Trends in pathology diagnoses during 10 years of a colorectal cancer screening programme.

AIMS: We report pathology findings from the first 10 years of the faecal-occult blood-based Northern Ireland Bowel Cancer Screening Programme, presenting summary data and trends in pathology diagnoses and clinicopathological features of screen-detected cancers. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data were analysed from a comprehensive polyp-level pathology database representing all endoscopy specimens from programme inception in 2010 until 2021. A total of 9800 individuals underwent 13 472 endoscopy procedures, yielding 25 967 pathology specimens and 32 119 diagnoses. Index specimen diagnoses (4.1%) and index colonoscopies (10.4%) yielded a diagnosis of colorectal cancer, representing 1045 cancers from 1020 individuals (25 with synchronous cancers). A further 13 index cancers were identified via computed tomography colonography; 65.3% of cancer diagnoses were in males; 41.7% were stage I, 23.1% stage II, 25.8% stage III and 1.8% stage IV (7.6% unstaged). Of 233 pT1 cancers diagnosed within local excision specimens, 79 (33.9%) had completion surgery. Ten-year trends showed a steady decline in the proportion of index colonoscopies that yielded a diagnosis of cancer (14.7% in year 1; 4.8% in year 11) or advanced colorectal polyp. There was a strong upward trend in diagnoses of sessile serrated lesions, which overtook hyperplastic polyps in proportions of total index diagnoses by the end of the study time-frame (8.7% compared to 8.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Over the first 10 years of a population colorectal cancer screening programme, 'real world' pathology data demonstrate success in the form of reduced diagnoses of cancer and advanced colorectal polyp with passage of successive screening rounds. Interesting trends with respect to serrated polyp diagnoses are also evident, probably related to pathologist and endoscopist behaviour.

A comparison of endoscopy versus pathology sizing of colorectal adenomas and potential implications for surveillance colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The aim of this study was to compare endoscopy and pathology sizing in a large population-based series of colorectal adenomas and to evaluate the implications for patient stratification into surveillance colonoscopy. METHODS: Endoscopy and pathology sizes available from intact adenomas removed at colonoscopies performed as part of the Northern Ireland Bowel Cancer Screening Programme, from 2010 to 2015, were included in this study. Chi-squared tests were applied to compare size categories in relation to clinicopathologic parameters and colonoscopy surveillance strata according to current American Gastroenterology Association and British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 2521 adenomas from 1467 individuals were included. There was a trend toward larger endoscopy than pathology sizing in 4 of the 5 study centers, but overall sizing concordance was good. Significantly greater clustering with sizing to the nearest 5 mm was evident in endoscopy versus pathology sizing (30% vs 19%, P < .001), which may result in lower accuracy. Applying a 10-mm cut-off relevant to guidelines on risk stratification, 7.3% of all adenomas and 28.3% of those 8 to 12 mm in size had discordant endoscopy and pathology size categorization. Depending on which guidelines are applied, 4.8% to 9.1% of individuals had differing risk stratification for surveillance recommendations, with the use of pathology sizing resulting in marginally fewer recommended surveillance colonoscopies. CONCLUSIONS: Choice of pathology or endoscopy approaches to determine adenoma size will potentially influence surveillance colonoscopy follow-up in 4.8% to 9.1% of individuals. Pathology sizing appears more accurate than endoscopy sizing, and preferential use of pathology size would result in a small, but clinically important, decreased burden on surveillance colonoscopy demand. Careful endoscopy sizing is required for adenomas removed piecemeal.