Reassessment colonoscopy to diagnose serrated polyposis syndrome in a colorectal cancer screening population.

Background and study aims Serrated polyposis syndrome (SPS) is a high risk condition for colorectal cancer (CRC). Surveillance strategies for patients with serrated lesions remain controversial. We aimed to evaluate a diagnostic strategy to detect SPS consistently during reassessment colonoscopy in patients with proximal serrated lesions. Methods This was a retrospective study of all individuals from a fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based CRC screening program (2010 - 2013) with one or more serrated lesions of ≥ 5 mm proximal to the sigmoid colon on baseline colonoscopy. We analyzed all individuals empirically scheduled for a reassessment colonoscopy aimed at diagnosing SPS within 1 year. Reassessment colonoscopy was performed with standard white-light or chromoendoscopy ±â€Šhigh definition endoscopy depending on availability. SPS diagnosis was based on the cumulative number of polyps in both the baseline and reassessment colonoscopies. Factors associated with SPS diagnosis were analyzed. Results From 3444 screening colonoscopies, 196 patients met the study entry criteria, of whom 11 patients (0.32 %) met the criteria for SPS on baseline colonoscopy. Reassessment colonoscopies were performed in 71 patients at 11.9 ±â€Š1.7 months and detected 20 additional patients with SPS, a tripling of the rate of SPS up to 0.90 %. Independent factors associated with SPS diagnosis were: having five or more proximal serrated lesions (odds ratio [OR] 4.01 [95 % confidence interval 1.20 - 13.45]; P = 0.02) or two or more sessile serrated polyps ≥ 10 mm (OR 6.35 [1.40 - 28.81]; P = 0.02) on baseline colonoscopy and the use of chromoendoscopy ±â€Šhigh definition endoscopy during reassessment colonoscopy (OR 4.99 [1.11 - 22.36]; P = 0.04). Conclusions A 1-year reassessment colonoscopy using chromoendoscopy and high definition endoscopes substantially improves SPS detection in individuals from a FIT-based screening program with proximal serrated lesions. Five or more proximal serrated lesions or two or more sessile serrated polyps ≥ 10 mm could be thresholds for requiring a reassessment colonoscopy. Prospective studies are required to validate these results and adjust surveillance recommendations in patients with serrated lesions.

Colorectal cancer risk factors in patients with serrated polyposis syndrome: a large multicentre study.

OBJECTIVE: Serrated polyposis syndrome (SPS) is associated with an increased colorectal cancer (CRC) risk, although the magnitude of the risk remains uncertain. Whereas intensive endoscopic surveillance for CRC prevention is advised, predictors that identify patients who have high CRC risk remain unknown. We performed a multicentre nationwide study aimed at describing the CRC risk in patients with SPS and identifying clinicopathological predictors independently associated with CRC. DESIGN: From March 2013 through September 2014, patients with SPS were retrospectively recruited at 18 Spanish centres. Data were collected from medical, endoscopy and histopathology reports. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify CRC risk factors. RESULTS: In 296 patients with SPS with a median follow-up time of 45 months (IQR 26-79.7), a median of 26 (IQR 18.2-40.7) serrated polyps and 3 (IQR 1-6) adenomas per patient were detected. Forty-seven patients (15.8%) developed CRC at a mean age of 53.9±12.8, and 4 out of 47 (8.5%) tumours were detected during surveillance (cumulative CRC incidence 1.9%). Patients with >2 sessile serrated adenomas/polyps (SSA/Ps) proximal to splenic flexure and ≥1 proximal SSA/P with high-grade dysplasia were independent CRC risk factors (incremental OR=2, 95% CI 1.22 to 3.24, p=0.006). Patients with no risk factors showed a 55% decrease in CRC risk (OR=0.45, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.86, p=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with SPS have an increased risk of CRC, although lower than previously published. Close colonoscopy surveillance in experienced centres show a low risk of developing CRC (1.9% in 5 years). Specific polyp features (SSA/P histology, proximal location and presence of high-grade dysplasia) should be used to guide clinical management.

