Biopsy of Non-tumor Sites After Biopsy of a Colorectal Cancer is not Associated With Metachronous Cancers: A Case-control Study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Recent research has demonstrated biologic plausibility for iatrogenic tumor seeding via colonoscopy as a cause of metachronous colorectal cancers (CRC). This study evaluated the association between biopsy of non-tumor sites after CRC biopsy and risk of metachronous CRC in a large community-based health care organization. METHODS: This was a retrospective case-control study of adults with an initial CRC diagnosed by colonoscopy between January 2006 and June 2018 who underwent curative resection. Cases developed a second primary (metachronous) CRC diagnosed 6 months to 4 years after the initial CRC, and were matched by age, sex, diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease, race, and ethnicity with up to 5 controls without a second CRC diagnosis. The exposure was biopsy in the colonic segment of the metachronous CRC (or corresponding segment in controls) after tumor biopsy, ascertained with blinding to case status. Associations were evaluated using conditional logistic regression and adjusted for potential cofounders. RESULTS: Among 14,119 patients diagnosed with an initial CRC during colonoscopy, 107 received a second CRC diagnosis. After exclusions for recurrent or synchronous CRC, 45 cases and 212 controls were included. There was no significant association between biopsy of non-tumor sites after initial CRC biopsy and risk of metachronous CRC in the segment of the additional biopsy site (adjusted odds ratio, 2.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-6.81). CONCLUSIONS: Metachronous cancers are not significantly associated with biopsy of non-tumor sites after biopsy of the primary cancer. Although the sample size does not allow definite exclusion of any association, these findings do not support iatrogenic tumor seeding as a common risk factor for metachronous CRC.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Fecal Immunochemical Testing, Colonoscopy Services, and Colorectal Neoplasia Detection in a Large United States Community-based Population.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected clinical services globally, including colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and diagnostic testing. We investigated the pandemic's impact on fecal immunochemical test (FIT) screening, colonoscopy utilization, and colorectal neoplasia detection across 21 medical centers in a large integrated health care organization. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study in Kaiser Permanente Northern California patients ages 18 to 89 years in 2019 and 2020 and measured changes in the numbers of mailed, completed, and positive FITs; colonoscopies; and cases of colorectal neoplasia detected by colonoscopy in 2020 vs 2019. RESULTS: FIT kit mailings ceased in mid-March through April 2020 but then rebounded and there was an 8.7% increase in kits mailed compared with 2019. With the later mailing of FIT kits, there were 9.0% fewer FITs completed and 10.1% fewer positive tests in 2020 vs 2019. Colonoscopy volumes declined 79.4% in April 2020 compared with April 2019 but recovered to near pre-pandemic volumes in September through December, resulting in a 26.9% decline in total colonoscopies performed in 2020. The number of patients diagnosed by colonoscopy with CRC and advanced adenoma declined by 8.7% and 26.9%, respectively, in 2020 vs 2019. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic led to fewer FIT screenings and colonoscopies in 2020 vs 2019; however, after the lifting of shelter-in-place orders, FIT screenings exceeded, and colonoscopy volumes nearly reached numbers from those same months in 2019. Overall, there was an 8.7% reduction in CRC cases diagnosed by colonoscopy in 2020. These data may help inform the development of strategies for CRC screening and diagnostic testing during future national emergencies.

Quality Indicators for the Detection and Removal of Colorectal Polyps and Interventions to Improve Them.

Modifiable risk factors for postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer include suboptimal lesion detection (missed neoplasms) and inadequate lesion removal (incomplete polypectomy) during colonoscopy. Competent detection and removal of colorectal polyps are thus fundamental to ensuring adequate colonoscopy quality. Several well-researched quality metrics for polyp detection have been implemented into clinical practice, chief among these the adenoma detection rate. Less data are available on quality indicators for polyp removal, which currently include complete resection rates and skills assessment tools. This review summarizes the available literature on quality indicators for the detection and removal of colorectal polyps, as well as interventions to improve them.

