ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Although colonoscopy is widely used as a screening test to detect colorectal cancer, its effect on the risks of colorectal cancer and related death is unclear. METHODS: We performed a pragmatic, randomized trial involving presumptively healthy men and women 55 to 64 years of age drawn from population registries in Poland, Norway, Sweden, and the Netherlands between 2009 and 2014. The participants were randomly assigned in a 1:2 ratio either to receive an invitation to undergo a single screening colonoscopy (the invited group) or to receive no invitation or screening (the usual-care group). The primary end points were the risks of colorectal cancer and related death, and the secondary end point was death from any cause. RESULTS: Follow-up data were available for 84,585 participants in Poland, Norway, and Sweden - 28,220 in the invited group, 11,843 of whom (42.0%) underwent screening, and 56,365 in the usual-care group. A total of 15 participants had major bleeding after polyp removal. No perforations or screening-related deaths occurred within 30 days after colonoscopy. During a median follow-up of 10 years, 259 cases of colorectal cancer were diagnosed in the invited group as compared with 622 cases in the usual-care group. In intention-to-screen analyses, the risk of colorectal cancer at 10 years was 0.98% in the invited group and 1.20% in the usual-care group, a risk reduction of 18% (risk ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70 to 0.93). The risk of death from colorectal cancer was 0.28% in the invited group and 0.31% in the usual-care group (risk ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.64 to 1.16). The number needed to invite to undergo screening to prevent one case of colorectal cancer was 455 (95% CI, 270 to 1429). The risk of death from any cause was 11.03% in the invited group and 11.04% in the usual-care group (risk ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.04). CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized trial, the risk of colorectal cancer at 10 years was lower among participants who were invited to undergo screening colonoscopy than among those who were assigned to no screening. (Funded by the Research Council of Norway and others; NordICC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00883792.).
Subject(s)
Colonoscopy , Colorectal Neoplasms , Early Detection of Cancer , Mass Screening , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Colonic Polyps/diagnosis , Colonic Polyps/epidemiology , Colonic Polyps/surgery , Colonoscopy/adverse effects , Colonoscopy/methods , Colonoscopy/statistics & numerical data , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Colorectal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Colorectal Neoplasms/mortality , Early Detection of Cancer/adverse effects , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Early Detection of Cancer/statistics & numerical data , Europe/epidemiology , Mass Screening/adverse effects , Mass Screening/methods , Mass Screening/statistics & numerical data , Odds Ratio , Risk , Follow-Up StudiesABSTRACT
At the end of the last century, a far-sighted 'working party' held in Sydney, Australia addressed the clinicopathological issues related to gastric inflammatory diseases. A few years later, an international conference held in Houston, Texas, USA critically updated the seminal Sydney classification. In line with these initiatives, Kyoto Global Consensus Report, flanked by the Maastricht-Florence conferences, added new clinical evidence to the gastritis clinicopathological puzzle.The most relevant topics related to the gastric inflammatory diseases have been addressed by the Real-world Gastritis Initiative (RE.GA.IN.), from disease definitions to the clinical diagnosis and prognosis. This paper reports the conclusions of the RE.GA.IN. consensus process, which culminated in Venice in November 2022 after more than 8 months of intense global scientific deliberations. A forum of gastritis scholars from five continents participated in the multidisciplinary RE.GA.IN. consensus. After lively debates on the most controversial aspects of the gastritis spectrum, the RE.GA.IN. Faculty amalgamated complementary knowledge to distil patient-centred, evidence-based statements to assist health professionals in their real-world clinical practice. The sections of this report focus on: the epidemiology of gastritis; Helicobacter pylori as dominant aetiology of environmental gastritis and as the most important determinant of the gastric oncogenetic field; the evolving knowledge on gastric autoimmunity; the clinicopathological relevance of gastric microbiota; the new diagnostic horizons of endoscopy; and the clinical priority of histologically reporting gastritis in terms of staging. The ultimate goal of RE.GA.IN. was and remains the promotion of further improvement in the clinical management of patients with gastritis.
Subject(s)
Gastritis , Helicobacter Infections , Helicobacter pylori , Stomach Neoplasms , Humans , Helicobacter Infections/complications , Helicobacter Infections/diagnosis , Helicobacter Infections/pathology , Gastritis/diagnosis , Gastritis/epidemiology , Gastritis/pathology , Endoscopy , Stomach Neoplasms/pathology , Gastric Mucosa/pathologyABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: During the last decade, the management of gastric intestinal metaplasia (GIM) has been addressed by several distinct international evidence-based guidelines. In this review, we aimed to synthesise these guidelines and provide clinicians with a global perspective of the current recommendations for managing patients with GIM, as well as highlight evidence gaps that need to be addressed with future research. DESIGN: We conducted a systematic review of the literature for guidelines and consensus statements published between January 2010 and February 2023 that address the diagnosis and management of GIM. RESULTS: From 426 manuscripts identified, 15 guidelines were assessed. There was consistency across guidelines regarding the purpose of endoscopic surveillance of GIM, which is to identify prevalent neoplastic lesions and stage gastric preneoplastic conditions. The guidelines also agreed that only patients with high-risk GIM phenotypes (eg, corpus-extended GIM, OLGIM stages III/IV, incomplete GIM subtype), persistent refractory Helicobacter pylori infection or first-degree family history of gastric cancer should undergo regular-interval endoscopic surveillance. In contrast, low-risk phenotypes, which comprise most patients with GIM, do not require surveillance. Not all guidelines are aligned on histological staging systems. If surveillance is indicated, most guidelines recommend a 3-year interval, but there is some variability. All guidelines recommend H. pylori eradication as the only non-endoscopic intervention for gastric cancer prevention, while some offer additional recommendations regarding lifestyle modifications. While most guidelines allude to the importance of high-quality endoscopy for endoscopic surveillance, few detail important metrics apart from stating that a systematic gastric biopsy protocol should be followed. Notably, most guidelines comment on the role of endoscopy for gastric cancer screening and detection of gastric precancerous conditions, but with high heterogeneity, limited guidance regarding implementation, and lack of robust evidence. CONCLUSION: Despite heterogeneous populations and practices, international guidelines are generally aligned on the importance of GIM as a precancerous condition and the need for a risk-stratified approach to endoscopic surveillance, as well as H. pylori eradication when present. There is room for harmonisation of guidelines regarding (1) which populations merit index endoscopic screening for gastric cancer and GIM detection/staging; (2) objective metrics for high-quality endoscopy; (3) consensus on the need for histological staging and (4) non-endoscopic interventions for gastric cancer prevention apart from H. pylori eradication alone. Robust studies, ideally in the form of randomised trials, are needed to bridge the ample evidence gaps that exist.
