An artificial intelligence-assisted system versus white light endoscopy alone for adenoma detection in individuals with Lynch syndrome (TIMELY): an international, multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Computer-aided detection (CADe) systems for colonoscopy have been shown to increase small polyp detection during colonoscopy in the general population. People with Lynch syndrome represent an ideal target population for CADe-assisted colonoscopy because adenomas, the primary cancer precursor lesions, are characterised by their small size and higher likelihood of showing advanced histology. We aimed to evaluate the performance of CADe-assisted colonoscopy in detecting adenomas in individuals with Lynch syndrome. METHODS: TIMELY was an international, multicentre, parallel, randomised controlled trial done in 11 academic centres and six community centres in Belgium, Germany, Italy, and Spain. We enrolled individuals aged 18 years or older with pathogenic or likely pathogenic MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, or EPCAM variants. Participants were consecutively randomly assigned (1:1) to either CADe (GI Genius) assisted white light endoscopy (WLE) or WLE alone. A centre-stratified randomisation sequence was generated through a computer-generated system with a separate randomisation list for each centre according to block-permuted randomisation (block size 26 patients per centre). Allocation was automatically provided by the online AEG-REDCap database. Participants were masked to the random assignment but endoscopists were not. The primary outcome was the mean number of adenomas per colonoscopy, calculated by dividing the total number of adenomas detected by the total number of colonoscopies and assessed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04909671. FINDINGS: Between Sept 13, 2021, and April 6, 2023, 456 participants were screened for eligibility, 430 of whom were randomly assigned to receive CADe-assisted colonoscopy (n=214) or WLE (n=216). 256 (60%) participants were female and 174 (40%) were male. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the mean number of adenomas per colonoscopy was 0·64 (SD 1·57) in the CADe group and 0·64 (1·17) in the WLE group (adjusted rate ratio 1·03 [95% CI 0·72-1·47); p=0·87). No adverse events were reported during the trial. INTERPRETATION: In this multicentre international trial, CADe did not improve the detection of adenomas in individuals with Lynch syndrome. High-quality procedures and thorough inspection and exposure of the colonic mucosa remain the cornerstone in surveillance of Lynch syndrome. FUNDING: Spanish Gastroenterology Association, Spanish Society of Digestive Endoscopy, European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Societat Catalana de Digestologia, Instituto Carlos III, Beca de la Marato de TV3 2020. Co-funded by the European Union.

Adenoma detection rate and tolerability of two ultra-low volume bowel preparations in screening: a noninferiority randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The adenoma detection rate (ADR), recognized as a surrogate marker for colorectal cancer incidence and mortality reduction, is closely linked to the efficacy of bowel cleansing. However, there is a dearth of evidence examining the impact on ADR when employing two distinct very low-dose bowel cleansing products. This study sought to compare ADR in a fecal immunochemical occult blood testing (iFOBT) based organized screening program by utilizing 1L polyethylene glycol plus ascorbate (1L-PEGA) versus magnesium citrate plus picosulphate (SPMC), both administered in a split-dose regimen. METHODS: We conducted a comparative, parallel, randomized, noninferiority, and low-intervention clinical trial, the study targeted individuals from a population colorectal cancer screening program aged 50-69 with a positive iFOBT result scheduled for a work-up colonoscopy in the morning. Participants were randomized to either 1L-PEGA or SPMC for bowel cleansing. Main outcome was ADR. Secondary outcomes were bowel preparation quality, individuals' safety, tolerability and satisfaction. RESULTS: A total of 1,002 subjects were included, 501 in each group. There were no differences between groups with respect to pooled ADR (SPMC, 56.5% [52.1-60.8]; 1L-PEGA, 53.7% [49.3-58.0]; RR 0.95 [0.85-1.06]); therefore, SPMC demonstrated noninferiority in ADR compared to 1L-PEGA (difference, 2.8%; 2-sided 95% lower confidence limit (LCL), -3.4). In addition, there were no significant differences in mean lesions regardless of size and location between arms. Bowel preparation favored 1L-PEGA (96.2% vs. 89.2%; p<0.001) whereas SPMC exhibited significantly higher safety and tolerability, as evidenced by fewer non-serious treatment-emergent adverse events CONCLUSIONS: SPMC emerged as a noninferior laxative compared to 1L-PEGA concerning ADR. Despite the superior bowel preparation quality associated with 1L-PEGA, the safety, tolerability and overall satisfaction of participants were higher with SPMC. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (EudraCT: 2019-003186-18) on March 18, 2019.

