboratory Test and Demographic Data in Diverse, Community-Based Population.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Approximately 30%-40% of screening-eligible adults in the United States are not up to date with colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. We aimed to validate a predictive score, generated by a machine learning algorithm with common laboratory test data, to identify patients at high risk for CRC in a large, community-based, ethnically diverse cohort. METHODS: We performed a nested case-control study using data from members of Kaiser Permanente Northern California (1996-2015). Cases were cohort members who received a complete blood cell count at ages 50-75 y, did not have a prior or current diagnosis of CRC diagnosis at the time of the blood cell count, and were subsequently diagnosed with CRC. We used data from the cohort to validate the ability of an algorithm that uses laboratory and demographic information to identify patients at increased risk for CRC. Test performance was evaluated using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and odds ratios (OR) with 95% CI values to compare high (defined as 97% specificity or more) vs low scores. RESULTS: A high score from the algorithm identified patients with a CRC diagnosis within the next 6 months with 35.4% sensitivity (95% CI, 33.8-36.7) and an AUROC of 0.78 (95% CI, 0.77-0.78). Patients with a high score had an increased risk of diagnosis with early-stage CRC (OR, 13.1; 95% CI, 11.8-14.3) and advanced stage CRC (OR, 24.8; 95% CI, 22.4-27.3) within the next 6 months. In patients with high scores, the ORs for proximal and distal cancers were 34.7 (95% CI, 31.5-37.7) and 12.1 (95% CI, 10.1-13.9), respectively. The algorithm's accuracy decreased with the time interval between blood test result and CRC diagnosis; performance did not differ by sex or race. CONCLUSIONS: We validated a predictive model that uses complete blood cell count and demographic data to identify patients at high risk of CRC. The algorithm identified 3% of the population who require an investigation and identified 35% of patients who received a diagnosis of CRC within the next 6 months.

Long-term Risk of Colorectal Cancer and Related Death After Adenoma Removal in a Large, Community-based Population.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The long-term risks of colorectal cancer (CRC) and CRC-related death following adenoma removal are uncertain. Data are needed to inform evidence-based surveillance guidelines, which vary in follow-up recommendations for some polyp types. Using data from a large, community-based integrated health care setting, we examined the risks of CRC and related death by baseline colonoscopy adenoma findings. METHODS: Participants at 21 medical centers underwent baseline colonoscopies from 2004 through 2010; findings were categorized as no-adenoma, low-risk adenoma, or high-risk adenoma. Participants were followed until the earliest of CRC diagnosis, death, health plan disenrollment, or December 31, 2017. Risks of CRC and related deaths among the high- and low-risk adenoma groups were compared with the no-adenoma group using Cox regression adjusting for confounders. RESULTS: Among 186,046 patients, 64,422 met eligibility criteria (54.3% female; mean age, 61.6 ± 7.1 years; median follow-up time, 8.1 years from the baseline colonoscopy). Compared with the no-adenoma group (45,881 patients), the high-risk adenoma group (7563 patients) had a higher risk of CRC (hazard ratio [HR] 2.61; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.87-3.63) and related death (HR 3.94; 95% CI 1.90-6.56), whereas the low-risk adenoma group (10,978 patients) did not have a significant increase in risk of CRC (HR 1.29; 95% CI 0.89-1.88) or related death (HR 0.65; 95% CI 0.19-2.18). CONCLUSIONS: With up to 14 years of follow-up, high-risk adenomas were associated with an increased risk of CRC and related death, supporting early colonoscopy surveillance. Low-risk adenomas were not associated with a significantly increased risk of CRC or related deaths. These results can inform current surveillance guidelines for high- and low-risk adenomas.

