British Society of Gastroenterology/Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland/Public Health England post-polypectomy and post-colorectal cancer resection surveillance guidelines.
ABSTRACT: These consensus guidelines were jointly commissioned by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG), the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) and Public Health England (PHE). They provide an evidence-based framework for the use of surveillance colonoscopy and non-colonoscopic colorectal imaging in people aged 18 years and over. They are the first guidelines that take into account the introduction of national bowel cancer screening. For the first time, they also incorporate surveillance of patients following resection of either adenomatous or serrated polyps and also post-colorectal cancer resection. They are primarily aimed at healthcare professionals, and aim to address:Which patients should commence surveillance post-polypectomy and post-cancer resection?What is the appropriate surveillance interval?When can surveillance be stopped? two or more premalignant polyps including at least one advanced colorectal polyp (defined as a serrated polyp of at least 10?mm in size or containing any grade of dysplasia, or an adenoma of at least 10?mm in size or containing high-grade dysplasia); or five or more premalignant polyps The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument provided a methodological framework for the guidelines. The BSG's guideline development process was used, which is National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) compliant.two or more premalignant polyps including at least one advanced colorectal polyp (defined as a serrated polyp of at least 10?mm in size or containing any grade of dysplasia, or an adenoma of at least 10?mm in size or containing high-grade dysplasia); or five or more premalignant polyps The key recommendations are that the high-risk criteria for future colorectal cancer (CRC) following polypectomy comprise either:two or more premalignant polyps including at least one advanced colorectal polyp (defined as a serrated polyp of at least 10?mm in size or containing any grade of dysplasia, or an adenoma of at least 10?mm in size or containing high-grade dysplasia); or five or more premalignant polyps This cohort should undergo a one-off surveillance colonoscopy at 3 years. Post-CRC resection patients should undergo a 1?year clearance colonoscopy, then a surveillance colonoscopy after 3 more years.
Project description:<h4>Background & aims</h4>Endoscopic screening reduces incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer (CRC) because precursor lesions, such as conventional adenomas or serrated polyps, are removed. Individuals with polypectomies are advised to undergo colonoscopy surveillance to prevent CRC. However, guidelines for surveillance intervals after diagnosis of a precursor lesion, particularly for individuals with serrated polyps, vary widely, and lack sufficient supporting evidence. Consequently, some high-risk patients do not receive enough surveillance and lower-risk subjects receive excessive surveillance.<h4>Methods</h4>We examined the association between findings from first endoscopy and CRC risk among 122,899 participants who underwent flexible sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy in the Nurses' Health Study 1 (1990-2012), Nurses' Health Study 2 (1989-2013), or the Health Professionals Follow-up Study (1990-2012). Endoscopic findings were categorized as no polyp, conventional adenoma, or serrated polyp (hyperplastic polyp, traditional serrated adenoma, or sessile serrated adenoma, with or without cytological dysplasia). Conventional adenomas were classified as advanced (?10 mm, high-grade dysplasia, or tubulovillous or villous histology) or nonadvanced, and serrated polyps were assigned to categories of large (?10 mm) or small (<10 mm). We used a Cox proportional hazards regression model to calculate the hazard ratios (HRs) of CRC incidence, after adjusting for various potential risk factors.<h4>Results</h4>After a median follow-up period of 10 years, we documented 491 incident cases of CRC: 51 occurred in 6161 participants with conventional adenomas, 24 in 5918 participants with serrated polyps, and 427 in 112,107 participants with no polyp. Compared with participants with no polyp detected during initial endoscopy, the multivariable HR for incident CRC in individuals with an advanced adenoma was 4.07 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.89-5.72) and the HR for CRC in individuals with a large serrated polyp was 3.35 (95% CI 1.37-8.15). In contrast, there was no significant increase in risk of CRC in patients with nonadvanced adenomas (HR 1.21; 95% CI 0.68-2.16, P = .52) or small serrated polyps (HR 1.25; 95% CI 0.76-2.08; P = .38).<h4>Conclusions</h4>These findings provide support for guidelines that recommend repeat lower endoscopy within 3 years of a diagnosis of advanced adenoma and large serrated polyps. In contrast, patients with nonadvanced adenoma or small serrated polyps may not require more intensive surveillance than patients without polyps.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Current guidelines recommend surveillance colonoscopies after polyp removal depending on the number and characteristics of polyps, but there is a lack of evidence supporting the recommendations. This report outlines the rationale and design of two randomized trials and one observational study investigating evidence-based surveillance strategies following polyp removal. Study design and endpoints: The EPoS studies started to recruit patients in April 2015.?EPoS study I randomizes 13?746 patients with low-risk adenomas (1?