Significant decrease in interval colorectal cancer incidence after implementing immunochemical testing in a multiple-round guaiac-based screening programme.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: We aimed to evaluate the effects of switching to faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) on the cumulative 2-year incidence rate of interval cancers, interval cancer rate and test sensitivity within a mature population-based colorectal cancer screening programme consisting of six rounds of biennial guaiac faecal occult blood testing (gFOBT). METHODS: The FIT results were compared with those of gFOBT used in each of the previous two rounds. For the three rounds analysed, 279,041 tests were performed by 156,186 individuals. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine interval cancer risk factors (Poisson regression) and to compare the sensitivity of FIT to gFOBT. RESULTS: There were 612 cases of screen-detected cancers and 209 cases of interval cancers. The sex- and age-adjusted cumulative 2-year incidence rates of interval cancers were 55.7 (95% CI, 45.3-68.5), 42.4 (95% CI, 32.6-55.2) and 15.8 (95% CI, 10.9-22.8) per 100,000 person-years after the last two rounds of gFOBT and FIT, respectively. The FIT/gFOBT incidence rate ratio was 0.38 [95% CI, 0.27-0.54] (P < 0.001). Sex- and age-adjusted sensitivity was significantly higher with FIT than with gFOBT (OR = 6.70 [95% CI, 4.48-10.01], P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: This population-based study revealed a dramatic decrease in the cumulative incidence rates of interval cancers after switching from gFOBT to FIT. These data provide an additional incentive for countries still using gFOBT to switch to FIT.

Solitary rectal ulcer syndrome in 102 patients: Do different phenotypes make sense?

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the pathophysiological mechanisms of solitary rectal ulcer syndrome (SRUS). AIMS: We aim to identify the different phenotypes, taking into account complaints, anatomy and anorectal physiology. METHODS: Complaints, endoscopy results, and physiology data of patients with histologically proven SRUS were collected and analysed. The associated anorectal diseases were faecal incontinence and obstructed defecation. The clinical aspects of SRUS were compared, and factors associated with anorectal diseases were identified. RESULTS: Overall, 102 consecutive patients were included. The predominant lesion was a rectal ulcer (66%), and inflammation of the rectal wall was present in 42% of patients. Abnormal rectal capacities and/or rectal perception was observed in more than half. Nearly half (52%) of the patients met the criteria for obstructed defecation and they tended to more frequently have psychiatric disease (66.7% vs 33.3%; p=0.07). Patients with faecal incontinence (17%) reported more self-perception of anal procidentia (p=0.01) and were more likely to have inflammation of the rectal wall (p=0.02), high-grade internal rectal procidentia (p=0.06) and anal hypotonia (p=0.004); their maximum tolerable volume was lower (p=0.004). CONCLUSION: The characteristics of patients with SRUS suggest different phenotypes. This may be a way to develop a comprehensive treatment strategy.

Improving the screening of precancerous anal lesions in high-risk subjects with normal cytology: A longitudinal cohort study using simple tests.

For patients at high risk of anal cancer, annual screening strategies using invasive evaluation methods are stressful. According to a normal examination at baseline using simple and non invasive tests, the aim of the work was to quantify neoplastic events. PATIENTS AND METHOD: Data from patients with a normal evaluation at the first visit were retrospectively extracted from a prospective database. The individual follow-up period was at least two years and three evaluations. Patients with abnormal cytology were assessed using high-resolution anoscopy and targeted biopsies. RESULTS: A total of 182 subjects (F/M: 10/90, aged 48.1(10.6) years, HIV: 81%) were followed for 41(11) months. Anal cytology remained normal in 94 patients (52%), but high-grade anal neoplasms occurred in 28 patients (15%). Patients with a negative HPV16 status at baseline had cumulative probabilities of high-grade AIN of 0.4%(0.1%-1.9%), 2.6%(1.2%-5.9%) and 7.5%(4.5%-12.2%) after 1 year, 2 years and 3 years of follow-up, respectively. These probabilities were lower than those of patients with a positive HPV16 at baseline and those with a previous history of AIN. CONCLUSION: In patients with normal cytology and negative HPV16 at baseline, a three-year interval screening may be a less cumbersome alternative to traditional annual screening.