Efficacy and safety of tegoprazan- and rabeprazole-based concomitant therapies for Helicobacter pylori infection: Real-world evidence.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Tegoprazan, a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker, has been approved for Helicobacter pylori eradication in Korea. We compared the efficacy and safety of tegoprazan- and rabeprazole-based concomitant therapies for H. pylori eradication in real-world clinical practice. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from patients with H. pylori infection treated with tegoprazan- or rabeprazole-based concomitant therapies. The primary endpoint was H. pylori eradication rate. The secondary endpoint was adverse events. RESULTS: Among the 1474 included patients, 620 and 854 received tegoprazan- and rabeprazole-based concomitant therapies, respectively. Intention-to-treat analysis showed no significant difference in the eradication rates between the tegoprazan- and rabeprazole-based concomitant therapy groups (74.7% [95% confidence interval [CI], 71.1-78.0%] vs 72.7% [95% CI, 69.7-75.6%], P = 0.400). Per-protocol analysis also demonstrated similar eradication rates for the groups (tegoprazan vs rabeprazole: 88.0% [95% CI, 85.0-90.6%] vs 85.9% [95% CI, 83.2-88.3%], P = 0.288). Although the overall adverse event rate did not differ between groups (tegoprazan vs rabeprazole, 39.2% vs 40.6%, P = 0.578), abdominal discomfort was less frequent in the tegoprazan group than in the rabeprazole group (1.3 vs 4.8%, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Tegoprazan- and rabeprazole-based concomitant therapies for H. pylori eradication showed comparable efficacy and overall safety. The effect of tegoprazan on dose increases or other regimens, such as bismuth-containing quadruple therapy, should be further evaluated, because the efficacy of tegoprazan-based concomitant therapy may be suboptimal in regions where the clarithromycin resistance rate is high.

Increased risk of pancreatic, thyroid, prostate and breast cancers in men with a family history of breast cancer: A population-based study.

The association between a family history of breast cancer (FHBC) in female first-degree relatives (FDRs) and cancer risk in men has not been evaluated. This study aimed to compare the risks of overall and site-specific cancers in men with and without FHBC. A population-based study was conducted with 3 329 106 men aged ≥40 years who underwent national cancer screening between 2013 and 2014. Men with and without FHBC in their female FDRs were age-matched in a 1:4 ratio. Men without FHBC were defined as those without a family history of any cancer type in their FDRs. Data from 69 124 men with FHBC and 276 496 men without FHBC were analyzed. The mean follow-up period was 4.7 ± 0.9 years. Men with an FHBC in any FDR (mother or sister) had a higher risk of pancreatic, thyroid, prostate and breast cancers than those without an FHBC (adjusted hazard ratios [aHRs] (95% confidence interval [CI]): 1.35 (1.07-1.70), 1.33 (1.12-1.56), 1.28 (1.13-1.44) and 3.03 (1.130-8.17), respectively). Although an FHBC in any one of the FDRs was not associated with overall cancer risk, FHBC in both mother and sibling was a significant risk factor for overall cancer (aHR: 1.69, 95% CI:1.11-2.57) and increased the risk of thyroid cancer by 3.41-fold (95% CI: 1.10-10.61). FHBC in the mother or sister was a significant risk factor for pancreatic, thyroid, prostate and breast cancers in men; therefore, men with FHBC may require more careful BRCA1/2 mutation-related cancer surveillance.

Mutual association between family history of gastric and colorectal cancer and risk of gastric and colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: We evaluated the associations between gastric cancer (GC) family history (FH) and colorectal cancer (CRC) risk and between CRC FH and GC/gastric adenoma risk. METHODS: We used data of participants who underwent national cancer screening between 2013 and 2014. Participants with GC or CRC FH in first-degree relatives (n = 1 172 750) and those without cancer FH (n = 3 518 250) were matched 1:3 by age and gender. RESULTS: Of the 1 172 750 participants with a FH, 871 104, 264 040, and 37 606 had FHs of only GC, only CRC, and both GC and CRC, respectively. The median follow-up time was 4.8 years. GC and CRC FHs were associated with increased GC and CRC risks, respectively. GC FH was associated with CRC risk (adjusted hazard ratio 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.10), whereas CRC FH was not associated with the risk of GC or gastric adenoma. However, gastric adenoma risk increased 1.62-fold (95% CI 1.40-1.87) in participants with FHs of both GC and CRC, demonstrating a significant difference with the 1.39-fold (95% CI 1.34-1.44) increase in participants with only GC FH. Furthermore, GC risk increased by 5.32 times (95% CI 1.74-16.24) in participants with FHs of both GC and CRC in both parents and siblings. CONCLUSIONS: GC FH was significantly associated with a 5% increase in CRC risk. Although CRC FH did not increase GC risk, FH of both GC and CRC further increased the risk of gastric adenoma. FHs of GC and CRC may affect each other's neoplastic lesion risk.