Risk of Advanced Neoplasia in First-Degree Relatives with Colorectal Cancer: A Large Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: First-degree relatives (FDR) of patients with colorectal cancer have a higher risk of developing colorectal cancer than the general population. For this reason, screening guidelines recommend colonoscopy every 5 or 10 y, starting at the age of 40, depending on whether colorectal cancer in the index-case is diagnosed at <60 or ≥60 y, respectively. However, studies on the risk of neoplastic lesions are inconclusive. The aim of this study was to determine the risk of advanced neoplasia (three or more non-advanced adenomas, advanced adenoma, or invasive cancer) in FDR of patients with colorectal cancer compared to average-risk individuals (i.e., asymptomatic adults 50 to 69 y of age with no family history of colorectal cancer). METHODS AND FINDINGS: This cross-sectional analysis includes data from 8,498 individuals undergoing their first lifetime screening colonoscopy between 2006 and 2012 at six Spanish tertiary hospitals. Of these individuals, 3,015 were defined as asymptomatic FDR of patients with colorectal cancer ("familial-risk group") and 3,038 as asymptomatic with average-risk for colorectal cancer ("average-risk group"). The familial-risk group was stratified as one FDR, with one family member diagnosed with colorectal cancer at ≥60 y (n = 1,884) or at <60 y (n = 831), and as two FDR, with two family members diagnosed with colorectal cancer at any age (n = 300). Multiple logistic regression analysis was used for between-group comparisons after adjusting for potential confounders (age, gender, and center). Compared with the average-risk group, advanced neoplasia was significantly more prevalent in individuals having two FDR with colorectal cancer (odds ratio [OR] 1.90; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.36-2.66, p < 0.001), but not in those having one FDR with colorectal cancer diagnosed at ≥60 y (OR 1.03; 95% CI 0.83-1.27, p = 0.77) and <60 y (OR 1.19; 95% CI 0.90-1.58, p = 0.20). After the age of 50 y, men developed advanced neoplasia over two times more frequently than women and advanced neoplasia appeared at least ten y earlier. Fewer colonoscopies by 2-fold were required to detect one advanced neoplasia in men than in women. Major limitations of this study were first that although average-risk individuals were consecutively included in a randomized control trial, this was not the case for all individuals in the familial-risk cohort; and second, the difference in age between the average-risk and familial-risk cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals having two FDR with colorectal cancer showed an increased risk of advanced neoplasia compared to those with average-risk for colorectal cancer. Men had over 2-fold higher risk of advanced neoplasia than women, independent of family history. These data suggest that screening colonoscopy guidelines should be revised in the familial-risk population.

[Hereditary gastric and pancreatic cancer predisposition syndromes]. / Síndromes de predisposición a cáncer gástrico y cáncer pancreático.

The most common hereditary gastrointestinal cancers are colorectal, mainly hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (Lynch syndrome) and familial adenomatous polyposis. Other extracolonic neoplasms, including the gastric and pancreatic adenocarcinomas, are less well known and studied because they account for a relatively small percentage of hereditary gastrointestinal cancers. Nonetheless, they merit special attention because of the high associated morbidity and mortality rates. We review the hereditary and familial syndromes associated with gastric and pancreatic cancers with a view to improving knowledge and understanding of these diseases, in order to heighten diagnostic suspicion and thus implement appropriate diagnostic strategies, screening, surveillance and treatment.

Prevalence of somatic mutl homolog 1 promoter hypermethylation in Lynch syndrome colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancers (CRCs) that have microsatellite instability (MSI) and mutL homolog 1 (MLH1) immunoloss are observed in 3 clinical scenarios: Lynch syndrome (LS), sporadic MSI CRC, and Lynch-like syndrome (LLS). v-Raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B1 (BRAF) mutational analysis is used to differentiate LS from sporadic MSI CRC. The role of MLH1 promoter methylation status for the differential diagnosis of these clinical forms is not well established. The objectives of this study were: 1) to analyze MLH1 promoter methylation in MLH1-deficient CRCs by pyrosequencing, and 2) to assess its role in the differential diagnosis of MLH1-deficient CRCs. METHODS: In total, 165 CRCs were analyzed, including LS (n = 19), MSI BRAF-mutated CRC (n = 37), MSI BRAF wild-type CRC (n = 60), and a control group of CRCs without MSI (microsatellite stable [MSS] CRC; n = 49). MLH1 promoter methylation status was analyzed by pyrosequencing, and the ability of different strategies to identify LS was assessed. RESULTS: The average ± standard deviation methylation in LS (9% ± 7%) was significantly lower than that in MSI BRAF-mutated CRC (42% ± 17%; P < .001) and in MSI BRAF wild-type CRC (25% ± 19%; P = .002). Somatic MLH1 hypermethylation was detected in 3 patients (15.8%) with LS, in 34 patients (91.9%) with MSI BRAF-mutated CRC, and in 37 patients (61.7%) with MSI BRAF wild-type tumors. Patients with MSI BRAF wild-type, unmethylated tumors (ie, LLS) had a stronger family history of CRC than those who had tumors with MLH1 methylation (P < .05). The sensitivity for ruling out LS was 100% for BRAF analysis, 84.2% for MLH1 methylation analysis, and 84.2% for the combination of both analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Somatic MLH1 promoter methylation occurs in up to 15% of LS CRCs. Somatic BRAF analysis is the most sensitive strategy for ruling out LS. Patients who have CRCs with loss of MLH1 protein expression and neither BRAF mutation nor MLH1 methylation resemble patients with LS.

