Extent of investigation and management of cases of 'unexplained' mismatch repair deficiency (u-dMMR): a UK Cancer Genetics Group consensus.

BACKGROUND: Mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR) is a characteristic feature of cancers linked to Lynch syndrome. However, in most cases, it results from sporadic somatic events rather than hereditary factors. The term 'Lynch-like syndrome' (LLS) has been used to guide colorectal cancer surveillance for relatives of individuals with a dMMR tumour when somatic and germline genomic testing is uninformative. As the assessment of mismatch repair through immunohistochemistry and/or microsatellite instability is increasingly applied across various tumour types for treatment planning, dMMR is increasingly detected in tumours where suspicion of hereditary aetiology is low. Our objective was to establish current practices and develop national guidance for investigating, and managing relatives of, patients with cancers demonstrating unexplained dMMR. METHODS: This was achieved through a virtual consensus meeting involving key stakeholders from the UK, through premeeting surveys, structured discussions and in-meeting polling to formulate best practice guidance. RESULTS: We identified variability in the availability of diagnostic technologies across specialist centres. It was agreed that equitable access to baseline testing is required, acknowledging the need for a pragmatic approach to investigating dMMR cancers not traditionally associated with Lynch syndrome. Factors such as family history, age, tumour type, protein loss pattern and extent of the investigation were deemed crucial in guiding family management. The term 'unexplained dMMR' was recommended over LLS. CONCLUSION: Decisions regarding investigations and future cancer risk management in patients and relatives should be nuanced, considering factors like clinical suspicion of hereditary predisposition to allocate limited resources efficiently and avoid unnecessary investigations in low-suspicion families.

Delphi Initiative for Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer (DIRECt) International Management Guidelines.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with early-onset colorectal cancer (eoCRC) are managed according to guidelines that are not age-specific. A multidisciplinary international group (DIRECt), composed of 69 experts, was convened to develop the first evidence-based consensus recommendations for eoCRC. METHODS: After reviewing the published literature, a Delphi methodology was used to draft and respond to clinically relevant questions. Each statement underwent 3 rounds of voting and reached a consensus level of agreement of ≥80%. RESULTS: The DIRECt group produced 31 statements in 7 areas of interest: diagnosis, risk factors, genetics, pathology-oncology, endoscopy, therapy, and supportive care. There was strong consensus that all individuals younger than 50 should undergo CRC risk stratification and prompt symptom assessment. All newly diagnosed eoCRC patients should receive germline genetic testing, ideally before surgery. On the basis of current evidence, endoscopic, surgical, and oncologic treatment of eoCRC should not differ from later-onset CRC, except for individuals with pathogenic or likely pathogenic germline variants. The evidence on chemotherapy is not sufficient to recommend changes to established therapeutic protocols. Fertility preservation and sexual health are important to address in eoCRC survivors. The DIRECt group highlighted areas with knowledge gaps that should be prioritized in future research efforts, including age at first screening for the general population, use of fecal immunochemical tests, chemotherapy, endoscopic therapy, and post-treatment surveillance for eoCRC patients. CONCLUSIONS: The DIRECt group produced the first consensus recommendations on eoCRC. All statements should be considered together with the accompanying comments and literature reviews. We highlighted areas where research should be prioritized. These guidelines represent a useful tool for clinicians caring for patients with eoCRC.

Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) in patients with signs or symptoms of suspected colorectal cancer (CRC): a joint guideline from the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) and the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG).

Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) has a high sensitivity for the detection of colorectal cancer (CRC). In a symptomatic population FIT may identify those patients who require colorectal investigation with the highest priority. FIT offers considerable advantages over the use of symptoms alone, as an objective measure of risk with a vastly superior positive predictive value for CRC, while conversely identifying a truly low risk cohort of patients. The aim of this guideline was to provide a clear strategy for the use of FIT in the diagnostic pathway of people with signs or symptoms of a suspected diagnosis of CRC. The guideline was jointly developed by the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland/British Society of Gastroenterology, specifically by a 21-member multidisciplinary guideline development group (GDG). A systematic review of 13 535 publications was undertaken to develop 23 evidence and expert opinion-based recommendations for the triage of people with symptoms of a suspected CRC diagnosis in primary care. In order to achieve consensus among a broad group of key stakeholders, we completed an extended Delphi of the GDG, and also 61 other individuals across the UK and Ireland, including by members of the public, charities and primary and secondary care. Seventeen research recommendations were also prioritised to inform clinical management.