Development of Desmoid Tumors After Ileorectal Anastomosis Versus Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis in Familial Adenomatous Polyposis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Desmoid tumors (DT) are an important cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). DT development might be related to the type and approach of colectomy. We aimed to compare DT development after colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis (IRA) and proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA). METHODS: We performed an international historical cohort study in patients with FAP who underwent IRA or IPAA between 1961 and 2020. The primary outcome was the incidence of abdominal DT (either mesenteric, retroperitoneal, or abdominal wall). Patients with a DT diagnosis before or at colectomy were excluded. Time to DT was considered censored at an eventual secondary proctectomy after IRA. We used multivariable Cox regression modelling to adjust for potential confounders. RESULTS: We analyzed data from 852 patients: 514 after IRA and 338 after IPAA (median follow-up, 21 and 16 years, respectively). DTs were diagnosed in 64 IRA patients (12%) and 66 IPAA patients (20%). The cumulative DT incidence at 5 and 10 years was 7.5% and 9.3% after open IRA and 4.7% and 10.9% after laparoscopic IRA. These estimates were 13.6% and 15.4% after open IPAA and 8.4% and 10.0% after laparoscopic IPAA. The postoperative risk was significantly higher after IPAA (P < .01) in multivariable analysis, whereas approach did not significantly influence the risk. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of developing an abdominal DT was found to be significantly higher after IPAA than after IRA. Postoperative DT risk should be taken into account when choosing between IRA and IPAA in FAP.

Colonoscopic surveillance in Lynch syndrome: guidelines in perspective.

Lynch syndrome predisposes to a high risk of colorectal cancer and colonoscopy remains the primary preventive strategy. The prevention of colorectal cancer through colonoscopy relies on identifying and removing adenomas, the main precursor lesion. Nevertheless, colonoscopy is not an optimal strategy since post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer remains an important issue. In continuation of a 2021 journal review, the present article seeks to offer an updated perspective by examining relevant articles from the past 3 years. We place recent findings in the context of existing guidelines, with a specific focus on colonoscopy surveillance. Key aspects explored include colonoscopy quality standards, timing of initiation, and surveillance intervals. Our review provides a comprehensive analysis of adenoma-related insights in Lynch syndrome, delving into emerging technologies like virtual chromoendoscopy and artificial intelligence-assisted endoscopy. This review aims to contribute valuable insights into the topic of colonoscopy surveillance in Lynch syndrome.

Endoscopic management of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis after prophylactic colectomy or restorative proctocolectomy - systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) develop early colorectal adenomas and if left untreated, progression to cancer is an inevitable event. Prophylactic surgery does not prevent further development of cancer in the rectal remnant, rectal cuff in patients with ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) and even on the ileal mucosa of the pouch body. The aim of this review is to assess long-term rates of cancer and adenoma development in patients with FAP after prophylactic surgery and to summarise current recommendations for endoscopic management and surveillance of these patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature search of studies from January 1946 through to June 2023 was conducted using the PRISMA checklist. The electronic database PubMed was searched. RESULTS: Fifty-four papers involving 5010 patients were reviewed. Cancer rate in the rectal remnant was 8.8-16.7% in the western population and 37% in the eastern population. The cumulative risk of cancer 30 years after surgery was 24%. Mortality due to cancer in the rectal remnant is 1.1-11.1% with a 5-year survival rate of 55%. The adenoma rate after primary IPAA was 9.4-85% with a cumulative risk of 85% 20 years after surgery and a cumulative risk of 12% for advanced adenomas 10 years after surgery. Cumulative risk for adenomas after ileorectal anastomosis (IRA) was 85% after 5 and 100% after 10 years. Adenomas developed more frequently after stapled (33.9-57%) compared to hand-sewn (0-33%) anastomosis. We identified reports of 45 cancers in patients after IPAA of which 30 were in the pouch body and 15 in the rectal cuff or at the anastomosis. CONCLUSIONS: There was a significant incidence of cancer and adenomas in the rectal remnant and ileal pouch of FAP patients during the long-term follow-up. Regular endoscopic surveillance is recommended, not only in IRA patients, but also in pouch patients after proctocolectomy.

