Risk factors for synchronous high-risk polyps in patients with colorectal cancer.

Purpose: Colorectal cancer (CRC) patients may experience inadequate preoperative colonoscopy due to bowel obstruction or inadequate bowel preparation, leading to potential oversight of other polyps. We aimed to identify risk factors for CRC complicated with synchronous high-risk polyps. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 6,674 CRC patients from December 2014 to September 2018 was conducted. High-risk polyps were defined as adenomas or serrated polyps that were ≥10 mm, or with tubulovillous/villous components or high-grade dysplasia. All other polyps were defined as low-risk polyps. Patients with complete pathological and clinical information were categorized into three groups: the no polyp group, the low-risk polyp group, and the high-risk polyp group. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to calculate the odds ratios (ORs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for all potential risk factors. Results: Among the 4,659 eligible patients, 848 (18.2%) were found to have low-risk polyps, while 675 (14.5%) were diagnosed with high-risk polyps. In a multivariate logistic regression model, compared to patients without polyps, those with synchronous high-risk polyps were more likely to be male (OR = 2.07), aged 50 or older (OR = 2.77), have early-stage tumors (OR = 1.46), colon tumors (OR = 1.53), NRAS mutant tumors (OR = 1.66), and BRAF wild-type tumors (OR = 2.43). Conclusion: Our study has identified several risk factors associated with the presence of synchronous high-risk polyps in CRC patients. Based on these findings, we recommend that patients who exhibit these high-risk factors undergo early follow-up of colonoscopy to detect synchronous polyps early.

Risk of advanced neoplasia after removal of colorectal adenomas with high-grade dysplasia.

BACKGROUND: Many studies reported the presence of adenomas with high-grade dysplasia (HGD) at index colonoscopy increased the incidence of advanced neoplasia (AN) and colorectal cancer (CRC) following. However, the conclusion remains obscure due to lack of studies on the specific population of adenomas with HGD. This study aimed to assess the long-term risk of AN and CRC after removal of adenomas with HGD. METHODS: A total of 814 patients who underwent adenomas with HGD removal between 2010 and 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. The outcomes were the incidences of AN and CRC during surveillance colonoscopy. Cox proportional hazards models were utilized to identify risk factors associated with AN and CRC. RESULTS: During more than 2000 person-years of follow-up, we found that AN and CRC incidence densities were 44.3 and 4.4 per 1000 person-years, respectively. The 10-year cumulative incidence of AN and CRC were 39.1% and 5.5%, respectively. In the multivariate model, synchronous low-risk polyps (HR 1.80, 95% CI 1.10-2.93) and synchronous high-risk polyps (HR 3.99, 95% CI 2.37-6.72) were risk factors for AN, whereas participation in surveillance colonoscopy visits (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.36-0.88 for 1 visit; HR 0.10, 95% CI 0.06-0.19 for ≥ 2 visits) were associated with decreased AN incidence. Additionally, elevated baseline carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level (HR 10.19, 95% CI 1.77-58.59) was a risk factor for CRC, while participation in ≥ 2 surveillance colonoscopy visits (HR 0.11, 95% CI 0.02-0.56) were associated with decreased CRC incidence. Interestingly, for 11 patients who developed CRC after removal of adenomas with HGD, immunohistochemistry revealed that 8 cases (73%) were deficient mismatch repair CRCs. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who have undergone adenoma with HGD removal are at higher risk of developing AN and CRC, while surveillance colonoscopy can reduce the risk. Patients with synchronous polyps, or with elevated baseline CEA level are considered high-risk populations and require more frequent surveillance.

Nomogram for predicting overall survival time of patients with stage IV colorectal cancer.

Background: Prognosis varies among stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC). Our study aimed to build a robust prognostic nomogram for predicting overall survival (OS) of patients with stage IV CRC in order to provide evidence for individualized treatment. Method: We collected the information of 16,283 patients with stage IV CRC in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database and then randomized these patients in a ratio of 7:3 into a training cohort and an internal validation cohort. In addition, 501 patients in the Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University (Guangzhou, China) database were selected and used as an external validation cohort. Univariate and multivariate Cox analyses were used to screen out significant variables for nomogram establishment. The nomogram model was assessed using time-dependent receiver-operating characteristic curve (time-dependent ROC), concordance index (C-index), calibration curve, and decision curve analysis. Survival curves were plotted using the Kaplan-Meier method. Result: The C-index of the nomogram for OS in the training, internal validation, and external validation cohorts were 0.737, 0.727, and 0.655, respectively. ROC analysis and calibration curves pronounced robust discriminative ability of the model. Further, we divided the patients into a high-risk group and a low-risk group according to the nomogram. Corresponding Kaplan-Meier curves showed that the prediction of the nomogram was consistent with the actual practice. Additionally, model comparisons and decision curve analysis proved that the nomogram for predicting prognosis was significantly superior to the tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) staging system. Conclusions: We constructed a nomogram to predict OS of the stage IV CRC and externally validate its generalization, which was superior to the TNM staging system.

Increased risk of colorectal neoplasia in inflammatory bowel disease patients with post-inflammatory polyps: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients with post-inflammatory polyps (PIPs) may carry an increased risk of colorectal neoplasia (CRN) including dysplasia and cancer. Current guidelines recommend active colonoscopy follow-up for these patients. However, the evidence for guidelines is still poor. In addition, some recent high-quality reports present a different view, which challenges the current guidelines. We hypothesize that IBD patients with PIPs are at increased risk of CRN. AIM: To evaluate the risk of CRN in IBD patients with and without PIPs. METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science was performed to identify studies that compared the risk of CRN in IBD patients with and without PIPs. In addition, we screened the reference lists and citation indices of the included studies. Quality assessment was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled odds ratio (OR) was calculated using the random-effects model to explore the final pooled effect size of the included studies and determine whether PIPs increase the risk of CRN. Sensitivity analysis, subgroup analysis, and assessment of publication bias were performed to examine the sources of heterogeneity. RESULTS: Twelve studies with 5819 IBD patients, including 1281 (22.01%) with PIPs, were considered eligible for this meta-analysis. We found that IBD patients with PIPs were at an increased risk of CRN as compared to those without PIPs [OR 2.01; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.43-2.83]. The results were similar when colorectal cancer was used as the study endpoint (OR 2.57; 95%CI: 1.69-3.91). Furthermore, the risk of CRN was still increased (OR 1.80; 95%CI: 1.12-2.91) when restricted to ulcerative colitis patients. Heterogeneity was high among the included studies (I² = 75%). Subgroup analysis revealed that the high heterogeneity was due to the study design. Sensitivity analysis showed that the main statistical outcomes did not essentially change after excluding any one of the included studies. No significant publication bias was found in the funnel plots. CONCLUSION: IBD patients with PIPs have an increased risk of CRN as compared with those without PIPs, which support the current guidelines. However, a high-quality randomized controlled trial is warranted.