ABSTRACT
Gastric intestinal metaplasia (GIM), which denotes conversion of gastric mucosa into an intestinal phenotype, can occur in all regions of the stomach, including cardiac, fundic, and pyloric mucosa. Since the earliest description of GIM, its association with gastric cancer of the differentiated (intestinal) type has been a well-recognized concern. Many epidemiologic studies have confirmed GIM to be significantly associated with subsequent gastric cancer development. Helicobacter pylori, the principal etiologic factor for gastric cancer, plays the most important role in predisposing to GIM. Although the role of GIM in the stepwise progression model of gastric carcinogenesis (the so-called "Correa cascade") has come into question recently, we review the scientific evidence that strongly supports this long-standing model and propose a new progression model that builds on the Correa cascade. Eradication of H pylori is the most important method for preventing gastric cancer globally, but the effect of eradication on established GIM, is limited, if any. Endoscopic surveillance for GIM may, therefore, be necessary, especially when there is extensive corpus GIM. Recent advances in image-enhanced endoscopy with integrated artificial intelligence have facilitated the identification of GIM and neoplastic lesions, which will impact preventive strategies in the near future.
Subject(s)
Helicobacter Infections , Helicobacter pylori , Precancerous Conditions , Stomach Neoplasms , Humans , Stomach Neoplasms/epidemiology , Stomach Neoplasms/etiology , Stomach Neoplasms/prevention & control , Artificial Intelligence , Helicobacter Infections/pathology , Gastric Mucosa/pathology , Metaplasia/pathology , Precancerous Conditions/pathologyABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To examine the prognostic potential of repeated faecal haemoglobin (F-Hb) concentration measurements in faecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based screening for colorectal cancer (CRC). DESIGN: Prognostic model. SETTING: Dutch biennial FIT-based screening programme during 2014-2018. PARTICIPANTS: 265 881 participants completing three rounds of FIT, with negative test results (F-Hb <47 µg Hb/g faeces) in rounds 1 and 2. INTERVENTIONS: Colonoscopy follow-up in participants with a positive FIT (F-Hb ≥47 µg Hb/g faeces). MAIN OUTCOMES: We evaluated prognostic models for detecting advanced neoplasia (AN) and CRC in round 3, with as predictors, participant age, sex, F-Hb in rounds 1 and 2, and categories/combinations/non-linear transformations of F-Hb. Primary evaluation criteria included: risk prediction accuracy (calibration), discrimination of participants with versus without AN or CRC (optimism-adjusted C-statistics, range 0.5-1.0), the degree of risk stratification and C-statistics in external validation. RESULTS: Among study participants, 8806 (3.3%) had a positive FIT result, 3254 (1.2%) had AN detected and 557 (0.2%) had cancer. F-Hb concentrations in rounds 1 and 2 were the strongest outcome predictors, with adjusted ORs of up to 9.4 (95% CI 7.5 to 11.7) for the highest F-Hb category. Risk predictions matched the observed risk for most participants (calibration intercept -0.008 to -0.099; slope 0.982-0.998), and discriminated participants with versus without AN or CRC with C-statistics of 0.78 (95% CI 0.77 to 0.79) and 0.73 (95% CI 0.71 to 0.75), respectively. The predicted risk ranged from 0.4% to 36.7% for AN and from 0.0% to 5.5% for CRC across participants. In external validation, the model retained similar discrimination accuracy for AN (C-statistic 0.77, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.87) and CRC (C-statistic 0.78, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.91). CONCLUSION: Participants at lower versus higher risk of future AN or CRC can be accurately identified based on their age, sex and particularly, prior F-Hb concentrations. Risk stratification should be considered based on this information.
Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms , Humans , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Prognosis , Occult Blood , Colonoscopy/methods , Feces/chemistry , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Hemoglobins/analysisABSTRACT
BACKGROUND & AIMS: A genome-wide significant association between anti-Helicobacter pylori (H pylori) IgG titers and Toll-like receptor (TLR1/6/10) locus on 4p14 was demonstrated for individuals of European ancestry, but not uniformly replicated. We re-investigated this association in an updated genome-wide association study (GWAS) meta-analysis for populations with low gastric cancer incidence, address potential causes of cohort heterogeneity, and explore functional implications of genetic variation at the TLR1/6/10 locus. METHODS: The dichotomous GWAS (25% individuals exhibiting highest anti-H pylori IgG titers vs remaining 75%) included discovery and replication sampls of, respectively, n = 15,685 and n = 9676, all of European ancestry. Longitudinal analysis of serologic data was performed on H pylori-eradicated subjects (n = 132) and patients under surveillance for premalignant gastric lesions (n = 107). TLR1/6/10 surface expression, TLR1 mRNA, and cytokine levels were measured in leukocyte subsets of healthy subjects (n = 26) genotyped for TLR1/6/10 variants. RESULTS: The association of the TLR1/6/10 locus with anti-H pylori IgG titers (rs12233670; ß = -0.267 ± SE 0.034; P = 4.42 × 10-15) presented with high heterogeneity and failed replication. Anti-H pylori IgG titers declined within 2-4 years after eradication treatment (P = 0.004), and decreased over time in patients with premalignant gastric lesions (P < 0.001). Variation at the TLR1/6/10 locus affected TLR1-mediated cytokine production and TLR1 surface expression on monocytes (P = 0.016) and neutrophils (P = 0.030), but not mRNA levels. CONCLUSIONS: The association between anti-H pylori IgG titers and TLR1/6/10 locus was not replicated across cohorts, possibly owing to dependency of anti-H pylori IgG titers on therapy, clearance, and antibody decay. H pylori-mediated immune cell activation is partly mediated via TLR1 signaling, which in turn is affected by genetic variation.
Subject(s)
Helicobacter Infections , Helicobacter pylori , Stomach Neoplasms , Toll-Like Receptor 1/genetics , Antibodies, Bacterial , Cytokines/genetics , Genome-Wide Association Study , Helicobacter Infections/diagnosis , Helicobacter Infections/drug therapy , Helicobacter Infections/genetics , Humans , Immunoglobulin G , Stomach Neoplasms/geneticsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The adenoma detection rate (ADR) is an essential quality indicator for endoscopists performing colonoscopies for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening as it is associated with postcolonoscopy CRCs (PCCRCs). Currently, data on ADRs of endoscopists performing colonoscopies in fecal immunochemical testing (FIT)-based screening, the most common screening method, are scarce. Also, the association between the ADR and PCCRC has not been demonstrated in this setting. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between the ADR and PCCRC risk in colonoscopies done after a positive FIT result. DESIGN: Population-based cohort. SETTING: Dutch, FIT-based, CRC screening program. PARTICIPANTS: Patients undergoing colonoscopy, done by accredited endoscopists, after a positive FIT result. MEASUREMENTS: Quality indicator performance and PCCRC incidence for colonoscopies in FIT-positive screenees were assessed. The PCCRCs were classified as interval, a cancer detected before recommended surveillance, or noninterval. The association between ADR and interval PCCRC was evaluated with a multivariable Cox regression model and PCCRC incidence was determined for different ADRs. RESULTS: 362 endoscopists performed 116 360 colonoscopies with a median ADR of 67%. In total, 209 interval PCCRCs were identified. The ADR was associated with interval PCCRC, with an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.95 (95% CI, 0.92 to 0.97) per 1% increase in ADR. For every 1000 patients undergoing colonoscopy, the expected number of interval PCCRC diagnoses after 5 years was approximately 2 for endoscopists with ADRs of 70%, compared with more than 2.5, almost 3.5, and more than 4.5 for endoscopists with ADRs of 65%, 60%, and 55%, respectively. LIMITATION: The relative short duration of follow-up (median, 52 months) could be considered a limitation. CONCLUSION: The ADR of endoscopists is inversely associated with the risk for interval PCCRC in FIT-positive colonoscopies. Endoscopists performing colonoscopy in FIT-based screening should aim for markedly higher ADRs compared with primary colonoscopy. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None.
Subject(s)
Adenoma , Colorectal Neoplasms , Adenoma/diagnosis , Cohort Studies , Colonoscopy , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Colorectal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , HumansABSTRACT
The Asia-Pacific region has the largest number of cases of colorectal cancer (CRC) and one of the highest levels of mortality due to this condition in the world. Since the publishing of two consensus recommendations in 2008 and 2015, significant advancements have been made in our knowledge of epidemiology, pathology and the natural history of the adenoma-carcinoma progression. Based on the most updated epidemiological and clinical studies in this region, considering literature from international studies, and adopting the modified Delphi process, the Asia-Pacific Working Group on Colorectal Cancer Screening has updated and revised their recommendations on (1) screening methods and preferred strategies; (2) age for starting and terminating screening for CRC; (3) screening for individuals with a family history of CRC or advanced adenoma; (4) surveillance for those with adenomas; (5) screening and surveillance for sessile serrated lesions and (6) quality assurance of screening programmes. Thirteen countries/regions in the Asia-Pacific region were represented in this exercise. International advisors from North America and Europe were invited to participate.