Exploring the utility and acceptability of Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) as a novel intervention for the improvement of colorectal Cancer (CRC) surveillance in individuals with lynch syndrome (FIT for lynch study): a single-arm, prospective, multi-centre, non-randomised study.

BACKGROUND: Lynch Syndrome (LS) is an inherited cancer predisposition syndrome defined by pathogenic variants in the mismatch repair (MMR) or EPCAM genes. In the United Kingdom, people with LS are advised to undergo biennial colonoscopy from as early as 25 until 75 years of age to mitigate a high lifetime colorectal cancer (CRC) risk, though the consideration of additional surveillance intervention(s) through the application of non-invasive diagnostic devices has yet to be longitudinally observed in LS patients. In this study, we will examine the role of annual faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) alongside biennial colonoscopy for CRC surveillance in people with LS. METHODS/DESIGN: In this single-arm, prospective, non-randomised study, 400 LS patients will be recruited across 11 National Health Service (NHS) Trusts throughout the United Kingdom. Study inclusion requires a LS diagnosis, between 25 and 73 years old, and a routine surveillance colonoscopy scheduled during the recruitment period. Eligible patients will receive a baseline OC-Sensor™ FIT kit ahead of their colonoscopy, and annually for 3 years thereafter. A pre-paid envelope addressed to the central lab will be included within all patient mailings for the return of FIT kits and relevant study documents. A questionnaire assessing attitudes and perception of FIT will also be included at baseline. All study samples received by the central lab will be assayed on an OC-Sensor™ PLEDIA Analyser. Patients with FIT results of ≥6 µg of Haemoglobin per gram of faeces (f-Hb) at Years 1 and/or 3 will be referred for colonoscopy via an urgent colonoscopy triage pathway. 16S rRNA gene V4 amplicon sequencing will be carried out on residual faecal DNA of eligible archived FIT samples to characterise the faecal microbiome. DISCUSSION: FIT may have clinical utility alongside colonoscopic surveillance in people with LS. We have designed a longitudinal study to examine the efficacy of FIT as a non-invasive modality. Potential limitations of this method will be assessed, including false negative or false positive FIT results related to specific morphological features of LS neoplasia or the presence of post-resection anastomotic inflammation. The potential for additional colonoscopies in a subset of participants may also impact on colonoscopic resources and patient acceptability. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial Registration: ISRCTN, ISRCTN15740250 . Registered 13 July 2021.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of tumour microsatellite-instability status as a predictor of response to fluorouracil-based adjuvant chemotherapy in colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: Colorectal cancer (CRC) can be classified according to the chromosomal-instability pathway (a microsatellite-stable (MSS) pathway) and the microsatellite-instability (MSI) pathway. Adjuvant therapy after surgery in advanced CRC is usually based on fluoropyrimidine 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) alone or combined with other agents. Controversy however remains on the use of 5-FU-based regimens in treating MSI-related tumours. AIMS: To systematically investigate the relationship between tumour microsatellite profile and 5-year overall survival in patients with CRC treated with 5-FU. METHODS: A systematic literature review of PubMed and Embase databases was conducted. Pre-specified criteria determined study inclusion/exclusion. The PRISMA and QUADAS-2 criteria were used to assess study suitability and quality respectively. Patients were categorised as having either MSI or MSS CRC. Overall 5-year survival was estimated from Kaplan-Meier curves. Publication bias was assessed using funnel-plots and Egger's test. RESULTS: 1807 studies were identified, with meta-analysis performed using nine studies. 5-FU treated individuals with CRC who died at 5 years were found to be 0.31 times less likely to have MSI than those who were alive, although this was not statistically significant. There was an insufficient number of studies to enable subgroup analysis by stage. CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis, MSI status does not alter 5-year survival of patients with CRC patients treated with adjuvant 5-FU, however there is significant heterogeneity in the design of individual studies in the data synthesis. More studies are necessary to clarify whether CRC patients with MSI CRC, in particular early stage, should be offered 5-FU based adjuvant chemotherapy.