-?2 tubular adenomas size <?10?mm, low-grade dysplasia) to surveillance after 5 and 10 years, or 10 years only. EPoS study II randomizes 13?704 patients with high-risk adenomas (3?-?10 adenomas or adenoma ??10?mm in diameter, or adenoma with high-grade dysplasia, or >?25?% villous features) to surveillance after 3, 5, and 10 years, or 5 and 10 years only. EPoS study III offers surveillance after 5 and 10 years to patients with serrated polyps ??10?mm in diameter at any location, or serrated polyps ??5?mm in diameter proximal to the splenic flexure. All polyps are removed before patients enter the trials. The primary end point is colorectal cancer incidence after 10 years. We assume a colorectal cancer risk of 1?% for patients in EPoS I, and 2?% for patients in EPoS II. Using a noninferiority hypothesis with an equivalence interval of 0.5?% for EPoS I and 0.7?% for EPoS II, the trials are 90?% powered to uncover differences larger than the equivalence intervals. For EPoS III, no power analyses have been performed. CONCLUSIONS:The present trials aim to develop evidence-based strategies for polyp surveillance, thereby maximizing effectiveness and minimizing resources. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02319928).
Project description:Background:The diagnostic yield of the faecal immunochemical test and sigmoidoscopy in detecting proximal serrated polyps in a colorectal cancer screening programme has not been fully assessed. Aim:We determined the detection rate of proximal serrated polyps by simulated sigmoidoscopy and faecal immunochemical test compared with total colonoscopy in a population-based, multicentre, nationwide, randomised controlled trial (ColonPrev study). Methods:Sigmoidoscopy yield was simulated based on the UK-Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Trial for total colonoscopy referral. Definitions were: proximal serrated polyp (proximal serrated polyp): sessile serrated polyp or hyperplastic polyp of any size and proximal at-risk serrated polyp (at-risk proximal serrated polyp): sessile serrated polyp of any size or hyperplastic polyp???10?mm, both located proximally to the splenic flexure. Results:A total of 10,611 individuals underwent faecal immunochemical test and 5059 underwent total colonoscopy and were evaluated by simulated sigmoidoscopy. Sigmoidoscopy and faecal immunochemical test were less accurate in detecting proximal serrated polyps (odds ratio: 0.13; 95% confidence interval: 0.10-0.18 and 0.13; 0.09-0.18, p?<?0.0001, respectively). Both tests were inferior to colonoscopy in detecting at-risk proximal serrated polyps, and sigmoidoscopy was inferior to faecal immunochemical test in detecting these lesions (odds ratio: 0.17; 95% confidence interval: 0.10-0.30 and 0.25; 0.17-0.37, p?<?0.0001, respectively). Conclusion:Sigmoidoscopy and faecal immunochemical test are less accurate in detecting proximal serrated polyps than colonoscopy, particularly in women.
Project description:BACKGROUND AND AIMS:Advanced colorectal polyps (adenoma or sessile serrated polyp???1 cm, adenoma with villous features, adenoma with high-grade dysplasia, or any sessile serrated polyps with dysplasia) are associated with an increased risk of future advanced colorectal neoplasia and confer an increased risk of advanced neoplasia to first-degree family members. Professional societies therefore recommend more intensive surveillance of these polyps and earlier screening for first-degree relatives. The aim of this study was to assess knowledge of personal and familial risk and recommendations among patients with advanced colorectal polyps and identify predictors of knowledge. METHODS:An online survey was designed to assess the domains of knowledge and risk perception regarding personal and familial colorectal cancer risk and screening recommendations. After expert review and pilot testing, the 37-item survey was electronically sent to all patients diagnosed with an advanced colon or rectal polyp under the age of 60. Patient report of polyp findings was compared to documented findings in the medical record. Univariable and multivariable regressions were performed to evaluate predictors of knowledge. RESULTS:One hundred thirty-seven out of 344 (39.8%) eligible patients responded to the survey. 28.5% of participants reported that the polyp they had removed was precancerous. 54.8% of participants reported that they have a higher risk of CRC, and 65.2% reported that they should be undergoing colonoscopy surveillance in 3 years or less. 40.1% reported that their first-degree family members are at increased CRC risk, and 38.0% reported that first-degree family members should get earlier screening. Participants reported their endoscopists as their top source of information about risk and recommendations, though only 7.3% of endoscopists made recommendations for family members. Female gender and higher income were predictors of accurate knowledge, as endoscopist was the main source of knowledge. CONCLUSIONS:Patients with advanced colorectal polyps have poor knowledge of personal and familial CRC risk and recommendations. Endoscopists who remove advanced polyps are in an ideal position to educate their patients about their personal risk and the risk and recommendations for first-degree family members.