Serrated Polyps and the Risk of Metachronous Colorectal Advanced Neoplasia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Surveillance recommendations for serrated polyps (SPs) are based on insufficient evidence. We aimed to evaluate the risk of metachronous advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACRN) associated with SPs. METHODS: We searched all relevant studies published through August 2020 that examined the risk of SPs for developing metachronous lesions. We performed meta-analyses of the risk of metachronous ACRN or colorectal cancer (CRC) between patients with SPs (or sessile serrated lesions [SSLs]) alone and those with conventional adenomas alone, and between patients with synchronous SPs (or SSLs) and conventional adenomas and those with conventional adenomas alone. RESULTS: Eleven studies with 1,079,315 patients were included in the meta-analysis. No significant differences in the risks of metachronous ACRN and CRC were found between the SPs alone and conventional adenomas alone groups (odds ratio [OR] [95% confidence interval [CI]]: ACRN, 0.70 [0.27-1.82]; CRC, 0.74 [0.47-1.14]). The risks were similar between SSLs alone and conventional adenomas alone (OR [95% CI]: ACRN, 0.91 [0.23-3.63]; CRC, 1.11 [0.42-2.97]). Significant heterogeneity was identified in these comparisons. Synchronous SPs (or SSLs) and high-risk adenomas (HRAs) had a higher risk of metachronous ACRN than HRAs alone (OR [95% CI]: SPs+HRAs, 1.64 [1.21-2.24]; SSLs+HRAs, 3.10 [1.92-4.99]); however, there was no difference in the risk between synchronous SPs (or SSLs) and low-risk adenomas and low-risk adenomas alone. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this meta-analysis support the current guidelines, which recommend similar surveillance intervals for SSLs and conventional adenomas. Patients with synchronous SPs (or SSLs) and HRAs appear to be at an increased risk of metachronous ACRN, and further studies are needed to determine whether they require more intensive surveillance.

Association Between Family History of Gastric Cancer and the Risk of Gastric Cancer and Adenoma: A Nationwide Population-Based Study.

INTRODUCTION: A family history of gastric cancer (GC) is a well-known risk factor for GC. However, the association between family history of GC and the risk of GC and gastric adenoma according to the affected family members is unclear. METHODS: We analyzed the data of participants aged ≥40 years who underwent national GC screening between 2013 and 2014. Participants with and without a family history of GC among first-degree relatives were matched by age and sex in a 1:4 ratio. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 4.9 years, 0.96% and 0.46% of 896,721 participants with a family history of GC and 0.65% and 0.32% of 3,586,884 participants without a family history of GC developed GC and gastric adenoma, respectively. A family history of GC among any first-degree relative was a risk factor for GC (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.48, 95% confidence interval 1.45-1.52) and gastric adenoma (HR 1.44, 95% confidence interval 1.39-1.50). The HRs for GC and gastric adenoma were higher in participants with a family history of GC in parents and siblings (2.26 and 2.19, respectively) than in those with a family history of GC in parents only (1.40 and 1.41, respectively) or siblings only (1.59 and 1.47, respectively). The HRs for GC in participants with vs without a family history of GC were 1.62, 1.55, and 1.42 in the 40-49, 50-59, and ≥60 years' age groups of participants, respectively. Similarly, the HRs for gastric adenoma increased with decreasing age of participants. DISCUSSION: A family history of GC was a risk factor for both GC and gastric adenoma. The risk of GC and gastric adenoma of the participants was higher when both parents and siblings had GC.