Low Referral Rates for Genetic Assessment of Patients With Multiple Adenomas in United Kingdom Bowel Cancer Screening Programs.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 1 in 20 cases of colorectal cancer are caused by monogenic syndromes. Published guidelines recommend that patients with 10 or more adenomas be referred for genetic testing, based on evidence that colorectal cancer risk is associated with adenoma multiplicity. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine adherence to guidelines on referral for genetic screening in patients with 10 or more adenomas. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study was performed of prospectively collected data from the UK Bowel Cancer Screening Programme between May 2007 and June 2018. Only histologically confirmed adenomas were included. Clinicopathological data were recorded from patient records, and referrals to clinical genetics services were ascertained. SETTING: Data were obtained from 3 centers in London, United Kingdom. PATIENTS: A total of 17,450 subjects underwent colonoscopy following an abnormal fecal occult blood test. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We quantified patients with 10 or more adenomas and the proportion referred for genetic screening. RESULTS: The adenoma detection rate was 50.6% among 17,450 patients who underwent colonoscopy (8831 had 1 or more adenomas). Three hundred forty-seven patients (2.0%) had 10 or more adenomas. Patients with 10 or more adenomas were more likely to be male than those with fewer than 10 adenomas (76.9% vs 53.4%; p < 0.0001). A family history was collected in 37.8% of the multiple adenoma population. Of 347 patients with 10 or more adenomas, 28 (8.1%) were referred for genetic assessment. LIMITATIONS: All 3 screening centers were in a single city. No genetic outcome data were available to permit analysis of actual rates of inherited cancer syndromes in this population. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, almost 1 in 50 patients had 10 or more adenomas. Despite guidelines advising genetic testing in this group, referral rates are low. A referral pathway and management strategies should be established to address this patient population. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B630. TASAS BAJAS DE DERIVACIN PARA LA EVALUACIN GENTICA DE PACIENTES CON ADENOMAS MLTIPLES EN LOS PROGRAMAS DE DETECCIN DEL CNCER DE INTESTINO DEL REINO UNIDO: ANTECEDENTES:Aproximadamente uno de cada veinte casos de cáncer colorrectal son causados por síndromes monogénicos. Las pautas publicadas recomiendan que los pacientes con diez o más adenomas sean derivados para pruebas genéticas, basándose en la evidencia de que el riesgo de cáncer colorrectal está asociado con la multiplicidad de adenomas.OBJETIVO:El objetivo de este estudio fue determinar la adherencia a las guías de derivación para cribado genético en pacientes con diez o más adenomas.DISEÑO:Se realizó un estudio transversal de datos recolectados prospectivamente del Programa de Detección de Cáncer de Intestino del Reino Unido entre mayo de 2007 y junio de 2018. Solo se incluyeron los adenomas confirmados histológicamente. Los datos clínico-patológicos se registraron a partir de los registros de los pacientes y se determinaron las derivaciones a los servicios de genética clínica.AJUSTE ENTORNO CLINICO:Los datos se obtuvieron de tres centros en Londres, Reino Unido.PACIENTES:Un total de 17.450 17450 sujetos pacientes se sometieron a una colonoscopia después de una prueba de sangre oculta en heces anormal positiva.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO VOLARACION:cuantificamos los pacientes con diez o más adenomas y la proporción remitida para cribado genético.RESULTADOS:La tasa de detección de adenomas fue del 50,6% entre 17.450 17450 pacientes que se sometieron a colonoscopia (8.831 8831 tenían uno o más adenomas). 347 pacientes (2,0%) tenían 10 o más adenomas. Los pacientes con 10 o más adenomas tenían más probabilidades de ser hombres que aquellos con menos de 10 adenomas (76,9% frente versus a 53,4%; p <0,0001). Se recogieron antecedentes familiares en el 37,8% de la población de adenomas múltiples. De 347 pacientes con 10 o más adenomas, 28 (8,1%) fueron remitidos para evaluación genética.LIMITACIONES:Los tres centros de detección se encontraban en una sola ciudad. No se disponía de datos de resultados genéticos que permitieran el análisis de las tasas reales de síndromes de cáncer hereditario en esta población.CONCLUSIONES:En este estudio, casi uno de cada cincuenta pacientes tenía diez o más adenomas. A pesar de las pautas que recomiendan las pruebas genéticas en este grupo, las tasas de derivación son bajas. Se debe establecer una vía de derivación y estrategias de manejo para abordar esta población de pacientes. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B630.