[Intraabdominal desmoid tumors in familial adenomatous polyposis]. / Tumores desmoides intraabdominales en la poliposis adenomatosa familiar.

Desmoid tumors are currently the main cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. More than 10% of these patients will develop these tumors during their lifetime and more than a third will suffer their consequences. The main risk factors for their development are female sex and abdominal surgery. The most frequent localization is intraabdominal. The therapeutic approach to these tumors has changed, and the surgical treatment of choice is currently the subject of debate. If a watch and wait approach is adopted, more than 50% of tumors will prove to be indolent. Therefore, the therapeutic strategy should be based on clinical presentation and should be decided by a multidisciplinary team working in a center with experience of these tumors. The present article proposes a prognostic classification to guide the therapeutic approach.

The genetic basis of familial adenomatous polyposis and its implications for clinical practice and risk management.

Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is an inherited disorder that represents the most common gastrointestinal polyposis syndrome. Germline mutations in the APC gene were initially identified as responsible for FAP, and later, several studies have also implicated the MUTYH gene as responsible for this disease, usually referred to as MUTYH-associated polyposis (MAP). FAP and MAP are characterized by the early onset of multiple adenomatous colorectal polyps, a high lifetime risk of colorectal cancer (CRC), and in some patients the development of extracolonic manifestations. The goal of colorectal management in these patients is to prevent CRC mortality through endoscopic and surgical approaches. Individuals with FAP and their relatives should receive appropriate genetic counseling and join surveillance programs when indicated. This review is focused on the description of the main clinical and genetic aspects of FAP associated with germline APC mutations and MAP.

Pitfalls in the diagnosis of biallelic PMS2 mutations.

Constitutional Mismatch Repair Deficiency (CMMR-D) syndrome is an inherited childhood cancer syndrome due to bi-allelic mutations in one of the four DNA mismatch repair genes involved in Lynch syndrome. The tumor spectrum of this syndrome includes hematological, brain and Lynch syndrome associated malignancies, with an increased risk of synchronous and metachronous cancers, and signs of Neurofibromatosis type-1 syndrome such as café-au-lait macules during the first three decades of life. Here, we report the first Argentinian patient with CMMR-D syndrome, focusing on her history of cancer and gastrointestinal manifestations, and the challenging molecular algorithm to finally reach her diagnosis.

LINE-1 hypomethylation is neither present in rectal aberrant crypt foci nor associated with field defect in sporadic colorectal neoplasia.

BACKGROUND: Aberrant crypt foci (ACF) are considered the first identifiable preneoplastic lesion in colorectal cancer (CRC), and have been proposed as a potential biomarker for CRC risk. Global DNA hypomethylation is an early event in colorectal carcinogenesis, and long interspersed nuclear element-1 (LINE-1) methylation status is a well-known surrogate marker for genome-wide DNA methylation levels. Despite the gradual increase in DNA hypomethylation in the adenoma-carcinoma sequence, LINE-1 methylation in ACF has never been studied. Moreover, recent studies have reported a field defect for LINE-1 hypomethylation, suggesting that LINE-1 methylation status in normal mucosa could be used to stratify CRC risk and tailor preventive strategies. Thus, we assessed LINE-1 status by pyrosequencing in rectal ACF and paired normal colorectal mucosa from individuals with sporadic colon cancer (CC) (n = 35) or adenoma (n = 42), and from healthy controls (n = 70). FINDINGS: Compared with normal mucosa, LINE-1 in ACF were hypermethylated across all groups (P < 0.0001). Furthermore, LINE-1 methylation status in normal colorectal mucosa was independent of the presence of adenoma or CC (P = 0.1072), and did not differ depending on the distance to the adenoma or CC. Interestingly, when we compared the LINE-1 methylation status in normal mucosa from different segments of the colorectum, we found higher hypomethylation in the rectum compared with the descending colon (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our results suggest that global hypomethylation is not present in rectal ACF and argues against the existence of LINE-1 methylation field defect in sporadic colon cancer.