Prospective, Multi-Institutional, Real-Time Next-Generation Sequencing of Pancreatic Cyst Fluid Reveals Diverse Genomic Alterations That Improve the Clinical Management of Pancreatic Cysts.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Next-generation sequencing (NGS) of pancreatic cyst fluid is a useful adjunct in the assessment of patients with pancreatic cyst. However, previous studies have been retrospective or single institutional experiences. The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate NGS on a multi-institutional cohort of patients with pancreatic cyst in real time. METHODS: The performance of a 22-gene NGS panel (PancreaSeq) was first retrospectively confirmed and then within a 2-year timeframe, PancreaSeq testing was prospectively used to evaluate endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration pancreatic cyst fluid from 31 institutions. PancreaSeq results were correlated with endoscopic ultrasound findings, ancillary studies, current pancreatic cyst guidelines, follow-up, and expanded testing (Oncomine) of postoperative specimens. RESULTS: Among 1933 PCs prospectively tested, 1887 (98%) specimens from 1832 patients were satisfactory for PancreaSeq testing. Follow-up was available for 1216 (66%) patients (median, 23 months). Based on 251 (21%) patients with surgical pathology, mitogen-activated protein kinase/GNAS mutations had 90% sensitivity and 100% specificity for a mucinous cyst (positive predictive value [PPV], 100%; negative predictive value [NPV], 77%). On exclusion of low-level variants, the combination of mitogen-activated protein kinase/GNAS and TP53/SMAD4/CTNNB1/mammalian target of rapamycin alterations had 88% sensitivity and 98% specificity for advanced neoplasia (PPV, 97%; NPV, 93%). Inclusion of cytopathologic evaluation to PancreaSeq testing improved the sensitivity to 93% and maintained a high specificity of 95% (PPV, 92%; NPV, 95%). In comparison, other modalities and current pancreatic cyst guidelines, such as the American Gastroenterology Association and International Association of Pancreatology/Fukuoka guidelines, show inferior diagnostic performance. The sensitivities and specificities of VHL and MEN1/loss of heterozygosity alterations were 71% and 100% for serous cystadenomas (PPV, 100%; NPV, 98%), and 68% and 98% for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PPV, 85%; NPV, 95%), respectively. On follow-up, serous cystadenomas with TP53/TERT mutations exhibited interval growth, whereas pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors with loss of heterozygosity of ≥3 genes tended to have distant metastasis. None of the 965 patients who did not undergo surgery developed malignancy. Postoperative Oncomine testing identified mucinous cysts with BRAF fusions and ERBB2 amplification, and advanced neoplasia with CDKN2A alterations. CONCLUSIONS: PancreaSeq was not only sensitive and specific for various pancreatic cyst types and advanced neoplasia arising from mucinous cysts, but also reveals the diversity of genomic alterations seen in pancreatic cysts and their clinical significance.

Prophylactic Perioperative Antibiotics in Open Pancreaticoduodenectomy: When Less Is More and When It Is Not. A National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Propensity-Matched Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: We hypothesized that first-generation cephalosporins (G1CEP) provide adequate antimicrobial coverage for pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) when no biliary stent is present but might be inferior to second-generation cephalosporins or broad-spectrum antibiotics (G2CEP/BS) in decreasing surgical-site infection (SSI) rates when a biliary stent is present. METHODS: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program 2014-2019 was used to select patients who underwent elective open PD. We divided the population into no-stent versus stent groups based on the status of biliary drainage and then divided each group into G1CEP versus G2CEP/BS subgroups based on the choice of perioperative antibiotics. We matched the subgroups per a propensity score match and analyzed postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: Six thousand two hundred forty five cases of 39,779 were selected; 2821 in the no-stent (45.2%) versus 3424 (54.8%) in the stent group. G1CEP were the antibiotics of choice in 2653 (42.5%) versus G2CEP/BS in 3592 (57.5%) cases. In the no-stent group, we matched 1129 patients between G1CEP and G2CEP/BS. There was no difference in SSI-specific complications (20.3% versus 21.0%; P = 0.677), general infectious complications (25.7% versus 26.9%; P = 0.503), PD-specific complications, overall morbidity, length of stay, or mortality. In the stent group, we matched 1244 pairs. G2CEP/BS had fewer SSI-specific complications (19.9% versus 26.6%; P < 0.001), collections requiring drainage (9.6% versus 12.9%; P = 0.011), and general infectious complications (28.5% versus 34.1%; P = 0.002) but no difference in overall morbidity, mortality, length of stay, and readmission rates. CONCLUSIONS: G2CEP/BS are associated with reduced rates of SSI-specific and infectious complications in stented patients undergoing open elective PD. In patients without prior biliary drainage, G1CEP seems to provide adequate antimicrobial coverage.