7-day versus 14-day tegoprazan-based triple therapy to treat Helicobacter pylori infection: Real-world evidence.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Potassium-competitive acid blockers (P-CABs) can be used to eradicate Helicobacter pylori infection. We aimed to evaluate the impact of treatment duration (7 vs 14 days) on successful H. pylori eradication with P-CAB-based triple therapy in Korea, where clarithromycin resistance rate is high. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the data of patients who received first-line treatment for H. pylori infection with tegoprazan-based triple therapy (50 mg tegoprazan + 1000 mg amoxicillin + 500 mg clarithromycin twice daily for 1 or 2 weeks). The primary endpoint was the eradication rate in intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. RESULTS: Of the 948 patients included in the study, 435 and 513 received 7-day and 14-day tegoprazan-based triple therapy, respectively. The eradication rate was higher in the 14-day therapy group than in the 7-day therapy group (ITT, 63.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 59.3-68.3%] vs 78.6% [95% CI, 74.9-81.9%], respectively, P < 0.001; per-protocol, 70.5% [95% CI, 65.8-74.8%] vs 85.1% [81.7-88.1%], respectively, P < 0.001). Overall adverse event rates did not differ between the two groups. Although six patients in the 14-day treatment group discontinued the prescribed medications due to adverse events, four of them (67%) discontinued the medication within 4 days. CONCLUSIONS: The 14-day tegoprazan-based triple therapy showed a superior eradication rate and acceptable adverse events compared with the 7-day tegoprazan-based triple therapy. A 14-day treatment regimen may be required when H. pylori infection is treated with tegoprazan-based triple therapy in regions with high clarithromycin resistance.

Impact of antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants on the performance of fecal immunochemical tests: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Antithrombotic agents may increase the bleeding tendency and affect the performance of fecal immunochemical test (FIT). We aimed to evaluate the impact of antithrombotic agents on the performance of FIT through a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: All relevant studies published between January 1980 and September 2020 that examined the diagnostic performance of FIT were searched through MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases. We performed a meta-analysis for the positive predictive value (PPV) of FIT for detecting advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACRN) or colorectal cancer (CRC) according to the administration of antithrombotic agents including aspirin, antiplatelet agents, and oral anticoagulants (OACs). RESULTS: Thirteen studies with 27,518 patients were included. Of these, 11 studies with data required for the calculation of pooled PPV were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled PPV of FIT for detecting ACRN was significantly lower in antithrombotic agent users than in non-users (odds ratio [OR] [95% confidence interval [CI]]: aspirin, 0.82 [0.68-0.99]; antiplatelet agents, 0.82 [0.69-0.96]; OACs, 0.66 [0.52-0.84]). For detecting CRC, antithrombotic agent use tended to be associated with a reduced PPV (aspirin, 0.76 [0.51-1.14]; antiplatelet agents, 0.73 [0.52-1.02]; OACs, 0.60 [0.25-1.44]). In the subgroup analysis, a FIT cutoff value of 15 µg Hb/g feces tended to be associated with lower PPVs compared to a value of 20 µg Hb/g feces in antithrombotic agent users. CONCLUSIONS: Aspirin, antiplatelet agents, and OACs significantly lowered the PPV of FIT for detecting ACRN. These drugs may increase the false-positive of FIT.

Risk of post-polypectomy bleeding after endoscopic mucosal resection in patients receiving antiplatelet medication: comparison between the continue and hold groups.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend continuing aspirin and discontinuing clopidogrel for colon polypectomy, but evidence for endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is insufficient. We aimed to assess post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB) in patients receiving antiplatelet agents and underwent EMR for various polyp sizes. METHODS: A single-center, prospective observational study was performed. Patients who underwent at least one EMR for polypectomy and those who received aspirin or clopidogrel were included. We compared PPB between the antiplatelet hold group (stopped antiplatelet therapy at least 5 days before the procedure) and continue group (antiplatelet therapy was maintained or stopped within 5 days before the procedure). RESULTS: Among patients who underwent EMR, 305 took aspirin (hold group 257, continue group 48) and 77 took clopidogrel (hold group 66, continue group 11). The mean number of polyps was four, and the mean size was 8.6 mm. There was no difference in the major PPB rate between the hold and continue groups among aspirin users (2.0% vs. 4.2%, P = 0.30), but it was significantly higher in the continue group than in the hold group among clopidogrel users (18.2% vs. 0%, P = 0.02). In patient- and polyp-based logistic regression analysis of clopidogrel users, the number of EMRs (OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.16-3.88), polyp size (OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.06-1.49), and continuing clopidogrel (OR 9.75, 95% CI 1.99-47.64) were independent risk factors for PPB. CONCLUSION: Continuous administration of antiplatelet agents was significantly associated with higher PPB in clopidogrel users, but not in aspirin users. Endoscopists should consider holding clopidogrel if the EMR includes polypectomy.