Subject(s)
Adenoma , Colonic Polyps , Colorectal Neoplasms , Adenoma/diagnosis , Adenoma/epidemiology , Adenoma/surgery , Asia/epidemiology , Colonoscopy , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Colorectal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Colorectal Neoplasms/pathology , Consensus , Early Detection of Cancer , HumansABSTRACT
DESCRIPTION: The purpose of this Clinical Practice Update Expert Review is to provide clinicians with guidance on the diagnosis and management of atrophic gastritis, a common preneoplastic condition of the stomach, with a primary focus on atrophic gastritis due to chronic Helicobacter pylori infection-the most common etiology-or due to autoimmunity. To date, clinical guidance for best practices related to the diagnosis and management of atrophic gastritis remains very limited in the United States, which leads to poor recognition of this preneoplastic condition and suboptimal risk stratification. In addition, there is heterogeneity in the definitions of atrophic gastritis, autoimmune gastritis, pernicious anemia, and gastric neoplasia in the literature, which has led to confusion in clinical practice and research. Accordingly, the primary objective of this Clinical Practice Update is to provide clinicians with a framework for the diagnosis and management of atrophic gastritis. By focusing on atrophic gastritis, this Clinical Practice Update is intended to complement the 2020 American Gastroenterological Association Institute guidelines on the management of gastric intestinal metaplasia. These recent guidelines did not specifically discuss the diagnosis and management of atrophic gastritis. Providers should recognize, however, that a diagnosis of intestinal metaplasia on gastric histopathology implies the diagnosis of atrophic gastritis because intestinal metaplasia occurs in underlying atrophic mucosa, although this is often not distinctly noted on histopathologic reports. Nevertheless, atrophic gastritis represents an important stage with distinct histopathologic alterations in the multistep cascade of gastric cancer pathogenesis. METHODS: The Best Practice Advice statements presented herein were developed from a combination of available evidence from published literature and consensus-based expert opinion. No formal rating of the strength or quality of the evidence was carried out. These statements are meant to provide practical advice to clinicians practicing in the United States. Best Practice Advice Statements BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: Atrophic gastritis is defined as the loss of gastric glands, with or without metaplasia, in the setting of chronic inflammation mainly due to Helicobacter pylori infection or autoimmunity. Regardless of the etiology, the diagnosis of atrophic gastritis should be confirmed by histopathology. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: Providers should be aware that the presence of intestinal metaplasia on gastric histology almost invariably implies the diagnosis of atrophic gastritis. There should be a coordinated effort between gastroenterologists and pathologists to improve the consistency of documenting the extent and severity of atrophic gastritis, particularly if marked atrophy is present. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: Providers should recognize typical endoscopic features of atrophic gastritis, which include pale appearance of gastric mucosa, increased visibility of vasculature due to thinning of the gastric mucosa, and loss of gastric folds, and, if with concomitant intestinal metaplasia, light blue crests and white opaque fields. Because these mucosal changes are often subtle, techniques to optimize evaluation of the gastric mucosa should be performed. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: When endoscopic features of atrophic gastritis are present, providers should assess the extent endoscopically. Providers should obtain biopsies from the suspected atrophic/metaplastic areas for histopathological confirmation and risk stratification; at a minimum, biopsies from the body and antrum/incisura should be obtained and placed in separately labeled jars. Targeted biopsies should additionally be obtained from any other mucosal abnormalities. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: In patients with histology compatible with autoimmune gastritis, providers should consider checking antiparietal cell antibodies and anti-intrinsic factor antibodies to assist with the diagnosis. Providers should also evaluate for anemia due to vitamin B-12 and iron deficiencies. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: All individuals with atrophic gastritis should be assessed for H pylori infection. If positive, treatment of H pylori should be administered and successful eradication should be confirmed using nonserological testing modalities. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: The optimal endoscopic surveillance interval for patients with atrophic gastritis is not well-defined and should be decided based on individual risk assessment and shared decision making. A surveillance endoscopy every 3 years should be considered in individuals with advanced atrophic gastritis, defined based on anatomic extent and histologic grade. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: The optimal surveillance interval for individuals with autoimmune gastritis is unclear. Interval endoscopic surveillance should be considered based on individualized assessment and shared decision making. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: Providers should recognize pernicious anemia as a late-stage manifestation of autoimmune gastritis that is characterized by vitamin B-12 deficiency and macrocytic anemia. Patients with a new diagnosis of pernicious anemia who have not had a recent endoscopy should undergo endoscopy with topographical biopsies to confirm corpus-predominant atrophic gastritis for risk stratification and to rule out prevalent gastric neoplasia, including neuroendocrine tumors. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 10: Individuals with autoimmune gastritis should be screened for type 1 gastric neuroendocrine tumors with upper endoscopy. Small neuroendocrine tumors should be removed endoscopically, followed by surveillance endoscopy every 1-2 years, depending on the burden of neuroendocrine tumors. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 11: Providers should evaluate for iron and vitamin B-12 deficiencies in patients with atrophic gastritis irrespective of etiology, especially if corpus-predominant. Likewise, in patients with unexplained iron or vitamin B-12 deficiency, atrophic gastritis should be considered in the differential diagnosis and appropriate diagnostic evaluation pursued. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 12: In patients with autoimmune gastritis, providers should recognize that concomitant autoimmune disorders, particularly autoimmune thyroid disease, are common. Screening for autoimmune thyroid disease should be performed.
Subject(s)
Diagnostic Techniques, Digestive System/standards , Gastritis, Atrophic/diagnosis , Gastritis, Atrophic/therapy , Gastroenterology/standards , Benchmarking , Clinical Decision-Making , Consensus , Gastritis, Atrophic/epidemiology , Humans , Predictive Value of Tests , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND & AIMS: The population prevalence of gastrointestinal (GI) disease is unclear and difficult to assess in an asymptomatic population. The aim of this study was to determine prevalence of GI lesions in a largely asymptomatic population undergoing colon capsule endoscopy (CCE). METHODS: Participants aged between 50-75 years were retrieved from the Rotterdam Study, a longitudinal epidemiological study, between 2017-2019. Participants received CCE with bowel preparation. Abnormalities defined as clinically relevant were Barrett segment >3cm, severe ulceration, polyp >10 mm or ≥3 polyps in small bowel (SB) or colon, and cancer. RESULTS: Of 2800 invited subjects, 462 (16.5%) participants (mean age 66.8 years, female 53.5%) ingested the colon capsule. A total of 451 videos were analyzed, and in 94.7% the capsule reached the descending colon. At least 1 abnormal finding was seen in 448 (99.3%) participants. The prevalence of abnormalities per GI segment, and the most common type of abnormality, were as follows: Esophageal 14.8% (Barrett's esophagus <3 cm in 8.3%), gastric 27.9% (fundic gland polyps in 18.1%), SB abnormalities 33.9% (erosions in 23.8%), colon 93.3% (diverticula in 81.2%). A total of 54 participants (12%) had clinically relevant abnormalities, 3 (0.7%) in esophagus/stomach (reflux esophagitis grade D, Mallory Weiss lesion and severe gastritis), 5 (1.1%) in SB (polyps > 10 mm; n = 4, severe ulcer n = 1,) and 46 (10.2%) in colon (polyp > 10 mm or ≥3 polyps n = 46, colorectal cancer n = 1). CONCLUSIONS: GI lesions are very common in a mostly asymptomatic Western population, and clinically relevant lesions were found in 12% at CCE. These findings provide a frame of reference for the prevalence rates of GI lesions in the general population.