Malignant colon polyps: predicting lymph node metastasis following endoscopic excision.

AIM: The risk of lymph node metastasis (LNM) of malignant colon polyps (MCPs) is partly estimated by histologic features of the sampled polyp. However, the routinely available histologic data is limited to tumor grade and status of lymphovascular invasion (LVI). METHODS: The NCDB for colon cancer 2004-2018 was utilized. Patients with pT1Nx adenocarcinoma arising in a polyp and undergoing partial colectomy with ≥ 12 retrieved nodes were selected. NCDB 2004-2017 was used as a training cohort to develop two scoring systems based on a multivariable regression for predictors of LNM including clinical characteristics, grade, and LVI: a nomogram scoring system (NSS) and a simplified scoring system (SSS). These models were internally validated using NCDB 2018 to calculate precision metrics for each model. RESULTS: Six thousand sixty-nine patients were selected in the training cohort. 64.5% of MCPs were in the sigmoid, and LNM rate was 11.2%. Multivariable regression identified younger age, females, hindgut location, higher grade, and LVI as significant predictors of LNM. LNM risk was 1.2% when all unfavorable predictors were absent and exceeded 10% when NSS > 70 or SSS ≥ 3. In the 2018 validation cohort, 723 patients were scored per NSS and SSS, and the negative predictive value for both was 96%. CONCLUSION: Estimating LNM risk in MCPs by applying clinical characteristics along with limited histologic data can help inform decision-making when considering formal oncologic resection. The NSS and SSS demonstrated comparable predictability of LNM among pT1Nx MCPs. The models require external validation and may be strengthened by incorporating additional endoscopic and pathologic characteristics.

Impact of margin status on outcomes after endoscopic resection of well-differentiated duodenal neuroendocrine tumors.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Duodenal neuroendocrine tumors (DNETs) are known to have low metastatic potential and follow an indolent course. Although DNETs <1 cm in size are amenable to endoscopic resection, little is known about the long-term outcomes and recurrence rates of this approach. METHODS: Sixty-three patients with DNETs from 3 centers were retrospectively studied from 2003 to 2018. We analyzed their resection modality (EMR, snare polypectomy, or forceps polypectomy), margin status, risk factors for recurrence, recurrence rate, and endoscopic surveillance patterns. RESULTS: Of the 63 patients who underwent endoscopic resection, 13 (20.6%) had recurrence. The presence of R1 margins was found to be a statistically significant risk factor for recurrence (P = .048). Mean surveillance time for all DNETs was 2.8 ± 2.6 years. Ninety-two percent of recurrences were detected within 3 years of resection. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that the main predictor of recurrence in low-grade DNETs <1.0 cm is the presence of positive tumor margins at the initial endoscopic resection. More frequent, earlier surveillance after resection than that currently recommended by European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society guidelines may be warranted to promptly capture DNET recurrences. Additionally, no recurrences occurred in our cohort after 4 years of surveillance.

Comparison of imaging modalities for measuring the diameter of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms of the pancreas.

