Outcomes following duodenectomy in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis.

Background and study aims Some patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) and extensive duodenal polyposis or cancer require total duodenectomy. Regular postoperative endoscopic surveillance of the remaining jejunum and stomach is recommended, but little is known about the outcomes after this surgery. Patients and methods Patients with FAP who underwent either pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) or pancreas-preserving total duodenectomy (PPTD) were identified at two expert centers. Data about postoperative endoscopic surveillance outcomes were collected, as well as survival outcomes. Results Overall, 119 patients (50% female) underwent duodenectomy (86 PD and 33 PPTD); 100 for benign duodenal polyposis and 19 for duodenal or ampullary cancer. Details of postoperative endoscopic surveillance were available for 88 patients (74%). During a median follow-up of 106 months, 36 patients (41%) were diagnosed with jejunal adenomas after duodenectomy, with a significantly higher proportion in patients who underwent PPTD compared with patients who underwent PD (log-rank, P < 0.01). Two patients developed jejunal cancer (2%). Twenty-six patients (30%) were diagnosed with a total of 66 gastric adenomas, of which 61% were located in the fundus/body and 39% in the antrum. Five patients (6%) developed gastric cancer after a median of 15 years (range 6-23 years), all but one within carpeting fundic gland polyposis. Patients who underwent surgery for cancer had worse survival than patients with benign disease and all but one patient with postoperative gastric/jejunal cancer died. Conclusions After duodenectomy in FAP, a considerable risk of developing adenomas and cancer in the stomach and jejunum exists with poor cancer prognosis, highlighting the need for close postoperative endoscopic surveillance.

Computer-Aided Diagnosis for Leaving Colorectal Polyps In Situ : A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) allows prediction of polyp histology during colonoscopy, which may reduce unnecessary removal of nonneoplastic polyps. However, the potential benefits and harms of CADx are still unclear. PURPOSE: To quantify the benefit and harm of using CADx in colonoscopy for the optical diagnosis of small (≤5-mm) rectosigmoid polyps. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, and Scopus were searched for articles published before 22 December 2023. STUDY SELECTION: Histologically verified diagnostic accuracy studies that evaluated the real-time performance of physicians in predicting neoplastic change of small rectosigmoid polyps without or with CADx assistance during colonoscopy. DATA EXTRACTION: The clinical benefit and harm were estimated on the basis of accuracy values of the endoscopist before and after CADx assistance. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) framework. The outcome measure for benefit was the proportion of polyps predicted to be nonneoplastic that would avoid removal with the use of CADx. The outcome measure for harm was the proportion of neoplastic polyps that would be not resected and left in situ due to an incorrect diagnosis with the use of CADx. Histology served as the reference standard for both outcomes. DATA SYNTHESIS: Ten studies, including 3620 patients with 4103 small rectosigmoid polyps, were analyzed. The studies that assessed the performance of CADx alone (9 studies; 3237 polyps) showed a sensitivity of 87.3% (95% CI, 79.2% to 92.5%) and specificity of 88.9% (CI, 81.7% to 93.5%) in predicting neoplastic change. In the studies that compared histology prediction performance before versus after CADx assistance (4 studies; 2503 polyps), there was no difference in the proportion of polyps predicted to be nonneoplastic that would avoid removal (55.4% vs. 58.4%; risk ratio [RR], 1.06 [CI, 0.96 to 1.17]; moderate-certainty evidence) or in the proportion of neoplastic polyps that would be erroneously left in situ (8.2% vs. 7.5%; RR, 0.95 [CI, 0.69 to 1.33]; moderate-certainty evidence). LIMITATION: The application of optical diagnosis was only simulated, potentially altering the decision-making process of the operator. CONCLUSION: Computer-aided diagnosis provided no incremental benefit or harm in the management of small rectosigmoid polyps during colonoscopy. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: European Commission. (PROSPERO: CRD42023402197).

Risk of Cancers Proximal to the Colon in Fecal Immunochemical Test Positive Screenees in a Colorectal Cancer Screening Program.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: In more than half of the colorectal cancer screening participants with a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) result, no advanced neoplasia (AN) is detected at colonoscopy. The positive FIT result could also be generated by cancers located proximal to the colon: upper gastrointestinal, oral cavity, nose, and throat cancers. We evaluated screenees' risk of being diagnosed with a cancer proximal to the colon within the 3 years and compared risks between those with a positive vs those with a negative FIT. METHODS: Data of Dutch colorectal cancer screening participants who underwent biennial FIT-based screening 2014-2018 were collected from the national screening database and linked to the National Cancer Registry. Screenees were classified into 3 groups: FIT-positives with AN (FIT+/AN+), FIT-positives without AN (FIT+/AN-), and FIT-negatives (FIT-). We compared the cumulative incidence of cancers proximal to the colon in each group 3 years after FIT. A Cox regression analysis with left truncation and right censoring, using FIT positivity as time-dependent variable and stratified for sex, was performed to compare the hazard of cancers proximal to the colon in participants who were FIT-positive vs FIT-negative. RESULTS: Three-year cumulative incidence of cancers proximal to the colon in FIT+/AN+ (n = 65,767), FIT+/AN- (n = 50,661), and FIT- (n = 1,831,647) screenees was 0.7%, 0.6%, and 0.4%, respectively (P < .001). FIT-positives were older and more frequently male than FIT-negatives (P < .001). Significantly more cancers proximal to the colon were detected among FIT-positives (P < .001; hazard ratio, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.44-1.67). CONCLUSION: FIT-positive screenees were at significantly increased risk of being diagnosed with a cancer proximal to the colon within 3 years after FIT, although the 3-year cumulative incidence was still less than 1%.

