Baseline Features and Reasons for Nonparticipation in the Colonoscopy Versus Fecal Immunochemical Test in Reducing Mortality From Colorectal Cancer (CONFIRM) Study, a Colorectal Cancer Screening Trial.

Importance: The Colonoscopy Versus Fecal Immunochemical Test in Reducing Mortality From Colorectal Cancer (CONFIRM) randomized clinical trial sought to recruit 50 000 adults into a study comparing colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality outcomes after randomization to either an annual fecal immunochemical test (FIT) or colonoscopy. Objective: To (1) describe study participant characteristics and (2) examine who declined participation because of a preference for colonoscopy or stool testing (ie, fecal occult blood test [FOBT]/FIT) and assess that preference's association with geographic and temporal factors. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study within CONFIRM, which completed enrollment through 46 Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers between May 22, 2012, and December 1, 2017, with follow-up planned through 2028, comprised veterans aged 50 to 75 years with an average CRC risk and due for screening. Data were analyzed between March 7 and December 5, 2022. Exposure: Case report forms were used to capture enrolled participant data and reasons for declining participation among otherwise eligible individuals. Main Outcomes and Measures: Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the cohort overall and by intervention. Among individuals declining participation, logistic regression was used to compare preference for FOBT/FIT or colonoscopy by recruitment region and year. Results: A total of 50 126 participants were recruited (mean [SD] age, 59.1 [6.9] years; 46 618 [93.0%] male and 3508 [7.0%] female). The cohort was racially and ethnically diverse, with 748 (1.5%) identifying as Asian, 12 021 (24.0%) as Black, 415 (0.8%) as Native American or Alaska Native, 34 629 (69.1%) as White, and 1877 (3.7%) as other race, including multiracial; and 5734 (11.4%) as having Hispanic ethnicity. Of the 11 109 eligible individuals who declined participation (18.0%), 4824 (43.4%) declined due to a stated preference for a specific screening test, with FOBT/FIT being the most preferred method (2820 [58.5%]) vs colonoscopy (1958 [40.6%]; P < .001) or other screening tests (46 [1.0%] P < .001). Preference for FOBT/FIT was strongest in the West (963 of 1472 [65.4%]) and modest elsewhere, ranging from 199 of 371 (53.6%) in the Northeast to 884 of 1543 (57.3%) in the Midwest (P = .001). Adjusting for region, the preference for FOBT/FIT increased by 19% per recruitment year (odds ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.14-1.25). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional analysis of veterans choosing nonenrollment in the CONFIRM study, those who declined participation more often preferred FOBT or FIT over colonoscopy. This preference increased over time and was strongest in the western US and may provide insight into trends in CRC screening preferences.

American Pancreatic Association Practice Guidelines in Chronic Pancreatitis: evidence-based report on diagnostic guidelines.

The diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis remains challenging in early stages of the disease. This report defines the diagnostic criteria useful in the assessment of patients with suspected and established chronic pancreatitis. All current diagnostic procedures are reviewed, and evidence-based statements are provided about their utility and limitations. Diagnostic criteria for chronic pancreatitis are classified as definitive, probable, or insufficient evidence. A diagnostic (STEP-wise; survey, tomography, endoscopy, and pancreas function testing) algorithm is proposed that proceeds from a noninvasive to a more invasive approach. This algorithm maximizes specificity (low false-positive rate) in subjects with chronic abdominal pain and equivocal imaging changes. Furthermore, a nomenclature is suggested to further characterize patients with established chronic pancreatitis based on TIGAR-O (toxic, idiopathic, genetic, autoimmune, recurrent, and obstructive) etiology, gland morphology (Cambridge criteria), and physiologic state (exocrine, endocrine function) for uniformity across future multicenter research collaborations. This guideline will serve as a baseline manuscript that will be modified as new evidence becomes available and our knowledge of chronic pancreatitis improves.

Detection of circulating pancreas epithelial cells in patients with pancreatic cystic lesions.

