The relationship between systemic inflammatory response, screen detection and outcome in colorectal cancer.

AIM: A raised systemic inflammatory response correlates with poorer colorectal cancer (CRC) outcomes. Faecal immunochemical test bowel screening aims to detect early-stage disease. We assessed the relationship between systemic inflammatory response, screen detection and CRC survival. METHOD: A retrospective, observational cohort study compared screen-detected and non-screen-detected CRC patients undergoing resection. Systemic inflammatory response was measured using lymphocyte/monocyte, neutrophil/lymphocyte and platelet/lymphocyte ratios (LMR, NLR, PLR). Covariables were compared using χ2 testing and survival with Cox regression. RESULTS: A total of 761 patients were included (326 screen-detected, 435 non-screen-detected). Screen-detected patients had lower systemic inflammatory response: low (<2.4) LMR (28.8% vs. 44.6%; P < 0.001), moderate (3-5) or high (>5) NLR (26.1% vs. 30.6%, P < 0.001; and 7.7% vs. 19.5%, P < 0.001) and high (>150) PLR (47.2% vs. 64.6%; P < 0.001). Median follow-up was 63 months. On univariate analysis, non-screen detection (hazard ratio [HR] 2.346, 95% CI 1.687-3.261; P < 0.001), advanced TNM (P < 0.001), low LMR (HR 2.038, 95% CI 1.514-2.742; P < 0.001), moderate NLR (HR 1.588, 95% CI 1.128-2.235; P = 0.008), high NLR (HR 2.382, 95% CI 1.626-3.491; P < 0.001) and high PLR (HR 1.827, 95% CI 1.326-2.519; P < 0.001) predicted poorer overall survival (OS). Non-screen detection (HR 2.713, 95% CI 1.742-4.226; P < 0.001), TNM (P < 0.001), low LMR (HR 1.969, 95% CI 1.340-2.893; P < 0.001), high NLR (HR 2.368, 95% CI 1.448-3.875; P < 0.001) and high PLR (HR 2.110, 95% CI 1.374-3.240; P < 0.001) predicted poorer cancer-specific survival (CSS). On multivariate analysis, non-screen detection (HR 1.698, 95% CI 1.152-2.503; P = 0.008) and low LMR (HR 1.610, 95% CI 1.158-2.238; P = 0.005) independently predicted poorer OS. Non-screen detection (HR 1.847, 95% CI 1.144-2.983; P = 0.012) and high PLR (HR 1.578, 95% CI 1.018-2.444; P = 0.041) predicted poorer CSS. CONCLUSION: Screen-detected CRC patients have a lower systemic inflammatory response. Non-screen detection and systemic inflammatory response (measured by LMR and PLR respectively) were independent predictors of poorer OS and CSS.

Management of malignant T1 colorectal cancer polyps: results from a 10-year prospective observational study.

AIM: The recurrence risk associated with residual malignant cells (bowel wall/regional nodes) following T1 colorectal cancer (CRC) polypectomy must be weighed against operative morbidity. Our aim was to describe the management and outcomes of a large prospective cohort of T1 CRCs. METHOD: All T1 CRCs diagnosed between March 2007 and March 2017 at the Glasgow Royal Infirmary were included. Patients were grouped by polypectomy, rectal local excision and formal resection status. χ2 testing, multivariate binary logistic and Cox regression were performed. RESULTS: Of 236 patients, 90 (38.1%) underwent polypectomy only, six (2.6%) polypectomy and then rectal excision, 57 (24.2%) polypectomy and then resection, 14 (5.9%) rectal excision only and 69 (29.2%) primary resection. Polypectomy only correlated with male sex (P = 0.028), older age (P < 0.001), distal CRCs (P < 0.001) and pedunculated polyps (P < 0.001); primary resection with larger polyps (P < 0.001); polypectomy then resection with piecemeal excision (P = 0.002) and involved polypectomy margin (P < 0.001). Poor differentiation (OR 7.860, 95% CI 1.117-55.328; P = 0.038) independently predicted lymph node involvement. Submucosal venous invasion (hazard ratio [HR] 10.154, 95% CI 2.087-49.396; P = 0.004) and mucinous subtype (HR 7.779, 95% CI 1.566-38.625; P = 0.012) independently predicted recurrence. Submucosal venous invasion (HR 5.792, 95% CI 1.056-31.754; P = 0.043) predicted CRC-specific survival. Although 64.4% of polypectomy-only patients had margin involvement/other risk factors, none developed recurrence. Of 94 with polypectomy margin involvement, five (5.3%) had confirmed residual tumour. Overall, lymph node metastases (7.1%), recurrence (4.2%) and cancer-specific mortality (3.0%) were rare. Cancer-specific 5-year survival was high: polypectomy only (100%), polypectomy and then resection (98.2%), primary resection (100%). CONCLUSION: Surveillance may be safe for more T1 CRC polyp patients. Multidisciplinary team discussion and informed patient choice are critical.

