Mortality from upper gastrointestinal tumors in colorectal cancer screening patients.

Background and study aims Currently, gastric cancer screening is only cost-effective in countries with high incidence. Integrated screening, in which gastroscopy is performed in conjunction with colonoscopy, could help reduce the gastric cancer screening procedure burden in countries with low or intermediate incidence. However, there is a lack of population-based studies to identify high-risk groups. Methods In this retrospective analysis of a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program database, we used Cox proportional hazards model to identify an association of high- and low-risk finding (polyps ≥ 10 mm or with high-grade dysplasia) with time to death from upper gastrointestinal cancer (esophageal and gastric). We estimated the 10-year mortality of upper gastrointestinal tumors in different 10-year age groups, stratified by sex and polyp finding at colonoscopy. Results We included 349,856 CRC screening colonoscopies in our study. The median follow-up time was 5.22 years (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.21-5.24 years). Of the participants, 4.5% had polyps ≥ 10 mm or with high-grade dysplasia (HGD). At the end of the study period, 384 deaths from upper gastrointestinal cancer had occurred. Aside from age and sex, we found the presence of high-risk polyps to be significantly associated with upper gastrointestinal cancer death (hazard ratio 1.54, 95% CI 1.06-2.25, P = 0.025). Conclusions CRC screening participants with polyps < 10 mm and no HGD have a lower risk for mortality from upper gastrointestinal cancers compared with participants with polyps > 10 mm and HGD. Future studies will demonstrate whether integrated screening with additional gastroscopy is effective in CRC screening participants with large or highly dysplastic polyps.

Association between endoscopist adenoma detection rate and serrated polyp detection: Retrospective analysis of over 200,000 screening colonoscopies.

Background and study aims Serrated lesions have been identified as precursor lesions for 20% to 35% of colorectal cancers (CRCs) and may contribute to a significant proportion of interval-cancer. Sessile-serrated-lesions (SSLs), in particular, tend to be flat and located in the proximal colon, making their detection challenging and requiring expertise. It remains unclear whether the detection rate for serrated polyps should be considered as a quality indicator in addition to the adenoma detection rate (ADR). This study sought to assess whether the ADR has an effect on the detection rate for serrated polyps. atients and methods In this retrospective analysis, prospectively collected data from 212,668 screening colonoscopies performed between 2012 and September 2018 were included. Spearman correlation and Whitney-Mann U-test were used to assess the association of ADR and the detection rate of SSLs with (SDR) and without hyperplastic polyps (SPADRs), the sessile serrated detection rate (SSLDR) as well as the clinically relevant serrated detection rate (CRSDR), including all SSLs and traditional serrated adenoma, hyperplastic polyps (HPs) >10 mm anywhere in the colon or HPs > 5 mm proximal to the sigmoid. Results The overall mean ADR was 21.78% (standard deviation [SD] 9.27), SDR 21.08% (SD 11.44), SPADR 2.19% (SD 2.49), and CRSDR was 3.81% (3.40). Significant correlations were found between the ADR and the SDR, SPADR, SSLDR, and CRSDR (rho=0.73 vs. rho=0.51 vs. rho=0.51 vs. rho=0.63; all P <0.001). Endoscopists with a mean ADR ≥25% had significantly higher SDR, SPADR, and CRSDR than endoscopists with a mean ADR <25% (all P <0.001; Mann-Whitney U-Test). Conclusions This study shows that endoscopists with higher ADR detect significantly more serrated lesions than those with a lower ADR.

Detection of high-risk polyps at screening colonoscopy indicates risk for liver and biliary cancer death.