Optimization of the surveillance strategy in patients with colorectal adenomas: A combination of clinical parameters and index colonoscopy findings.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: In addition to index colonoscopy findings, demographic parameters including age are associated with the risk of metachronous advanced colorectal neoplasia. Here, we aimed to develop a risk scoring model for predicting advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACRN) during surveillance using a combination of clinical factors and index colonoscopy findings. METHODS: Patients who underwent the removal of one or more adenomas and surveillance colonoscopy were included. A risk scoring model for ACRN was developed using the Cox proportional hazard model. Surveillance interval was determined as a time point exceeding 4% of the cumulative ACRN incidence in each risk group. RESULTS: Of 9591 participants, 4725 and 4866 were randomly allocated to the derivation and validation cohorts, respectively. Age, abdominal obesity, advanced adenoma, and ≥ 3 adenomas at index colonoscopy were identified as risk factors for metachronous ACRN. Based on the regression coefficients, point scores were assigned as follows: age, 1 point (per 1 year); abdominal obesity, 10 points; advanced adenoma, 10 points; and ≥ 3 adenomas, 15 points. Patients were classified into high-risk (≥ 80 points), moderate-risk (50-79 points), and low-risk (30-49 points) groups. In the validation cohort, the high-risk and moderate-risk groups showed a higher risk of ACRN than the low-risk group (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]: 7.11 [4.10-12.32] and 1.58 [1.09-2.30], respectively). Two-, 4-, and 5-year surveillance intervals were recommended for the high-risk, moderate-risk, and low-risk groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our proposed model may facilitate effective risk stratification of ACRN during surveillance and the determination of appropriate surveillance intervals.

Effect of Cotinine-Verified Change in Smoking Status on Risk of Metachronous Colorectal Neoplasia After Polypectomy.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Previous assessments of colorectal neoplasia (CRN) recurrence after polypectomy used self-report to determine smoking status. We evaluated the association between change in smoking status and metachronous CRN risk after polypectomy using cotinine level in urine to determine tobacco exposure. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of participants in the Kangbuk Samsung Health Study in Korea who underwent a screening colonoscopy examination and measurement of cotinine in urine samples. Our analysis included 4762 patients who had 1 or more adenomas detected in an index colonoscopy performed between January 2010 and December 2014, and underwent a surveillance colonoscopy, 6 or more months later, until December 2017. RESULTS: Patients were classified into 4 groups based on the change in cotinine-verified smoking status from index to follow-up colonoscopy (mean interval, 3.2 ± 1.3 y), as follows: remained nonsmokers (n = 2962; group 1), smokers changed to nonsmokers (n = 600; group 2), nonsmokers changed to smokers (n = 138; group 3), and remained smokers (n = 1062; group 4). After adjustment for confounding factors, group 4 had a significantly higher risk of metachronous CRN than group 1 (hazard ratio [HR], 1.54; 95% CI, 1.36-1.73) and group 2 (HR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.39-1.99). Group 4 also had a higher risk of metachronous advanced CRN than group 1 (HR, 2.84; 95% CI, 1.79-4.53) and group 2 (HR, 2.10; 95% CI, 1.13-3.89). Group 3 had a higher risk of metachronous CRN than group 1 (HR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.14-1.97) and group 2 (HR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.20-2.20). CONCLUSIONS: In a retrospective study of individuals with at least 1 adenoma, we found that cotinine-verified changes in smoking status between index and follow-up colonoscopy are associated with a risk of metachronous CRN. Helping patients quit smoking is important for effective prevention of colorectal cancer.