Stable hemoglobin concentration with fecal immunochemical test at high temperatures in a Caribbean colorectal cancer screening program.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: High temperatures may reduce fecal immunochemical test (FIT) positivity and colorectal cancer (CRC) detection sensitivity. We investigated the effect of temperature on hemoglobin concentration [Hb], in the FOB Gold®. Additionally, we examined FIT pick-up, storage, return times and specimen collection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In vitro experiments with buffer containing FIT devices, inoculated with Hb-spiked stool. For 7 days, 144 samples were stored in groups of 36 at 4 °C, 22 °C, 30 °C, and 50 °C. Additionally, 54 samples were stored in groups of 18 at 34 °C, 42 °C and 50 °C for 20 h. Paired t-tests and repeated measure ANOVA assessed [Hb] change. Sixty-five screening participants completed a FIT-handling questionnaire. RESULTS: After 7 days, mean [Hb] was stable at 30 °C (0.8 µg Hb/g;95 %CI: -1.5 to 3.1;p = 0.50). For 50 °C, mean [Hb] decreased within 2 days (-21.3 µg Hb/g;95 %CI: -30.2 to -12.5;p < 0.001) and after 20 h (-63.0 µg Hb/g;95 %CI: -88.7 to -37.3;p < 0.001), respectively. All other temperature categories showed significant mean [Hb] increase. Same-day FIT return was reported by 80 %. Eighty-seven percent experienced specimen collection as easy and 33 % kept the FIT refrigerated after collection. CONCLUSIONS: The FOB Gold® is suitable for CRC screening in tropical climates. Although most respondents indicated same-day sample return, we recommend avoiding FIT storage above 30 °C for longer than7 days.

Consensus statements on the current landscape of artificial intelligence applications in endoscopy, addressing roadblocks, and advancing artificial intelligence in gastroenterology.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) AI Task Force along with experts in endoscopy, technology space, regulatory authorities, and other medical subspecialties initiated a consensus process that analyzed the current literature, highlighted potential areas, and outlined the necessary research in artificial intelligence (AI) to allow a clearer understanding of AI as it pertains to endoscopy currently. METHODS: A modified Delphi process was used to develop these consensus statements. RESULTS: Statement 1: Current advances in AI allow for the development of AI-based algorithms that can be applied to endoscopy to augment endoscopist performance in detection and characterization of endoscopic lesions. Statement 2: Computer vision-based algorithms provide opportunities to redefine quality metrics in endoscopy using AI, which can be standardized and can reduce subjectivity in reporting quality metrics. Natural language processing-based algorithms can help with the data abstraction needed for reporting current quality metrics in GI endoscopy effortlessly. Statement 3: AI technologies can support smart endoscopy suites, which may help optimize workflows in the endoscopy suite, including automated documentation. Statement 4: Using AI and machine learning helps in predictive modeling, diagnosis, and prognostication. High-quality data with multidimensionality are needed for risk prediction, prognostication of specific clinical conditions, and their outcomes when using machine learning methods. Statement 5: Big data and cloud-based tools can help advance clinical research in gastroenterology. Multimodal data are key to understanding the maximal extent of the disease state and unlocking treatment options. Statement 6: Understanding how to evaluate AI algorithms in the gastroenterology literature and clinical trials is important for gastroenterologists, trainees, and researchers, and hence education efforts by GI societies are needed. Statement 7: Several challenges regarding integrating AI solutions into the clinical practice of endoscopy exist, including understanding the role of human-AI interaction. Transparency, interpretability, and explainability of AI algorithms play a key role in their clinical adoption in GI endoscopy. Developing appropriate AI governance, data procurement, and tools needed for the AI lifecycle are critical for the successful implementation of AI into clinical practice. Statement 8: For payment of AI in endoscopy, a thorough evaluation of the potential value proposition for AI systems may help guide purchasing decisions in endoscopy. Reliable cost-effectiveness studies to guide reimbursement are needed. Statement 9: Relevant clinical outcomes and performance metrics for AI in gastroenterology are currently not well defined. To improve the quality and interpretability of research in the field, steps need to be taken to define these evidence standards. Statement 10: A balanced view of AI technologies and active collaboration between the medical technology industry, computer scientists, gastroenterologists, and researchers are critical for the meaningful advancement of AI in gastroenterology. CONCLUSIONS: The consensus process led by the ASGE AI Task Force and experts from various disciplines has shed light on the potential of AI in endoscopy and gastroenterology. AI-based algorithms have shown promise in augmenting endoscopist performance, redefining quality metrics, optimizing workflows, and aiding in predictive modeling and diagnosis. However, challenges remain in evaluating AI algorithms, ensuring transparency and interpretability, addressing governance and data procurement, determining payment models, defining relevant clinical outcomes, and fostering collaboration between stakeholders. Addressing these challenges while maintaining a balanced perspective is crucial for the meaningful advancement of AI in gastroenterology.