Guidelines for the management of hereditary colorectal cancer from the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG)/Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI)/United Kingdom Cancer Genetics Group (UKCGG).

Heritable factors account for approximately 35% of colorectal cancer (CRC) risk, and almost 30% of the population in the UK have a family history of CRC. The quantification of an individual's lifetime risk of gastrointestinal cancer may incorporate clinical and molecular data, and depends on accurate phenotypic assessment and genetic diagnosis. In turn this may facilitate targeted risk-reducing interventions, including endoscopic surveillance, preventative surgery and chemoprophylaxis, which provide opportunities for cancer prevention. This guideline is an update from the 2010 British Society of Gastroenterology/Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (BSG/ACPGBI) guidelines for colorectal screening and surveillance in moderate and high-risk groups; however, this guideline is concerned specifically with people who have increased lifetime risk of CRC due to hereditary factors, including those with Lynch syndrome, polyposis or a family history of CRC. On this occasion we invited the UK Cancer Genetics Group (UKCGG), a subgroup within the British Society of Genetic Medicine (BSGM), as a partner to BSG and ACPGBI in the multidisciplinary guideline development process. We also invited external review through the Delphi process by members of the public as well as the steering committees of the European Hereditary Tumour Group (EHTG) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE). A systematic review of 10 189 publications was undertaken to develop 67 evidence and expert opinion-based recommendations for the management of hereditary CRC risk. Ten research recommendations are also prioritised to inform clinical management of people at hereditary CRC risk.

British Society of Gastroenterology/Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland/Public Health England post-polypectomy and post-colorectal cancer resection surveillance guidelines.

These consensus guidelines were jointly commissioned by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG), the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) and Public Health England (PHE). They provide an evidence-based framework for the use of surveillance colonoscopy and non-colonoscopic colorectal imaging in people aged 18 years and over. They are the first guidelines that take into account the introduction of national bowel cancer screening. For the first time, they also incorporate surveillance of patients following resection of either adenomatous or serrated polyps and also post-colorectal cancer resection. They are primarily aimed at healthcare professionals, and aim to address:Which patients should commence surveillance post-polypectomy and post-cancer resection?What is the appropriate surveillance interval?When can surveillance be stopped? two or more premalignant polyps including at least one advanced colorectal polyp (defined as a serrated polyp of at least 10 mm in size or containing any grade of dysplasia, or an adenoma of at least 10 mm in size or containing high-grade dysplasia); or five or more premalignant polyps The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument provided a methodological framework for the guidelines. The BSG's guideline development process was used, which is National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) compliant.two or more premalignant polyps including at least one advanced colorectal polyp (defined as a serrated polyp of at least 10 mm in size or containing any grade of dysplasia, or an adenoma of at least 10 mm in size or containing high-grade dysplasia); or five or more premalignant polyps The key recommendations are that the high-risk criteria for future colorectal cancer (CRC) following polypectomy comprise either:two or more premalignant polyps including at least one advanced colorectal polyp (defined as a serrated polyp of at least 10 mm in size or containing any grade of dysplasia, or an adenoma of at least 10 mm in size or containing high-grade dysplasia); or five or more premalignant polyps This cohort should undergo a one-off surveillance colonoscopy at 3 years. Post-CRC resection patients should undergo a 1 year clearance colonoscopy, then a surveillance colonoscopy after 3 more years.

The Manchester International Consensus Group recommendations for the management of gynecological cancers in Lynch syndrome.

PURPOSE: There are no internationally agreed upon clinical guidelines as to which women with gynecological cancer would benefit from Lynch syndrome screening or how best to manage the risk of gynecological cancer in women with Lynch syndrome. The Manchester International Consensus Group was convened in April 2017 to address this unmet need. The aim of the Group was to develop clear and comprehensive clinical guidance regarding the management of the gynecological sequelae of Lynch syndrome based on existing evidence and expert opinion from medical professionals and patients. METHODS: Stakeholders from Europe and North America worked together over a two-day workshop to achieve consensus on best practice. RESULTS: Guidance was developed in four key areas: (1) whether women with gynecological cancer should be screened for Lynch syndrome and (2) how this should be done, (3) whether there was a role for gynecological surveillance in women at risk of Lynch syndrome, and (4) what preventive measures should be recommended for women with Lynch syndrome to reduce their risk of gynecological cancer. CONCLUSION: This document provides comprehensive clinical guidance that can be referenced by both patients and clinicians so that women with Lynch syndrome can expect and receive appropriate standards of care.