Subject(s)
Capsule Endoscopy , Colonic Polyps , Stomach Neoplasms , Aged , Colon/pathology , Colonic Polyps/pathology , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Prevalence , Stomach Neoplasms/pathologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of Hemospray (Cook Medical, Winston-Salem, NC, USA), a hemostatic powder, as monotherapy for active peptic ulcer bleeding. METHODS: In this prospective, multicenter, single-arm study, patients with Forrest Ia or Ib peptic ulcers underwent endoscopic application of Hemospray as treatment of first intent. Effectiveness endpoints were successful hemostasis at the end of the index endoscopy, recurrent bleeding within 72 hours and from 72 hours to 30 days, adverse events requiring reintervention or resulting in morbidity or mortality, and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: Hemospray was successfully administered in 98.5% of patients (66/67). Hemostasis was achieved at the index endoscopy in 90.9% of patients (60/66) with Hemospray alone and in an additional 4 patients treated with additional modalities, yielding an overall hemostasis rate of 97.0% (64/66). Rebleeding occurred in 13.3% of patients (8/60), 5 within 72 hours and 3 between 72 hours and 30 days. Two cases of perforation and 2 patient deaths occurred during the study, but none of these cases or any other adverse events were attributed to the use of Hemospray. The rate of early rebleeding was significantly higher in patients with Forrest Ia ulcers compared with patients with Forrest Ib ulcers. Higher rates of early bleeding in patients with Forrest Ia ulcers is consistent with results from studies where Hemospray was used as rescue after failure of conventional methods. CONCLUSIONS: Hemospray is an effective initial treatment for patients with active peptic ulcer bleeding, but care should be taken to monitor for recurrent bleeding. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT01306864.).
Subject(s)
Hemostasis, Endoscopic , Hemostatics , Peptic Ulcer , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal , Hemostasis, Endoscopic/methods , Hemostatics/therapeutic use , Humans , Minerals/therapeutic use , Peptic Ulcer/chemically induced , Peptic Ulcer Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Peptic Ulcer Hemorrhage/drug therapy , Powders , Prospective Studies , Recurrence , Treatment Outcome , Ulcer/therapyABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Gastric intestinal metaplasia (GIM) is a premalignant lesion, highly associated with Helicobacter pylori infection. Previous studies have shown that H. pylori is able to induce the expression of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1), an inhibitory immune modulator, in gastric cells. Our aim was to investigate whether tissues from GIM patients may exploit PD-L1 expression upon H. pylori infection to evade immunosurveillance. METHODS: Immunohistochemistry was performed for PD-L1 and enteroendocrine markers somatostatin and gastrin on samples derived from a cohort of patients with known GIM, both before and after H. pylori eradication. To determine the identity of any observed PD-L1-positive cells, we performed multiplex immunofluorescent staining and analysis of single-cell sequencing data. RESULTS: GIM tissue was rarely positive for PD-L1. In normal glands from GIM patients, PD-L1 was mainly expressed by gastrin-positive G-cells. While the D-cell and G-cell compartments were both diminished 2-fold (p = .015 and p = .01, respectively) during H. pylori infection in the normal antral tissue of GIM patients, they were restored 1 year after eradication. The total number of PD-L1-positive cells was not affected by H. pylori, but the percentage of PD-L1-positive G-cells was 30% higher in infected subjects (p = .011), suggesting that these cells are preferentially rescued from destruction. CONCLUSIONS: Antral G-cells frequently express PD-L1 during homeostasis. G-cells seem to be protected from H. pylori-induced immune destruction by PD-L1 expression. GIM itself does not express PD-L1 and is unlikely to escape immunosurveillance via expression of PD-L1.
