Colorectal Cancer Screening in the Elderly: Does Increased Prevalence Necessitate Tighter Surveillance.

BACKGROUND: With age, colorectal cancer (CRC) prevalence rises. The elderly (> 75 years), and the very elderly (> 85 years) are especially vulnerable. The advantages of screening must be assessed in the context of diminished life span and co-morbidities. OBJECTIVES: To compare CRC findings in colonoscopies that were performed following a positive fecal occult blood test/fecal immunochemical test (FOBT/FIT) in both elderly and very elderly age groups with those of younger patients. METHODS: We identified colonoscopies conducted between 1998 and 2019 following a positive stool test for occult blood in asymptomatic individuals. A finding of malignancy was compared between the two patient age groups. Furthermore, a sub-analysis was performed for positive malignancy findings in FOBT/FIT among patients > 85 years compared to younger than < 75 years. RESULTS: We compared the colonoscopy findings in 10,472 patients: 40-75 years old (n=10,146) vs. 76-110 years old (n=326). There was no significant difference in prevalence of CRC detection rate between the groups following positive FOBT/FIT (2.1% vs. 2.7%, P = 0.47). Similar results for non-significant differences were obtained in the sub-analysis compared to malignancy detection rates in the very elderly 0% (n=0) vs. 2.1% for < 75 years old (n=18), P = 0.59. CONCLUSIONS: Although the prevalence of CRC increases with age, no significant increase in the detection rate of CRC by FOBT was found in either the elderly or very elderly age groups. Screening colonoscopies in elderly patients should be performed only after careful consideration of potential benefits, risks, and patient preferences.

Screening and Colonoscopy Quality Measures: Ethnic Disparities and Impact on Patients' Outcome.

Background: Recent reports have confirmed the improving trends in colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and outcomes. Still, disparities in incidence and mortality in CRC continue to persist between major ethnic groups despite the provision of widespread screening and improved care. We aimed to outline, from an endoscopic point of view, ethnic disparities in major endoscopic measures concerned with CRC screening and detection and track their impact on patients' outcomes. Methods: We reviewed electronic reports of patients referred for colonoscopy procedures over 20 years. We compared demographic, clinical, and endoscopic findings between major ethnic population groups in Israel. In addition, trends of screening utilization, bowel preparation, and polyp detection rates were tracked, and the incidence of CRC diagnosis was followed. Results: A total of 51307 patients had undergone colonoscopies, of whom 16% were Arabs, and 84% were Jewish. The procedures performed for CRC screening throughout the study period were significantly lower in Arabs (5% vs. 13.1%; P < 0.0001). In parallel, for most of the follow-up period, the Arab patients had higher rates of inadequate bowel preparation (overall: 19.9% vs. 12%; P < 0.001) and a lower polyp detection rate (16.7% vs. 22.5%; P < 0.0001). Expectedly, the incidence of CRC has steadily decreased in the Jewish group, while an adverse pattern of increasing incidence was documented in the Arab patient during the follow-up period. Conclusion: Characterized by lower screening utilization and poor bowel preparation, the incidence of CRC development in Arab patients is increasing, while improving trends of CRC were observed in their Jewish counterparts.

Effect of Doctor's and Assisting Nurse's Years of Experience on Polyp Detection Rate: A Retrospective Cohort.

BACKGROUND: Polyp detection rate (PDR) is a convenient quality measure indicator. Many factors influence PDR, including the patient's background, age, referral (ambulatory or hospitalized), and bowel cleansing. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether years of professional experience have any effect on PDR. METHODS: A multivariate analysis of a retrospective cohort was performed, where both patient- and examiner-related variables, including the experience of doctors and nurses, were evaluated. PDR, as the dependent variable was calculated separately for all (APDR), proximal (PPDR), and small (SPDR) polyps. RESULTS: Between 1998 and 2019, 20,996 patients underwent colonoscopy at a single center. After controlling for covariates, the experience of both doctors and nurses was not found to be associated with APDR (odds ratio [OR] 0.99, 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 0.98-1.00, P = 0.15 and OR 1.03, 95%CI 1.02-1.04, P < 0.0001, respectively). However, after 2.4 years of colonoscopy experience for doctors, and 9.5 years of experience for nurses, a significant increase in APDR was observed. Furthermore, results revealed no association for PPDR and SPDR, as well. CONCLUSIONS: Years of colonoscopy experience for both doctors and assisting nurses were not associated with APDR, PPDR, and SPDR. In doctors with 2.4 years of experience and nurses with 9.5 years of experience, a significant increase in APDR was observed.

Association between time to colonoscopy after a positive guaiac fecal test result and risk of colorectal cancer and advanced stage disease at diagnosis.

We evaluated time to colonoscopy after a positive guaiac-based fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) result and its association with the risk of overall colorectal cancer (CRC) and advanced-stage disease at diagnosis. We conducted a retrospective cohort study (2011-2013) within the Clalit Health Services, Israel. Participants were patients between 50 and 74 years old with a positive gFOBT result who had follow-up colonoscopies within 24 months. The exposure was time to colonoscopy, and the main outcome measure was a risk for overall and advanced CRC (defined as Stages III-IV). Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were adjusted for patient demographics and baseline risk factors. Of the 17,958 patients with positive gFOBT results (median age, 61 years [interquartile range, 56-67 years]; women, 52.2%), there were 685 cases of CRC and 156 cases of an advanced-stage disease diagnosed. The rate of cancer diagnosis at 0-3, 4-6, 7-9, 10-12 and 13-24 months was 3.9%, 2.5%, 3.5%, 4.2% and 7.3%, respectively (p < 0.001). Compared to colonoscopy follow-up within 0-3 months, risks for any CRC and advanced stage disease were higher for a follow-up of 12-24 months: OR, 1.97 (95% CI, 1.51-2.56) and 1.88 (95% CI, 1.43-2.46), respectively. For right-sided cancer (n = 194), an increased risk starts at 10 months, OR, 1.91 (95% CI 1.03-3.56). A result of 3-6 positive fields was significantly associated diagnosis of cancer (OR, 5.52; 95% CI, 4.71-6.46) and advanced stage disease (OR, 8.07; 95% CI, 5.74-11.36). Encouraging an early uptake of colonoscopy and targeting those with 10-24 months delay and a 3-6 positive fields is warranted.

Triglyceride levels and risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus: a longitudinal large study.

The relationship between triglyceridemia and diabetes mellitus remains unclear. This study evaluated the risk of diabetes and impaired fasting glucose associated with a wide range of triglyceride levels. A longitudinal retrospective study was carried out employing data from a screening center between the years 2000 and 2012. Inclusion criteria were absence of diabetes at baseline and attendance at the center at least twice over a 5-year period. Participants were divided by fasting blood glucose level (normal/impaired) at the first visit. A total of 5085 participants were eligible for the study. Of the 4164 normoglycemic participants at baseline, 40 (0.96%) had diabetes and 998 (24%) had impaired fasting glucose by the end of the study. On stepwise logistic regression analysis, every 10 mg/dL increase in triglyceride level significantly increased the risk of diabetes by 4% and of impaired fasting glucose by 2% (p<0.001). This association held true even when rising triglyceride levels remained within the accepted normal range (<150 mg/dL, p<0.001). Sustained increments in serum triglyceride level, even within the accepted normal range, are an independent risk factor for diabetes mellitus and impaired fasting glucose in normoglycemic participants.