Risk stratification for the detection of metachronous polyps after bowel screening polypectomy: clinical outcomes from the Integrated Technologies for Improved Polyp Surveillance (INCISE) study cohort.

BACKGROUND: After colorectal polypectomy, 20-50 per cent of patients develop metachronous polyps and some have increased colorectal cancer risk. British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) 2020 guidelines recommend surveillance colonoscopy for high-risk patients based on index pathology. The aim of this study was to evaluate metachronous lesion outcome using BSG 2020 criteria. METHODS: A retrospective, multicentred study was conducted including patients who had polypectomy during screening colonoscopy (2009-2016) followed by surveillance. Demographics, index pathology, and BSG 2020 risk criteria were compared with regard to metachronous lesion pathology (non-advanced versus advanced lesions) and timing of detection (early versus late). Advanced lesions were defined as adenomas/serrated polyps greater than or equal to 10 mm, high-grade dysplasia, serrated polyps with dysplasia, or colorectal cancer, and late lesions those detected greater than 2 years after the index procedure. RESULTS: Of 3090 eligible patients, 2643 were included. Among these, retrospective BSG 2020 application would have excluded 51.5 per cent from surveillance. After a median of 36 months, the advanced polyp/colorectal cancer rate in BSG 2020 high-risk patients was 16.3 versus 13.0 per cent in low-risk patients. Older age (P = 0.008) correlated with advanced metachronous lesions. Male sex, greater than five polyps, and BSG 2020 high-risk criteria correlated with non-advanced and advanced lesions (P < 0.001). Older age (P < 0.001), villous features (P = 0.006), advanced index polyp (P = 0.020), and greater than five polyps (P < 0.001) correlated with early metachronous lesions. Male sex and BSG 2020 high-risk criteria correlated with early and late lesions (P < 0.001). On multivariable regression, increased polyp number (odds ratio (OR) 1.15 (95 per cent c.i. 1.07 to 1.25); P < 0.001) and villous features (OR 1.49 (95 per cent c.i. 1.05 to 2.10); P = 0.025) independently correlated with early advanced lesions. The rate of non-advanced and advanced metachronous polyps was higher in BSG 2020 high- versus low-risk patients (44.4 versus 35.4 per cent for non-advanced and 15.7 versus 11.8 per cent for advanced; P < 0.001), but the colorectal cancer rate was similar (0.6 versus 1.2 per cent). However, when examining only lesions detected greater than 2 years after the index colonoscopy in high- versus low-risk patients, no significant differences were observed (P = 0.140). CONCLUSION: BSG 2020 criteria correlated with metachronous polyps, but did not differentiate advanced and non-advanced lesions and were not predictive of late lesions.

Prevalence of repeat faecal immunochemical testing in symptomatic patients attending primary care.