Urban-Rural Disparities and Temporal Trends in Peptic Ulcer Disease Epidemiology, Treatment, and Outcomes in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: The incidence of peptic ulcer disease (PUD) has been decreasing over time with Helicobacter pylori eradication and use of acid-suppressing therapies. However, PUD remains a common cause of hospitalization in the United States. We aimed to evaluate contemporary national trends in the incidence, treatment patterns, and outcomes for PUD-related hospitalizations and compare care delivery by hospital rurality. METHODS: Data from the National Inpatient Sample were used to estimate weighted annual rates of PUD-related hospitalizations. Temporal trends were evaluated by joinpoint regression and expressed as annual percent change with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We determined the proportion of hospitalizations requiring endoscopic and surgical interventions, stratified by clinical presentation and rurality. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess independent predictors of in-hospital mortality and postoperative morbidity. RESULTS: There was a 25.8% reduction (P < 0.001) in PUD-related hospitalizations from 2005 to 2014, although the rate of decline decreased from -7.2% per year (95% CI: 13.2% to -0.7%) before 2008 to -2.1% per year (95% CI: 3.0% to -1.1%) after 2008. In-hospital mortality was 2.4% (95% CI: 2.4%-2.5%). Upper endoscopy (84.3% vs 78.4%, P < 0.001) and endoscopic hemostasis (26.1% vs 16.8%, P < 0.001) were more likely to be performed in urban hospitals, whereas surgery was performed less frequently (9.7% vs 10.5%, P < 0.001). In multivariable logistic regression, patients managed in urban hospitals were at higher risk for postoperative morbidity (odds ratio 1.16 [95% CI: 1.04-1.29]), but not death (odds ratio 1.11 [95% CI: 1.00-1.23]). DISCUSSION: The rate of decline in hospitalization rates for PUD has stabilized over time, although there remains significant heterogeneity in treatment patterns by hospital rurality.

When Should We Let Colorectal Cancer Screening Get Personal?

ABSTRACT: Although screening reduces colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and related mortality, national CRC screening rates remain suboptimal. Identifying strategies to improve screening rates remains an area of intense focus, and previous literature supports an association between the perceived risk of CRC and a likelihood or intent to complete screening. However, risk estimation alone through the validated National Cancer Institute Colorectal Cancer Risk Assessment Tool does not improve screening uptake compared with general education. Future studies should couple risk estimation with patient navigation and decision support aids to build upon our existing armamentarium of effective interventions.

Association between improved adenoma detection rates and interval colorectal cancer rates after a quality improvement program.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Although colonoscopy reduces colorectal cancer (CRC) risk, interval CRCs (iCRCs) still occur. We aimed to determine iCRC incidence, assess the relationship between adenoma detection rates (ADRs) and iCRC rates, and evaluate iCRC rates over time concomitant with initiation of an institutional colonoscopy quality improvement (QI) program. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent colonoscopy at an academic medical center (January 2003 to December 2015). We identified iCRCs through our data warehouse and reviewed charts to confirm appropriateness for study inclusion. iCRC was defined as a cancer diagnosed 6 to 60 months and early iCRC as a cancer diagnosed 6 to 36 months after index colonoscopy. We measured the relationship between provider ADRs and iCRC rates and assessed iCRC rates over time with initiation of a QI program that started in 2010. RESULTS: A total of 193,939 colonoscopies were performed over the study period. We identified 186 patients with iCRC. The overall iCRC rate was .12% and the early iCRC rate .06%. Average-risk patients undergoing colonoscopy by endoscopists in the highest ADR quartile (34%-52%) had a 4-fold lower iCRC risk (relative risk, .23; 95% confidence interval, .11-.48) than those undergoing colonoscopy by endoscopists in the lowest quartile (12%-21%). After QI program initiation, overall iCRC rates improved from .15% to .08% (P < .001) and early iCRC rates improved from .07% to .04% (P = .004). CONCLUSIONS: We confirmed that iCRC rate is inversely correlated with provider ADR. ADRs increased and iCRC rates decreased over time, concomitant with a QI program focused on split-dose bowel preparation, quality metric measurement, provider education, and feedback. iCRC rate measurement should be considered a feasible, outcomes-driven institutional metric of colonoscopy quality.