CTNND1 is involved in germline predisposition to early-onset gastric cancer by affecting cell-to-cell interactions.

BACKGROUND: CDH1 and CTNNA1 remain as the main genes for hereditary gastric cancer. However, they only explain a small fraction of gastric cancer cases with suspected inherited basis. In this study, we aimed to identify new hereditary genes for early-onset gastric cancer patients (EOGC; < 50 years old). METHODS: After germline exome sequencing in 20 EOGC patients and replication of relevant findings by gene-panel sequencing in an independent cohort of 152 patients, CTNND1 stood out as an interesting candidate gene, since its protein product (p120ctn) directly interacts with E-cadherin. We proceeded with functional characterization by generating two knockout CTNND1 cellular models by gene editing and introducing the detected genetic variants using a lentiviral delivery system. We assessed ß-catenin and E-cadherin levels, cell detachment, as well as E-cadherin localization and cell-to-cell interaction by spheroid modeling. RESULTS: Three CTNND1 germline variants [c.28_29delinsCT, p.(Ala10Leu); c.1105C > T, p.(Pro369Ser); c.1537A > G, p.(Asn513Asp)] were identified in our EOGC cohorts. Cells encoding CTNND1 variants displayed altered E-cadherin levels and intercellular interactions. In addition, the p.(Pro369Ser) variant, located in a key region in the E-cadherin/p120ctn binding domain, showed E-cadherin mislocalization. CONCLUSIONS: Defects in CTNND1 could be involved in germline predisposition to gastric cancer by altering E-cadherin and, consequently, cell-to-cell interactions. In the present study, CTNND1 germline variants explained 2% (3/172) of the cases, although further studies in larger external cohorts are needed.

Uso de paneles de genes en pacientes con alto riesgo de cáncer digestivo hereditario: documento de posicionamiento de la AEG, SEOM, AEGH y consorcio IMPaCT-GENÓMICA / Use of multi-gene panels in patients at high risk of hereditary digestive cancer: position statement of AEG, SEOM, AEGH and IMPaCT-GENÓMICA consortium

Este documento de posicionamiento, auspiciado por la Asociación Española de Gastroenterología, la Sociedad Española de Oncología Médica, la Asociación Española de Genética Humana y el consorcio IMPaCT-Genómica, tiene como objetivo realizar recomendaciones para el uso de paneles de genes en la evaluación de individuos con alto riesgo de cáncer digestivo hereditario. Para medir la calidad de la evidencia y los niveles de recomendación se ha utilizado la metodología basada en el sistema Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Se obtuvo el consenso entre expertos mediante un método Delphi. El documento incluye recomendaciones sobre escenarios clínicos en los que se recomienda el uso de paneles de genes en cáncer colorrectal, síndromes polipósicos, cáncer gástrico y pancreático, así como los genes de los paneles a ser considerados en cada una de estas situaciones clínicas. También se establecen recomendaciones sobre la evaluación de mosaicismos, las estrategias de asesoramiento ante la ausencia de sujeto índice y, finalmente, el análisis constitucional tras identificación de variantes patogénicas tumorales. (AU)

This position statement, sponsored by the Asociación Española de Gastroenterología, the Sociedad Española de Oncología Médica, the Asociación Española de Genética Humana and the IMPaCT-Genómica Consortium aims to establish recommendations for use of multi-gene panel testing in patients at high risk of hereditary gastrointestinal and pancreatic cancer. To rate the quality of the evidence and the levels of recommendation, we used the methodology based on the GRADE system (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). We reached a consensus among experts using a Delphi method. The document includes recommendations on clinical scenarios where multi-gene panel testing is recommended in colorectal cancer, polyposis syndromes, gastric and pancreatic cancer, as well as the genes to be considered in each clinical scenario. Recommendations on the evaluation of mosaicisms, counseling strategies in the absence of an index subject and, finally, constitutional analysis after identification of pathogenic tumor variants are also made. (AU)

Use of multi-gene panels in patients at high risk of hereditary digestive cancer: position statement of AEG, SEOM, AEGH and IMPaCT-GENÓMICA consortium. / Uso de paneles de genes en pacientes con alto riesgo de cáncer digestivo hereditario: documento de posicionamiento de la AEG, SEOM, AEGH y consorcio IMPaCT-GENÓMICA.