Subject(s)
Helicobacter Infections , Helicobacter pylori , Precancerous Conditions , Stomach Neoplasms , B7-H1 Antigen/genetics , B7-H1 Antigen/metabolism , Gastric Mucosa/pathology , Gastrins/metabolism , Helicobacter Infections/pathology , Helicobacter pylori/metabolism , Humans , Inflammation/pathology , Metaplasia/metabolism , Precancerous Conditions/pathology , Somatostatin/metabolism , Stomach Neoplasms/pathologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Worldwide, many countries have adopted colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes, often based on faecal occult blood tests (FOBTs). CRC screening aims to detect advanced neoplasia (AN), which is defined as CRC or advanced adenomas. FOBTs fall into two categories based on detection technique and the detected blood component: qualitative guaiac-based FOBTs (gFOBTs) and faecal immunochemical tests (FITs), which can be qualitative and quantitative. Screening with gFOBTs reduces CRC-related mortality. OBJECTIVES: To compare the diagnostic test accuracy of gFOBT and FIT screening for detecting advanced colorectal neoplasia in average-risk individuals. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, BIOSIS Citation Index, Science Citation Index Expanded, and Google Scholar. We searched the reference lists and PubMed-related articles of included studies to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included prospective and retrospective studies that provided the number of true positives, false positives, false negatives, and true negatives for gFOBTs, FITs, or both, with colonoscopy as reference standard. We excluded case-control studies. We included studies in which all participants underwent both index test and reference standard ("reference standard: all"), and studies in which only participants with a positive index test underwent the reference standard while participants with a negative test were followed for at least one year for development of interval carcinomas ("reference standard: positive"). The target population consisted of asymptomatic, average-risk individuals undergoing CRC screening. The target conditions were CRC and advanced neoplasia (advanced adenomas and CRC combined). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened and selected studies for inclusion. In case of disagreement, a third review author made the final decision. We used the Rutter and Gatsonis hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic model to explore differences between tests and identify potential sources of heterogeneity, and the bivariate hierarchical model to estimate sensitivity and specificity at common thresholds: 10 µg haemoglobin (Hb)/g faeces and 20 µg Hb/g faeces. We performed indirect comparisons of the accuracy of the two tests and direct comparisons when both index tests were evaluated in the same population. MAIN RESULTS: We ran the initial search on 25 June 2019, which yielded 63 studies for inclusion. We ran a top-up search on 14 September 2021, which yielded one potentially eligible study, currently awaiting classification. We included a total of 33 "reference standard: all" published articles involving 104,640 participants. Six studies evaluated only gFOBTs, 23 studies evaluated only FITs, and four studies included both gFOBTs and FITs. The cut-off for positivity of FITs varied between 2.4 µg and 50 µg Hb/g faeces. For each Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS)-2 domain, we assessed risk of bias as high in less than 20% of studies. The summary curve showed that FITs had a higher discriminative ability than gFOBTs for AN (P < 0.001) and CRC (P = 0.004). For the detection of AN, the summary sensitivity of gFOBTs was 15% (95% confidence interval (CI) 12% to 20%), which was significantly lower than FITs at both 10 µg and 20 µg Hb/g cut-offs with summary sensitivities of 33% (95% CI 27% to 40%; P < 0.001) and 26% (95% CI 21% to 31%, P = 0.002), respectively. Results were simulated in a hypothetical cohort of 10,000 screening participants with 1% CRC prevalence and 10% AN prevalence. Out of 1000 participants with AN, gFOBTs missed 850, while FITs missed 670 (10 µg Hb/g cut-off) and 740 (20 µg Hb/g cut-off). No significant differences in summary specificity for AN detection were found between gFOBTs (94%; 95% CI 92% to 96%), and FITs at 10 µg Hb/g cut-off (93%; 95% CI 90% to 95%) and at 20 µg Hb/g cut-off (97%; 95% CI 95% to 98%). So, among 9000 participants without AN, 540 were offered (unnecessary) colonoscopy with gFOBTs compared to 630 (10 µg Hb/g) and 270 (20 µg Hb/g) with FITs. Similarly, for the detection of CRC, the summary sensitivity of gFOBTs, 39% (95% CI 25% to 55%), was significantly lower than FITs at 10 µg and 20 µg Hb/g cut-offs: 76% (95% CI 57% to 88%: P = 0.001) and 65% (95% CI 46% to 80%; P = 0.035), respectively. So, out of 100 participants with CRC, gFOBTs missed 61, and FITs missed 24 (10 µg Hb/g) and 35 (20 µg Hb/g). No significant differences in summary specificity for CRC were found between gFOBTs (94%; 95% CI 91% to 96%), and FITs at the 10 µg Hb/g cut-off (94%; 95% CI 87% to 97%) and 20 µg Hb/g cut-off (96%; 95% CI 91% to 98%). So, out of 9900 participants without CRC, 594 were offered (unnecessary) colonoscopy with gFOBTs versus 594 (10 µg Hb/g) and 396 (20 µg Hb/g) with FITs. In five studies that compared FITs and gFOBTs in the same population, FITs showed a higher discriminative ability for AN than gFOBTs (P = 0.003). We included a total of 30 "reference standard: positive" studies involving 3,664,934 participants. Of these, eight were gFOBT-only studies, 18 were FIT-only studies, and four studies combined both gFOBTs and FITs. The cut-off for positivity of FITs varied between 5 µg to 250 µg Hb/g faeces. For each QUADAS-2 domain, we assessed risk of bias as high in less than 20% of studies. The summary curve showed that FITs had a higher discriminative ability for detecting CRC than gFOBTs (P < 0.001). The summary sensitivity for CRC of gFOBTs, 59% (95% CI 55% to 64%), was significantly lower than FITs at the 10 µg Hb/g cut-off, 89% (95% CI 80% to 95%; P < 0.001) and the 20 µg Hb/g cut-off, 89% (95% CI 85% to 92%; P < 0.001). So, in the hypothetical cohort with 100 participants with CRC, gFOBTs missed 41, while FITs missed 11 (10 µg Hb/g) and 11 (20 µg Hb/g). The summary specificity of gFOBTs was 98% (95% CI 98% to 99%), which was higher than FITs at both 10 µg and 20 µg Hb/g cut-offs: 94% (95% CI 92% to 95%; P < 0.001) and 95% (95% CI 94% to 96%; P < 0.001), respectively. So, out of 9900 participants without CRC, 198 were offered (unnecessary) colonoscopy with gFOBTs compared to 594 (10 µg Hb/g) and 495 (20 µg Hb/g) with FITs. At a specificity of 90% and 95%, FITs had a higher sensitivity than gFOBTs. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: FITs are superior to gFOBTs in detecting AN and CRC in average-risk individuals. Specificity of both tests was similar in "reference standard: all" studies, whereas specificity was significantly higher for gFOBTs than FITs in "reference standard: positive" studies. However, at pre-specified specificities, the sensitivity of FITs was significantly higher than gFOBTs.