Oral Leukoplakia and Risk of Progression to Oral Cancer: A Population-Based Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The optimal clinical management of oral precancer remains uncertain. We investigated the natural history of oral leukoplakia, the most common oral precancerous lesion, to estimate the relative and absolute risks of progression to cancer, the predictive accuracy of a clinician's decision to biopsy a leukoplakia vis-à-vis progression, and histopathologic predictors of progression. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study (1996-2012) of patients with oral leukoplakia (n = 4886), identified using electronic medical records within Kaiser Permanente Northern California. Among patients with leukoplakia who received a biopsy (n = 1888), we conducted a case-cohort study to investigate histopathologic predictors of progression. Analyses included indirect standardization and unweighted or weighted Cox regression. RESULTS: Compared with the overall Kaiser Permanente Northern California population, oral cancer incidence was substantially elevated in oral leukoplakia patients (standardized incidence ratio = 40.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 34.8 to 47.6; n = 161 cancers over 22 582 person-years). Biopsied leukoplakias had a higher oral cancer risk compared with those that were not biopsied (adjusted hazard ratio = 2.38, 95% CI = 1.73 to 3.28). However, to identify a prevalent or incident oral cancer, the biopsy decision had low sensitivity (59.6%), low specificity (62.1%), and moderate positive-predictive value (5.1%). Risk of progression to oral cancer statistically significantly increased with the grade of dysplasia; 5-year competing risk-adjusted absolute risks were: leukoplakia overall = 3.3%, 95% CI = 2.7% to 3.9%; no dysplasia = 2.2%, 95% CI = 1.5% to 3.1%; mild-dysplasia = 11.9%, 95% CI = 7.1% to 18.1%; moderate-dysplasia = 8.7%, 95% CI = 3.2% to 17.9%; and severe dysplasia = 32.2%, 95% CI = 8.1%-60.0%. Yet 39.6% of cancers arose from biopsied leukoplakias without dysplasia. CONCLUSIONS: The modest accuracy of the decision to biopsy a leukoplakia vis-à-vis presence or eventual development of oral cancer highlights the need for routine biopsy of all leukoplakias regardless of visual or clinical impression. Leukoplakia patients, particularly those with dysplasia, need to be closely monitored for signs of early cancer.

Clinical Molecular Marker Testing Data Capture to Promote Precision Medicine Research Within the Cancer Research Network.

PURPOSE: To evaluate health care systems for the availability of population-level data on the frequency of use and results of clinical molecular marker tests to inform precision cancer care. METHODS: We assessed cancer-related molecular marker test data availability across 12 US health care systems in the Cancer Research Network. Overall, these systems provide care to a diverse population of more than 12 million people in the United States. We performed qualitative analyses of test data availability for five blood-based protein, nine germline, and 14 tissue-based tumor marker tests in each health care system's electronic health record and tumor registry using key informants, test code lists, and manual review of data types and output. We then performed quantitative analyses to estimate the proportion of patients with cancer with test utilization data and results for specific molecular marker tests. RESULTS: Health systems were able to systematically capture population-level data on all five blood protein markers, six of 14 tissue-based tumor markers, and none of the nine germline markers. Successful, systematic data capture was achievable for tests with electronic data feeds for test results (blood protein markers) or through prior manual abstraction by tumor registrars (select tumor-based markers). For test results stored in scanned image files (particularly germline and tumor marker tests), information on which test was performed and test results was not readily accessible in an electronic format. CONCLUSION: Even in health care systems with sophisticated electronic health records, there were few codified data elements available for evaluating precision cancer medicine test use and results at the population level. Health care organizations should establish standards for electronic reporting of precision medicine tests to expedite cancer research and facilitate the implementation of precision medicine approaches.

Colorectal Cancer Screening in People With and Without HIV in an Integrated Health Care Setting.

BACKGROUND: As people with HIV (PWH) live longer, age-appropriate colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is increasingly important. Limited data exist on CRC screening and outcomes comparing PWH and persons without HIV. SETTING: Large integrated health care system. METHODS: This study included PWH and demographically matched persons without HIV who were aged 50-75 years during 2005-2016 and had no previous CRC screening. We evaluated time to first CRC screening (fecal test, sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy). We also assessed detection of adenoma and CRC with sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy by HIV status, accounting for CRC risk factors including sex, age, race/ethnicity, number of outpatient visits, smoking, body mass index, type-2 diabetes, and inflammatory bowel disease. Among PWH, we evaluated whether CD4 count (<200/200-499/≥500 cells/µL) was associated with adenoma and CRC. RESULTS: Among 3177 PWH and 29,219 persons without HIV, PWH were more likely to be screened (85.6% vs. 79.1% within 5 years, P < 0.001). Among those with sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy, adenoma was detected in 161 (19.6%) PWH and 1498 (22.6%) persons without HIV, and CRC was detected in 4 (0.5%) PWH and 69 (1.0%) persons without HIV. In adjusted analyses, we found no difference in prevalence of either adenoma or CRC by HIV status (adjusted prevalence ratio = 0.97, 95% confidence interval: 0.83 to 1.12). Lower CD4 count did not increase likelihood of adenoma or CRC. CONCLUSIONS: Within an integrated health care system with an organized CRC screening program, we found no disparities in CRC screening uptake or outcomes among people with and without HIV, and CD4 count did not influence CRC risk among PWH.