This position statement, sponsored by the Asociación Española de Gastroenterología, the Sociedad Española de Oncología Médica, the Asociación Española de Genética Humana and the IMPaCT-Genómica Consortium aims to establish recommendations for use of multi-gene panel testing in patients at high risk of hereditary gastrointestinal and pancreatic cancer. To rate the quality of the evidence and the levels of recommendation, we used the methodology based on the GRADE system (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). We reached a consensus among experts using a Delphi method. The document includes recommendations on clinical scenarios where multi-gene panel testing is recommended in colorectal cancer, polyposis syndromes, gastric and pancreatic cancer, as well as the genes to be considered in each clinical scenario. Recommendations on the evaluation of mosaicisms, counseling strategies in the absence of an index subject and, finally, constitutional analysis after identification of pathogenic tumor variants are also made.

Linked-color imaging versus high definition white-light endoscopy for evaluation of post-polypectomy scars of nonpedunculated lesions: LCI-Scar study.

BACKGROUND: Detection and treatment of recurrence after piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection of nonpedunculated colorectal polyps are crucial for avoidance of post-colonoscopy cancer. Linked-color imaging (LCI) has demonstrated improved polyp detection but has never been assessed for evaluation of post-polypectomy scars. Our aim was to compare sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV) between LCI and white-light endoscopy (WLE) for detection of post-polypectomy recurrence. METHODS: Patients undergoing surveillance colonoscopy after resection of lesions ≥15 mm were included in this prospective, single-center, randomized, crossover study. Each post-polypectomy scar underwent two examinations, one with LCI and the other with WLE, performed by two blinded endoscopists. Blue-light imaging (BLI) was then applied. A diagnosis of recurrence with a level of confidence was made for each modality and histopathology was the gold standard. RESULTS: 129 patients with 173 scars were included. Baseline patient, lesion, and procedural characteristics were similar in both arms. Recurrence was detected in 56/173 (32.4%), with 27/56 (48.2%) adenomas and 29/56 (51.8%) serrated lesions. LCI had greater sensitivity (96.4% [95%CI 87.8%-99.5%]) versus WLE (89.3% [95%CI 78.1%-95.9%]) and greater NPV (98.1% [95%CI 93.4%-99.8%] versus 94.6% [95%CI 88.7%-98.0%]). Paired concordance between modalities was 96.0%. In discordant cases, LCI identified four true-positive cases not detected by WLE and reclassified one false-positive of WLE. WLE reclassified two false positives of LCI without any increase in recurrence detection. CONCLUSIONS: LCI was highly accurate and had greater ability than WLE to rule out recurrence on post-polypectomy scars after resection of large polyps.

Serum DNA methylome of the colorectal cancer serrated pathway enables non-invasive detection.

The clinical relevance of the colorectal cancer serrated pathway is evident, but the screening of serrated lesions remains challenging. We aimed to characterize the serum methylome of the serrated pathway and to evaluate circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) methylomes as a potential source of biomarkers for the non-invasive detection of serrated lesions. We collected serum samples from individuals with serrated adenocarcinoma (SAC), traditional serrated adenomas, sessile serrated lesions, hyperplastic polyps and individuals with no colorectal findings. First, we quantified cfDNA methylation with the MethylationEPIC array. Then, we compared the methylation profiles with tissue and serum datasets. Finally, we evaluated the utility of serum cfDNA methylation biomarkers. We identified a differential methylation profile able to distinguish high-risk serrated lesions from no serrated neoplasia, showing concordance with tissue methylation from SAC and sessile serrated lesions. Serum methylation profiles are pathway-specific, clearly separating serrated lesions from conventional adenomas. The combination of ninjurin 2 (NINJ2) and glutamate-rich 1 (ERICH1) methylation discriminated high-risk serrated lesions and SAC with 91.4% sensitivity (64.4% specificity), while zinc finger protein 718 (ZNF718) methylation reported 100% sensitivity for the detection of SAC (96% specificity). This is the first study exploring the serum methylome of serrated lesions. Differential methylation of cfDNA can be used for the non-invasive detection of colorectal serrated lesions.

