Evaluation of an online family history tool for identifying hereditary and familial colorectal cancer.

Identifying a hereditary colorectal cancer (CRC) syndrome or familial CRC (FCC) in a CRC patient may enable the patient and relatives to enroll in surveillance protocols. As these individuals are insufficiently recognized, we evaluated an online family history tool, consisting of a patient-administered family history questionnaire and an automated genetic referral recommendation, to facilitate the identification of patients with hereditary CRC or FCC. Between 2015 and 2016, all newly diagnosed CRC patients in five Dutch outpatient clinics, were included in a trial with a stepped-wedge design, when first visiting the clinic. Each hospital continued standard procedures for identifying patients at risk (control strategy) and then, after a predetermined period, switched to offering the family history tool to included patients (intervention strategy). After considering the tool-based recommendation, the health care provider could decide on and arrange the referral. Primary outcome was the relative number of CRC patients who received screening or surveillance recommendations for themselves or relatives because of hereditary CRC or FCC, provided by genetic counseling. The intervention effect was evaluated using a logit-linear model. With the tool, 46/489 (9.4%) patients received a screening or surveillance recommendation, compared to 35/292 (12.0%) in the control group. In the intention-to-treat-analysis, accounting for time trends and hospital effects, this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.58). A family history tool does not necessarily assist in increasing the number of CRC patients and relatives enrolled in screening or surveillance recommendations for hereditary CRC or FCC. Other interventions should be considered.

Adding family history to faecal immunochemical testing increases the detection of advanced neoplasia in a colorectal cancer screening programme.

BACKGROUND: Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening has suboptimal sensitivity for detecting advanced neoplasia. To increase its performance, FIT could be combined with other risk factors. AIM: To evaluate the incremental yield of a screening programme using a positive FIT or a CRC family history, to offer a diagnostic colonoscopy. METHODS: For this post hoc analysis, data were collected in the colonoscopy arm of a colonoscopy or colonography for screening study. In this study, 6600 randomly selected, asymptomatic men and women (50-75 years) were invited for screening colonoscopy. 1112 Participants completed a FIT and a questionnaire prior to colonoscopy. We compared the yield of FIT-only and FIT combined with CRC family history, defined as having one or more first-degree relatives with CRC. RESULTS: At a 10 µg Hb/g faeces FIT-positivity threshold the combined strategy would increase the yield from 36 (3.2%; CI: 2.4-4.5%) to 53 (4.8%; CI: 3.7-6.2%) cases of advanced neoplasia, at the expense of 148 additional negative colonoscopies. Sensitivity in detecting advanced neoplasia would increase from 36% (CI: 26-46%) to 52% (CI: 42-63%), whereas specificity would decrease from 93% (CI: 92-95%) to 79% (CI: 76-81%). The strategy will be preferred if one accepts 8.8 false positives for every additional participant in whom advanced neoplasia can be detected. CONCLUSIONS: Offering colonoscopy to those with a positive FIT or CRC family history increases the yield of a FIT-based screening programme. Depending on the number of negative colonoscopies one accepts, this combined approach can be considered for improving CRC screening.

Validation of an online questionnaire for identifying people at risk of familial and hereditary colorectal cancer.

We developed and validated an online questionnaire to document familial cancer history, in order to facilitate the detection of persons with a familial or hereditary colorectal cancer (CRC) risk. The development of the self-administered online questionnaire for the assessment of familial and hereditary CRC risk was based on nationwide criteria for referral to genetic specialists due to a Lynch syndrome suspicion, as well as existing criteria for surveillance colonoscopies because of an increased risk of familial CRC. The questionnaire was validated at a private colonoscopy center. Patients scheduled for colonoscopy were enrolled (n = 150). Performance of the questionnaire was assessed by comparing referrals based on questionnaire data against referral decisions based on full pedigree data. In a second validation phase, referrals based on questionnaire data were compared with referrals based on data collected in a telephone interview. We also calculated inter-observer agreement in referral decisions. In the first validation phase, the questionnaire had a sensitivity of 90% (95% CI 55-98%) at a specificity of 98% (95% CI 87-100%) in identifying persons qualifying for referral. In the second validation phase, sensitivity was 100% (95% CI 63-100) at a specificity of 97% (95% CI 91-99%). In both validation phases an inter-observer agreement of 100% in referral decisions was achieved. The online questionnaire has a high sensitivity and specificity in identifying persons qualifying for referral because of suspected Lynch syndrome or familial CRC. Implementation of this tool in colonoscopy clinics can facilitate the detection of patients with hereditary or familial CRC.

Long-term followup after electrocautery transurethral resection of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia.

Introduction. For decades, transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) has been the "gold standard" operation for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) but is based mainly on historic data. The historic data lacks use of validated measures and current TURP differs significantly from that performed 30 years ago. Methods. Men who had undergone TURP between 2001 and 2005 were reviewed. International prostate symptom score (IPSS), quality of life (QOL) and peak urinary flow rate (Q(max⁡)), and postvoid residual (PVR) were recorded. Operative details and postoperative complications were documented. Patients were then invited to attend for repeat assessment. Results. 91 patients participated. Mean follow-up time was 70 months. Mean follow-up results were IPSS-7; QoL-1.5; Q(max⁡)-23 mL/s; PVR-45 mL. These were an improvement from baseline of 67%, 63%, 187%, and 80%, respectively. Early complication rates were low, with no blood transfusions, TUR syndrome, or deaths occurring. Urethral stricture rate was higher than anticipated at 14%. Conclusion. This study shows modern TURP still produces durable improvement in voiding symptoms which remains comparable with historic studies. This study, however, found a marked drop in early complications but, conversely, a higher than expected incidence of urethral strictures.

Giant-cell carcinoma of the lung. Clinical and pathological assessment. Comparison with other large-cell anaplastic bronchogenic carcinomas.

Fewer than 40 cases of giant-cell carcinoma of the lung have been described in the world literature. Fourteen new cases are now presented. This is a special type of large-cell anaplastic carcinoma characterized by tumour giant cells with one or more nuclei and by a very pleomorphic appearance. A number of previous authors have emphasized the following special features of this type of tumour. Occurrence in a younger age group, a more rapid course from initial symptoms until death, more extensive metastasization, and a more peripheral location of the primary tumour than in other large-cell anaplastic carcinomas. It has also been stated that the tumour differs from other large-cell anaplastic carcinomas in its shorter duration (average 4 1/2 months) and more peripheral distribution (c/p ratio 1:2.2). In the present material only the survival period was significantly shorter (average 7 months), while in other respects the tumour did not differ from other large-cell anaplastic carcinomas.