Comparison of Universal Versus Age-Restricted Screening of Colorectal Tumors for Lynch Syndrome Using Mismatch Repair Immunohistochemistry: A Cohort Study.

Background: Guidelines recommend screening all patients with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer (CRC) for Lynch syndrome (LS). However, the efficiency of universal LS screening in elderly populations has not been well studied. Objective: To compare the performance of age-restricted and universal LS screening using reflex mismatch repair (MMR) immunohistochemistry (IHC) of CRC tumors. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: A large, diverse, community-based health care system. Participants: 3891 persons with newly diagnosed CRC who had LS screening between 2011 and 2016. Measurements: Diagnostic yield of different LS screening strategies. Results: Sixty-three LS cases (diagnostic yield, 1.62%) were identified by universal screening, with only 5 (7.9%) detected after age 70 years and 1 (1.6%) detected after age 80 years. When all patients with CRC who had universal screening were used as the denominator, 58 LS cases (diagnostic yield, 1.49% [95% CI, 1.13% to 1.92%]) were identified in patients with CRC diagnosed at or before age 70 years, 60 LS cases (diagnostic yield, 1.54% [CI, 1.18% to 1.98%]) were identified in those with CRC diagnosed at or before age 75 years, and 62 LS cases (diagnostic yield, 1.59% [CI, 1.22% to 2.04%]) were identified in those with CRC diagnosed at or before age 80 years. Using 75 years as the upper age limit for screening missed 3 of 63 (4.8%) LS cases but resulted in 1053 (27.1%) fewer cases requiring tumor MMR IHC. Using 80 years as the upper age limit missed 1 of 63 (1.6%) LS cases and resulted in 668 (17.2%) fewer cases requiring tumor MMR IHC. Limitation: Persons who were eligible for but did not complete germline analysis were excluded from calculations of performance characteristics. Conclusion: The incremental diagnostic yield decreased substantially after age 70 to 75 years. Stopping reflex CRC screening for LS after age 80 years may be reasonable because of very low efficiency, particularly in resource-limited settings, but this merits further investigation. Studies evaluating the effect of diagnosing LS in elderly persons on their family members are needed. Primary Funding Source: Kaiser Permanente Northern California Division of Research.

Risk factors for medication non-adherence among atrial fibrillation patients.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) patients are routinely prescribed medications to prevent and treat complications, including those from common co-occurring comorbidities. However, adherence to such medications may be suboptimal. Therefore, we sought to identify risk factors for general medication non-adherence in a population of patients with atrial fibrillation. METHODS: Data were collected from a large, ethnically-diverse cohort of Kaiser Permanente Northern and Southern California adult members with incident diagnosed AF between January 1, 2006 and June 30, 2009. Self-reported questionnaires were completed between May 1, 2010 and September 30, 2010, assessing patient socio-demographics, health behaviors, health status, medical history and medication adherence. Medication adherence was assessed using a previously validated 3-item questionnaire. Medication non-adherence was defined as either taking medication(s) as the doctor prescribed 75% of the time or less, or forgetting or choosing to skip one or more medication(s) once per week or more. Electronic health records were used to obtain additional data on medical history. Multivariable logistic regression analyses examined the associations between patient characteristics and self-reported general medication adherence among patients with complete questionnaire data. RESULTS: Among 12,159 patients with complete questionnaire data, 6.3% (n = 771) reported medication non-adherence. Minority race/ethnicity versus non-Hispanic white, not married/with partner versus married/with partner, physical inactivity versus physically active, alcohol use versus no alcohol use, any days of self-reported poor physical health, mental health and/or sleep quality in the past 30 days versus 0 days, memory decline versus no memory decline, inadequate versus adequate health literacy, low-dose aspirin use versus no low-dose aspirin use, and diabetes mellitus were associated with higher adjusted odds of non-adherence, whereas, ages 65-84 years versus < 65 years of age, a Charlson Comorbidity Index score ≥ 3 versus 0, and hypertension were associated with lower adjusted odds of non-adherence. CONCLUSIONS: Several potentially preventable and/or modifiable risk factors related to medication non-adherence and a few non-modifiable risk factors were identified. These risk factors should be considered when assessing medication adherence among patients diagnosed with AF.

Long-term Risk of Colorectal Cancer and Related Deaths After a Colonoscopy With Normal Findings.