Colorectal polypectomy and endoscopic mucosal resection: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - Update 2024.

1: ESGE recommends cold snare polypectomy (CSP), to include a clear margin of normal tissue (1-2 mm) surrounding the polyp, for the removal of diminutive polyps (≤ 5 mm).Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence. 2: ESGE recommends against the use of cold biopsy forceps excision because of its high rate of incomplete resection.Strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence. 3: ESGE recommends CSP, to include a clear margin of normal tissue (1-2 mm) surrounding the polyp, for the removal of small polyps (6-9 mm).Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence. 4: ESGE recommends hot snare polypectomy for the removal of nonpedunculated adenomatous polyps of 10-19 mm in size.Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence. 5: ESGE recommends conventional (diathermy-based) endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for large (≥ 20 mm) nonpedunculated adenomatous polyps (LNPCPs).Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence. 6: ESGE suggests that underwater EMR can be considered an alternative to conventional hot EMR for the treatment of adenomatous LNPCPs.Weak recommendation, moderate quality of evidence. 7: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) may also be suggested as an alternative for removal of LNPCPs of ≥ 20 mm in selected cases and in high-volume centers.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 8: ESGE recommends that, after piecemeal EMR of LNPCPs by hot snare, the resection margins should be treated by thermal ablation using snare-tip soft coagulation to prevent adenoma recurrence.Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence. 9: ESGE recommends (piecemeal) cold snare polypectomy or cold EMR for SSLs of all sizes without suspected dysplasia.Strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence. 10: ESGE recommends prophylactic endoscopic clip closure of the mucosal defect after EMR of LNPCPs in the right colon to reduce to reduce the risk of delayed bleeding.Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence. 11: ESGE recommends that en bloc resection techniques, such as en bloc EMR, ESD, endoscopic intermuscular dissection, endoscopic full-thickness resection, or surgery should be the techniques of choice in cases with suspected superficial invasive carcinoma, which otherwise cannot be removed en bloc by standard polypectomy or EMR.Strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence.

Microbiome confounders and quantitative profiling challenge predicted microbial targets in colorectal cancer development.

Despite substantial progress in cancer microbiome research, recognized confounders and advances in absolute microbiome quantification remain underused; this raises concerns regarding potential spurious associations. Here we study the fecal microbiota of 589 patients at different colorectal cancer (CRC) stages and compare observations with up to 15 published studies (4,439 patients and controls total). Using quantitative microbiome profiling based on 16S ribosomal RNA amplicon sequencing, combined with rigorous confounder control, we identified transit time, fecal calprotectin (intestinal inflammation) and body mass index as primary microbial covariates, superseding variance explained by CRC diagnostic groups. Well-established microbiome CRC targets, such as Fusobacterium nucleatum, did not significantly associate with CRC diagnostic groups (healthy, adenoma and carcinoma) when controlling for these covariates. In contrast, the associations of Anaerococcus vaginalis, Dialister pneumosintes, Parvimonas micra, Peptostreptococcus anaerobius, Porphyromonas asaccharolytica and Prevotella intermedia remained robust, highlighting their future target potential. Finally, control individuals (age 22-80 years, mean 57.7 years, standard deviation 11.3) meeting criteria for colonoscopy (for example, through a positive fecal immunochemical test) but without colonic lesions are enriched for the dysbiotic Bacteroides2 enterotype, emphasizing uncertainties in defining healthy controls in cancer microbiome research. Together, these results indicate the importance of quantitative microbiome profiling and covariate control for biomarker identification in CRC microbiome studies.

Polyketide synthase positive Escherichia coli one-time measurement in stool is not informative of colorectal cancer risk in a screening setting.

