Incidence of Colorectal Cancer and Extracolonic Cancers in Veteran Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

Background: The risk for colorectal cancer (CRC) and certain extracolonic cancers is thought to be increased in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), but few recent US studies have evaluated this issue. We aimed to estimate the incidence of CRC and extracolonic cancers in IBD patients. Methods: In this case-control study, cases were all IBD patients treated in our Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) hospital who developed CRC or extracolonic cancers between 1996 and 2015. Controls were patients in the general VA population who developed these cancers during the same time. We compared cancer incidence rates (IRs) in cases and controls. Results: There was no significant difference between cases and controls in the 20-year IR for CRC (148/100 000 in IBD patients, 97/100 000 in controls; relative risk [RR], 1.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.86-2.69). In contrast, IBD cases had a significantly higher 20-year IR for all extracolonic cancers than controls (2839/100 000 in IBD patients, 1960/100 000 in controls; RR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.27-1.65). Site-specific analyses revealed that IBD patients had significantly elevated risks for nonmelanoma skin cancers (RR, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.99-2.85), melanoma skin cancers (RR, 2.85; 95% CI, 1.63-4.88), renal tumors (RR, 2.90; 95% CI, 1.46-5.84), prostate cancer (RR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.28-2.27), and pancreatic cancer (RR, 4.23; 95% CI, 1.35-13.29). Conclusions: The incidence of CRC was not significantly higher in our veteran patients with IBD than in control patients in the general VA population. In contrast, our IBD patients had a significantly higher risk for extracolonic cancers than controls, including cancers of the skin, kidneys, prostate, and pancreas. 10.1093/ibd/izx046_video1Video 1.izx046_Mosher_Video5734484616001.

Bile duct brushings in a pig model: examination of intraobserver variability and variability in specimen quality obtained in sequential animals and between two different brushes.

PURPOSE: In patients with bile duct malignancy, bile duct brushing is plagued by a low yield diagnosing underlying malignancy. There are few data explaining why this is so. This porcine model was designed to examine three variables: 1) examination of inter-observer variability, 2) variability in specimen quality obtained in sequential animals, and 3) variability between two different brushes (one designed for colon with large bristles, one for duodenum with short bristles). METHODS: En bloc resection of liver, bile ducts, duodenum, and pancreas was performed on three 6-mo-old crossbred pigs at the time of commercial slaughter. In each pig, one common hepatic duct and one common bile duct brushing, all performed by the same investigator, were done. Ten identical vigorous passes were done with each brush (long bristle or short bristle) on virgin epithelium. Specimens were graded for cellularity by three cytopathologists who were blinded to the site or brush size. Interobserver variability as well as variability among sequential animals and between the two different brushes was compared. RESULTS: Interobserver variability among the three cytologists was almost nil. Cellularity obtained using the short brush alone varied from unsatisfactory to high. Cellularity obtained using the long brush alone varied from unsatisfactory to moderate. Variability of cells obtained from one pig to the next ranged from unsatisfactory to high. CONCLUSIONS: 1) While interobserver variability was very low, variability in cellularity obtained from one pig to the next, and from one brush to the next, was very high. This sampling variability may partially explain the low yield in malignant cells in human malignant biliary brushing. Multiple brushings in one patient may alleviate part of this problem. 2) There was no advantage to either brush type (large bristle or small bristle).

Dysphagia in a patient with a history of large B-cell lymphoma: esophageal disease with negative biopsy findings.

A patient with a previous diagnosis of lymphoma showed signs of dysphagia. Endoscopy found a lesion of the esophagus. Brush cytology and biopsy sampling were accomplished. The biopsy showed inflammation and granulation tissue but no tumor. The cytology specimen, however, was diagnostic of lymphoma. This case emphasizes the need for obtaining cytologic specimens concurrently with biopsies of esophageal lesions.