Adenoma Detection Rate and Colorectal Cancer Risk in Fecal Immunochemical Test Screening Programs : An Observational Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs based on fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) represent the standard of care for population-based interventions. Their benefit depends on the identification of neoplasia at colonoscopy after FIT positivity. Colonoscopy quality measured by adenoma detection rate (ADR) may affect screening program effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between ADR and postcolonoscopy CRC (PCCRC) risk in a FIT-based screening program. DESIGN: Retrospective population-based cohort study. SETTING: Fecal immunochemical test-based CRC screening program between 2003 and 2021 in northeastern Italy. PATIENTS: All patients with a positive FIT result who had a colonoscopy were included. MEASUREMENTS: The regional cancer registry supplied information on any PCCRC diagnosed between 6 months and 10 years after colonoscopy. Endoscopists' ADR was categorized into 5 groups (20% to 39.9%, 40% to 44.9%, 45% to 49.9%, 50% to 54.9%, and 55% to 70%). To examine the association of ADR with PCCRC incidence risk, Cox regression models were fitted to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs. RESULTS: Of the 110 109 initial colonoscopies, 49 626 colonoscopies done by 113 endoscopists between 2012 and 2017 were included. After 328 778 person-years follow-up, 277 cases of PCCRC were diagnosed. Mean ADR was 48.3% (range, 23% and 70%). Incidence rates of PCCRC from lowest to highest ADR group were 13.13, 10.61, 7.60, 6.01, and 5.78 per 10 000 person-years. There was a significant inverse association between ADR and PCCRC incidence risk, with a 2.35-fold risk increase (95% CI, 1.63 to 3.38) in the lowest group compared with the highest. The adjusted HR for PCCRC associated with 1% increase in ADR was 0.96 (CI, 0.95 to 0.98). LIMITATION: Adenoma detection rate is partly determined by FIT positivity cutoff; exact values may vary in different settings. CONCLUSION: In a FIT-based screening program, ADR is inversely associated with PCCRC incidence risk, mandating appropriate colonoscopy quality monitoring in this setting. Increasing endoscopists' ADR may significantly reduce PCCRC risk. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None.

Regional variations in the use of complementary and alternative medicines (CAM) for inflammatory bowel disease patients in Italy: an IG-IBD study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Complementary and alternative medicines (CAM) are being used increasingly by patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). We aimed to assess the prevalence and usage of CAM in different geographical areas of Italy and possible predictors of their use. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A structured questionnaire, administered to outpatients, attending 8 general hospitals and 9 tertiary referral centres, was completed by 2011 patients (909 CD, 1087 UC and 15 indeterminate colitis). 583 patients lived in the North, 659 in Central Italy and 769 in the South. RESULTS: CAM users were 475 (23.6%) with no regional differences in their distribution. Usage correlated significantly with female gender (p=0.030), higher education (p=0.021), hospitalization rates (p=0.000), extra-intestinal complications (p=0.000), non-adherence to conventional treatments (p=0.054), adverse reactions to conventional treatments (p=0.000), and active disease (p=0.007); 5-ASA usage was associated with a more limited use of CAM (p=0.005). Dietary changes or supplements and prayer were significantly more frequently reported in South, while Northern Italian patients more frequently used homeopathy, herbal medicines and physical exercises. Patients in Central Italy adopted an intermediate behavior. CAM use ameliorated the patient's general well-being according to two thirds of the users. Costs were higher for Northern patients than in Central or Southern Italy. CONCLUSION: One in four IBD patients in Italy use CAM. More money is spent on CAM in Northern Italy. Regional differences emerged as regards the type of CAM but not in terms of disease features, frequency of and reasons for CAM use, or perceived effects.