Rationalizing polyp matching criteria in colon capsule endoscopy: an international expert consensus through RAND (modified DELPHI) process.

Background: Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) has gained momentum as an alternative modality for the investigation of the lower gastrointestinal tract. Of the few challenges that remain, the comparison and - eventually - matching of polyps at different timestamps leads to the potential for double reporting and can contribute to false-positive findings and inaccuracies. With the impending artificial intelligence integration, the risk of double reporting the same polyp due to the lack of information on spatial orientation underscores the necessity for establishing criteria for polyp matching. Objectives: This RAND/University of California, Los Angeles (modified Delphi) process aims to identify the key factors or components used to match polyps within a CCE video. This involves exploring the attributes of each factor to create comprehensive polyp-matching criteria based on international expert consensus. Design: A systematic qualitative study using surveys. Methods: A panel of 11 international CCE experts convened to assess a survey comprised of 60 statements. Participants anonymously rated statement appropriateness on a 1-9 scale (1-3: inappropriate, 4-6: uncertain and 7-9: appropriate). Following a virtual group discussion of the Round 1 results, a Round 2 survey was developed and completed before the final analysis. Results: The factors that were agreed to be essential for polyp matching include (1) timestamp, (2) polyp localization, (3) polyp vascular pattern, (4) polyp size, (5) time interval of the polyp appearance between the green and yellow camera, (6) surrounding tissue, (7) polyp morphology and (8) polyp surface and contour. When five or more factors are satisfied, it was agreed that the comparing polyps are likely the same polyp. Conclusion: This study has established the first complete criteria for polyp matching in CCE. While it might not provide a definitive solution for matching difficult, small and common polyps, these criteria serve as a framework to guide and facilitate the process of polyp-matching.

Creating criteria and standards for matching polyps (abnormal growth in the bowels) on colon capsule video analysis: an international expert agreement using the RAND (modified Delphi process) process Background: Doctors often use colon capsule endoscopy (CCE), a high-tech capsule with two cameras, to record and check for diseases in the small and large bowels as the capsule travels through the intestines. One of the most common conditions in the large bowel is polyps, which are abnormal growths in the lining of the bowel. Comparing and matching polyps in the same video from the capsule can be tricky as they look very similar, leading to the possibility of incorrectly reporting the same polyp twice or more. This can lead to wrong results and inaccuracies. The literature did not have any criteria or standards for matching polyps in CCE before. Aim: Using the RAND/UCLA (modified Delphi) process, this study aims to identify the key factors or components used to match polyps within a CCE video. The goal is to explore each factor and create complete criteria for polyp matching based on the agreement from international experts. Method: A group of 11 international CCE experts came together to evaluate a survey with 60 statements. They anonymously rated each statement on a scale from 1 to 9 (1-3: inappropriate, 4-6: uncertain, and 7-9: appropriate). After discussing the Round 1 results virtually, a Round 2 survey with the same but revised questions was created and completed before the final analysis of their agreement. Results: The main factors for matching polyps are 1) the timing when the polyp was seen, 2) where it is in the bowel, 3) its blood vessel pattern, 4) size, 5) the timing of its appearance between cameras, 6) surrounding tissue features, 7) its shape, and 8) surface features. If five or more of these factors match, the compared polyps are likely the same. Conclusion: This study establishes the first complete criteria for matching polyps in CCE. While it may not provide a definitive solution for matching challenging and small polyps, these criteria serve as a guide to help and make the process of polyp matching easier.

Increased Risk of Breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 Infections in Patients with Colorectal Cancer: A Population-Based Propensity-Matched Analysis.