Environmental factors like the pathogenicity island polyketide synthase positive (pks+) Escherichia coli (E. coli) could have potential for risk stratification in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. The association between pks+ E. coli measured in fecal immunochemical test (FIT) samples and the detection of advanced neoplasia (AN) at colonoscopy was investigated. Biobanked FIT samples were analyzed for both presence of E. coli and pks+ E. coli and correlated with colonoscopy findings; 5020 CRC screening participants were included. Controls were participants in which no relevant lesion was detected because of FIT-negative results (cut-off ≥15 µg Hb/g feces), a negative colonoscopy, or a colonoscopy during which only a nonadvanced polyp was detected. Cases were participants with AN [CRC, advanced adenoma (AA), or advanced serrated polyp (ASP)]. Existing DNA isolation and quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) procedures were used for the detection of E. coli and pks+ E. coli in stool. A total of 4542 (90.2%) individuals were E. coli positive, and 1322 (26.2%) were pks+ E. coli positive. The prevalence of E. coli in FIT samples from individuals with AN was 92.9% compared to 89.7% in FIT samples of controls (p = 0.010). The prevalence of pks+ E. coli in FIT samples from individuals with AN (28.6%) and controls (25.9%) was not significantly different (p = 0.13). The prevalences of pks+ E. coli in FIT samples from individuals with CRC, AA, or ASP were 29.6%, 28.3%, and 32.1%, respectively. In conclusion, the prevalence of pks+ E. coli in a screening population was 26.2% and did not differ significantly between individuals with AN and controls. These findings disqualify the straightforward option of using a snapshot measurement of pks+ E. coli in FIT samples as a stratification biomarker for CRC risk. © 2024 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

Aberrant PRDM2 methylation as an early event in serrated lesions destined to evolve into microsatellite-instable colorectal cancers.

Up to 30% of colorectal cancers (CRCs) develop from sessile serrated lesions (SSLs). Within the serrated neoplasia pathway, at least two principally distinct oncogenetic routes exist generating microsatellite-stable and microsatellite-instable CRCs, respectively. Aberrant DNA methylation (DNAm) is found early in the serrated pathway and might play a role in both oncogenetic routes. We studied a cohort of 23 SSLs with a small focus (<10 mm) of dysplasia or cancer, 10 of which were MLH1 deficient and 13 MLH1 proficient. By comparing, for each SSL, the methylation status of (1) the region of dysplasia or cancer (SSL-D), (2) the nondysplastic SSL (SSL), and (3) adjacent normal mucosa, differentially methylated probes (DMPs) and regions (DMRs) were assessed both genome-wide as well as in a tumor-suppressor gene-focused approach. By comparing DNAm of MLH1-deficient SSL-Ds with their corresponding SSLs, we identified five DMRs, including those annotating for PRDM2 and, not unexpectedly, MLH1. PRDM2 gene promotor methylation was associated with MLH1 expression status, as it was largely hypermethylated in MLH1-deficient SSL-Ds and hypomethylated in MLH1-proficient SSL-Ds. Significantly increased DNAm levels of PRDM2 and MLH1, in particular at 'critical' MLH1 probe sites, were to some extent already visible in SSLs as compared to normal mucosa (p = 0.02, p = 0.01, p < 0.0001, respectively). No DMRs, nor DMPs, were identified for SSLs destined to evolve into MLH1-proficient SSL-Ds. Our data indicate that, within both arms of the serrated CRC pathway, the majority of the epigenetic alterations are introduced early during SSL formation. Promoter hypermethylation of PRDM2 and MLH1 on the other hand specifically initiates in SSLs destined to transform into MLH1-deficient CRCs suggesting that the fate of SSLs may not necessarily result from a stochastic process but possibly is already imprinted and predisposed.

The multitarget faecal immunochemical test for improving stool-based colorectal cancer screening programmes: a Dutch population-based, paired-design, intervention study.

BACKGROUND: The faecal immunochemical test (FIT) is widely employed for colorectal cancer screening. However, its sensitivity for advanced precursor lesions remains suboptimal. The multitarget FIT (mtFIT), measuring haemoglobin, calprotectin, and serpin family F member 2, has demonstrated enhanced sensitivity for advanced neoplasia, especially advanced adenomas, at equal specificity to FIT. This study aimed to prospectively validate and investigate the clinical utlitity of mtFIT versus FIT in a setting of population-based colorectal cancer screening. METHODS: Individuals aged 55-75 years and who were eligible for the Dutch national FIT-based colorectal cancer screening programme were invited to submit both a FIT and mtFIT sample collected from the same bowel movement. Positive FIT (47 µg/g haemoglobin cutoff) or mtFIT (based on decision-tree algorithm) led to a colonoscopy referral. The primary outcome was the relative detection rate of mtFIT versus FIT for all advanced neoplasia. Secondary outcomes were the relative detection rates of colorectal cancer, advanced adenoma, and advanced serrated polyps individually and the long-term effect of mtFIT-based versus FIT-based programmatic screening on colorectal cancer incidence, mortality, and cost, determined with microsimulation modelling. The study has been registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05314309, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between March 25 and Dec 7, 2022, 35 786 individuals were invited to participate in the study, of whom 15 283 (42·7%) consented, and 13 187 (86·3%) of 15 283 provided both mtFIT and FIT samples with valid results. Of the 13 187 participants, 6637 (50·3%) were male and 6550 (49·7%) were female. mtFIT showed a 9·11% (95% CI 8·62-9·61) positivity rate and 2·27% (95% CI 2·02-2·54) detection rate for advanced neoplasia, compared with a positivity rate of 4·08% (3·75-4·43) and a detection rate of 1·21% (1·03-1·41) for FIT. Detection rates of mtFIT versus FIT were 0·20% (95% CI 0·13-0·29) versus 0·17% (0·11-0·27) for colorectal cancer; 1·64% (1·43-1·87) versus 0·86% (0·72-1·04) for advanced adenoma, and 0·43% (0·33-0·56) versus 0·17% (0·11-0·26) for advanced serrated polyps. Modelling demonstrated that mtFIT-based screening could reduce colorectal cancer incidence by 21% and associated mortality by 18% compared with the current Dutch colorectal cancer screening programme, at feasible costs. Furthermore, at equal positivity rates, mtFIT outperformed FIT in terms of diagnostic yield. At an equally low positivity rate, mtFIT-based screening was predicted to further decrease colorectal cancer incidence by 5% and associated mortality by 4% compared with FIT-based screening. INTERPRETATION: The higher detection rate of mtFIT for advanced adenoma compared with FIT holds the potential to translate into additional and clinically meaningful long-term colorectal cancer incidence and associated mortality reductions in programmatic colorectal cancer screening. FUNDING: Stand Up to Cancer, Dutch Cancer Society, Dutch Digestive Foundation, and Health~Holland.