Subject(s)
Adenoma , Colorectal Neoplasms , Adenoma/diagnosis , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Guaiac , Hemoglobins , Humans , Occult Blood , Prospective Studies , Retrospective Studies , Sensitivity and SpecificityABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Insight into the management of cancer in the primary care setting is pivotal to improve early recognition and survival of cancer patients. Therefore, the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR) was linked to the General Practitioner (GP) Database of the PHARMO Database Network to make this research possible. METHODS: The NCR collects tumour data on all newly diagnosed cancer patients, whereas the GP Database comprises data from electronic patient records registered by GPs. Databases were linked using a probabilistic record linkage technology. RESULTS: Through record linkage of the NCR and the GP Database, we have established a large population-based cohort (NCR-PHARMO GP cohort) of 135,868 cancer patients. Data are available on demographics, tumour characteristics, primary health care use before and after cancer diagnosis including medication use, medical conditions, laboratory tests, and referrals. Data can be used for a number of different studies, for example, to study the diagnostic pathway in the primary care setting in order to identify possibilities for early recognition. CONCLUSION: The NCR-PHARMO GP cohort provides rich data on the primary care management of cancer facilitating large-scale observational cancer research in the primary care setting. The patient-level linkage allows for long-term follow-up of cancer patients, with ongoing annual updates.
Subject(s)
General Practitioners , Neoplasms , Cohort Studies , Databases, Factual , Humans , Neoplasms/therapy , Netherlands/epidemiology , Primary Health CareABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is used in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, yet it leaves room for improvement. OBJECTIVE: To develop a multitarget FIT (mtFIT) with better diagnostic performance than FIT. DESIGN: Diagnostic test accuracy study. SETTING: Colonoscopy-controlled series. PARTICIPANTS: Persons (n = 1284) from a screening (n = 1038) and referral (n = 246) population were classified by their most advanced lesion (CRC [n = 47], advanced adenoma [n = 135], advanced serrated polyp [n = 30], nonadvanced adenoma [n = 250], and nonadvanced serrated polyp [n = 53]), along with control participants (n = 769). MEASUREMENTS: Antibody-based assays were developed and applied to leftover FIT material. Classification and regression tree (CART) analysis was applied to biomarker concentrations to identify the optimal combination for detecting advanced neoplasia. Performance of this combination, the mtFIT, was cross-validated using a leave-one-out approach and compared with FIT at equal specificity. RESULTS: The CART analysis showed a combination of hemoglobin, calprotectin, and serpin family F member 2-the mtFIT-to have a cross-validated sensitivity for advanced neoplasia of 42.9% (95% CI, 36.2% to 49.9%) versus 37.3% (CI, 30.7% to 44.2%) for FIT (P = 0.025), with equal specificity of 96.6%. In particular, cross-validated sensitivity for advanced adenomas increased from 28.1% (CI, 20.8% to 36.5%) to 37.8% (CI, 29.6% to 46.5%) (P = 0.006). On the basis of these results, early health technology assessment indicated that mtFIT-based screening could be cost-effective compared with FIT. LIMITATION: Study population is enriched with persons from a referral population. CONCLUSION: Compared with FIT, the mtFIT showed better diagnostic accuracy in detecting advanced neoplasia because of an increased detection of advanced adenomas. Moreover, early health technology assessment indicated that these results provide a sound basis to pursue further development of mtFIT as a future test for population-based CRC screening. A prospective screening trial is in preparation. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Stand Up to Cancer/Dutch Cancer Society, Dutch Digestive Foundation, and HealthHolland.
Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Diagnostic Tests, Routine/standards , Feces/chemistry , Mass Screening/instrumentation , Aged , Biomarkers, Tumor/chemistry , Colonoscopy , Early Detection of Cancer , Female , Humans , Male , Middle AgedABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) survivors treated with abdominal radiotherapy and/or procarbazine have an increased risk of developing colorectal neoplasia. AIMS: We evaluated the clinicopathological characteristics and risk factors for developing (advanced) neoplasia (AN) in HL survivors. METHODS: In all, 101 HL survivors (median age 51 years, median age of HL diagnosis 25 years) underwent colonoscopy and 350 neoplasia and 44 AN (classified as advanced adenomas/serrated lesions or colorectal cancer), mostly right-sided, were detected, as published previously. An average-risk asymptomatic cohort who underwent screening colonoscopy were controls (median age 60 years). Clinicopathological characteristics of AN were evaluated in both groups. Mismatch repair (MMR) status was assessed using immunohistochemistry (MLH1/MSH2/MSH6/PMS2). Logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate the risk factors for AN in HL survivors, including age at HL diagnosis and interval between HL and colonoscopy. RESULTS: In 101 colonoscopies in HL survivors, AN was primarily classified based on polyp size ≥10 mm, whereas (high-grade)dysplasia was more often seen in AN in controls. An interval between HL diagnosis and colonoscopy >26 years was associated with more AN compared with an interval of <26 years, with an odds ratio for AN of 3.8 (95% confidence interval 1.4-9.1) (p < 0.01). All 39 AN that were assessed were MMR proficient. CONCLUSIONS: Colorectal neoplasia in HL survivors differ from average-risk controls; classification AN was primarily based on polyp size (≥10 mm) in HL survivors. Longer follow-up between HL diagnosis and colonoscopy was associated with a higher prevalence of AN in HL survivors.
Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms , Hodgkin Disease , Adult , Colonoscopy , Colorectal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Colorectal Neoplasms/etiology , Hodgkin Disease/epidemiology , Hodgkin Disease/etiology , Humans , Middle Aged , Risk Factors , SurvivorsABSTRACT
Guidelines from national and international professional societies on upper gastrointestinal bleeding highlight the important clinical issues but do not always identify specific management strategies pertaining to individual patients. Optimal treatment should consider the personal needs of an individual patient and the pertinent resources and experience available at the point of care. This article integrates international guidelines and consensus into three stages of management: pre-endoscopic assessment and treatment, endoscopic evaluation and haemostasis and postendoscopic management. We emphasise the need for personalised management strategies based on patient characteristics, nature of bleeding lesions and the clinical setting including available resources.