Cold snare polypectomy for duodenal adenomas in familial adenomatous polyposis: a prospective international cohort study.

Background and study aims In patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), endoscopic resection of duodenal adenomas is commonly performed to prevent cancer and prevent or defer duodenal surgery. However, based on studies using different resection techniques, adverse events (AEs) of polypectomy in the duodenum can be significant. We hypothesized that cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is a safe technique for duodenal adenomas in FAP and evaluated its outcomes in our centers. Patients and methods We performed a prospective international cohort study including FAP patients who underwent CSP for one or more superficial non-ampullary duodenal adenomas of any size between 2020 and 2022. At that time, this technique was common practice in our centers for superficial duodenal adenomas. The primary outcome was the occurrence of intraprocedural and post-procedural AEs. Results In total, 133 CSPs were performed in 39 patients with FAP (1-18 per session). Median adenoma size was 10 mm (interquartile range 8-15 mm), ranging from 5 to 40 mm; 27 adenomas were ≥20 mm (20%). Of the 133 polypectomies, 109 (82%) were performed after submucosal injection. Sixty-one adenomas (46%) were resected en bloc and 72 (54%) piecemeal. Macroscopic radical resection was achieved for 129 polypectomies (97%). Deep mural injury type II occurred in three polyps (2%) with no delayed perforation after prophylactic clipping. There were no clinically significant bleeds, perforations or other post-procedural AEs. Histopathology showed low-grade dysplasia in all 133 adenomas. Conclusions CSP for (multiple) superficial non-ampullary duodenal adenomas in FAP seems feasible and safe. Long-term prospective research is needed to evaluate whether protocolized duodenal polypectomies prevent cancer and surgery.

Quantification of rare somatic single nucleotide variants by droplet digital PCR using SuperSelective primers.

Somatic single-nucleotide variants (SNVs) occur every time a cell divides, appearing even in healthy tissues at low frequencies. These mutations may accumulate as neutral variants during aging, or eventually, promote the development of neoplasia. Here, we present the SP-ddPCR, a droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) based approach that utilizes customized SuperSelective primers aiming at quantifying the proportion of rare SNVs. For that purpose, we selected five potentially pathogenic variants identified by whole-exome sequencing (WES) occurring at low variant allele frequency (VAF) in at-risk colon healthy mucosa of patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer or advanced adenoma. Additionally, two APC SNVs detected in two cancer lesions were added to the study for WES-VAF validation. SuperSelective primers were designed to quantify SNVs at low VAFs both in silico and in clinical samples. In addition to the two APC SNVs in colonic lesions, SP-ddPCR confirmed the presence of three out of five selected SNVs in the normal colonic mucosa with allelic frequencies ≤ 5%. Moreover, SP-ddPCR showed the presence of two potentially pathogenic variants in the distal normal mucosa of patients with colorectal carcinoma. In summary, SP-ddPCR offers a rapid and feasible methodology to validate next-generation sequencing data and accurately quantify rare SNVs, thus providing a potential tool for diagnosis and stratification of at-risk patients based on their mutational profiling.

Serum methylation of GALNT9, UPF3A, WARS, and LDB2 as noninvasive biomarkers for the early detection of colorectal cancer and advanced adenomas.

BACKGROUND: Early detection has proven to be the most effective strategy to reduce the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer (CRC). Nevertheless, most current screening programs suffer from low participation rates. A blood test may improve both the adherence to screening and the selection to colonoscopy. In this study, we conducted a serum-based discovery and validation of cfDNA methylation biomarkers for CRC screening in a multicenter cohort of 433 serum samples including healthy controls, benign pathologies, advanced adenomas (AA), and CRC. RESULTS: First, we performed an epigenome-wide methylation analysis with the MethylationEPIC array using a sample pooling approach, followed by a robust prioritization of candidate biomarkers for the detection of advanced neoplasia (AN: AA and CRC). Then, candidate biomarkers were validated by pyrosequencing in independent individual cfDNA samples. We report GALNT9, UPF3A, WARS, and LDB2 as new noninvasive biomarkers for the early detection of AN. The combination of GALNT9/UPF3A by logistic regression discriminated AN with 78.8% sensitivity and 100% specificity, outperforming the commonly used fecal immunochemical test and the methylated SEPT9 blood test. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this study highlights the utility of cfDNA methylation for CRC screening. Our results suggest that the combination methylated GALNT9/UPF3A has the potential to serve as a highly specific and sensitive blood-based test for screening and early detection of CRC.