Critical research gaps and recommendations to inform research prioritisation for more effective prevention and improved outcomes in colorectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Colorectal cancer (CRC) leads to significant morbidity/mortality worldwide. Defining critical research gaps (RG), their prioritisation and resolution, could improve patient outcomes. DESIGN: RG analysis was conducted by a multidisciplinary panel of patients, clinicians and researchers (n=71). Eight working groups (WG) were constituted: discovery science; risk; prevention; early diagnosis and screening; pathology; curative treatment; stage IV disease; and living with and beyond CRC. A series of discussions led to development of draft papers by each WG, which were evaluated by a 20-strong patient panel. A final list of RGs and research recommendations (RR) was endorsed by all participants. RESULTS: Fifteen critical RGs are summarised below: RG1: Lack of realistic models that recapitulate tumour/tumour micro/macroenvironment; RG2: Insufficient evidence on precise contributions of genetic/environmental/lifestyle factors to CRC risk; RG3: Pressing need for prevention trials; RG4: Lack of integration of different prevention approaches; RG5: Lack of optimal strategies for CRC screening; RG6: Lack of effective triage systems for invasive investigations; RG7: Imprecise pathological assessment of CRC; RG8: Lack of qualified personnel in genomics, data sciences and digital pathology; RG9: Inadequate assessment/communication of risk, benefit and uncertainty of treatment choices; RG10: Need for novel technologies/interventions to improve curative outcomes; RG11: Lack of approaches that recognise molecular interplay between metastasising tumours and their microenvironment; RG12: Lack of reliable biomarkers to guide stage IV treatment; RG13: Need to increase understanding of health related quality of life (HRQOL) and promote residual symptom resolution; RG14: Lack of coordination of CRC research/funding; RG15: Lack of effective communication between relevant stakeholders. CONCLUSION: Prioritising research activity and funding could have a significant impact on reducing CRC disease burden over the next 5 years.

The diagnostic yield of colonoscopic surveillance following resection of early age onset colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The primary benefit of post-colorectal cancer (CRC) colonoscopic surveillance is to detect and remove premalignant lesions to prevent metachronous CRC. Current guidelines for long-term colonoscopic surveillance post early age onset CRC (EOCRC) resection are based on limited evidence. The aims of this study were to assess the diagnostic yield of colonoscopic surveillance post-EOCRC resection and identify molecular and clinicopathological risk factors associated with advanced neoplasia. METHODOLOGY: A retrospective cohort study of prospectively collected data was conducted at St Mark's hospital, London, United Kingdom, for patients diagnosed with EOCRC who underwent at least one episode of post-CRC colonoscopic surveillance between 1978 and 2022. We collected clinicopathological data including tumour molecular status and neoplasia detection rates. RESULTS: In total, 908 colonoscopic surveillance procedures were performed in 195 patients over 2581.3 person-years of follow-up. The diagnostic yields of metachronous CRC, advanced adenomas and non-advanced adenomas were 1.76%, 3.41% and 22.69% respectively. Sixteen patients (8.21%) developed metachronous CRC, and the majority (87.5%) were detected more than 3 years post index EOCRC diagnosis. Detection of advanced neoplasia was significantly higher in EOCRC patients with Lynch syndrome (26.15%) compared with those in whom Lynch syndrome was excluded (13.13%) (OR, 2.343; 95% CI, 1.014-5.256; p = 0.0349). CONCLUSIONS: During colonoscopic surveillance post-EOCRC resection, the long-term risk of developing metachronous advanced neoplasia remains high in the context of Lynch syndrome, but this trend is not as clearly evident when Lynch syndrome has been excluded.

Genetic predisposition to gastrointestinal polyposis: syndromes, tumour features, genetic testing, and clinical management.

Gastrointestinal tract polyposis is characterised by the presence of multiple polyps, particularly in the colorectum, and encompasses both cancer predisposition genetic syndromes and non-syndromic clinical manifestations. The sources of the heterogeneity observed in polyposis syndromes relate to genetic cause, mode of inheritance, polyp burden and histological type, and spectrum and frequency of extracolonic manifestations. These features determine the clinical management of carriers, including strategies for cancer prevention and early detection, and oncological treatments. Despite substantial progress in identifying the genetic causes of polyposis, a large proportion of cases remain genetically unexplained. Although some of these cases might be due to lifestyle, environmental factors, or cancer treatments, it is likely that additional polyposis predisposition genes will be identified. This Review provides an overview of the known syndromes and genes, genetic testing, and clinical management of patients with polyposis, and recent advances and challenges in the field of gastrointestinal polyposis.