Background/Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the association between colorectal cancer (CRC) and the risk of breakthrough respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in vaccinated patients with CRC. Methods: This retrospective cohort study used the TriNetX research network to identify vaccinated patients with CRC. Patients were matched using propensity score matching (PSM) and divided into patients with CRC and control (without history of CRC) groups. The primary outcome was the risk of breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 in vaccinated patients. The secondary outcome was a composite of all-cause emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalization, and death during the follow-up period after the diagnosis of COVID-19. Results: A total of 15,416 vaccinated patients with CRC were identified and propensity matched with 15,416 vaccinated patients without CRC. Patients with CRC had a significantly increased risk for breakthrough infections compared to patients without CRC (aOR = 1.78; [95% CI: 1.47-2.15]). Patients with CRC were at increased risk of breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections after two doses (aOR = 1.71; [95% CI: 1.42-2.06]) and three doses (aOR = 1.36; [95% CI: 1.09-1.69]) of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Vaccinated patients with CRC were at a lower risk of COVID-19 infection than unvaccinated CRC patients (aOR = 0.342; [95% CI: 0.289-0.404]). The overall composite outcome (all-cause ED visits, all-cause hospitalization, and all-cause death) was 51.6% for breakthrough infections, which was greater than 44.3% for propensity score-matched patients without CRC (aOR = 1.79; [95% CI: 1.29-2.47]). Conclusions: This cohort study showed significantly increased risks for breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection in vaccinated patients with CRC. Breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections in patients with CRC were associated with significant and substantial risks for hospitalizations.

A population-based analysis on the incidence of metachronous colon cancer after endoscopic resection of advanced adenomas with high-grade dysplasia: does location matter?

BACKGROUND: Advanced adenomas (AAs) with high-grade dysplasia (HGD) represent a risk factor for metachronous neoplasia, with guidelines recommending short-interval surveillance. Although the worse prognosis of proximal (vs distal) colon cancers (CCs) is established, there is paucity of evidence on the impact of laterality on the risk of subsequent neoplasia for these AAs. METHODS: Adults with HGD adenomas undergoing polypectomy were identified in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2000-2019). Cumulative incidence of malignancy was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Fine-Gray models assessed the effect of patient and disease characteristics on CC incidence. RESULTS: Of 3199 patients, 26% had proximal AAs. A total of 65 cases of metachronous adenocarcinoma were identified after polypectomy of 35 proximal and 30 distal adenomas with HGD. The 10-year cumulative incidence of CC was 2.3%; when stratified by location, it was 4.8% for proximal vs 1.4% for distal adenomas. Proximal location was significantly associated with increased incidence of metachronous cancer (adjusted hazard ratio, 3.32; 95% CI, 2.05-5.38). CONCLUSION: Proximal location of AAs with HGD was associated with >3-fold increased incidence of metachronous CC and shorter time to diagnosis. These data suggest laterality should be considered in the treatment and follow-up of these patients.

Adenomas and Sessile Serrated Lesions in 45- to 49-Year-Old Individuals Undergoing Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is now recommended at the age of 45 years in the United States. However, information regarding the adenomas detection rate (ADR) and sessile serrated lesions (SSLs) in 45- to 49-year-old individuals is limited. In addition, the impact of lowering the screening age to 45 years on the ADR and the detection rate of SSLs is not well elucidated. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to report the overall ADR and SSL detection rate in 45- to 49-year-old individuals undergoing colonoscopy. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov , and the Cochrane database from inception through October 2022 to identify studies reporting on ADR and SSL detection rates in 45- to 49-year-old individuals undergoing colonoscopies for all indications. This approach acknowledges the possibility of including individuals undergoing diagnostic colonoscopies or those with increased risk factors for CRC. We also conducted a separate analysis examining ADR in average-risk individuals undergoing screening colonoscopy. The pooled rates with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were generated using the fixed-effects model. I2 was used to adjudicate heterogeneity. RESULTS: Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria. All studies were retrospective except one; 3 had data from national/local registries. There were 41,709 adenomas detected across 150,436 colonoscopies. The pooled overall ADR was 23.1% (95% CI 19.7%-27.0%, I2 = 98.6%). The pooled ADR in individuals with average risk of CRC from 7 studies was 28.2% (95% CI 24.6%-32.0%, I2 = 96.5%). The pooled overall SSL detection rate from 6 studies was 6.3% (95% CI 3.8%-10.5%, I2 = 97%). The included studies were heterogeneous because of differences in the inclusion and exclusion criteria and patient population. DISCUSSION: In 45- to 49-year-old individuals undergoing a colonoscopy for any indication, the ADR and SSL detection rates were 23.1% and 6.3%, respectively. We conclude that these outcomes in 45- to 49-year-olds are comparable with individuals aged 50-54 years.

Risk of colorectal cancer in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis and concomitant inflammatory bowel disease compared with primary sclerosing cholangitis only.