BACKGROUND: Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) are pre-malignant pancreatic cysts detected by imaging. Cyst size is one of many features evaluated on computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), or endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) to help guide IPMN management. Our objective was to determine which imaging modality best predicts pathological cyst size. METHODS: We analyzed records for 57 IPMN cases surgically treated at Moffitt Cancer Center from 2008 to 2016 for whom pre-operative CT, MRI, and EUS IPMN cyst size and post-operative pathological cyst size values were available. Long axis cyst diameter measurements were compared to each other and corresponding pathological cyst measurements using within-subjects ANOVA, Bland-Altman analysis, and linear regression. Consensus measurements were also performed on CT and MRI images. RESULTS: Cyst size measured via CT and MRI overestimated pathological size by 0.33 cm and 0.27 cm, respectively, whereas EUS underestimated pathological size by 0.05 cm and had the narrowest 95% limit of agreement (LOA). Among pathologically-confirmed cysts <3 cm, MRI overestimated pathological size by 0.30 cm (P = 0.049) and had the widest LOA, followed by EUS and CT. Among cysts ≥3 cm, EUS underestimated pathological size by 0.35 cm (P = 0.059) and MRI and CT overestimated pathological size by 0.23 cm and 0.51 cm, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this small retrospective study, EUS cyst size measurements correlated best with pathologic specimens compared to CT and MRI, especially for cysts < 3 cm. Larger prospective studies are needed to determine which imaging modalities are best to risk-stratify IPMNs and guide surgical versus. Non-surgical management.

CDX-2 Expression in Esophageal Biopsies Without Goblet Cell Intestinal Metaplasia May Be Predictive of Barrett's Esophagus.

BACKGROUND: CDX-2 is a nuclear homeobox transcription factor not normally expressed in esophageal and gastric epithelia, reported to highlight intestinal metaplasia (IM) in the esophagus. Pathological absence of goblet cells at initial screening via hematoxylin and eosin (HE) and alcian blue (AB) staining results in patient exclusion from surveillance programs. AIMS: This study aimed to determine whether non-goblet cell IM, as defined by CDX-2 positivity, can be considered to be a precursor to Barrett's esophagus (BE). METHODS: This study received IRB approval (17,284). Patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (n = 181) who underwent upper-gastrointestinal endoscopy with biopsies of the distal esophagus to rule out BE using HE/AB staining and CDX-2 immunostaining were followed for 3 years. Initial and follow-up staining results were evaluated for age/sex. RESULTS: Differences between development of goblet cell IM in CDX-2-negative and CDX-2-positive groups were evaluated. A Kaplan-Meier curve showed that, out of the 134 patients initially positive for CDX-2, 25 (18.7%) had developed goblet cell IM after 2 years and 106 (79.1%) after 3 years. Conversely, of the 47 patients initially negative for CDX-2, 8 (17.9%) developed goblet cell IM after 24 months and only 11 (23.8%) after 40 to 45 months (P = .049; age-adjusted Cox proportional hazard regression model). CONCLUSION: In cases that are initially AB negative and CDX-2 positive, CDX-2 was demonstrated to have a potential prognostic utility for early detection of progression to BE. CDX-2 expression is significantly predictive for risk of goblet cell IM development 40 to 45 months after initial biopsy.

Endoscopic Ultrasound Placement of Preloaded Fiducial Markers Shortens Procedure Time Compared to Back-Loaded Markers.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Fiducial markers are inert radiopaque gold or carbon markers implanted in or near pancreatic tumor to demarcate areas for image-guided radiation therapy. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) pre-loaded fiducial needles (PLNs) have been developed to circumvent technical issues associated with traditional back-loaded fiducials (BLNs). We performed a randomized controlled trial to compare procedure times in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma undergoing EUS-guided placement of BLNs vs PLNs. METHODS: In a prospective study, 44 patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma referred for fiducial marker placement at 2 tertiary care centers were assigned to groups that received PLNs (n = 22) or BLNs (n = 22); each group had the same proportion of patients with tumors of different locations (head or neck vs body or tail).The procedure was standardized among all endoscopists and placement of a minimum of 3 markers inside the tumor was defined as technical success. The times for procedure and fiducial placement were recorded, total number of fiducial markers used documented, and grade of procedure difficulty ranked by passing the needle or deploying the fiducials. Other recorded variables included tumor characteristics, fluoroscopy use, and the number of fiducials clearly seen by EUS and fluoroscopy. The primary aim was to compare the duration of EUS-guided fiducial insertion of BLNs vs PLNs. RESULTS: The median placement time was significantly shorter in the PLN group (9 min) than the BLN group (16 min) (P < .001). However, the 44% reduction in time did not reach pre-specified levels (≥60%). Similar results were found after stratifying by tumor location. Deployment of BLNs was easier than deployment of PLNs (P = .03). There was no significant difference between groups in technical success, number of fiducials placed, EUS or fluoroscopic visualization, or adverse events. During simulation computed tomography and image-guided radiation therapy, there was no difference between groups in visualization of fiducials, migration rate, or accuracy of placement. CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized controlled trial of 44 patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma, we found EUS-guided placement of PLNs to require less time and produce similar results compared with BLNs. Further refinements in PLN delivery system are needed to increase the ease of deployment. Clinicaltrials.gov no: NCT02332863.