The Diagnostic Yield of Genetic Testing in Patients With Multiple Colorectal Adenomas: A Specialist Center Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: Adenoma multiplicity is associated with increased colorectal cancer (CRC) risk. The utility of genetic testing in patients with multiple colorectal adenomas (MCRA) remains uncertain. We evaluated the diagnostic yield of mutations in polyposis- and CRC-associated genes in patients with MCRA. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional review of adult patients with 10-99 cumulative adenomas from the prospective database at the St Mark's Hospital Polyposis Registry and Family Cancer Clinic between 1999 and 2021. Genetic testing was performed for adenomatous polyposis-associated genes, hamartomatous polyposis-associated genes, and nonpolyposis colorectal cancer-associated genes. Clinicopathological outcomes were extracted for multiple logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-nine patients with MCRA (median age 61 [interquartile range 53-69] years) were identified. Sixty-six patients (25.5%) had a pathogenic variant or likely pathogenic variant, with APC and biallelic MUTYH mutations constituting the majority of identified pathogenic variant/likely pathogenic variants. Diagnostic yields were greater than 10% at any adenoma burden. In univariate analysis, higher adenoma burden and younger age were associated with higher yield (both P < 0.0001). In patients with MCRA with 10-19 adenomas without a relevant personal or family history of CRC, the diagnostic yield was nil. In multiple logistic regression analysis, higher adenoma burden, younger age, personal history of CRC, and first-degree familial history of CRC were associated with higher diagnostic yield. DISCUSSION: Diagnostic yield of >10% at any adenoma burden supports current guidance for constitutional genetic testing in patients with MCRA, although the low yield in people older than 60 years with 10-19 adenomas suggests that a stratified approach might be appropriate.

Identification of people with Lynch syndrome from those presenting with colorectal cancer in England: baseline analysis of the diagnostic pathway.

It is believed that >95% of people with Lynch syndrome (LS) remain undiagnosed. Within the National Health Service (NHS) in England, formal guidelines issued in 2017 state that all colorectal cancers (CRC) should be tested for DNA Mismatch Repair deficiency (dMMR). We used a comprehensive population-level national dataset to analyse implementation of the agreed diagnostic pathway at a baseline point 2 years post-publication of official guidelines. Using real-world data collected and curated by the National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service (NCRAS), we retrospectively followed up all people diagnosed with CRC in England in 2019. Nationwide laboratory diagnostic data incorporated somatic (tumour) testing for dMMR (via immunohistochemistry or microsatellite instability), somatic testing for MLH1 promoter methylation and BRAF status, and constitutional (germline) testing of MMR genes. Only 44% of CRCs were screened for dMMR; these figures varied over four-fold with respect to geography. Of those CRCs identified as dMMR, only 51% underwent subsequent diagnostic testing. Overall, only 1.3% of patients with colorectal cancer had a germline MMR genetic test performed; up to 37% of these tests occurred outside of NICE guidelines. The low rates of molecular diagnostic testing in CRC support the premise that Lynch syndrome is underdiagnosed, with significant attrition at all stages of the testing pathway. Applying our methodology to subsequent years' data will allow ongoing monitoring and analysis of the impact of recent investment. If the diagnostic guidelines were fully implemented, we estimate that up to 700 additional people with LS could be identified each year.

Biology of Precancers and Opportunities for Cancer Interception: Lesson from Colorectal Cancer Susceptibility Syndromes.

Hereditary gastrointestinal cancer is associated with molecular and neoplastic precursors which have revealed much about sporadic carcinogenesis. Therefore, an appreciation of constitutional and somatic events linked to these syndromes have provided a useful model for the development of risk models and preventative strategies. In this review, we focus of two of the best characterized syndromes, Lynch syndrome (LS) and familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). Our understanding of the neoplasia-immune interaction in LS has contributed to the development of immune mediated therapies including cancer preventing vaccines and immunotherapy for cancer precursors. Chemoprevention in LS with aspirin and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs has also translated into clinical cancer, however the efficacy of such agents in FAP remains elusive when cancer is applied as an endpoint in trials rather than the use of 'indirect' endpoints such as polyp burden, and requires further elucidation of biological mechanisms in FAP. Finally, we review controversies in gastrointestinal surveillance for LS and FAP, including limitations and opportunities of upper and lower gastrointestinal endoscopy in the prevention and early detection of cancer.