AIM: The faecal immunochemical test (FIT) for faecal haemoglobin (f-Hb) helps determine the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) and has been integrated into symptomatic referral pathways. 'Safety netting' advice includes considering referral for persistent symptoms, but no published data exists on repeated FITs. We aimed to examine the prevalence of serial FITs in primary care and CRC risk in these patients. METHOD: A multicentre, retrospective, observational study was conducted of patients with two or more consecutive f-Hb results within a year from three Scottish Health Boards which utilize FIT in primary care. Cancer registry data ensured identification of CRC cases. RESULTS: Overall, 135 396 FIT results were reviewed, of which 12 359 were serial results reported within 12 months (9.1%), derived from 5761 patients. Of these, 42 (0.7%) were diagnosed with CRC. A total of 3487 (60.5%) patients had two f-Hb < 10 µg/g, 944 (16.4%) had f-Hb ≥ 10 µg/g followed by <10 µg/g, 704 (12.2%) f-Hb < 10 µg/g followed by ≥10 µg/g and 626 (10.9%) had two f-Hb ≥ 10 µg/g. The CRC rate in each group was 0.1%, 0.4%, 1.4% and 4.0%, respectively. Seven hundred and thirty four patients submitted more than two FITs within a year. The likelihood of one or more f-Hb ≥ 10 µg/g rose from 40.4% with two samples to 100% with six, while the CRC rate fell from 0.8% to 0%. CONCLUSION: Serial FITs within a year account for 9.1% of all results in our Boards. CRC prevalence amongst symptomatic patients with serial FIT is lower than in single-FIT cohorts. Performing two FITs within a year for patients with persistent symptoms effectively acts as a safety net, while performing more than two within this timeframe is unlikely to be beneficial.

Alternative diagnoses and demographics associated with a raised quantitative faecal immunochemical test in symptomatic patients.

BACKGROUND: The faecal immunochemical test (FIT) has proven utility for colorectal cancer detection in symptomatic patients. However, most patients with a raised faecal haemoglobin (f-Hb) do not have colorectal cancer. We investigated alternative diagnoses and demographics associated with a raised f-Hb in symptomatic patients. METHODS: A retrospective, observational study was performed of patients with FIT submitted between August 2018 to January 2019 in NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde followed by colonoscopy. Colonoscopy/pathology reports were searched for alternative diagnoses. Covariables were compared using the χ2 test. Multivariate binary logistic regression identified independent predictors of a raised f-Hb. RESULTS: 1272 patients were included. In addition to colorectal cancer (odds ratio (OR), 9.27 (95% confidence interval (CI): 3.61-23.83; p < 0.001)), older age (OR, 1.52 (95% CI: 1.00-2.32; p = 0.05)), deprivation (OR, 1.54 (95% CI: 1.21-1.94; p < 0.001)), oral anticoagulants (OR, 1.78 (95% CI: 1.01-3.15; p = 0.046)), rectal bleeding (OR, 1.47 (95% CI: 1.15-1.88; p = 0.002)), advanced adenoma (OR, 7.52 (95% CI: 3.90-14.49; p < 0.001)), non-advanced polyps (OR, 1.78 (95% CI: 1.33-2.38; p < 0.001)) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) (OR, 4.19 (95% CI: 2.17-8.07; p < 0.001)) independently predicted raised f-Hb. Deprivation (Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD) 1-2: OR, 2.13 (95% CI: 1.38-3.29; p = 0.001)) independently predicted a raised f-Hb in patients with no pathology found at colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: An elevated f-Hb is independently associated with older age, deprivation, anticoagulants, rectal bleeding, advanced adenoma, non-advanced polyps and IBD in symptomatic patients. Deprivation is associated with a raised f-Hb in the absence of pathology. This must be considered when utilising FIT in symptomatic patients.

Combining the quantitative faecal immunochemical test and full blood count reliably rules out colorectal cancer in a symptomatic patient referral pathway.