Gastric and duodenal cancer in individuals with Lynch syndrome: a nationwide cohort study.

Background: Lynch syndrome increases the risk of gastric cancer (GC) and duodenal cancer (DC), particularly in individuals with MLH1 and MSH2 pathogenic variants (PVs). To provide further insight into whether, and from what age, esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) surveillance may be beneficial, we evaluated the cumulative incidence and tumour characteristics of GC and DC in a large nationwide cohort of Dutch individuals with LS. Methods: For this retrospective nationwide cohort study, clinical data of individuals with LS registered at the Dutch Hereditary Cancer Registry were matched with pathology reports filed by the Dutch Pathology registry. All individuals registered between Jan 1, 1989 and Dec 31, 2021 with proven or putative PVs in one of the mismatch repair genes were included. Cumulative incidences of GC and DC were estimated for high-risk (MLH1, MSH2 and EpCAM) and low-risk (MSH6 and PMS2) PVs using competing risk methodology (Fine and Gray method) with death due to other causes as competing risk. Findings: Among 1002 individuals with high-risk and 765 individuals with low-risk PVs, 29 GCs (1.6%) and 39 DCs (2.2%) were diagnosed. Cumulative incidence of GC and DC under the age of 50 was very low (≤1%) for all individuals. At age 70 and 75, cumulative incidence of GC was 3% [95% CI 1%-5%] and 5% [3%-8%] for high-risk PVs and 1% [0%-2%] and 1% [0%-2%] for low-risk PVs (p = 0.006). For DC, cumulative incidence at age 70 and 75 was 5% [3%-7%] and 6% [3%-8%] in high-risk, 1% [0%-1%] and 2% [0%-4%] in low-risk PVs, respectively (p = 0.01). Primary tumour resection was performed in 62% (18/29) of GCs and 77% (30/39) of DC cases. Early-stage GC, defined as TNM stage I, was found in 32% (9/28) of GCs. Early-stage DC, defined as TNM stage I-IIa, was found in 39% (14/36) of DCs. Interpretation: Individuals with MLH1, MSH2, and EpCAM PVs have an increased risk of developing GC and DC at the age of 70 years, but this risk is very low before the age of 50 years. The age of onset of surveillance, the yield of GC and DC during EGD surveillance, and its cost-effectiveness should be subject of future studies. Funding: None.

Effect of an E-learning resource on endoscopists' proximal serrated polyp detection rate: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies demonstrated that a higher proximal serrated polyp detection rate (PSPDR) among endoscopists is associated with a lower risk of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC) incidence and death for their patients. Our objective was to evaluate the effect of an e-learning resource on PSPDR. METHODS: We performed a multicenter randomized controlled trial within the Dutch fecal immunochemical test-based colorectal cancer screening program. Endoscopists were randomized using block randomization per center to either receive a 60-minute e-learning resource on serrated polyp detection or not. PSPDR was calculated based on all colonoscopies performed during a 27-month pre-intervention and a 17-month post-intervention period. The primary end point was difference in PSPDR between intervention and control arms (intention to treat) using mixed effect logistic regression modeling, with time (pre-intervention/post-intervention) and interaction between time and arm (intervention/control) as fixed effects, and endoscopists as random effects. RESULTS: 116 endoscopists (57 intervention, 59 controls) were included, and performed 27494 and 33888 colonoscopies, respectively. Median PSPDR pre-intervention was 13.6% (95%CI 13.0-14.1) in the intervention arm and 13.8% (95%CI 13.3-14.3) in controls. Post-intervention PSPDR was significantly higher over time in the intervention arm than in controls (17.1% vs. 15.4%, P=0.01). CONCLUSION: In an era of increased awareness and increasing PSPDRs, endoscopists who undertook a one-time e-learning course significantly accelerated the increase in PSPDR compared with endoscopists who did not undertake the e-learning. Widespread implementation might reduce PCCRC incidence.