Comparative systematic review and meta-analysis of 1- to 5-mm versus 6- to 9-mm adenomas on the risk of metachronous advanced colorectal neoplasia.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The current guidelines recommend the same surveillance interval for ≥3 nonadvanced adenomas (NAAs), without discriminating between diminutive (1-5 mm) and small (6-9 mm) adenomas. Additionally, the same surveillance interval is recommended for patients with ≤2 diminutive NAAs and those with ≤2 small NAAs. However, it is questionable whether these recommendations are appropriate. METHODS: We searched all relevant studies published through September 2019 that examined the risk of metachronous advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACRN) according to the size (diminutive vs small) and the number of adenomas found during an index colonoscopy. Low-risk adenomas (LRAs) were subclassified into 2 categories (LRA-1, ≤2 diminutive NAAs; and LRA-2, ≤2 small NAAs), and high-risk adenomas (HRAs) were subclassified into 3 categories (HRA-1, ≥3 diminutive NAAs; HRA-2, ≥3 small NAAs; and HRA-3, advanced adenoma). RESULTS: Eight studies involving 36,142 patients were evaluated. The LRA-2 group had a higher risk of metachronous ACRN than the LRA-1 group (risk ratio, 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.23-1.81). Additionally, the HRA-2 and HRA-3 groups had a higher risk of metachronous ACRN than the HRA-1 group (hazard ratios [HRs], 1.51 [95% CI, 1.002-2.28] and 1.92 [95% CI, 1.11-3.33], respectively). However, there was no significant difference between the HRA-1 versus LRA-2 groups (HR, 1.23; 95% CI, .78-1.94). CONCLUSIONS: Among the HRA and LRA groups, those with diminutive NAAs had a lower risk of metachronous ACRN than those with small NAAs. We believe that clinical guidelines should consider extending the surveillance intervals in patients with diminutive NAAs only.

Risk of developing metachronous advanced colorectal neoplasia after resection of low-risk diminutive versus small adenomas.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Current postpolypectomy guidelines classify 1 to 2 diminutive (1-5 mm) nonadvanced adenomas (NAAs) and 1 to 2 small (6-9 mm) NAAs as low-risk adenomas and recommend the same surveillance interval for both lesions. We compared the risk of metachronous advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACRN) for both groups. METHODS: We studied 8602 patients who underwent removal of ≥1 NAA and follow-up colonoscopic surveillance. Patients were categorized into 4 groups based on size and number of baseline NAAs: group 1, ≤2 diminutive NAAs (n = 6379); group 2, ≤2 small NAAs (n = 1672); group 3, ≥3 diminutive NAAs (n = 293); and group 4, ≥3 small NAAs (n = 258). Size was classified based on the largest NAA. RESULTS: The 5-year cumulative incidence rates of metachronous ACRN in groups 1, 2, 3, and 4 were 2.7%, 5.1%, 10.7%, and 15.1%, respectively. Groups 2, 3, and 4 had a higher risk of metachronous ACRN than group 1. Compared with group 1, the adjusted hazard ratios for metachronous ACRN were 2.06 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.46-2.91) for group 2, 2.75 (95% CI, 1.53-4.96) for group 3, and 4.49 (95% CI, 2.62-7.70) for group 4. However, the risk of metachronous ACRN was not significantly different between groups 3 and 4 (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.62; 95% CI, .76-3.44). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with ≤2 NAAs, patients with 1- to 5-mm NAAs had a lower risk of metachronous ACRN than those with 6- to 9-mm NAAs. The guidelines should consider extending surveillance intervals in patients with ≤2 diminutive NAAs.

Association between waist circumference and risk of colorectal neoplasia in normal-weight adults.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Abdominal obesity, measured using waist circumference (WC), is associated with the colorectal neoplasia (CRN) risk. We examined whether WC is associated with the CRN risk even in normal-weight individuals. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed on asymptomatic normal-weight (body mass index 18.5-23 kg/m2 ) individuals who underwent colonoscopy as health checkups. RESULTS: Of 63 057 examinees, 30 498 were men (mean age, 41.1 years) and 32 559 were women (mean age, 41.7 years). The prevalence of overall CRN in WC quartiles 1, 2, 3, and 4 was 14.2%, 15.5%, 15.5%, and 18.7%, respectively, in men and 7.4%, 8.9%, 9.4%, and 11.5%, respectively, in women. The prevalence of advanced CRN (ACRN) in WC quartiles 1, 2, 3, and 4 was 1.5%, 1.3%, 1.6%, and 2.1%, respectively, in men and 1.0%, 1.3%, 1.2%, and 1.3%, respectively, in women. Among men, the overall CRN risk in quartile 4 (> 82 cm) was higher than that in quartiles 1, 2, and 3 (adjusted odds ratio, OR [95% confidence interval, CI], 1.22 [1.11-1.34], 1.12 [1.05-1.23], and 1.18 [1.07-1.29], respectively); the ACRN risk in quartile 4 was also higher than that in quartiles 1, 2, and 3 (adjusted OR [95% CI], 1.41 [1.09-1.81], 1.56 [1.19-2.03], and 1.50 [1.16-1.94], respectively). Among women, the overall CRN risk in quartile 4 (> 77 cm) was higher than that in quartiles 1 and 3; the ACRN risk was not different among all groups. CONCLUSIONS: Even with a normal weight, a large WC was associated with the CRN risk, especially with the ACRN risk in men.