Risk-stratified faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) for urgent colonoscopy in Lynch syndrome during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Lynch syndrome is a hereditary cancer disease resulting in an increased risk of colorectal cancer. Herein, findings are reported from an emergency clinical service implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic utilizing faecal immunochemical testing ('FIT') in Lynch syndrome patients to prioritize colonoscopy while endoscopy services were limited. METHODS: An emergency service protocol was designed to improve colonoscopic surveillance access throughout the COVID-19 pandemic in England for people with Lynch syndrome when services were extremely restricted (1 March 2020 to 31 March 2021) and promoted by the English National Health Service. Requests for faecal immunochemical testing from participating centres were sent to the National Health Service Bowel Cancer Screening South of England Hub and a faecal immunochemical testing kit, faecal immunochemical testing instructions, paper-based survey, and pre-paid return envelope were sent to patients. Reports with faecal haemoglobin results were returned electronically for clinical action. Risk stratification for colonoscopy was as follows: faecal haemoglobin less than 10 µg of haemoglobin/g of faeces (µg/g)-scheduled within 6-12 weeks; and faecal haemoglobin greater than or equal to 10 µg/g-triaged via an urgent suspected cancer clinical pathway. Primary outcomes of interest included the identification of highest-risk Lynch syndrome patients and determining the impact of faecal immunochemical testing in risk-stratified colonoscopic surveillance. RESULTS: Fifteen centres participated from June 2020 to March 2021. Uptake was 68.8 per cent amongst 558 patients invited. For 339 eligible participants analysed, 279 (82.3 per cent) had faecal haemoglobin less than 10 µg/g and 60 (17.7 per cent) had faecal haemoglobin greater than or equal to 10 µg/g. In the latter group, the diagnostic accuracy of faecal immunochemical testing was 65.9 per cent and escalation to colonoscopy was facilitated (median 49 versus 122 days, χ2 = 0.0003, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Faecal immunochemical testing demonstrated clinical value for Lynch syndrome patients requiring colorectal cancer surveillance during the pandemic in this descriptive report of an emergency COVID-19 response service. Further longitudinal investigation on faecal immunochemical testing efficacy in Lynch syndrome is warranted and will be examined under the 'FIT for Lynch' study (ISRCTN15740250).

EUS-guided FNA for diagnosis of solid pancreatic neoplasms: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions remains challenging despite advancement in imaging technologies. EUS has the benefit of being a minimally invasive, well-tolerated procedure, although results are operator-dependent. The addition of FNA (EUS-guided FNA) provides samples for cytopathologic analysis, a major advantage over other imaging techniques. OBJECTIVE: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA for pancreatic cancer. DESIGN: This is a meta-analysis of published studies assessing the diagnostic capability of EUS-FNA. Relevant studies were identified via MEDLINE and were included if they used a reference standard of definitive surgical histology or clinical follow-up of at least 6 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Data from selected studies were analyzed by using test accuracy meta-analysis software, providing a pooled value for sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio, and summary receiver operating characteristic curve. Cytology results were classified as inadequate, benign, atypical, suspicious, or malignant. Predefined subgroup analysis was performed. RESULTS: Thirty-three studies published between 1997 and 2009 were included, with a total number of 4984 patients. The pooled sensitivity for malignant cytology was 85% (95% confidence interval [CI], 84-86), and pooled specificity was 98% (95% CI, 0.97-0.99). If atypical and suspicious cytology results were included to determine true neoplasms, the sensitivity increased to 91% (95% CI, 90-92); however, the specificity was reduced to 94% (95% CI, 93-96). The diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA was enhanced in prospective, multicenter studies. LIMITATION: Publication bias was not a significant determinant of pooled accuracy. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis demonstrates that EUS-FNA is a highly accurate diagnostic test for solid neoplasms of the pancreas and should be considered when algorithms for investigating solid pancreatic lesions are being planned.