Post-colonoscopy colorectal cancers in a national fecal immunochemical test-based colorectal cancer screening program.

BACKGROUND: Post-colonoscopy colorectal cancers (PCCRCs) decrease the effect of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs. To enable PCCRC incidence reduction in the long-term, we classified PCCRCs diagnosed after colonoscopies performed in a fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based screening program. METHODS: PCCRCs diagnosed after colonoscopies performed between 2014-2016 for a positive FIT in the Dutch CRC screening program were included. PCCRCs were categorized according to the World Endoscopy Organization consensus statement into (a) interval PCCRC (diagnosed before the recommended surveillance); (b) non-interval type A (diagnosed at the recommended surveillance interval); (c) non-interval type B (diagnosed after the recommended surveillance interval); or (d) non-interval type C (diagnosed after the intended recommended surveillance interval, with surveillance not implemented owing to co-morbidity). The most probable etiology was determined by root-cause analysis. Tumor stage distributions were compared between categories. RESULTS: 116362 colonoscopies were performed after a positive FIT with 9978 screen-detected CRCs. During follow-up, 432 PCCRCs were diagnosed. The 3-year PCCRC rate was 2.7%. PCCRCs were categorized as interval (53.5%), non-interval type A (14.6%), non-interval type B (30.6%), and non-interval type C (1.4%). The most common etiology for interval PCCRCs was possible missed lesion with adequate examination (73.6%); they were more often diagnosed at an advanced stage (stage III/IV; 53.2%) compared with non-interval type A (15.9%; P<0.001) and non-interval type B (40.9%; P=0.03) PCCRCs. CONCLUSIONS: The 3-year PCCRC rate was low in this FIT-based CRC screening program. Approximately half of PCCRCs were interval PCCRCs. These were mostly caused by missed lesions and were diagnosed at a more advanced stage. This emphasizes the importance of high quality colonoscopy with optimal polyp detection.

Benefit-Harm Analysis for Informed Decision Making on Participating in Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Modeling Study.

OBJECTIVES: To facilitate informed decision making on participating in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, we assessed the benefit-harm balance of CRC screening for a wide range of subgroups over different time horizons. METHODS: The study combined incidence proportions of benefits and harms of (not) participating in CRC screening estimated by the Adenoma and Serrated pathway to CAncer microsimulation model, a preference eliciting survey, and benefit-harm balance modeling combining all outcomes to determine the net health benefit of CRC screening over 10, 20, and 30 years. Probability of net health benefit was estimated for 210 different subgroups based on age, sex, previous participation in CRC screening, and lifestyle. RESULTS: CRC screening was net beneficial in 183 of 210 subgroups over 30 years (median probability [MP] of 0.79, interquartile range [IQR] of 0.69-0.85) across subgroups. Net health benefit was greater for men (MP 0.82; IQR 0.69-0.89) than women (MP 0.76; IQR 0.67-0.83) and for those without history of participation in previous screenings (MP 0.84; IQR 0.80-0.89) compared with those with (MP 0.69; IQR 0.59-0.75). Net health benefit decreased with increasing age, from MP of 0.84 (IQR 0.80-0.86) at age 55 to 0.61 (IQR 0.56-0.71) at age 75. Shorter time horizons led to lower benefit, with MP of 0.70 (IQR 0.62-0.80) over 20 years and 0.54 (IQR 0.48-0.67) over 10 years. CONCLUSIONS: Our benefit-harm analysis provides information about net health benefit of screening participation, based on important characteristics and preferences of individuals, which could assist screening invitees in making informed decisions on screening participation.

Cold snare polypectomy for duodenal adenomas in familial adenomatous polyposis: a prospective international cohort study.

Background and study aims In patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), endoscopic resection of duodenal adenomas is commonly performed to prevent cancer and prevent or defer duodenal surgery. However, based on studies using different resection techniques, adverse events (AEs) of polypectomy in the duodenum can be significant. We hypothesized that cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is a safe technique for duodenal adenomas in FAP and evaluated its outcomes in our centers. Patients and methods We performed a prospective international cohort study including FAP patients who underwent CSP for one or more superficial non-ampullary duodenal adenomas of any size between 2020 and 2022. At that time, this technique was common practice in our centers for superficial duodenal adenomas. The primary outcome was the occurrence of intraprocedural and post-procedural AEs. Results In total, 133 CSPs were performed in 39 patients with FAP (1-18 per session). Median adenoma size was 10 mm (interquartile range 8-15 mm), ranging from 5 to 40 mm; 27 adenomas were ≥20 mm (20%). Of the 133 polypectomies, 109 (82%) were performed after submucosal injection. Sixty-one adenomas (46%) were resected en bloc and 72 (54%) piecemeal. Macroscopic radical resection was achieved for 129 polypectomies (97%). Deep mural injury type II occurred in three polyps (2%) with no delayed perforation after prophylactic clipping. There were no clinically significant bleeds, perforations or other post-procedural AEs. Histopathology showed low-grade dysplasia in all 133 adenomas. Conclusions CSP for (multiple) superficial non-ampullary duodenal adenomas in FAP seems feasible and safe. Long-term prospective research is needed to evaluate whether protocolized duodenal polypectomies prevent cancer and surgery.