Exploring Stakeholders' Perspectives on Implementing Universal Germline Testing for Colorectal Cancer: Findings From a Clinical Practice Survey.

PURPOSE: New guidelines recommend considering germline genetic testing for all patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). However, there is a lack of data on stakeholders' perspectives on the advantages and barriers of implementing universal germline testing (UGT). This study assessed the perspectives of members of the Collaborative Group of the Americas on Inherited Gastrointestinal Cancer (CGA-IGC) regarding the implementation of UGT for patients with CRC, including readiness, logistics, and barriers. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was sent to 317 active members of CGA-IGC. The survey included sections on demographics, clinical practice specialty, established institutional practices for testing, and questions pertaining to support of and barriers to implementing UGT for patients with CRC. RESULTS: Eighty CGA-IGC members (25%) participated, including 42 genetic counselors (53%) and 14 gastroenterologists (18%). Forty-seven (59%) reported an academic medical center as their primary work setting, and most participants (56%) had more than 10 years of clinical practice. Although most participants (73%) supported UGT, 54% indicated that changes in practice would be required before adopting UGT, and 39% indicated that these changes would be challenging to implement. There was support for both genetics and nongenetics providers to order genetic testing, and a majority (57%) supported a standardized multigene panel rather than a customized gene panel. Key barriers to UGT implementation included limited genetics knowledge among nongenetics providers, time-consuming processes for obtaining consent, ordering tests, disclosing results, and lack of insurance coverage. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates wide support among hereditary GI cancer experts for implementation of UGT for patients with CRC. However, alternative service delivery models using nongenetics providers should be considered to address the logistical barriers to UGT implementation, particularly the growing demand for genetic testing.

Screening uptake of colonoscopy versus fecal immunochemical testing in first-degree relatives of patients with non-syndromic colorectal cancer: A multicenter, open-label, parallel-group, randomized trial (ParCoFit study).

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy screening is underused by first-degree relatives (FDRs) of patients with non-syndromic colorectal cancer (CRC) with screening completion rates below 50%. Studies conducted in FDR referred for screening suggest that fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) was not inferior to colonoscopy in terms of diagnostic yield and tumor staging, but screening uptake of FIT has not yet been tested in this population. In this study, we investigated whether the uptake of FIT screening is superior to the uptake of colonoscopy screening in the familial-risk population, with an equivalent effect on CRC detection. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This open-label, parallel-group, randomized trial was conducted in 12 Spanish centers between February 2016 and December 2021. Eligible individuals included asymptomatic FDR of index cases <60 years, siblings or ≥2 FDR with CRC. The primary outcome was to compare screening uptake between colonoscopy and FIT. The secondary outcome was to determine the efficacy of each strategy to detect advanced colorectal neoplasia (adenoma or serrated polyps ≥10 mm, polyps with tubulovillous architecture, high-grade dysplasia, and/or CRC). Screening-naïve FDR were randomized (1:1) to one-time colonoscopy versus annual FIT during 3 consecutive years followed by a work-up colonoscopy in the case of a positive test. Randomization was performed before signing the informed consent using computer-generated allocation algorithm based on stratified block randomization. Multivariable regression analysis was performed by intention-to-screen. On December 31, 2019, when 81% of the estimated sample size was reached, the trial was terminated prematurely after an interim analysis for futility. Study outcomes were further analyzed through 2-year follow-up. The main limitation of this study was the impossibility of collecting information on eligible individuals who declined to participate. A total of 1,790 FDR of 460 index cases were evaluated for inclusion, of whom 870 were assigned to undergo one-time colonoscopy (n = 431) or FIT (n = 439). Of them, 383 (44.0%) attended the appointment and signed the informed consent: 147/431 (34.1%) FDR received colonoscopy-based screening and 158/439 (35.9%) underwent FIT-based screening (odds ratio [OR] 1.08; 95% confidence intervals [CI] [0.82, 1.44], p = 0.564). The detection rate of advanced colorectal neoplasia was significantly higher in the colonoscopy group than in the FIT group (OR 3.64, 95% CI [1.55, 8.53], p = 0.003). Study outcomes did not change throughout follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, compared to colonoscopy, FIT screening did not improve screening uptake by individuals at high risk of CRC, resulting in less detection of advanced colorectal neoplasia. Further studies are needed to assess how screening uptake could be improved in this high-risk group, including by inclusion in population-based screening programs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02567045).

