Faecal immunochemical test mitigates risk of delayed colonoscopy in people with elevated risk of colorectal neoplasia.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Surveillance colonoscopies may be delayed because of pressure on resources, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to determine whether delayed surveillance colonoscopy increases the risk for advanced neoplasia and whether interval screening with faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) and other known risk factors can mitigate this risk. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of individuals undergoing surveillance colonoscopy for personal or family history of colorectal neoplasia was being provided with FIT between colonoscopies. Colonoscopy ≥ 6 months after the guideline-recommended interval was considered "delayed." Individuals were stratified based on prime colonoscopy findings to nonneoplastic findings, non-advanced adenoma, and advanced adenoma. The relative risk (RR) for developing advanced neoplasia was determined using a robust multivariable modified Poisson regression. RESULTS: Of 2548 surveillance colonoscopies, 1457 (57.18%) were delayed. Prior advanced adenoma, older age (> 60 years) and nonparticipation in interval FIT were associated with increased risk for advanced neoplasia (P < 0.05). There was a trend to increased risk in those with prior advanced adenoma with an increasing colonoscopy delay (P trend = 0.01). In participants who did not complete interval FIT and having advanced adenoma in the prime colonoscopy, risk of advanced neoplasia was 2.48 times higher (RR = 2.48, 95% confidence interval: 1.20-5.13) in participants who had beyond 2 years of delayed colonoscopy compared with those with on-time colonoscopy. Colonoscopy delay did not increase the risk of advanced neoplasia in participants with negative interval FIT results. CONCLUSION: Surveillance colonoscopy can be safely extended beyond 6 months in elevated colorectal cancer risk patients who do not have prior advanced adenoma diagnosis, particularly if interval FIT is negative.

Features associated with high-risk sessile serrated polyps at index and follow-up colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Clinically significant serrated polyps are precursors of colorectal cancers, with features considered high risk including size ≥10 mm, dysplasia, and presence of synchronous conventional adenoma. While these features have been described in cohorts undergoing screening colonoscopy, there is little information regarding the prevalence and patient characteristics associated with high-risk sessile serrated polyps (SSPs) in those undergoing surveillance colonoscopy. METHODS: Polyp pathology at the index and first follow-up colonoscopy performed between 2004 and 2019 were examined in patients enrolled in a surveillance program because of an index finding of adenoma and/or SSP. Demographics and pathology features for SSP were compared between the colonoscopies. RESULTS: Of 6297 patients undergoing index colonoscopy, 2035 underwent follow-up colonoscopy after 3.3 years (interquartile range 2.1-4.8 years). The proportion with SSP decreased from 7.6% at index to 5.0% at follow-up (P < 0.001); however, the proportion of SSPs that were considered high risk was not different between the colonoscopies (62.8% vs 62.4%). Female gender was associated with the presence of high-risk SSP at index colonoscopy (odds ratio [OR] 1.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.28-2.06), while age ≥75 years (OR 3.38, 95% CI 1.67-6.81) and previous high-risk SSP (OR 9.40, 95% CI 4.23-20.88) were independently associated with high-risk SSP at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of SSP falls by one-third at first follow-up colonoscopy although the proportion of SSP with high-risk features remains the same. While females were more likely to have a high-risk SSP at the index colonoscopy, those at greatest risk for high-risk SSP at follow-up colonoscopy were age >75 years and an index high-risk SSP.

Sessile Serrated Polyps with Synchronous Conventional Adenomas Increase Risk of Future Advanced Neoplasia.

BACKGROUND: Surveillance colonoscopy guidelines following adenomas or sessile serrated adenomas/polyps (SSPs) are based on pathology features known to be associated with risk of future colorectal cancer. A synchronous conventional adenoma may increase the malignant potential of SSP, but current guidelines do not address this combination of pathologies. AIMS: The aim was to assess the risk of advanced neoplasia after SSP with or without synchronous adenoma compared to that following a conventional adenoma. METHODS: An audit was conducted on colonoscopies performed between 2000 and 2014 as part of a surveillance program. Index colonoscopy findings were classified as: low-risk SSP and high-risk SSP (size ≥ 10 mm or with cytological dysplasia) with and without synchronous adenoma; high-risk adenoma and low-risk adenoma. Risk of advanced neoplasia was determined at subsequent surveillance colonoscopies. RESULTS: In total, 2157 patients had adenoma or SSP found at index colonoscopy-low-risk adenoma (40%), high-risk adenoma (54%) and SSP (4%). Synchronous adenomas were seen with 47% of SSP. The median follow-up was 50.3 months (interquartile range 28.1-79.3). Compared to an index finding of low-risk adenoma, index findings of high-risk adenoma, as well as SSP with synchronous adenoma, were independent predictors of future advanced neoplasia (high-risk adenoma: hazard ratio (HR) = 2.04 (95% CI 1.70-2.45); high-risk SSP + adenoma HR = 3.20 (95% CI 1.31-7.82); low-risk SSP + adenoma: HR = 2.20 (95% CI 1.03-4.68)). CONCLUSIONS: Synchronous adenoma increases the risk of advanced neoplasia for SSP equivalent to that seen following high-risk adenoma. Guidelines for surveillance should take into account concurrent pathologies with SSP.

