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.

Endoscopist fatigue estimates and colonoscopic adenoma detection in a large community-based setting.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopist fatigue may impact colonoscopy quality, but prior studies conflict, and minimal data exist from community-based practices where most colonoscopies are performed. METHODS: Within a large, community-based integrated healthcare system, we evaluated the associations among 4 measures of endoscopist fatigue and colonoscopic adenoma detection from 2010 to 2013. Fatigue measures included afternoon versus morning colonoscopy and the number of GI procedures performed before a given colonoscopy, including consideration of prior procedure complexity. Analyses were adjusted for potential confounders using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: We identified 126 gastroenterologists who performed 259,064 total GI procedures (median, 6 per day; range, 1-24), including 76,445 screening and surveillance colonoscopies. Compared with morning examinations, colonoscopies in the afternoon were not associated with lower adenoma detection for screening examinations, surveillance examinations, or their combination (OR for combination, .99; 95% CI, .96-1.03). The number of procedures performed before a given colonoscopy, with or without consideration of prior procedure complexity, was also not inversely associated with adenoma detection (OR for adenoma detection for colonoscopies in the fourth quartile of fatigue based on the number of prior procedures performed vs colonoscopies performed as the first procedure of the day, .99; 95% CI, .94-1.04). CONCLUSIONS: In a large community-based setting, adenoma detection for screening and surveillance colonoscopies were not associated with either time of day or the number of prior procedures performed by the endoscopist, within the range of procedure volumes evaluated. The lack of association persisted after accounting for prior procedure complexity.

Population-representative incidence of drug-induced acute liver failure based on an analysis of an integrated health care system.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Medications are a major cause of acute liver failure (ALF) in the United States, but no population-based studies have evaluated the incidence of ALF from drug-induced liver injury. We aimed to determine the incidence and outcomes of drug-induced ALF in an integrated health care system that approximates a population-based cohort. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study using data from the Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) health care system between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2010. We included all KPNC members age 18 years and older with 6 months or more of membership and hospitalization for potential ALF. The primary outcome was drug-induced ALF (defined as coagulopathy and hepatic encephalopathy without underlying chronic liver disease), determined by hepatologists who reviewed medical records of all KPNC members with inpatient diagnostic and laboratory criteria suggesting potential ALF. RESULTS: Among 5,484,224 KPNC members between 2004 and 2010, 669 had inpatient diagnostic and laboratory criteria indicating potential ALF. After medical record review, 62 (9.3%) were categorized as having definite or possible ALF, and 32 (51.6%) had a drug-induced etiology (27 definite, 5 possible). Acetaminophen was implicated in 18 events (56.3%), dietary/herbal supplements in 6 events (18.8%), antimicrobials in 2 events (6.3%), and miscellaneous medications in 6 events (18.8%). One patient with acetaminophen-induced ALF died (5.6%; 0.06 events/1,000,000 person-years) compared with 3 patients with non-acetaminophen-induced ALF (21.4%; 0.18/1,000,000 person-years). Overall, 6 patients (18.8%) underwent liver transplantation, and 22 patients (68.8%) were discharged without transplantation. The incidence rates of any definite drug-induced ALF and acetaminophen-induced ALF were 1.61 events/1,000,000 person-years (95% confidence interval, 1.06-2.35) and 1.02 events/1,000,000 person-years (95% confidence interval, 0.59-1.63), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Drug-induced ALF is uncommon, but over-the-counter products and dietary/herbal supplements are its most common causes.

Adenoma detection rate and risk of colorectal cancer and death.

BACKGROUND: The proportion of screening colonoscopic examinations performed by a physician that detect one or more adenomas (the adenoma detection rate) is a recommended quality measure. However, little is known about the association between this rate and patients' risks of a subsequent colorectal cancer (interval cancer) and death. METHODS: Using data from an integrated health care delivery organization, we evaluated the associations between the adenoma detection rate and the risks of colorectal cancer diagnosed 6 months to 10 years after colonoscopy and of cancer-related death. With the use of Cox regression, our estimates of attributable risk were adjusted for the demographic characteristics of the patients, indications for colonoscopy, and coexisting conditions. RESULTS: We evaluated 314,872 colonoscopies performed by 136 gastroenterologists; the adenoma detection rates ranged from 7.4 to 52.5%. During the follow-up period, we identified 712 interval colorectal adenocarcinomas, including 255 advanced-stage cancers, and 147 deaths from interval colorectal cancer. The unadjusted risks of interval cancer according to quintiles of adenoma detection rates, from lowest to highest, were 9.8, 8.6, 8.0, 7.0, and 4.8 cases per 10,000 person-years of follow-up, respectively. Among patients of physicians with adenoma detection rates in the highest quintile, as compared with patients of physicians with detection rates in the lowest quintile, the adjusted hazard ratio for any interval cancer was 0.52 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39 to 0.69), for advanced-stage interval cancer, 0.43 (95% CI, 0.29 to 0.64), and for fatal interval cancer, 0.38 (95% CI, 0.22 to 0.65). Each 1.0% increase in the adenoma detection rate was associated with a 3.0% decrease in the risk of cancer (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.96 to 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: The adenoma detection rate was inversely associated with the risks of interval colorectal cancer, advanced-stage interval cancer, and fatal interval cancer. (Funded by the Kaiser Permanente Community Benefit program and the National Cancer Institute.).