Fecal occult blood and calprotectin testing to prioritize primary care patients for colonoscopy referral: The advantage study.

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy is the gold standard for colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosis and screening, but endoscopy services are usually overburdened. This study aims to investigate the usefulness of fecal hemoglobin (fHb) and calprotectin (FC) for the identification of patients with high probability of CRC who need urgent referral. METHODS: In a multicenter prospective study, we enrolled symptomatic patients referred from primary care for colonoscopy. Prior to bowel preparation, fHb and FC quantitative tests were performed. The diagnostic performance was estimated for each biomarker/combination. We built a multivariable predictive model based on logistic regression, translated to a nomogram and a risk calculator to assist clinicians in the decision-making process. RESULTS: The study included 1224 patients, of whom 69 (5.6%) had CRC. At the fHb cut-offs of >0 and 10 µg/g, the negative predictive values for CRC were 98.8% (95% confidence interval 97.8%-99.3%) and 98.6% (95%CI 97.7%-99.1%), and the sensitivities were 85.5% (95%CI 75.0%-92.8%) and 79.7% (95%CI 68.3%-88.4%), respectively. When we added the cut-off of 150 µg/g of FC to both fHb thresholds, the sensitivity of fecal tests improved. In the multivariate logistic regression model, the concentration of fHb was an independent predictor for CRC; age and gender were also independently associated with CRC. CONCLUSIONS: fHb and FC are useful as part of a triage tool to identify those symptomatic patients with high probability of CRC. This can be easily applied by physicians to prioritize high-risk patients for urgent colonoscopy.

Current chemoprevention approaches in Lynch syndrome and Familial adenomatous polyposis: a global clinical practice survey.

Background: International chemoprevention preferences and approaches in Lynch syndrome (LS) and APC-associated polyposis, including Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) and attenuated FAP (AFAP) have not been previously explored. Aim: To describe current chemoprevention strategies for patients with LS or FAP/AFAP (referred to collectively as FAP) practiced by members of four international hereditary cancer societies through administration of a survey. Results: Ninety-six participants across four hereditary gastrointestinal cancer societies responded to the survey. Most respondents (91%, 87/96) completed information regarding their demographics and practice characteristics relating to hereditary gastrointestinal cancer and chemoprevention clinical practices. Sixty-nine percent (60/87) of respondents offer chemoprevention for FAP and/or LS as a part of their practice. Of the 75% (72/96) of survey respondents who were eligible to answer practice-based clinical vignettes based off of their responses to ten barrier questions regarding chemoprevention, 88% (63/72) of those participants completed at least one case vignette question to further characterize chemoprevention practices in FAP and/or LS. In FAP, 51% (32/63) would offer chemoprevention for rectal polyposis, with sulindac - 300 mg (18%, 10/56) and aspirin (16%, 9/56) being the most frequently selected options. In LS, 93% (55/59) of professionals discuss chemoprevention and 59% (35/59) frequently recommend chemoprevention. Close to half of the respondents (47%, 26/55) would recommend beginning aspirin at time of commencement of the patient's first screening colonoscopy (usually at age 25yrs). Ninety-four percent (47/50) of respondents would consider a patient's diagnosis of LS as an influential factor for aspirin use. There was no consensus on the dose of aspirin (≤100 mg, >100 mg - 325 mg or 600 mg) to offer patients with LS and there was no agreement on how other factors, such as BMI, hypertension, family history of colorectal cancer, and family history of heart disease, would affect the recommendation for aspirin use. Possible harm among older patients (>70 years) was identified as the most common reason to discourage aspirin use. Conclusion: Although chemoprevention is widely discussed and offered to patients with FAP and LS by an international group of hereditary gastrointestinal cancer experts, there is significant heterogeneity in how it is applied in clinical practice.