Competence in Endoscopic Ultrasound and Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography, From Training Through Independent Practice.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: It is unclear whether participation in competency-based fellowship programs for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) results in high-quality care in independent practice. We measured quality indicator (QI) adherence during the first year of independent practice among physicians who completed endoscopic training with a systematic assessment of competence. METHODS: We performed a prospective multicenter cohort study of invited participants from 62 training programs. In phase 1, 24 advanced endoscopy trainees (AETs), from 20 programs, were assessed using a validated competence assessment tool. We used a comprehensive data collection and reporting system to create learning curves using cumulative sum analysis that were shared with AETs and trainers quarterly. In phase 2, participating AETs entered data into a database pertaining to every EUS and ERCP examination during their first year of independent practice, anchored by key QIs. RESULTS: By the end of training, most AETs had achieved overall technical competence (EUS 91.7%, ERCP 73.9%) and cognitive competence (EUS 91.7%, ERCP 94.1%). In phase 2 of the study, 22 AETs (91.6%) participated and completed a median of 136 EUS examinations per AET and 116 ERCP examinations per AET. Most AETs met the performance thresholds for QIs in EUS (including 94.4% diagnostic rate of adequate samples and 83.8% diagnostic yield of malignancy in pancreatic masses) and ERCP (94.9% overall cannulation rate). CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective multicenter study, we found that although competence cannot be confirmed for all AETs at the end of training, most meet QI thresholds for EUS and ERCP at the end of their first year of independent practice. This finding affirms the effectiveness of training programs. Clinicaltrials.gov ID NCT02509416.

Setting minimum standards for training in EUS and ERCP: results from a prospective multicenter study evaluating learning curves and competence among advanced endoscopy trainees.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Minimum EUS and ERCP volumes that should be offered per trainee in "high quality" advanced endoscopy training programs (AETPs) are not established. We aimed to define the number of procedures required by an "average" advanced endoscopy trainee (AET) to achieve competence in technical and cognitive EUS and ERCP tasks to help structure AETPs. METHODS: American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE)-recognized AETPs were invited to participate; AETs were graded on every fifth EUS and ERCP examination using a validated tool. Grading for each skill was done using a 4-point scoring system, and learning curves using cumulative sum analysis for overall, technical, and cognitive components of EUS and ERCP were shared with AETs and trainers quarterly. Generalized linear mixed-effects models with a random intercept for each AET were used to generate aggregate learning curves, allowing us to use data from all AETs to estimate the average learning experience for trainees. RESULTS: Among 62 invited AETPs, 37 AETs from 32 AETPs participated. Most AETs reported hands-on EUS (52%, median 20 cases) and ERCP (68%, median 50 cases) experience before starting an AETP. The median number of EUS and ERCPs performed per AET was 400 (range, 200-750) and 361 (range, 250-650), respectively. Overall, 2616 examinations were graded (EUS, 1277; ERCP-biliary, 1143; pancreatic, 196). Most graded EUS examinations were performed for pancreatobiliary indications (69.9%) and ERCP examinations for ASGE biliary grade of difficulty 1 (72.1%). The average AET achieved competence in core EUS and ERCP skills at approximately 225 and 250 cases, respectively. However, overall technical competence was achieved for grade 2 ERCP at about 300 cases. CONCLUSION: The thresholds provided for an average AET to achieve competence in EUS and ERCP may be used by the ASGE and AETPs in establishing the minimal standards for case volume exposure for AETs during their training. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02509416.).

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal, Version 2.2019.

Identifying individuals with hereditary syndromes allows for improved cancer surveillance, risk reduction, and optimized management. Establishing criteria for assessment allows for the identification of individuals who are carriers of pathogenic genetic variants. The NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal provide recommendations for the assessment and management of patients with high-risk colorectal cancer syndromes. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on criteria for the evaluation of Lynch syndrome and considerations for use of multigene testing in the assessment of hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes.