Subject(s)
Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/standards , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/surgery , Hemostasis, Endoscopic/standards , Precision Medicine , Upper Gastrointestinal Tract/surgery , Humans , Practice Guidelines as TopicABSTRACT
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Many countries have introduced colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs with fecal immunochemical tests (FITs), and follow-up colonoscopies for individuals with a positive FIT result. In order to make an informed decision to participate, individuals must be informed about the benefits and harms of FIT-based screening and subsequent colonoscopy. Colonoscopy-related fatal complications in FIT-based screening are understudied. We aimed to estimate the colonoscopy-related mortality in a national FIT-based CRC screening program. METHODS: Colonoscopy-related mortality within 30 days after colonoscopy was assessed by analysis of data from national endoscopy complication databases in the Netherlands, determining the excess 30-day rate of death in FIT-positive individuals undergoing colonoscopy vs FIT-negative individuals (based on data from the national screening database), and determining the rate of likely colonoscopy-related deaths based on registered causes of death by the Statistics Netherlands. RESULTS: Between October 2013 and December 2017, 172,797 participants underwent colonoscopy after a positive result from a FIT in the Dutch national CRC screening program; 13,848 participants received a diagnosis of CRC. The reported fatal complication rate was 0.23 per 10,000 FIT-positive participants (or 1 per 43,199; 95% CI, 0.090 - 0.60) undergoing colonoscopy, whereas this was 0.91 per 10,000 FIT-positive participants (or 1 per 10,961; 95% CI, 0.44 - 1.38) according to the excess death rate. Likely colonoscopy-related causes of death were reported in 0.86 per 10,000 FIT-positive participants (or 1 per 11,236; 95% CI, 0.48 - 1.63) who underwent colonoscopy, of which 50% considered cardiovascular events. CONCLUSIONS: Colonoscopy-related mortality within the Dutch FIT-based CRC screening program was estimated to range from 0.23 to 0.91 per 10,000 FIT-positive participants undergoing colonoscopy. These findings indicate underreporting of fatal complications in registries and a noteworthy incidence of fatal cardiovascular adverse events that requires further investigation. Nevertheless, the harm of FIT-based CRC screening is vastly outweighed by the benefits.
Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms , Early Detection of Cancer , Colonoscopy , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Feces , Humans , Mass Screening , Occult BloodABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Primary colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical test (FIT) are the most commonly used colorectal cancer (CRC) screening modalities. Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) might be an alternative. Data on the performance of CCE as a CRC screening tool in a screening population remain scarce. This is the first systematic review to provide an overview of the applicability of CCE as a CRC screening tool. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted of literature published up to September 2020.âStudies reporting on CRC screening by second-generation CCE in an average-risk screening population were included. RESULTS: 582 studies were identified and 13 were included, comprising 2485 patients. Eight studies used CCE as a filter test after a positive FIT result and five studies used CCE for primary screening. The polyp detection rate of CCE was 24â%â-â74â%. For polyps >â6âmm, sensitivity of CCE was 79â%â-â96â% and specificity was 66â%â-â97â%. For polyps ≥â10âmm, sensitivity of CCE was 84â%â-â97â%, which was superior to computed tomographic colonography (CTC). The CRC detection rate for completed CCEs was 93â% (25/27). Bowel preparation was adequate in 70â%â-â92â% of examinations, and completion rates varied from 57â% to 92â%, depending on the booster used. No CCE-related complications were described. CONCLUSION: CCE appeared to be a safe and effective tool for the detection of CRC and polyps in a screening setting. Accuracy was comparable to colonoscopy and superior to CTC, making CCE a good alternative to colonoscopy in CRC screening programs, although completion rates require improvement.
Subject(s)
Capsule Endoscopy , Colorectal Neoplasms , Colonoscopy , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Early Detection of Cancer , HumansABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Guidelines recommend endoscopy with biopsies to stratify patients with gastric premalignant lesions (GPL) to high and low progression risk. High-risk patients are recommended to undergo surveillance. We aimed to assess the accuracy of guideline recommendations to identify low-risk patients, who can safely be discharged from surveillance. METHODS: This study includes patients with GPL. Patients underwent at least two endoscopies with an interval of 1-6 years. Patients were defined 'low risk' if they fulfilled requirements for discharge, and 'high risk' if they fulfilled requirements for surveillance, according to European guidelines (MAPS-2012, updated MAPS-2019, BSG). Patients defined 'low risk' with progression of disease during follow-up (FU) were considered 'misclassified' as low risk. RESULTS: 334 patients (median age 60 years IQR11; 48.7% male) were included and followed for a median of 48 months. At baseline, 181/334 (54%) patients were defined low risk. Of these, 32.6% were 'misclassified', showing progression of disease during FU. If MAPS-2019 were followed, 169/334 (51%) patients were defined low risk, of which 32.5% were 'misclassified'. If BSG were followed, 174/334 (51%) patients were defined low risk, of which 32.2% were 'misclassified'. Seven patients developed gastric cancer (GC) or dysplasia, four patients were 'misclassified' based on MAPS-2012 and three on MAPS-2019 and BSG. By performing one additional endoscopy 72.9% (95% CI 62.4-83.3) of high-risk patients and all patients who developed GC or dysplasia were identified. CONCLUSION: One-third of patients that would have been discharged from GC surveillance, appeared to be 'misclassified' as low risk. One additional endoscopy will reduce this risk by 70%.