Importance: Guidelines recommend a 10-year rescreening interval after a colonoscopy with normal findings (negative colonoscopy results), but evidence supporting this recommendation is limited. Objective: To examine the long-term risks of colorectal cancer and colorectal cancer deaths after a negative colonoscopy result, in comparison with individuals unscreened, in a large, community-based setting. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in an integrated health care delivery organization serving more than 4 million members across Northern California. A total of 1 251 318 average-risk screening-eligible patients (age 50-75 years) between January 1, 1998, and December 31, 2015, were included. The study was concluded on December 31, 2016. Exposures: Screening was examined as a time-varying exposure; all participants contributed person-time unscreened until they were either screened or censored. If the screening received was a negative colonoscopy result, the participants contributed person-time in the negative colonoscopy results group until they were censored. Main Outcomes and Measures: Using Cox proportional hazards regression models, the hazard ratios (HRs) for colorectal cancer and related deaths were calculated according to time since negative colonoscopy result (or since cohort entry for those unscreened). Hazard ratios were adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, Charlson comorbidity score, and body mass index. Results: Of the 1 251 318 patients, 613 692 were men (49.0%); mean age was 55.6 (7.0) years. Compared with the unscreened participants, those with a negative colonoscopy result had a reduced risk of colorectal cancer and related deaths throughout the more than 12-year follow-up period, and although reductions in risk were attenuated with increasing years of follow-up, there was a 46% lower risk of colorectal cancer (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.31-0.94) and 88% lower risk of related deaths (hazard ratio, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.02-0.82) at the current guideline-recommended 10-year rescreening interval. Conclusions and Relevance: A negative colonoscopy result in average-risk patients was associated with a lower risk of colorectal cancer and related deaths for more than 12 years after examination, compared with unscreened patients. Our study findings may be able to inform guidelines for rescreening after a negative colonoscopy result and future studies to evaluate the costs and benefits of earlier vs later rescreening intervals.

Effects of Organized Colorectal Cancer Screening on Cancer Incidence and Mortality in a Large Community-Based Population.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Little information is available on the effectiveness of organized colorectal cancer (CRC) screening on screening uptake, incidence, and mortality in community-based populations. METHODS: We contrasted screening rates, age-adjusted annual CRC incidence, and incidence-based mortality rates before (baseline year 2000) and after (through 2015) implementation of organized screening outreach, from 2007 through 2008 (primarily annual fecal immunochemical testing and colonoscopy), in a large community-based population. Among screening-eligible individuals 51-75 years old, we calculated annual up-to-date status for cancer screening (by fecal test, sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy), CRC incidence, cancer stage distributions, and incidence-based mortality. RESULTS: Initiation of organized CRC screening significantly increased the up-to-date status of screening, from 38.9% in 2000 to 82.7% in 2015 (P < .01). Higher rates of screening were associated with a 25.5% reduction in annual CRC incidence between 2000 and 2015, from 95.8 to 71.4 cases/100,000 (P < .01), and a 52.4% reduction in cancer mortality, from 30.9 to 14.7 deaths/100,000 (P < .01). Increased screening was initially associated with increased CRC incidence, due largely to greater detection of early-stage cancers, followed by decreases in cancer incidence. Advanced-stage CRC incidence rates decreased 36.2%, from 45.9 to 29.3 cases/100,000 (P < .01), and early-stage CRC incidence rates decreased 14.5%, from 48.2 to 41.2 cases/100,000 (P < .04). CONCLUSIONS: Implementing an organized CRC screening program in a large community-based population rapidly increased screening participation to the ≥80% target set by national organizations. Screening rates were sustainable and associated with substantial decreases in CRC incidence and mortality within short time intervals, consistent with early detection and cancer prevention.

Low Cancer Risk of South Asians: A Brief Report.

CONTEXT: South Asians (ancestry in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, or Sri Lanka) may have lower cancer risk than other racial-ethnic groups. OBJECTIVE: To supplement published cohort data suggesting low cancer risk in South Asians. DESIGN: Logistic regression models with 7 covariates to study cancer mortality through 2012 in 273,843 persons (1117 South Asians) with baseline examination data from 1964 to 1985. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Cancer mortality. RESULTS: Through 2012, death was attributed to cancer in 28,031 persons, of which 1555 were Asians, including 32 South Asians. The all-Asian vs white adjusted odds ratio was 1.0, and the South Asian vs white odds ratio was 0.5 (p < 0.001). In separate regressions, South Asians were at lower risk than blacks, Chinese, Filipinos, Japanese, or other Asians. The South Asian-white disparity was concentrated in men but was generally similar when strata of smoking, body mass index, baseline age, and date of death were compared. CONCLUSION: These data support the observation that compared with whites and other Asian groups, South Asians, especially men, have a lower risk of cancer.