A nurse-led model at public academic hospitals maintains high adherence to colorectal cancer surveillance guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the compliance of colorectal cancer surveillance decisions for individuals at greater risk with current evidence-based guidelines and to determine whether compliance differs between surveillance models. DESIGN: Prospective auditing of compliance of surveillance decisions with evidence-based guidelines (NHMRC) in two decision-making models: nurse coordinator-led decision making in public academic hospitals and physician-led decision making in private non-academic hospitals. SETTING: Selected South Australian hospitals participating in the Southern Co-operative Program for the Prevention of Colorectal Cancer (SCOOP). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportions of recall recommendations that matched NHMRC guideline recommendations (March-May 2015); numbers of surveillance colonoscopies undertaken more than 6 months ahead of schedule (January-December 2015); proportions of significant neoplasia findings during the 15 years of SCOOP operation (2000-2015). RESULTS: For the nurse-led/public academic hospital model, the recall interval recommendation following 398 of 410 colonoscopies (97%) with findings covered by NHMRC guidelines corresponded to the guideline recommendations; for the physician-led/private non-academic hospital model, this applied to 257 of 310 colonoscopies (83%) (P < 0.001). During 2015, 27% of colonoscopies in public academic hospitals (mean, 27 months; SD, 13 months) and 20% of those in private non-academic hospitals (mean, 23 months; SD, 12 months) were performed more than 6 months earlier than scheduled, in most cases because of patient-related factors (symptoms, faecal occult blood test results). The ratio of the numbers of high risk adenomas to cancers increased from 6.6:1 during 2001-2005 to 16:1 during 2011-2015. CONCLUSION: The nurse-led/public academic hospital model for decisions about colorectal cancer surveillance intervals achieves a high degree of compliance with guideline recommendations, which should relieve burdening of colonoscopy resources.

Surveillance colonoscopy findings in asymptomatic participants over 75 years of age.

Background and Aim: Surveillance colonoscopy for colorectal cancer (CRC) is generally not recommended beyond 75 years of age. The study determined incidence and predictors of advanced adenoma and CRC in older individuals undergoing surveillance colonoscopy. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of asymptomatic older participants (≥75 years), enrolled in a South Australian CRC surveillance program who underwent colonoscopy (2015-2020). Clinical records were extracted for demographics, personal or family history of CRC, comorbidities, polypharmacy, and colonoscopy findings. The associations between clinical variables and advanced adenoma or CRC at surveillance were assessed with multivariable Poisson regression analysis. Results: Totally 698 surveillance colonoscopies were analyzed from 574 participants aged 75-91 years (55.6% male). The incidence of CRC was 1.6% (11/698), while 37.9% (260/698) of procedures had advanced adenoma detected. Previous CRC (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 5.9, 95% CI 1.5-22.5), age ≥85 years (IRR 5.8, 95% CI 1.6-20.1) and active smoking (IRR 4.9, 95% CI 1.0-24.4) were independently associated with CRC diagnosis, while advanced adenoma at immediately preceding colonoscopy (IRR 1.6, 95% CI 1.3-2.0) and polypharmacy (IRR 1.2, 95% CI 1.0-1.5) were associated with advanced adenoma at surveillance colonoscopy in asymptomatic older participants (≥75 years). Conclusion: Advanced neoplasia was found in more than one third of the surveillance procedures completed in this cohort. Continuation of surveillance beyond age 75 yeasrs may be considered in participants who have previous CRC or are active smokers (provided they are fit to undergo colonoscopy). In other cases, such as past advanced adenoma only, the need for ongoing surveillance should be considered alongside participant preference and health status.