Simple proxies for detection of clinically significant serrated polyps and data for their benchmarks.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Serrated polyp detection rate (SDR) is a potential quality indicator for preventing colorectal cancer associated with the serrated pathway. Using clinically significant SDR (CSSDR) has been suggested based on clinically significant serrated polyp's ability to be colorectal cancer precursors. Correlations between CSSDR and simpler SDRs, other than proximal SDR, have not yet been studied. We aimed to investigate which simpler SDR indicator is most relevant to CSSDR or adenoma detection rate (ADR) and provide benchmark data. METHODS: We analyzed 26 627 colonoscopies performed by 30 endoscopists. Clinically significant serrated polyps were defined as any sessile serrated adenoma/polyp or traditional serrated adenoma, hyperplastic polyps ≥ 5 mm in the proximal colon, or hyperplastic polyps ≥ 10 mm anywhere in the colon. Correlation of CSSDR and ADR with other simple SDRs, SDR-pathology (sessile serrated adenoma/polyp or traditional serrated adenoma), SDR-size (≥ 10 mm), and SDR-location (proximal location) was analyzed using Pearson's correlation test and Steiger's z-test. RESULTS: The CSSDR was 1.7% to 13.2% (mean = 6.1%). The correlation coefficient of CSSDR/SDR-size was 0.91 (P < 0.01), which was higher than that of CSSDR/SDR-location (0.64, P < 0.01) (0.91 vs 0.61, P < 0.01). The correlation coefficient of ADR/CSSDR and ADR/SDR-location was 0.41 (P < 0.01) and 0.81 (P < 0.01), respectively. For ADR ≥ 25%, endoscopists' median screening CSSDR was 5.4%, while SDR-location and SDR-size were 10.9% and 2.2%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Large SDR could be a simple proxy for CSSDR, in addition to proximal SDR. Large SDR and proximal SDR benchmarks of 2.2% and 10.9% may guide adequate serrated polyp detection with uniform definitions and simpler calculations.

Skeletal muscle mass and risk of advanced adenoma in surveillance colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Sarcopenia has been suggested to be associated with chronic inflammation and insulin resistance. This study aimed to evaluate whether low muscle mass is associated with the incidence and recurrence of advanced colorectal adenoma. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study including 14 701 participants who underwent first-time screening colonoscopy between 2003 and 2012 and follow-up colonoscopy until 2017. Skeletal muscle mass was measured using a bioelectrical impedance analyzer and divided by body weight to calculate the skeletal muscle mass index (SMI). RESULTS: During a median 47 (interquartile range, 35-58) months of follow-up, overall and advanced adenoma developed in 2988 (20.3%) and 207 (1.41%) participants, respectively. In multivariate analysis using models adjusted for baseline adenoma risk, lifestyle factors, markers for insulin resistance and chronic inflammation, and metabolic syndrome, decreasing SMI quartiles were associated with increased risk of occurrence of advanced adenoma and overall adenoma. The adjusted hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) comparing SMI quartiles 3, 2, and 1 to quartile 4 were 1.57 (1.03-2.41), 1.22 (0.78-1.92), and 1.77 (1.13-2.76), respectively, for advanced adenoma (P for trend = 0.049) and 1.05 (0.95-1.17), 1.09 (0.98-1.21), and 1.26 (1.13-1.41), respectively, for overall adenoma (P for trend < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort with long-term colonoscopy follow-up, low relative muscle mass was associated with increased risk of occurrence of advanced adenoma and overall adenoma at follow-up colonoscopy, independent of metabolic and inflammatory markers. Timely and thorough surveillance colonoscopy may be emphasized in such populations.

Biologic Use Patterns and Predictors for Non-persistence and Switching of Biologics in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Nationwide Population-Based Study.