BACKGROUND: Hepatobiliary cancers share risk factors with colorectal cancer (CRC), but there are no combined screening programs for these conditions. AIMS: The aim of this study was to assess whether patients with high-risk colonic polyps are more likely to die from liver related tumors than patients with a negative colonoscopy. METHODS: In this retrospective analysis of mortality data, Austrian screening participants were included. The absolute risk for hepatobiliary cancer death was calculated using the cumulative incidence method. We aimed to identify an association with time to death of hepatobiliary cancer by Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: 343,838 colonoscopies performed between 01/2007 and 12/2020 were included in the analysis, of which 17,678 (5.14%) revealed high-risk polyps. Overall hepatobiliary cancer mortality was more than twice as high in patients with high risk polyps (cumulative incidence 0.39%, 95% CI 0.37-0.41%) compared to patients with a negative colonoscopy (cumulative incidence 0.17%, 95% CI 0.17-0.17%). When adjusting for age and sex, having high-risk polyps at screening colonoscopy was significantly associated with hepatobiliary cancer death (HR 1.83, 95% CI 1.29- 2.59, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with certain colonic polyp characteristics are at increased risk for mortality of liver malignancies. Further studies are needed to determine whether a structured additional screening for liver diseases and consecutive malignancies might be beneficial in these patients.

Polyp characteristics at screening colonoscopy and post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer mortality: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Polyp size and high-grade dysplasia in polyps at screening colonoscopy are considered risk factors for post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC) development and death, which might be averted by surveillance colonoscopy. However, robust evidence backing these risk factors is lacking. We aimed to investigate whether polyp size or dysplasia grade is associated with PCCRC mortality. METHODS: This was a retrospective study including individuals of the Austrian Quality Certificate for Screening Colonoscopy who underwent a colonoscopy between January 2007 and December 2020. We investigated the association of polyp size and dysplasia in polyps with PCCRC mortality according to Cox regression analysis. In addition, whether patients with certain polyp characteristics had similar risk for CRC death compared with the Austrian population was assessed by calculating standardized mortality ratios (SMRs). RESULTS: A total of 316,001 individuals were included. After a median follow-up time of 5.27 years (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.25-5.29), a significant association of polyps 10 to 20 mm (hazard ratio, 4.00; 95% CI, 2.46-6.50; P < .001) as well as high-grade dysplasia (hazard ratio, 6.61; 95% CI, 3.31-13.2; P < .001) with PCCRC death was observed. PCCRC mortality was significantly lower than the expected CRC mortality in the general population in patients with polyps <10 mm and without high-grade dysplasia (SMR, .27; 95% CI, .21-.33; P < .001), which was not observed for patients with polyps ≥10 mm or with high-grade dysplasia (SMR, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.64-2.57; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Polyp size ≥10 mm and high-grade dysplasia are associated with PCCRC mortality in screening patients. The data suggest that these patients might benefit most from surveillance colonoscopy.

Comparison of adenoma detection rate and proximal serrated polyp detection rate and their effect on post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer mortality in screening patients.

BACKGROUND: Patients with serrated polyps are at increased risk for post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC); however, evidence for a dedicated serrated polyp detection rate is lacking. The aim of this study was to investigate the association of the proximal serrated polyp detection rate (PSDR) and adenoma detection rate (ADR) with PCCRC death. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis within the Austrian quality assurance program for screening colonoscopy. Spearman's rank coefficient was calculated for the assessment of association between ADR and PSDR. Whether ADR or PSDR were associated with colorectal cancer mortality was assessed by Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: 229/729 screening colonoscopies performed by 308 endoscopists were analyzed. The ADR (hazard ratio [HR] per 1 percentage point increase 0.98, 95 %CI 0.96-0.99) as well as the PSDR (HR per 1 percentage point increase 0.97, 95 %CI 0.94-0.99) were significantly associated with PCCRC death. The correlation coefficient of the ADR and PSDR calculated at every colonoscopy was 0.70 (95 %CI 0.70-0.71), and the corresponding PSDR value for an ADR performance standard of 25 % was 11.1 %. At the end of the study period, 86 endoscopists (27.9 %) reached an ADR of > 25 % and a PSDR of > 11.1 %. CONCLUSIONS: The ADR as well as the PSDR were associated with PCCRC death. Striving for a high PSDR in addition to a high ADR might reduce the risk for PCCRC mortality in patients undergoing screening colonoscopy.