Risk Prediction of Metachronous Colorectal Cancer from Molecular Features of Adenomas: A Nested Case-Control Study.

Current morphologic features defining advanced adenomas (size ≥10 mm, high-grade dysplasia or ≥25% villous component) cannot optimally distinguish individuals at high risk or low risk of metachronous colorectal cancer (me-CRC), which may result in suboptimal surveillance. Certain DNA copy-number alterations (CNAs) are associated with adenoma-to-carcinoma progression. We aimed to evaluate whether these molecular features can better predict an individual's risk of me-CRC than the morphologic advanced adenoma features.In this nested case-control study, 529 individuals with a single adenoma at first colonoscopy were selected from a Norwegian adenoma cohort. DNA copy-number profiles were determined, by low-coverage whole-genome sequencing. Prevalence of CNAs in advanced and non-advanced adenomas and its association (OR) with me-CRC was assessed. For the latter, cases (with me-CRC) were matched to controls (without me-CRC) on follow-up, age and sex.CNAs associated with adenoma-to-carcinoma progression were observed in 85/267 (32%) of advanced adenomas and in 27/262 (10%) of non-advanced adenomas. me-CRC was statistically significantly associated, also after adjustment for other variables, with age at baseline [OR, 1.14; 95% confidence interval CI), 1.03-1.26; P = 0.012], advanced adenomas (OR, 2.46; 95% CI, 1.50-4.01; P < 0.001) and with the presence of ≥3 DNA copy-number losses (OR, 1.90; 95% CI. 1.02-3.54; P = 0.043).Molecularly-defined high-risk adenomas were associated with me-CRC, but the association of advanced adenoma with me-CRC was stronger. SIGNIFICANCE: Identifying new biomarkers may improve prediction of me-CRC for individuals with adenomas and optimize surveillance intervals to reduce risk of colorectal cancer and reduce oversurveillance of patients with low risk of colorectal cancer. Use of DNA CNAs alone does not improve prediction of me-CRC. Further research to improve risk classification is required.

Cross-sectional risk models using quantitative fecal hemoglobin in colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Fecal Immunochemical Testing (FIT) is a central tool in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. To improve the selection of individuals for colonoscopy, risk models combining FIT with additional CRC risk factors have been developed. This systematic review aims to provide an overview of the current noninvasive FIT-based risk models for CRC screening to facilitate future implementation. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search for risk models that combined quantitative fecal hemoglobin with clinical data or noninvasive biomarkers and that were intended for CRC screening. Risk of bias was assessed using the PROBAST tool. RESULTS: Twenty risk models reported across 29 publications were included. The overall risk of bias was high. In studies that compared risk models to FIT, 11/12 (92%) risk models had a significantly higher c-statistic than FIT only. 16/20 risk models (80%) had not been externally validated and only one model has been implemented so far. CONCLUSION: FIT-based risk models have the potential to improve the yield of CRC screening. Unfortunately, all included publications had a high risk of bias and most risk models have not yet been externally validated. The prospect of improved CRC screening with risk models should encourage more rigorous evaluation in existing screening programs.