AIM: Primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) increases the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients; however, there is a paucity of literature to suggest PSC alone as an independent risk factor for CRC. We aimed to determine if PSC is an independent risk factor for CRC in a large tertiary care medical center. Optimizing screening intervals is of great importance, given the burden and risks associated with a lifetime of colonoscopy screening. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study consists of patients diagnosed with PSC preceding IBD (PSC-IBD) and PSC-only before January 6, 2023 from a large, tertiary, academic medical center. Patients diagnosed with IBD concurrently or before PSC were excluded to reduce IBD's impact on CRC risk. Demographic data and colonoscopy findings were collected and assessed. RESULTS: Overall, 140 patients from all NYU Langone Health clinical settings were included. Patients with PSC-IBD were more likely to be diagnosed with CRC (23.3% vs. 1.8%, p < 0.01) and either low-grade or uncharacterized dysplasia (16.7% vs. 0.0%, p < 0.01) compared with those with PSC-only. Among PSC-only patients, the estimated CRC risk was significantly elevated compared with that expected of the standard NYU Langone population (SIR 9.2, 95% CI 1.1, 33.2). CONCLUSIONS: Our study revealed a significantly heightened CRC risk in PSC-IBD patients compared with those with PSC-only. Importantly, individuals with PSC-only also face a greater CRC risk compared with the general population. Individuals with PSC-alone may require extended screening and surveillance colonoscopy intervals compared with those with PSC-IBD, yet still require more frequent monitoring than screening guidelines recommend for the general population.

Expert endoscopist assessment of colorectal polyp size using virtual scale endoscopy, visual or snare-based estimation: a prospective video-based study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Accurate polyp size estimation during colonoscopy has an impact on clinical decision-making. A laser-based virtual scale endoscope (VSE) is available to allow measuring polyp size using a virtual adaptive scale. This study evaluates video-based polyp size measurement accuracy among expert endoscopists using either VSE or visual assessment (VA) with either snare as reference size or without any reference size information. METHODS: A prospective, video-based study was conducted with 10 expert endoscopists. Video sequences from 90 polyps with known reference size (fresh specimen measured using calipers) were distributed on three different slide sets so that each slide set showed the same polyp only once with either VSE, VA or snare-based information. A slide set was randomly assigned to each endoscopist. Endoscopists were asked to provide size estimation based on video review. RESULTS: Relative accuracies for VSE, VA, and snare-based estimation were 75.1% (95% CI [71.6-78.5]), 65.0% (95% CI [59.5-70.4]) and 62.0% (95% CI [54.8-69.0]), respectively. VSE yielded significantly higher relative accuracy compared to VA (p = 0.002) and to snare (p = 0.001). A significantly lower percentage of polyps 1-5 mm were misclassified as >5 mm using VSE versus VA and snare (6.52% vs. 19.6% and 17.5%, p = 0.004) and a significantly lower percentage of polyps >5 mm were misclassified as 1-5 mm using VSE versus VA and snare (11.4% vs. 31.9% and 14.9%, p = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopists estimate polyp size with the highest accuracy when virtual adaptive scale information is displayed. Using a snare to assist sizing did not improve measurement accuracy compared to displaying visual information alone.

Large language models: a primer and gastroenterology applications.

Over the past year, the emergence of state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) in tools like ChatGPT has ushered in a rapid acceleration in artificial intelligence (AI) innovation. These powerful AI models can generate tailored and high-quality text responses to instructions and questions without the need for labor-intensive task-specific training data or complex software engineering. As the technology continues to mature, LLMs hold immense potential for transforming clinical workflows, enhancing patient outcomes, improving medical education, and optimizing medical research. In this review, we provide a practical discussion of LLMs, tailored to gastroenterologists. We highlight the technical foundations of LLMs, emphasizing their key strengths and limitations as well as how to interact with them safely and effectively. We discuss some potential LLM use cases for clinical gastroenterology practice, education, and research. Finally, we review critical barriers to implementation and ongoing work to address these issues. This review aims to equip gastroenterologists with a foundational understanding of LLMs to facilitate a more active clinician role in the development and implementation of this rapidly emerging technology.