BACKGROUND: Data on real-life patterns of biologic use for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are scarce. AIMS: We aimed to examine the patterns of biologic use and the factors associated with non-persistence and switching of biologics in Korean IBD patients. METHODS: Using National Health Insurance claims, we collected data on patients who were diagnosed with IBD and exposed to biologics between 2010 and 2016. RESULTS: Among 1838 patients with Crohn's disease (CD), 1237 and 601 started with infliximab and adalimumab, respectively. Among 1125 patients with ulcerative colitis (UC), 774, 294, and 57 initiated infliximab, adalimumab, and golimumab, respectively. Rates of non-persistence and switching were higher in UC than in CD. One- and 3-year non-persistence rates were 14.2% and 26.5% in CD and 35.4% and 53.4% in UC, respectively. One- and 3-year switching rates were 3.7% and 10.1% in CD and 15.6% and 22.0% in UC, respectively. In both CD and UC, infliximab and adalimumab initiators showed similar persistence rates, whereas adalimumab initiators had a higher risk of switching than infliximab initiators. In UC, golimumab initiators had a higher risk of non-persistence and switching than infliximab initiators. Steroid use at biologic initiation was associated with an increased risk of non-persistence and switching in both CD and UC. UC patients who started biologic treatment at tertiary hospitals were more likely to continue treatment than those who started at general hospitals/community hospitals/clinics. CONCLUSIONS: In real-world clinical practice settings, discontinuation of biologics occurred frequently in IBD patients, and switching of biologics was common in UC patients.

Prevalence of and Risk Factors for Colorectal Neoplasia in Asymptomatic Young Adults (20-39 Years Old).

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The incidence of colorectal cancer is increasing among persons 50 years old or younger. However, data on the epidemiology of young-onset colorectal neoplasia (CRN) are limited. Although some studies have investigated the epidemiology of CRN in persons younger than 50 years, most have focused on persons 40 years or older. We evaluated the prevalence of and risk factors for CRN in adults younger than 40 years. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of 72,356 asymptomatic individuals, 20-39 years old, who underwent colonoscopies as participants in the Kangbuk Samsung Health Study in South Korea, from August 2004 through December 2015. Data on medical history and health-related behavior were collected from self-administered questionnaires. Patients were divided into groups based on age (20-29 years, n = 7340 or 30-39 years, n = 65,016), and χ2 tests were used to compare categorical variables between groups. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to assess the risk factors for overall and advanced CRN. RESULTS: The prevalence of overall CRN in group of 20-29 years was 5.9% and in the group of 30-39 years was 9.5% (P < .001); prevalence values for advanced CRN were 0.6% and 0.9%, respectively (P = .005). In the group of 30-39 years, age, smoking, alcohol intake, obesity, and abdominal obesity were independent risk factors for overall and advanced CRN. Additionally, male sex and metabolic syndrome were independent risk factors for overall CRN, whereas regular exercise reduced risk of overall CRN. Even in the 20-29 years group, obesity, abdominal obesity, and increased levels of triglycerides were independent risk factors for overall and advanced CRN, whereas age, increased blood pressure, and increased fasting blood glucose level were independent risk factors for overall CRN. CONCLUSION: In a retrospective analysis of 72,356 asymptomatic persons under 40 years of age evaluated by colonoscopy in Korea, we found modifiable factors, such as smoking, alcohol intake, obesity, and metabolic syndrome, to be significant risk factors for CRN-even in persons of 20-39 years old. Colorectal cancer screening strategies should consider these risk factors.

Risk of Developing Metachronous Advanced Colorectal Neoplasia After Polypectomy in Patients With Multiple Diminutive or Small Adenomas.