Hematogenous dissemination is thought to be a late event in cancer progression. We recently showed in a genetic model of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma that pancreas cells can be detected in the bloodstream before tumor formation. To confirm these findings in humans, we used microfluidic geometrically enhanced differential immunocapture to detect circulating pancreas epithelial cells in patient blood samples. We captured more than 3 circulating pancreas epithelial cells/mL in 7 of 21 (33%) patients with cystic lesions and no clinical diagnosis of cancer (Sendai criteria negative), 8 of 11 (73%) with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, and in 0 of 19 patients without cysts or cancer (controls). These findings indicate that cancer cells are present in the circulation of patients before tumors are detected, which might be used in risk assessment.

A pilot retrospective study of the relationship between estrogen use and pancreatitis/pancreatic function in women with chronic abdominal pain.

CONTEXT: Estrogens are thought to cause pancreatitis by raising triglyceride levels but whether there are other effects on the pancreas is debatable. OBJECTIVE: To better elucidate the relationship between estrogens and pancreatitis and pancreatic function in a pilot study. DESIGN/SETTING/PATIENTS: Our retrospectively collected database of 224 patients who had undergone secretin stimulation testing was queried for females with available medication histories, who were then divided into two groups: those taking estrogens (E) and those not on estrogens (N). Mann Whitney U and Fisher's exact tests were used. RESULTS: Seventy of the patients in the database were females with available medication histories. Thirty-five (50.0%) were taking estrogens. Twenty-nine (82.9%) of the E patients experienced any type of pancreatitis (i.e., acute pancreatitis, acute relapsing pancreatitis, chronic pancreatitis) while only 19 (54.3%) of the N patients did (P=0.019). During secretin stimulation testing, the peak bicarbonate levels for E and N patients were 80±18 and 90±23 mEq/L, respectively (P=0.058). When patients with any type of pancreatitis were excluded, E patients still displayed decreased peak bicarbonate levels in response to secretin (90±18 vs. 104±19 mEq/L; P=0.021). Weight, age, triglyceride levels, frequency of patients with cholecystectomy and biliary stones did not significantly differ between the two groups (E and N respectively). CONCLUSIONS: These pilot data suggest exogenous estrogens may be related to the development of acute pancreatitis and acute relapsing pancreatitis, and probably to a lesser degree chronic pancreatitis, perhaps through a triglyceride independent mechanism. During secretin stimulation testing, peak bicarbonate production may be diminished in women on estrogens (even in those who have never had pancreatitis). Further study is necessary to better define the relationship between estrogen use, pancreatitis, and pancreatic function.

Intraobserver agreement among endosonographers for endoscopic ultrasound features of chronic pancreatitis: a blinded multicenter study.

OBJECTIVE: Assess intraobserver agreement among endosonographers for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) features of chronic pancreatitis (CP). METHODS: Thirty EUS images from patients with suspected CP were shown twice in random order to 5 blinded endosonographers. The following accepted features of CP were assessed: (1) hyperechoic foci, (2) hyperechoic strands, (3) lobularity, (4) cysts, (5) stones, (6) main pancreatic duct dilatation, (7) pancreatic duct irregularity, (8) hyperechoic duct margins, (9) visible side branches, and (10) overall assessment for CP. Intraobserver κ statistics were calculated for each endosonographer and for each feature. Interobserver κ was also calculated. RESULTS: The mean intraobserver κ values were 0.82, 0.65, 0.71, 0.59, and 0.86 for the 5 endosonographers. The mean intraobserver κ values for each feature were (1) 0.66, (2) 0.67, (3) 0.70, (4) not calculable, (5) 0.96, (6) 0.81, (7) 0.77, (8) 0.69, (9) 0.51, and (10) 0.73. The mean interobserver κ values were 0.19, 0.07, 0.53, not calculable, 0.77, 0.77, 0.60, 0.34, 0.11, and 0.39, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: There was good intraobserver agreement in the interpretation of EUS features of CP. The intraobserver agreement seems better than the published interobserver agreement for EUS features of CP and better than the published intraobserver agreement for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography imaging for CP.