No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Background The proportion of cancer cases in younger patients is increasing though colorectal cancer (CRC) screening guidelines recommend starting at age 50. The national treatment patterns and outcomes of these patients are largely unknown. Methods This is a population-based retrospective cohort study of the nationally representative Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry for patients diagnosed with CRC from 1998-2011. Patients were categorized as being younger or older than the recommended screening age. Differences in stage at diagnosis, patterns of therapy, and disease-specific survival were compared between age groups using multinomial regression, multiple regression, cox-proportional hazards regression, and Weibull survival analysis. Results Of 258,024 CRC patients, 37,847 (15%) were younger than 50. Young patients were more likely to present with regional (Relative risk ratio [RRR]: 1.3, p<0.001) or distant (RRR: 1.5, p<0.001) disease. CRC patients with distant metastasis were more likely to receive surgical therapy for their primary tumor in the younger age group (adjusted probability: 72% vs. 63%; p<0.001), and radiation therapy was more likely in younger RC patients (adjusted probability: 53% vs. 48%; p<0.001). Patients younger than screening age had better overall disease-specific survival (Hazard ratio: 0.77; p<0.001), despite a larger proportion presenting with advanced disease. Conclusions Colorectal cancer patients diagnosed before age 50 are more likely to present with advanced stage disease. However, they receive more aggressive therapy and achieve longer disease-specific survival, despite the greater proportion with advanced-stage disease. These findings suggest the need for improved risk assessment and screening decisions for younger adults.

OverviewColorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth most frequently diagnosed cancer and the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Abstract This is a focused update highlighting the most current NCCN Guidelines for diagnosis and management of Lynch syndrome. Lynch syndrome is the most common cause of hereditary colorectal cancer, usually resulting from a germline mutation in 1 of 4 DNA mismatch repair genes (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, or PMS2), or deletions in the EPCAM promoter. Patients with Lynch syndrome are at an increased lifetime risk, compared with the general population, for colorectal cancer, endometrial cancer, and other cancers, including of the stomach and ovary. As of 2016, the panel recommends screening all patients with colorectal cancer for Lynch syndrome and provides recommendations for surveillance for early detection and prevention of Lynch syndrome-associated cancers. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2016;14(8):1010-1030 NCCN Categories of Evidence and ConsensusCategory 1: Based upon high-level evidence, there is uniform NCCN consensus that the intervention is appropriate. Category 2A: Based upon lower-level evidence, there is uniform NCCN consensus that the intervention is appropriate. Category 2B: Based upon lower-level evidence, there is NCCN consensus that the intervention is appropriate. Category 3: Based upon any level of evidence, there is major NCCN disagreement that the intervention is appropriate. These guidelines are also available on the Internet. For the latest update, visit NCCN.org.

Identifying individuals with hereditary syndromes allows for improved cancer surveillance, risk reduction, and optimized management. Establishing criteria for assessment allows for the identification of individuals who are carriers of pathogenic genetic variants. The NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal provide recommendations for the assessment and management of patients with high-risk colorectal cancer syndromes. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on criteria for the evaluation of Lynch syndrome and considerations for use of multigene testing in the assessment of hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes.

The prior standard for proceeding with elective colectomy following 2 episodes of diverticulitis is no longer accepted. Decisions to proceed with colectomy should be made based on consideration of the risks of recurrent diverticulitis, the morbidity of surgery, ongoing symptoms, the complexity of disease, and operative risk. Laparoscopic surgery is preferred to open approaches. Recent evidence suggests that existing guidelines should be updated.