Suboptimal Agreement Among Cytopathologists in Diagnosis of Malignancy Based on Endoscopic Ultrasound Needle Aspirates of Solid Pancreatic Lesions: A Validation Study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Despite the widespread use of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) to sample pancreatic lesions and the standardization of pancreaticobiliary cytopathologic nomenclature, there are few data on inter-observer agreement among cytopathologists evaluating pancreatic cytologic specimens obtained by EUS-FNA. We developed a scoring system to assess agreement among cytopathologists in overall diagnosis and quantitative and qualitative parameters, and evaluated factors associated with agreement. METHODS: We performed a prospective study to validate results from our pilot study that demonstrated moderate to substantial inter-observer agreement among cytopathologists for the final cytologic diagnosis. In the first phase, 3 cytopathologists refined criteria for assessment of quantity and quality measures. During phase 2, EUS-FNA specimens of solid pancreatic lesions from 46 patients were evaluated by 11 cytopathologists at 5 tertiary care centers using a standardized scoring tool. Individual quantitative and qualitative measures were scored and an overall cytologic diagnosis was determined. Clinical and EUS parameters were assessed as predictors of unanimous agreement. Inter-observer agreement (IOA) was calculated using multi-rater kappa (κ) statistics and a logistic regression model was created to identify factors associated with unanimous agreement. RESULTS: The IOA for final diagnoses, based on cytologic analysis, was moderate (κ = 0.56; 95% CI, 0.43-0.70). Kappa values did not increase when categories of suspicious for malignancy, malignant, and neoplasm were combined. IOA was slight to moderate for individual quantitative (κ = 0.007; 95% CI, -0.03 to -0.04) and qualitative parameters (κ = 0.5; 95% CI, 0.47-0.53). Jaundice was the only factor associated with agreement among all cytopathologists on multivariate analysis (odds ratio for unanimous agreement, 5.3; 95% CI, 1.1-26.89). CONCLUSIONS: There is a suboptimal level of agreement among cytopathologists in the diagnosis of malignancy based on analysis of EUS-FNA specimens obtained from solid pancreatic masses. Strategies are needed to refine the cytologic criteria for diagnosis of malignancy and enhance tissue acquisition techniques to improve diagnostic reproducibility among cytopathologists.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Colorectal Cancer Screening, Version 1.2018.

The NCCN Guidelines for Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening outline various screening modalities as well as recommended screening strategies for individuals at average or increased-risk of developing sporadic CRC. The NCCN panel meets at least annually to review comments from reviewers within their institutions, examine relevant data, and reevaluate and update their recommendations. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize 2018 updates to the NCCN Guidelines, with a primary focus on modalities used to screen individuals at average-risk for CRC.

Endoscopic ultrasonography complements computed tomography in predicting portal or superior mesenteric vein resection in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend computed tomographic (CT) scans for vascular staging of patients with pancreatic carcinoma; however, endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) in these patients is not required and its utility in combination with CT scan is less well-defined. The purpose of this study is to explore the utility of EUS in addition to CT in identifying patients with borderline resectable pancreatic carcinoma (BRPC). METHODS: We reviewed our database of patients with BRPC who went to surgery with curative intent. Inclusion criteria were preoperative staging with CT scan and EUS, completion of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy, and surgical resection. RESULTS: We identified 62 patients (average age of 65 ± 9 years, 60% male); 97% of patients underwent R0 resections. We found that 29% of patients were classified as BRPC by EUS alone, 23% by CT alone, and 48% by both modalities. Of 34 patients who required vein resection, EUS alone preoperatively identified 88% of these patients while CT alone identified 67%. EUS identified 11 patients who required vein resection that CT did not identify as BRPC, whereas CT identified 4 patients that EUS did not identify as BRPC. On multivariate analysis, EUS was associated with vein resection (P < 0.02), but CT scan findings, tumor size, and CA19-9 values were not associated (each P > 0.1). CONCLUSIONS: EUS complemented CT in identifying BRPC patients requiring vein resection, with nearly one-third of patients identified with EUS alone, supporting EUS use in addition to CT scan for vascular staging of patients with pancreatic carcinoma.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary access versus precut papillotomy in patients with failed biliary cannulation: a retrospective study.