Project description:Adenomatous polyps adjacent to colorectal cancer (CRC) were found to exhibit two distinct microRNAs (miRs) patterns from normal mucosa to low- and separately, to high-grade dysplasia; presence in screen-detected adenoma of non-cancer patients is unknown. Global miR expression was performed on biopsies obtained from 109 healthy patients undergoing screening/surveillance colonoscopy. Included were normal mucosa (NM); hyperplastic polyp (HP); tubular adenoma (TA), tubulovillous adenoma, with or without, high-grade dysplasia (TVHG) and serrated-polyps; sessile serrated adenoma (SSA) and traditional serrated adenoma (TSA). Logistic regression was used to model miRs predictive of histology and CRC risk. We identified 99 miRs that differed across five histologic groups (FDR=0.05) and that accurately separated on histology (Concordance Index (CI)=0.96). In HPNM, miRs-145, -143, -107a, -23b, and -24 were upregulated whereas miRs-663, -1268, -320b, -1275, and -671 where overexpressed in TVHGs (FDR P<0 .05). The expression of miR-145 and -30a showed high accuracy to separate low from high-risk polyps independent of serrated status (CI= 97.1%; AUC 93.4%). For TSAs, miR-125b and -199a were uniquely downregulated relative to HPNMs and miR-335 discriminated between non-serrated and serrated histology. Histologically advanced polyps from non-cancer patients share miR alterations with those reported for CRC and high-grade adenoma adjacent to tumor including downregulation of immune regulatory miRs-125 and -199a in TSAs; polyp that frequently present with in situ carcinoma. These data extend evidence that miR patterns of high-risk adenoma are detectable in subset of screen-detected adenoma for which measurement may be useful in in adenoma risk stratification. Overall design: The statistical analysis included 113 samples allocated to one of five pathology groups. Samples desginated as normal mucosa and hyperplastic polyp (HPNM) were combined to serve as the controls. The remaining four pathologic groups included tubular adenoma (TA), tululovillous adenoma with or without high grade dysplasia (TVHG), sessile serrated adenoma (SSA), and traditional serrated adenoma (TSA). The RNA was isolated from FFPE biopsy tissues obained from 109 human patients undergoing colonoscopy. Therefore, study design included 113 human RNA samples with biological replicates for five conditions.
Project description:Serrated polyps have been recognised in the last decade as important premalignant lesions accounting for between 15% and 30% of colorectal cancers. There is therefore a clinical need for guidance on how to manage these lesions; however, the evidence base is limited. A working group was commission by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) Endoscopy section to review the available evidence and develop a position statement to provide clinical guidance until the evidence becomes available to support a formal guideline. The scope of the position statement was wide-ranging and included: evidence that serrated lesions have premalignant potential; detection and resection of serrated lesions; surveillance strategies after detection of serrated lesions; special situations-serrated polyposis syndrome (including surgery) and serrated lesions in colitis; education, audit and benchmarks and research questions. Statements on these issues were proposed where the evidence was deemed sufficient, and re-evaluated modified via a Delphi process until >80% agreement was reached. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) tool was used to assess the strength of evidence and strength of recommendation for finalised statements. Key recommendation: we suggest that until further evidence on the efficacy or otherwise of surveillance are published, patients with sessile serrated lesions (SSLs) that appear associated with a higher risk of future neoplasia or colorectal cancer (SSLs ?10?mm or serrated lesions harbouring dysplasia including traditional serrated adenomas) should be offered a one-off colonoscopic surveillance examination at 3?years (weak recommendation, low quality evidence, 90% agreement).