Impact of restrictions due to COVID-19 on a quality-assured screening colonoscopy program.

Background and study aims On February 25, 2020, the first patient was diagnosed with COVID-19 in Austria. On March 16, 2020, the Austrian government imposed restrictions and subsequently the Austrian Medical Association recommended minimizing screening examinations in compliance with government restrictions. The aims of this study were to evaluate the impact of this recommendation on the number of colonoscopies performed weekly and detection of non-advanced adenomas, advanced adenomas (AA) and colorectal cancer (CRC) and to calculate how many undetected adenomas could have developed into CRC. Methods We analyzed the number of colonoscopies and pathological findings within a quality assured national colorectal cancer screening program before the COVID-19 pandemic (March 1, t 2019 to September 1, 2019, Period 1) and compared those rates to months during which access to colonoscopy was limited (March 1, 2020 and September 1, 2020, Period 2) with a Wilcoxon-rank-test and a chi-square test. Results A total of 29,199 screening colonoscopies were performed during Period 1 and 24,010 during Period 2. The mean rate of colonoscopies per week during Period 1 was significantly higher than during Period 2 (808,35 [SD = 163,75] versus 594,50 [SD = 282,24], P  = 0.005). A total of 4,498 non-advanced adenomas were detected during Period 1 versus 3,562 during Period 2 ( P  < 0.001). In total 1,317 AAs and 140 CRCs were detected during Period 1 versus 919 AAs and 106 CRCs during Period 2. These rates did not differ significantly ( P  = 0.2 and P  = 0.9). Conclusions During the COVID-19 crisis, the number of colonoscopies performed per week was significantly lower compared to the year before, but there was no difference in the detection of CRCs and AAs.

Impact of adenoma detection rate on detection of advanced adenomas and endoscopic adverse events in a study of over 200,000 screening colonoscopies.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is the best established quality parameter for screening colonoscopy. Guidelines recommend a target ADR >25% because previous studies have shown that patients of endoscopists with higher ADRs have a lower risk of postcolonoscopy interval cancers. However, studies have shown that improvement in ADR mainly results in increased detection of clinically irrelevant nonadvanced adenomas (NAAs). The impact of ADR on the detection of advanced adenomas (AAs) as well as adverse event rates has yet to be determined. METHODS: A total of 218,193 screening colonoscopies performed between 2007 and 2010 by 262 endoscopists within the Austrian quality assurance program were analyzed. We divided endoscopists into quintiles based on ADRs and calculated mean advanced ADRs (AADRs), NAA detection rates (NAADRs), and adverse event rates for each quintile. Spearman rank-order was used to calculate overall correlations between ADRs and AADRs as well as adverse event rates. Endoscopists with an ADR <25% were compared with those with an ADR >25%. RESULTS: Fifty-one percent of patients were women. Mean ADR was 23.03% (95% confidence interval [CI], 21.93-24.13), AADRs 7.72% (95% CI, 7.19-8.25), and NAADRs 15.31% (95% CI, 14.36-16.27). Overall, there was a significant correlation between ADR and AADR (rho = .51; P < .001). When ADR was divided into quintiles, mean AADR increased with increasing ADR. Even in the highest ADR group (ADR, 31.36%-52.27%) there was a further increase in AADR with a mean of 10.75% (95% CI, 9.31-12.19). Importantly, NAADRs increased continuously with improvement in ADRs but never dissociated from a simultaneous improvement in AADRs. However, there was also a significant correlation of ADRs and endoscopic adverse events (rho = .26, P < .001), even if the perforation rate of .028% (95% CI, .004-.052) in the highest ADR group still remained within the accepted limits based on guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing ADR is associated with improved detection of AAs and therefore is likely to prevent more cases of colorectal cancer. However, higher ADR was also associated with a higher rate of adverse events, although the adverse event rate was low.