Metachronous colorectal cancer risk according to Lynch syndrome pathogenic variant after extensive versus partial colectomy in the Netherlands: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Extensive colectomy (subtotal or total colectomy) is often advised for carriers of Lynch syndrome with colorectal cancer. However, the risk of metachronous colorectal cancer might differ by Lynch syndrome variant, meaning that partial colectomy, which has better functional outcomes, might be adequate for some patients with low-risk variants. We aimed to assess the risk of metachronous colorectal cancer after partial colectomy and extensive colectomy in carriers of Lynch syndrome with different pathogenic variants. METHODS: For this retrospective cohort study, carriers of Lynch syndrome with colorectal cancer in the Netherlands were identified by linkage of the Dutch Foundation for the Detection of Hereditary Tumors (StOET) database and the Dutch Nationwide Network and Registry of Histopathology and Cytopathology (PALGA) database. Data on demographics, Lynch syndrome variants, colorectal cancers, surgery types, mortality, and surveillance colonoscopies were extracted. Data on colorectal cancer and surveillance colonoscopies were updated until Feb 28, 2022. Data on survival status was updated until Feb 7, 2022. MLH1, MSH2, and EPCAM were classified as high-risk variants and MSH6 and PMS2 as low-risk variants. Patients for whom the type of surgery was unknown were excluded. Cox regression time-to-event analyses were done to assess the risk of metachronous colorectal cancer in four subgroups based on pathogenic variant (high-risk vs low-risk variants) and the extent of surgery (extensive colectomy vs partial colectomy). Sex, age at the time of primary colorectal cancer, primary colorectal cancer stage, performance of surveillance colonoscopies, adherence to the surveillance guidelines, and time period of primary colorectal cancer diagnosis were added to the model as possible confounders. Metachronous colorectal cancer was defined as colorectal cancer diagnosed more than 6 months after the primary colorectal cancer. Patients were censored at time of death or assembly of the database. FINDINGS: Of 1908 carriers of Lynch syndrome registered in StOET, 532 with a history of colorectal cancer were identified after linkage with PALGA. Five carriers were excluded because of an unknown surgery type, leaving 527 in our sample (mean age at primary colorectal cancer 48·7 years [SD 12·1]; 274 [52%] male and 253 [48%] female). 121 (23%) patients developed metachronous colorectal cancer (median time from primary colorectal cancer to metachronous colorectal cancer 11·0 years [IQR 2·1-17·8]). Metachronous colorectal cancer occurred in 12 (12%) of 97 patients with high-risk variants and extensive colectomy, in 85 (32%) of 267 patients with high-risk variants and partial colectomy, in zero (0%) of 11 patients with low-risk variants and extensive colectomy, and in 24 (16%) of 152 patients with low-risk variants and partial colectomy. Partial colectomy was associated with a higher risk of metachronous colorectal cancer than extensive colectomy in the high-risk variant group (hazard ratio 1·97, 95% CI 1·04-3·73; p=0·039). The risk of metachronous colorectal cancer did not differ between carriers of low-risk variants who had partial colectomy and those of high-risk variants who had extensive colectomy (1·14, 0·55-2·36; p=0·72). INTERPRETATION: The risk of metachronous colorectal cancer after partial colectomy in carriers of low-risk variants is similar to the risk after extensive colectomy in carriers of high-risk variants. This finding suggests that partial colectomy followed by endoscopic surveillance is an appropriate management approach to treat colorectal cancer in carriers of low-risk Lynch syndrome variants. FUNDING: None.

Interval post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer following a negative colonoscopy in a fecal immunochemical test-based screening program.

BACKGROUND: In the Dutch colorectal (CRC) screening program, fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-positive individuals are referred for colonoscopy. If no relevant findings are detected at colonoscopy, individuals are reinvited for FIT screening after 10 years. We aimed to assess CRC risk after a negative colonoscopy in FIT-positive individuals. METHODS: In this cross-sectional cohort study, data were extracted from the Dutch national screening information system. Participants with a positive FIT followed by a negative colonoscopy between 2014 and 2018 were included. A negative colonoscopy was defined as a colonoscopy during which no more than one nonvillous, nonproximal adenoma < 10 mm or serrated polyp < 10 mm was found. The main outcome was interval post-colonoscopy CRC (iPCCRC) risk. iPCCRC risk was reviewed against the risk of interval CRC after a negative FIT (FIT IC) with a 2-year screening interval. RESULTS: 35 052 FIT-positive participants had a negative colonoscopy and 24 iPCCRCs were diagnosed, resulting in an iPCCRC risk of 6.85 (95 %CI 4.60-10.19) per 10 000 individuals after a median follow-up of 1.4 years. After 2.5 years of follow-up, age-adjusted iPCCRC risk was approximately equal to FIT IC risk at 2 years. CONCLUSION: Risk of iPCCRC within a FIT-based CRC screening program was low during the first years after colonos-copy but, after 2.5 years, was the same as the risk in FIT-negative individuals at 2 years, when they are reinvited for screening. Colonoscopy quality may therefore require further improvement and FIT screening interval may need to be reduced after negative colonoscopy.

First report from the International Evaluation of Endoscopic classification Japan NBI Expert Team: International multicenter web trial.

OBJECTIVES: Narrow-band imaging (NBI) contributes to real-time optical diagnosis and classification of colorectal lesions. The Japan NBI Expert Team (JNET) was introduced in 2011. The aim of this study was to explore the diagnostic accuracy of JNET when applied by European and Japanese endoscopists not familiar with this classification. METHODS: This study was conducted by 36 European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and 49 Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society (JGES) non-JNET endoscopists using still images of 150 lesions. For each lesion, nonmagnified white-light, nonmagnified NBI, and magnified NBI images were presented. In the magnified NBI, the evaluation area was designated by region of interest (ROI). The endoscopists scored histological prediction for each lesion. RESULTS: In ESGE members, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were respectively 73.3%, 94.7%, and 93.0% for JNET Type 1; 53.0%, 64.9%, and 62.1% for Type 2A; 43.9%, 67.7%, and 55.1% for Type 2B; and 38.1%, 93.7%, and 85.1% for Type 3. When Type 2B and 3 were considered as one category of cancer, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for differentiating high-grade dysplasia and cancer from the others were 59.9%, 72.5%, and 63.8%, respectively. These trends were the same for JGES endoscopists. CONCLUSION: The diagnostic accuracy of the JNET classification was similar between ESGE and JGES and considered to be sufficient for JNET Type 1. On the other hand, the accuracy for Types 2 and 3 is not sufficient; however, JNET 2B lesions should be resected en bloc due to the risk of cancers and JNET 3 can be treated by surgery due to its high specificity.