Project description:Postpolypectomy surveillance has become a major indication for colonoscopy as a result of increased use of screening colonoscopy in Korea. In this report, a careful analytic approach was used to address all available evidences to delineate the predictors for advanced neoplasia at surveillance colonoscopy and we elucidated the high risk findings of the index colonoscopy as follows: 3 or more adenomas, any adenoma larger than 10 mm, any tubulovillous or villous adenoma, any adenoma with high-grade dysplasia, and any serrated polyps larger than 10 mm. Surveillance colonoscopy should be performed five years after the index colonoscopy for those without any high-risk findings and three years after the index colonoscopy for those with one or more high risk findings. However, the surveillance interval can be shortened considering the quality of the index colonoscopy, the completeness of polypectomy, the patient's general condition, and family and medical history.
Project description:BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: The real-time optical diagnosis of colorectal polyps with high confidence predictions can achieve high levels of accuracy. Increasing the rates of high confidence optical diagnosis can improve the clinical application of real-time optical diagnosis in routine practice. The primary aim of this prospective study was to evaluate whether high magnifying endoscopy improves the rates of high confidence narrow-band imaging (NBI) - based optical diagnosis for differentiating between neoplastic and non-neoplastic colorectal lesions according to the NBI international colorectal endoscopic (NICE) classification. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive adult patients undergoing colonoscopy with a high magnifying (maximum, × 80) colonoscope between April and August 2012 were recruited. The optical diagnosis for each polyp was evaluated during colonoscopy in two consecutive stages by the same endoscopist, who first used NBI with non-magnifying endoscopy (NBI-NME), then NBI with magnifying endoscopy (NBI-ME). A level of confidence was assigned to each prediction. RESULTS: The analysis included 124 patients (mean age, 56.4 years; male-to-female ratio, 72:52) with 248 polyps smaller than 10 mm. Of the 248 polyps, 210 were 1 to 5 mm in size and 38 were 6 to 9 mm in size; 77 polyps were hyperplastic, 4 were sessile serrated adenomas/polyps, 160 were low grade adenomas, 5 were high grade adenomas, and 2 were deep submucosal invasive carcinomas. The rate of high confidence optical diagnosis when NBI-ME was used was significantly higher than the rate when NBI-NME was used for diminutive (1 - 5 mm) polyps (92.9 % vs 79.5 %, P < 0.001) and for small (6 - 9 mm) polyps (94.7 % vs 84.2 %, P = 0.048). CONCLUSION: High magnifying endoscopy significantly improved the rates of high confidence NBI-based optical diagnosis of diminutive and small colorectal polyps. STUDY REGISTRATION: UMIN 000007608.
Project description:BACKGROUND:It is unknown whether narrow-band imaging (NBI) could be more effective than high-definition white-light endoscopy (HD-WLE) in detecting serrated lesions in patients with prior serrated lesions >?5?mm not completely fulfilling serrated polyposis syndrome (SPS) criteria. METHODS:We conducted a randomized, cross-over trial in consecutive patients with prior detection of at least one serrated polyp ?10?mm or???3 serrated polyps larger than 5?mm, both proximal to the sigmoid colon. Five experienced endoscopists performed same-day tandem colonoscopies, with the order being randomized 1:1 to NBI-HD-WLE or HD-WLE-NBI. All tandem colonoscopies were performed by the same endoscopist. RESULTS:We included 41 patients. Baseline characteristics were similar in the two cohorts: NBI-HD-WLE (n?=?21) and HD-WLE-NBI (n?=?20). No differences were observed in the serrated lesion detection rate of NBI versus HD-WLE: 47.4% versus 51.9% (OR 0.84, 95% CI: 0.37-1.91) for the first and second withdrawal, respectively. Equally, no differences were found in the polyp miss rate of NBI versus HD-WLE: 21.3% versus 26.1% (OR 0.77, 95% CI: 0.43-1.38). Follow-up colonoscopy in nine patients (22%) allowed them to be reclassified as having SPS. CONCLUSIONS:In patients with previous serrated lesions, the serrated lesion detection rate was similar with NBI and HD-WLE. A shorter surveillance colonoscopy interval increases the detection of missed serrated polyps and could change the diagnosis of SPS in approximately one in every five patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02406547, registered on April 2, 2015.