PURPOSE: Faecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) has proven utility for Colorectal Cancer (CRC) detection in symptomatic patients. Most studies have examined FIT in symptomatic patients subsequently referred from primary care. We investigated associations between CRC and FIT in both referred and non-referred symptomatic patients. METHODS: A retrospective, observational study of all patients with a FIT submitted Aug 2018 to Jan 2019 in NHS GG&C was performed. Referral to colorectal/gastroenterology and decision to perform colonoscopy were recorded. FIT results were grouped as f-Hb < 10/10-149/150-399/ ≥ 400 µg/g. The MCN cancer registry identified new cases of CRC. Covariables were compared using the χ2 test. Multivariate binary logistic regression identified independent predictors of CRC. RESULTS: A total of 4968 patients were included. Raised FIT correlated with decision to refer (p < 0.001) and scope (p < 0.001). With 23-month median follow-up, 61 patients were diagnosed with CRC. These patients were older (median 69 vs 59 years, cancer and no cancer respectively, p = 0.001), more likely to be male (55.7% vs 42.1%, p = 0.033), and to report rectal bleeding (51.7% vs 36.1%, p = 0.013). FIT (< 10 µg/g 8.2% vs 76.7% and ≥ 400 µg/g 55.7% vs 3.8%, p < 0.001) and anaemia (45.9% vs 19.7%, p < 0.001) were associated with CRC. On multivariate analysis, age (p = 0.023), male sex (p = 0.04), FIT (≥ 400 OR 54.256 (95% CI:20.683-142.325; p < 0.001)), and anaemia (OR 1.956 (1.071-3.574; p = 0.029)) independently predicted CRC. One patient (0.04%) with a negative FIT and normal haemoglobin had CRC. CONCLUSION: GP referral and secondary care investigation patterns were influenced by FIT. The combination of normal Hb and f-Hb excluded CRC in 99.96% of cases, providing excellent reassurance to those prioritising access to endoscopy services.

Novel Methods of Risk Stratifying Patients for Metachronous, Pre-Malignant Colorectal Polyps: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: Despite conventional measures of future polyp risk (histology, dysplasia, size, number), surveillance places a burden on patients and colonoscopy services. We aimed to review novel risk stratification techniques. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed for studies using genomics, transcriptomics, IHC or microbiome as markers of metachronous polyp risk. RESULTS: 4165 papers underwent title, 303 abstract and 215 full paper review. 25 papers were included. 49 mutations/ SNPs/ haplotypes in 23 genes/ chromosomal regions (KRAS, APC, EGFR, COX1/2, IL23R, DRD2, CYP2C9/24A1/7A1, UGT1A6, ODC, ALOX12/15, PGDH, SRC, IGSF5, KCNS3, EPHB1/ KY, FAM188b, 3p24.1, 9q33.2, 13q33.2) correlated with metachronous adenoma / advanced adenoma risk. Expression levels of 6 proteins correlated with metachronous adenoma (p53, ß-catenin, COX2, Adnab-9, ALDH1A1) or sessile serrated polyp (ANXA10) risk. CONCLUSION: Although genomic and IHC markers correlated with metachronous polyp risk, it seems likely that a panel of novel markers will be required to refine this risk.

The Relationship Between Co-morbidity, Screen-Detection and Outcome in Patients Undergoing Resection for Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Bowel cancer screening increases early stage disease detection and reduces cancer-specific mortality. We assessed the relationship between co-morbidity, screen-detection and survival in colorectal cancer. METHODS: A retrospective, observational cohort study compared screen-detected (SD) and non-screen-detected (NSD) patients undergoing potentially curative resection (April 2009-March 2011). Co-morbidity was quantified using ASA, Lee and Charlson Indices. Systemic inflammatory response was measured using the neutrophil lymphocyte ratio (NLR). Covariables were compared using crosstabulation and the χ2 test for linear trend. Survival was analysed using Cox Regression. RESULTS: Of 770 patients, 331 had SD- and 439 NSD-disease. A lower proportion of SD patients had a high ASA (≥3) compared to NSD (27.2% vs 37.3%; p = 0.007). There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients with a high (≥2) Lee Index (16.3% SD vs 21.9% NSD; p = 0.054) or high (≥3) Charlson Index (22.7% SD vs 26.9% NSD; p = 0.181). On univariate analysis, NSD (HR 2.182 (1.594-2.989;p < 0.001)), emergency presentation (HR 3.390 (2.401-4.788; p < 0.001)), advanced UICC-TNM (III or IV) (p < 0.001), high ASA (≥3) (HR 1.857 (1.362-2.532; p < 0.001)), high Charlson Index (≥3) (HR 1.800 (1.333-2.432; p < 0.001)) and high (≥3) NLR (HR 1.825 (1.363-2.442; p < 0.001)) were associated with poorer overall survival (OS). NSD predicted poorer cancer-specific survival (CSS) (HR 2.763 (1.776-4.298; p < 0.001)). On multivariate analysis, NSD retained significance as an independent predictor of poorer OS (HR 1.796 (1.224-2.635; p = 0.003)) and CSS (HR 1.924 (1.193-3.102; p = 0.007)). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with SD cancers have significantly lower ASA scores. After adjusting for ASA, co-morbidity and a broad range of covariables, SD patients retain significantly better OS and CSS.