Large language models in gastroenterology: a simplified overview for clinicians This text discusses the recent advancements in large language models (LLMs), like ChatGPT, which have significantly advanced artificial intelligence. These models can create specific, high-quality text responses without needing extensive training data or complex programming. They show great promise in transforming various aspects of clinical healthcare, particularly in improving patient care, medical education, and research. This article focuses on how LLMs can be applied in the field of gastroenterology. It explains the technical aspects of LLMs, their strengths and weaknesses, and how to use them effectively and safely. The text also explores how LLMs could be used in clinical practice, education, and research in gastroenterology. Finally, it discusses the challenges in implementing these models and the ongoing efforts to overcome them, aiming to provide gastroenterologists with the basic knowledge needed to engage more actively in the development and use of this emerging technology.

Multilevel Interventions to Improve Colorectal Cancer Screening in an Urban Native American Community: A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial.

Native Americans have the highest burden of colorectal cancer (CRC) and the lowest rates of CRC screening across the United States.1 The disparities in CRC screening were made worse during the pandemic, creating an unmet need to implement evidence-based, multilevel interventions to improve CRC screening uptake. This can be achieved through an organized outreach program with identification of screen-eligible individuals using health records from the clinic; and a screening program with the following: (1) a mailed invitation, (2) a package of materials so patients can complete a fecal immunochemical test (FIT) kit from their homes, (3) reminder calls and a letter, and (4) navigation to a diagnostic colonoscopy.2-5 We conducted a pilot randomized controlled trial of a program of outreach vs usual care for completion of CRC screening at an urban clinic serving the Native American community. Applying the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR),6 we also conducted patient and provider interviews to understand barriers and facilitators to the organized program and CRC screening in general.

Establishment of Standards for the Referral of Large Non-Pedunculated Colorectal Polyps: An International Expert Consensus Using a Modified Delphi Process.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Resection of colorectal polyps has been shown to decrease the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer. Large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps are often referred to expert centres for endoscopic resection, which requires relevant information to be conveyed to the therapeutic endoscopist to allow for triage and planning of resection technique. The primary objective of our study was to establish minimum expected standards for the referral of LNPCP for potential ER. METHODS: A Delphi methodology was employed to establish consensus on minimum expected standards for the referral of large colorectal polyps among a panel of international endoscopy experts. The expert panel was recruited through purposive sampling, and three rounds of surveys were conducted to achieve consensus, with quantitative and qualitative data analysed for each round. RESULTS: A total of 24 international experts from diverse continents participated in the Delphi study, resulting in consensus on 19 statements related to the referral of large colorectal polyps. The identified factors, including patient demographics, relevant medications, lesion factors, photodocumentation and the presence of a tattoo, were deemed important for conveying the necessary information to therapeutic endoscopists. The mean scores for the statements ranged from 7.04 to 9.29 out of 10, with high percentages of experts considering most statements as a very high priority. Subgroup analysis by continent revealed some variations in consensus rates among experts from different regions. CONCLUSION: The identified consensus statements can aid in improving the triage and planning of resection techniques for large colorectal polyps, ultimately contributing to the reduction of colorectal cancer incidence and mortality.

Effect of ginger supplementation on the fecal microbiome in subjects with prior colorectal adenoma.

Ginger has been associated with a decreased incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) through reduction in inflammatory pathways and inhibition of tumor growth. Recent pre-clinical models have implicated changes in the gut microbiome as a possible mediator of the ginger effect on CRC. We hypothesized that, in adults previously diagnosed with a colorectal adenoma, ginger supplementation would alter the fecal microbiome in the direction consistent with its CRC-inhibitory effect. Sixty-eight adults were randomized to take either ginger or placebo daily for 6 weeks, with a 6-week washout and longitudinal stool collection throughout. We performed 16S rRNA sequencing and evaluated changes in overall microbial diversity and the relative abundances of pre-specified CRC-associated taxa using mixed-effects logistic regression. Ginger supplementation showed no significant effect on microbial community structure through alpha or beta diversity. Of 10 pre-specified CRC-associated taxa, there were significant decreases in the relative abundances of the genera Akkermansia (p < 0.001), Bacteroides (p = 0.018), and Ruminococcus (p = 0.013) after 6-week treatment with ginger compared to placebo. Ginger supplementation led to decreased abundances of Akkermansia and Bacteroides, which suggests that ginger may have an inhibitory effect on CRC-associated taxa. Overall, ginger supplementation appears to have a limited effect on gut microbiome in patients with colorectal adenomas.

The National Burden of Colorectal Cancer in the United States from 1990 to 2019.