Background and aims Precut papillotomy is widely used after failed biliary cannulation. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary access techniques are newer methods to facilitate access and therapy in failed cannulation. We evaluated the impact of EUS-guided biliary access on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) success and compared these techniques to precut papillotomy. Patients and methods We retrospectively compared two ERCP cohorts. One cohort consisted of biliary ERCPs (n = 1053) attempted in patients with native papillae and surgically unaltered anatomy in whom precut papillotomy and/or EUS-guided biliary access were routinely performed immediately after failed cannulation. This cohort was compared with a similar ERCP cohort (n = 1062) in which only precut papillotomy was available for failed cannulation. The following outcomes were compared: conventional cannulation success, rates of attempted advanced access techniques (precut or EUS), precut success, EUS-guided biliary access success, and ERCP failure rates. Results Although conventional cannulation success, rates of attempted advanced access technique (precut or EUS), and precut success were similar, the ERCP failure rate was lower when both EUS-guided biliary access and precut were available (1.0 % [95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.4 - 1.6]), compared with when only precut was possible for failed access (3.6 % [95 %CI 2.5 - 4.7]; P < 0.001). Success for EUS-guided biliary access (95.1 % [95 %CI 89.7 - 100]) was significantly higher than for precut (75.3 % [95 %CI 68.2 - 82.4]; P < 0.001), and mainly due to superiority in malignant obstruction (93.5 % vs. 64 %; P < 0.001). Conclusions EUS-guided biliary access decreases the rate of therapeutic biliary ERCP failure. Our results support the use of EUS-guided biliary access to optimize single-session ERCP success. In experienced hands, these techniques appear as effective, if not more so, than precut papillotomy.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal, Version 3.2017.

The NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal provide recommendations for the management of patients with high-risk syndromes associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). The NCCN Panel for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal meets at least annually to assess comments from reviewers within their institutions, examine relevant data, and reevaluate and update their recommendations. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on genes newly associated with CRC risk on multigene panels, the associated evidence, and currently recommended management strategies.

Endoscopic resection is cost-effective compared with laparoscopic resection in the management of complex colon polyps: an economic analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic resection (ER) is an efficacious treatment for complex colon polyps (CCPs). Many patients are referred for surgical resection because of concerns over procedural safety, incomplete polyp resection, and adenoma recurrence after ER. Efficacy data for both resection strategies are widely available, but a paucity of data exist on the cost-effectiveness of each modality. The aim of this study was to perform an economic analysis comparing ER and laparoscopic resection (LR) strategies in patients with CCP. METHODS: A decision analysis tree was constructed using decision analysis software. The 2 strategies (ER vs LR) were evaluated in a hypothetical cohort of patients with CCPs. A hybrid Markov model with a 10-year time horizon was used. Patients entered the model after colonoscopic diagnosis at age 50. Under Strategy I, patients underwent ER followed by surveillance colonoscopy at 3 to 6 months and 12 months. Patients with failed ER and residual adenoma at 12 months were referred for LR. Under Strategy II, patients underwent LR as primary treatment. Patients with invasive cancer were excluded. Estimates regarding ER performance characteristics were obtained from a systematic review of published literature. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (2012-2013) and the 2012 Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project databases were used to determine the costs and loss of utility. We assumed that all procedures were performed with anesthesia support, and patients with adverse events in both strategies required inpatient hospitalization. Baseline estimates and costs were varied by using a sensitivity analysis through the ranges. RESULTS: LR was found to be more costly and yielded fewer quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) compared with ER. The cost of ER of a CCP was $5570 per patient and yielded 9.640 QALYs. LR of a CCP cost $18,717 per patient and yielded fewer QALYs (9.577). For LR to be more cost-effective, the thresholds of 1-way sensitivity analyses were (1) technical success of ER for complete resection in <75.8% of cases, (2) adverse event rates for ER > 12%, and (3) LR cost of <$14,000. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that ER is a cost-effective strategy for removal of CCPs. The effectiveness is driven by high technical success and low adverse event rates associated with ER, in addition to the increased cost of LR.

Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal Version 1.2016, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

This is a focused update highlighting the most current NCCN Guidelines for diagnosis and management of Lynch syndrome. Lynch syndrome is the most common cause of hereditary colorectal cancer, usually resulting from a germline mutation in 1 of 4 DNA mismatch repair genes (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, or PMS2), or deletions in the EPCAM promoter. Patients with Lynch syndrome are at an increased lifetime risk, compared with the general population, for colorectal cancer, endometrial cancer, and other cancers, including of the stomach and ovary. As of 2016, the panel recommends screening all patients with colorectal cancer for Lynch syndrome and provides recommendations for surveillance for early detection and prevention of Lynch syndrome-associated cancers.

The Clinical Utility of Evaluating the Luminal Upper Gastrointestinal Tract During Linear Endoscopic Ultrasonography.

BACKGROUND: The clinical utility of performing esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) before linear endoscopic ultrasonography (L-EUS) to evaluate the luminal upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract is not well established. GOALS: The study was aimed to determine the prevalence of clinically meaningful luminal abnormalities (any luminal finding requiring further evaluation with mucosal biopsy or initiation of treatment) in patients undergoing L-EUS. The study also sought to compare the ability of the gastroscope and the linear echoendoscope in identifying these lesions. STUDY: A prospective, multicenter cohort study enrolled patients undergoing L-EUS for nonluminal indications. All patients underwent EGD followed by L-EUS by 2 different endoscopists. The second endoscopist was blinded to the results of the initial EGD. The identification of clinically meaningful luminal lesions and quality of endoscopic visualization of the upper GI tract were measured. RESULTS: In the cohort of 175 patients, 52 (29.7%) patients had clinically meaningful luminal findings seen in the upper GI tract. There was no significant difference in the number of clinically meaningful lesions identified on EGD and L-EUS (25.1% vs. 22.9%, P=0.39). No significant difference was found in the miss rate of clinically meaningful lesions between the 2 modalities (EGD: 4.5% vs. EUS: 6.9%, P=0.39). CONCLUSIONS: A substantial minority of patients undergoing L-EUS for nonluminal indications will have clinically meaningful luminal findings. The endoscopic evaluation of the luminal upper GI tract can be adequately achieved using the linear echoendoscope.

Plastic biliary stent patency in patients with locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma receiving downstaging chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Plastic stents in patients with biliary obstruction caused by pancreatic adenocarcinoma are typically exchanged at 3-month intervals. Plastic stents may have reduced durability in patients receiving chemotherapy. OBJECTIVE: To determine the duration of plastic biliary stent patency in patients undergoing chemotherapy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. DESIGN: Retrospective, multicenter cohort study. SETTING: Three tertiary academic referral centers. PATIENTS: A total of 173 patients receiving downstaging chemotherapy for locally advanced or borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma from 1996 to 2013. INTERVENTIONS: Placement of 10F or larger plastic biliary stents. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcome was overall duration of stent patency. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of premature stent exchange (because of cholangitis or jaundice) and hospitalization rates. RESULTS: A total of 233 plastic stents were placed, and the overall median duration of stent patency was 53 days (interquartile range [IQR] 25-99 days). Eighty-seven stents were removed at the time of surgical resection, and 63 stents were exchanged routinely per protocol. The remaining 83 stent exchanges were performed for worsening liver function test results, jaundice, or cholangitis, representing a 35.6% rate of premature stent exchange. The median stent patency duration in the premature stent exchange group was 49 days (IQR 25-91 days) with a 44.6% hospitalization rate. The overall rate of cholangitis was 15.0% of stent exchanges, occurring a median of 56 days after stent placement (IQR 26-89 days). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective study. CONCLUSIONS: Plastic biliary stents placed during chemotherapy/chemoradiation for pancreatic adenocarcinoma have a shorter-than-expected patency duration, and a substantial number of patients will require premature stent exchange. Consideration should be given to shortening the interval for plastic biliary stent exchange.

Colorectal Cancer Screening, Version 1.2015.

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Colorectal Cancer Screening provide recommendations for selecting individuals for colorectal cancer screening, and for evaluation and follow-up of colon polyps. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize major discussion points of the 2015 NCCN Colorectal Cancer Screening panel meeting. Major discussion topics this year were the state of evidence for CT colonography and stool DNA testing, bowel preparation procedures for colonoscopy, and guidelines for patients with a positive family history of colorectal cancer.