Analysis of lesion localisation at colonoscopy: outcomes from a multi-centre U.K. study.

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy is currently the gold standard for detection of colorectal lesions, but may be limited in anatomically localising lesions. This audit aimed to determine the accuracy of colonoscopy lesion localisation, any subsequent changes in surgical management and any potentially influencing factors. METHODS: Patients undergoing colonoscopy prior to elective curative surgery for colorectal lesion/s were included from 8 registered U.K. sites (2012-2014). Three sets of data were recorded: patient factors (age, sex, BMI, screener vs. symptomatic, previous abdominal surgery); colonoscopy factors (caecal intubation, scope guide used, colonoscopist accreditation) and imaging modality. Lesion localisation was standardised with intra-operative location taken as the gold standard. Changes to surgical management were recorded. RESULTS: 364 cases were included; majority of lesions were colonic, solitary, malignant and in symptomatic referrals. 82% patients had their lesion/s correctly located at colonoscopy. Pre-operative CT visualised lesion/s in only 73% of cases with a reduction in screening patients (64 vs. 77%; p = 0.008). 5.2% incorrectly located cases at colonoscopy underwent altered surgical management, including conversion to open. Univariate analysis found colonoscopy accreditation, scope guide use, incomplete colonoscopy and previous abdominal surgery significantly influenced lesion localisation. On multi-variate analysis, caecal intubation and scope guide use remained significant (HR 0.35, 0.20-0.60 95% CI and 0.47; 0.25-0.88, respectively). CONCLUSION: Lesion localisation at colonoscopy is incorrect in 18% of cases leading to potentially significant surgical management alterations. As part of accreditation, colonoscopists need lesion localisation training and awareness of when inaccuracies can occur.

Improving lesion localisation at colonoscopy: an analysis of influencing factors.

PURPOSE: Colonoscopy detects colorectal cancer and determines lesion localisation that influences surgical planning. However, published work suggests that the accuracy of lesion localisation can be low as 60%, with implications for both the surgeon and the patient. This work aims to identify potential influencing factors at colonoscopy that could lead to improved lesion localisation accuracy. METHODS: A multi-centred, prospective, observational study was performed that identified patients who were undergoing planned curative resection for a colorectal lesion. Localisation of a lesion at colonoscopy was compared to the intra-operative lesion localisation to determine accuracy of colonoscopic localisation. Patient factors and colonoscopic factors were recorded to determine any influencing factors on lesion localisation at colonoscopy. RESULTS: One hundred and eleven patients were analysed: mean age 67.4 years (range 27-89); male:female ratio 1.3:1; symptomatic referrals (n = 78, 70.3%); and previous abdominal surgery in 27 patients (24.3%). Complete colonoscopy was recorded in 78 patients (70.3%). In 88 patients (79.3%), colonoscopic lesion localisation matched the intra-operative location. Pre-operative CT imaging was unable to identify the tumour in 24 cases (21.8%). Potential influencing patient and colonoscopic factors on accurate lesion localisation at colonoscopy found complete colonoscopy to be the only significant factor (p = 0.008). CONCLUSION: Colonoscopic lesion localisation was found to be inaccurate in 79.3% cases, and with pre-operative CT unable to detect all lesions, this study confirms that accurate lesion localisation in the modern era is increasingly reliant on colonoscopy. Incomplete colonoscopy was the only significant factor that influenced inaccurate lesion localisation at colonoscopy.