Baseline Colonoscopy Findings Associated With 10-Year Outcomes in a Screening Cohort Undergoing Colonoscopy Surveillance

Lieberman, David A.; Sullivan, Brian; Hauser, Elizabeth R.; Qin, Xuejun; Musselwhite, Laura W.; OʼLeary, Meghan C.; Redding, Thomas S.; Madison, Ashton; Bullard, A. Jasmine; Thomas, R. J. S.; Sims, Kellie J.; Williams, Christina D.; Hyslop, Terry; Weiss, David G.; Gupta, Samir; Gellad, Ziad F.; Robertson, Douglas J.; Provenzale, Dawn

doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2019.07.052

Cited by 56 publications

(64 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Cancer screening utilizes medical tests to identify precancerous lesions before cancer is formed or to detect cancer before it progresses into more advanced stages [ 7 , 8 ]. Screening is an effective prevention mechanism that could substantially reduce cancer incidence and mortality rates in patients [ 9 - 12 ]. While not curative, cancer screening has potential to decrease the burden of cancer [ 13 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of COVID-19 on Cancer Screening: Challenges and Opportunities

Cancino¹,

Su²,

Mesa³

et al. 2020

JMIR Cancer

109

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cancer is a leading cause of death in the United States and across the globe. Cancer screening is an effective preventive measure that can reduce cancer incidence and mortality. While cancer screening is integral to cancer control and prevention, due to the COVID-19 outbreak many screenings have either been canceled or postponed, leaving a vast number of patients without access to recommended health care services. This disruption to cancer screening services may have a significant impact on patients, health care practitioners, and health systems. In this paper, we aim to offer a comprehensive view of the impact of COVID-19 on cancer screening. We present the challenges COVID-19 has exerted on patients, health care practitioners, and health systems as well as potential opportunities that could help address these challenges.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of COVID-19 on Cancer Screening: Challenges and Opportunities

Cancino¹,

Su²,

Mesa³

et al. 2020

JMIR Cancer

109

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The only factor with an odds ratio > 2 for advanced adenomas was adenoma multiplicity [21]. Another study in veterans showed a higher 10-year incidence of advanced neoplasia in patients with baseline CRC or advanced adenomas than in patients with one to two adenomas or no neoplasia (43.7 % and 21.9 % vs. 6.3 % or 4.1 %) [22]. Interestingly, patients with three or more small adenomas carried a 66 % risk of developing advanced neoplasia compared with patients with advanced adenomas (odds ratios 2.50 vs. 3.77).…”

Section: Conclusion Low-volume Ner1006 Enhances High-qualitymentioning

confidence: 97%

High-quality colon cleansing and multiple neoplasia detection with 1L NER1006 versus mid-volume options: Post hoc analysis of phase 3 clinical trials

Epstein¹,

Bénamouzig

Halonen

et al. 2020

Endosc Int Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and study aims Multiple neoplasia increase the risk of colorectal cancer. High-quality cleansing may improve adenoma detection. We assessed whether a new bowel preparation can improve colon cleansing and multiple lesion detection. Patients and methods This post hoc analysis of two randomized clinical trials in Europe and the US assessed the per study and combined cleansing efficacy of overnight split dosing with (preparation + clear fluids) 1 + 1 L polyethylene glycol (PEG) NER1006 versus 2 + 1 L PEG + ascorbate (2LPEG) or 1 + 2 L oral sulfate solution (OSS) combined. Treatment-blinded central readers assessed cleansing quality using the Harefield Cleansing Scale (HCS). Patients with full segmental scoring were included. HCS segmental scores 0–4 (high-quality = HCS 3–4) were analyzed for NER1006 versus 2LPEG/OSS. Mean number of polyps or adenomas per patient (MPP/MAP) was calculated for treatments in patients with at least one polyp or adenoma. Results In 1037 patients, NER1006 attained a greater rate of HCS 3 scores (29 % vs. 20 %; P < 0.001) and HCS 4 scores (20 % vs. 17 %; P = 0.007) versus 2LPEG/OSS. More polyps (678 versus 585) and adenomas (397 versus 331) were detected with NER1006 (N = 517) versus 2LPEG/OSS (N = 520). In all neoplasia-positive patients, with increasing minimal per-patient neoplasia multiplicity from 1 to 10, NER1006 numerically improved MPP (difference ± SE: 0.48 ± 0.24 to 3.89 ± 3.37) and MAP (0.47 ± 0.26 to 7.50 ± 9.00) versus 2LPEG/OSS. Conclusions Low-volume NER1006 enhances high-quality cleansing versus medium-volume 2LPEG or OSS, individually and when combined. NER1006 may consequently facilitate the detection of multiple neoplasia in patients.

show abstract

“…47,48 In addition, emerging data suggest that a 10-year follow-up may be safe for individuals with low-risk adenomas. 49,50 During the 2020 update, the panel discussed the data and potential benefits versus risks of changing the recommended follow-up for these individuals from 5 to 10 years to 10 years.…”

Section: Follow-up For Low-risk Adenomas Post-colonoscopymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…49 An analysis of data from the Department of Veteran Affairs Cooperative Studies Program Study (n53121) also determined that in a group of asymptomatic veterans who underwent colonoscopy, after a 10-year follow-up, individuals with 1 to 2 small adenomas at baseline did not have a higher risk of advanced neoplasia or CRC compared with those without adenomas. 50…”

Section: Follow-up For Low-risk Adenomas Post-colonoscopymentioning

confidence: 99%

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Colorectal Cancer Screening, Version 2.2020

Provenzale

Ness

Llor

et al. 2020

Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The NCCN Guidelines for Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening describe various colorectal screening modalities as well as recommended screening schedules for patients at average or increased risk of developing sporadic CRC. They are intended to aid physicians with clinical decision-making regarding CRC screening for patients without defined genetic syndromes. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on select recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines, including a section on primary and secondary CRC prevention, and provide context for the panel’s recommendations regarding the age to initiate screening in average risk individuals and follow-up for low-risk adenomas.

show abstract

Baseline Colonoscopy Findings Associated With 10-Year Outcomes in a Screening Cohort Undergoing Colonoscopy Surveillance

Cited by 56 publications

References 58 publications

The Impact of COVID-19 on Cancer Screening: Challenges and Opportunities

The Impact of COVID-19 on Cancer Screening: Challenges and Opportunities

High-quality colon cleansing and multiple neoplasia detection with 1L NER1006 versus mid-volume options: Post hoc analysis of phase 3 clinical trials

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Colorectal Cancer Screening, Version 2.2020

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About