CRC accounts for approximately a tenth of all cancer cases and deaths in the US. Due to large differences in demographics among the different states, we aim to determine trends in the CRC epidemiology and across different states, age groups, and genders. CRC rates, age-adjusted to the standard US population, were obtained from the GBD 2019 database. Time trends were estimated as annual percentage change (APC). A pairwise comparison was conducted between age- and gender-specific trends using the tests of parallelism and coincidence. Age-specific trends were also assessed in two age subgroups: younger adults aged 15-49 years and older adults aged 50-74 years. We also analyzed the prevalence, incidence, mortality, and DALYs in the US between 1990 and 2019. A total of 5.53 million patients were diagnosed with CRC in the US between 1990 and 2019. Overall, CRC incidence rates have significantly increased in younger adults (11.1 per 100,000 persons) and decreased in older adults (136.8 per 100,000 persons) (AAPC = 1.2 vs. -0.6; AAPC difference = 1.8, p < 0.001). Age-specific trends were neither identical (p < 0.001) nor parallel (p < 0.001), suggesting that CRC incidence rates are different and increasing at a greater rate in younger adults compared to older adults. However, for both men and women (49.4 and 35.2 per 100,000 persons), incidence rates have decreased over the past three decades at the same rate (AAPC = -0.5 vs. -0.5; AAPC difference = 0, p = 0.1). Geographically, the southern states had the highest mortality rates with Mississippi having the highest rate of 20.1 cases per 100,000 population in 2019. Massachusetts, New York, and the District of Colombia had the greatest decreases in mortality over the study period (-42.1%, -41.4%, and -40.9%). Decreased mortality was found in all states except Mississippi, where the mortality of CRC increased over the study period (+1.5%). This research provides crucial insights for policymakers to tailor resource allocation, emphasizing the dynamic nature of CRC burden across states and age groups, ultimately informing targeted strategies for prevention and intervention.

Colon polyps: updates in classification and management.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Colon polyps are potential precursors to colorectal cancer (CRC), which remains one of the most common causes of cancer-associated death. The proper identification and management of these colorectal polyps is an important quality measure for colonoscopy outcomes. Here, we review colon polyp epidemiology, their natural history, and updates in endoscopic classification and management. RECENT FINDINGS: Colon polyps that form from not only the adenoma, but also the serrated polyp pathway have significant risk for future progression to CRC. Therefore, correct identification and management of sessile serrated lesions can improve the quality of screening colonoscopy. Malignant polyp recognition continues to be heavily reliant on well established endoscopic classification systems and plays an important role in intraprocedural management decisions. Hot snare remains the gold standard for pedunculated polyp resection. Nonpedunculated noninvasive lesions can be effectively removed by large forceps if diminutive, but cold snare is preferred for colon polyps 3-20 mm in diameter. Larger lesions at least 20 mm require endoscopic mucosal resection. Polyps with the endoscopic appearance of submucosal invasion require surgical referral or advanced endoscopic resection in select cases. Advances in artificial intelligence may revolutionize endoscopic polyp classification and improve both patient and cost-related outcomes of colonoscopy. SUMMARY: Clinicians should be aware of the most recent updates in colon polyp classification and management to provide the best care to their patients initiating screening colonoscopy.

Colorectal cancer screening-what does the recent NordICC trial mean for the U.S. population?

The incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) has declined over time, though it remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in the U.S. It has the third highest incidence in incidence among all cancers and is the second leading cause of cancer death in both men and women. Screening reduces the incidence and mortality from CRC. There are several modalities for CRC screening, but the most common ones are a choice between a non-invasive stool-based test, such as fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) or an invasive endoscopic modality, such as colonoscopy. In the U.S. colonoscopy is the predominant CRC screening modality, with observational studies reporting large reductions in CRC incidence and mortality. Recently, a large randomized controlled trial (RCT) on effectiveness of colonoscopy reported smaller than expected reduction in CRC incidence and no reduction in CRC mortality with colonoscopy screening. Explanations of the lower than expected benefit include low uptake of colonoscopy, short follow-up for mortality endpoints and quality indicators (QIs) for some of the endoscopists participating in the screening colonoscopies. The findings of the study need to be taken in context with other literature on effectiveness of colonoscopy, with the overall message of reassuring patients of the benefits of screening, and colonoscopy. Here, we discuss the latest evidence on colonoscopy screening and it in the context of other screening modalities and the landscape.