INTRODUCTION: Current post-polypectomy guidelines recommend a 3-year surveillance interval for ≥3 nonadvanced adenomas (NAAs) without discrimination between diminutive (1-5 mm) and small (6-9 mm) adenomas. We compared the risk of metachronous advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACRN) among these groups. METHODS: We studied 9,733 patients who underwent ≥1 adenoma removal and follow-up colonoscopic surveillance. Patients were classified based on baseline adenoma characteristics: group 1, 1-2 NAAs (n = 8,051); group 2, ≥3 diminutive NAAs (n = 293); group 3, ≥3 small NAAs (n = 258); and group 4, advanced adenomas (AAs) (n = 1,131). RESULTS: The mean age of the study population was 45.8 ± 8.2 years. In group 4, most patients (94.5%) had 1 AA. The 3- and 5-year cumulative incidence rates of metachronous ACRN in groups 1, 2, 3, and 4 were 0.9%, 2.8%, 3.5%, and 4.0% and 3.1%, 10.7%, 15.1%, and 8.5%, respectively. Groups 2, 3, and 4 had a higher risk of metachronous ACRN than group 1. Compared with those for group 1, adjusted hazard ratios (95% confidence interval) for metachronous ACRN were 2.07 (1.16-3.68), 3.29 (1.94-5.56), and 2.73 (2.00-3.72) for groups 2, 3, and 4, respectively. However, this relationship was statistically insignificant between groups 2, 3, and 4. Compared with those for group 2, adjusted hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for groups 3 and 4 were 1.59 (0.76-3.30) and 1.32 (0.72-2.42), respectively, and 0.83 (0.47-1.46) for group 4 compared with group 3. The results of patients aged ≥50 years were identical to those of all patients. DISCUSSION: Risk of metachronous ACRN was not different between patients aged ≥50 years who underwent polypectomy of ≥3 diminutive NAAs, ≥3 small NAAs, and AA, thus supporting current guidelines that recommend a uniform surveillance interval for these lesions.

Yield of repeat colonoscopy in asymptomatic individuals with a positive fecal immunochemical test and recent colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: A fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is often repeated annually, even after a recent colonoscopy. However, there are no published data on the proper approach to FIT-positive patients after a recent colonoscopy. We compared colorectal cancer (CRC) and advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACRN) prevalence based on the interval since the last colonoscopy. METHODS: We reviewed asymptomatic screenees aged ≥50 years who underwent FIT and colonoscopy. RESULTS: Of 2228 FIT-positive participants, 514 had a colonoscopy less than 3 years before (group 1), 427 had a colonoscopy had a colonoscopy 3 to 10 years before (group 2), and 1287 had a colonoscopy >10 years before or no colonoscopy (group 3). The prevalence of CRC in groups 1, 2, and 3 was 2.1%, 1.6%, and 7.2%, respectively, and that for ACRN was 10.9%, 12.6%, and 26.0%, respectively. Even after adjusting for confounders, CRC and ACRN detection rates in group 1 were lower than those in group 3 but not lower than those in group 2. Among 6135 FIT-negative participants, the prevalence of CRC in the 3 groups was .7%, .4%, and 3.4%, respectively, and that for ACRN was 6.0%, 6.1%, and 14.7%, respectively. CRC and ACRN detection rates were significantly higher in FIT-positive participants than in FIT-negative participants in all 3 groups. CONCLUSIONS: In FIT-positive patients who underwent colonoscopy within the prior 3 years, CRC and ACRN prevalence was not low. Our findings support the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on the CRC screening recommendation that repeat colonoscopy be offered to patients with positive FIT results and recent colonoscopy.

Usefulness of risk stratification models for colorectal cancer based on fecal hemoglobin concentration and clinical risk factors.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: We aimed to develop risk stratification models for advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACRN) and colorectal cancer (CRC) based on fecal hemoglobin (f-Hb) concentration and clinical risk factors. METHODS: We reviewed screenees aged ≥50 years who underwent fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and colonoscopy and developed risk-scoring models for ACRN and CRC using logistic regression analysis. Participants were classified into low- (risk lower than that in FIT-negative individuals), intermediate- (risk higher than that in FIT-negative but lower than that in FIT-positive individuals), high- (risk similar to that in FIT-positive individuals), and very-high- (risk higher than that in FIT-positive individuals) risk groups. RESULTS: Of 3733 participants, 367 (9.8%) and 70 (1.9%) had ACRN and CRC, respectively. On multivariable analysis, age (ß = .043/y), former smoker (ß = .401), current smoker (ß = .841), diabetes (ß = .097), and square root of f-Hb concentration (ß = .071) were significantly associated with ACRN. In terms of CRC, age (ß = .035/y) and square root of f-Hb concentration (ß = .004) were associated factors. After point assignments based on the regression coefficient, we could classify screenees as low-, intermediate-, high-, and very-high-risk groups. ACRN was identified in 2.9%, 5.3%, 16.2%, and 35.7% of screenees in the low-, intermediate-, high-, and very-high-risk groups, respectively. CRC was identified in .1%, .5%, 3.9%, and 11.1% of screenees in the low-, intermediate-, high-, and very-high-risk groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed models can effectively stratify the risk for ACRN and CRC and provide accurate information on this risk in individuals who undergo FIT.