Sa1689 Microsatellite Instability, BRAF and KRAS Mutation in Postcolonoscopy Cancers: An Explorative Study

Clercq, Chantal le; Riedl, Robert G.; Bouwens, Mariëlle; Carvalho, Beatriz; Meijer, Gerrit A.; Engeland, Manon van; Winkens, Björn; Masclee, Ad; Sanduleanu, Silvia

doi:10.1016/s0016-5085(13)61002-1

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Concurrent circulating levels of the insulin-like growth factor-1 receptor are associated with colorectal cancer development [ 33 , 34 ]. Still, we found no difference between PCCRCs and dCRCs according to MMR status which has been associated with rapid tumor growth in previous research [ 35 – 37 ]. Our results concerning T2D-related CRC biology are thus contradictory and future studies on molecular characteristics are needed.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 77%

Type 2 diabetes mellitus and post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer: clinical and molecular characteristics and survival

Boysen,

Troelsen,

Sørensen

et al. 2024

Cancer Causes Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Studies suggest that patients with type two diabetes mellitus (T2D) may be at increased risk of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC). We investigated clinical and molecular characteristics and survival of T2D patients with PCCRC to elucidate how T2D-related PCCRC may arise. Methods We identified T2D patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) from 1995 to 2015 and computed prevalence ratios (PRs) comparing clinical and molecular characteristics of CRC in T2D patients with PCCRC vs. in T2D patients with colonoscopy-detected CRC (dCRC). We also followed T2D patients from the diagnosis of PCCRC/dCRC until death, emigration, or study end and compared mortality using Cox-proportional hazards regression models adjusted for sex, age, year of CRC diagnosis, and CRC stage. Results Compared with dCRC, PCCRC was associated with a higher prevalence of proximal CRCs (54% vs. 40%; PR: 1.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.27–1.62) in T2D patients. We found no difference between PCCRC vs. dCRC for CRC stage, histology, and mismatch repair status. The proportion of CRCs that could be categorized as PCCRC decreased over time. Within one year after CRC, 63% of PCCRC vs. 78% of dCRC patients were alive (hazard ratio [HR] 1.85 [95% CI 1.47–2.31]). Within five years after CRC, 44% of PCCRC vs. 54% of dCRC patients were still alive (HR 1.44 [95% CI 1.11–1.87]). Conclusion The increased prevalence of proximally located PCCRCs and the poorer survival may suggest overlooked colorectal lesions as a predominant explanation for T2D-related PCCRC, although altered tumor progression cannot be ruled out.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 77%

Type 2 diabetes mellitus and post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer: clinical and molecular characteristics and survival

Boysen,

Troelsen,

Sørensen

et al. 2024

Cancer Causes Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Prior studies suggest that PCCRCs arising rapid tumor growth are associated with diminished MMR function (22)(23)(24). However, we found no difference between PCCRCs and dCRCs according to MMR status.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 75%

Type 2 diabetes mellitus and post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer: Clinical and molecular characteristics and survival

Boysen¹,

Troelsen

Sørensen

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Studies suggest that patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) may be at increased risk of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC). We investigated clinical and molecular characteristics and survival of T2D patients with PCCRC to elucidate how T2D-related PCCRC may arise. Methods We identified T2D patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) from 1995 to 2015 and computed prevalence ratios (PRs) comparing clinical and molecular characteristics of CRC in T2D patients with PCCRC vs. in T2D patients with colonoscopy-detected CRC (dCRC). We also followed T2D patients from the diagnosis of PCCRC/dCRC until death, emigration, or study end and compared mortality using Cox-proportional hazards regression models adjusted for sex, age, year of CRC diagnosis, and CRC stage. Results Compared with dCRC, PCCRC was associated with a higher prevalence of proximal CRCs (54% vs. 40%; PR: 1.43, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.27–1.62) in T2D patients. We found no difference between PCCRC vs. dCRC for CRC stage, histology, and mismatch repair status. The proportion of CRCs that could be categorized as PCCRC decreased over time. Within one year after CRC, 63% of PCCRC vs. 78% of dCRC patients were alive (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.85 [95% CI: 1.47–2.31]). Within five years after CRC, 44% of PCCRC vs. 54% of dCRC patients were still alive (HR: 1.44 [95% CI: 1.11–1.87]). Conclusion The increased prevalence of proximally located PCCRCs and the poorer survival may suggest overlooked colorectal lesions, as well as changed or rapid tumor progression as explanations for T2D-related PCCRC.

show abstract

“…Evidence at molecular level is, however, sparse. 5,[58][59][60][61][62] Higher prevalence of MSI and extensive DNA methylation were found in PCCRCs vs. prevalent CRCs: MSI 30.4% vs. 10.3% (p=0.003), CIMP 57% vs. 33% (p=0.004). It is worthwhile to mention, these studies were conducted on the same sample of 63 tumors, from a predominantly male population of veterans, underscoring the need for additional data.…”

Section: New Cancersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a study of 3616 screening participants, 62 the authors found that 10 of a total of 39 CRCs (25.6%) identified after two rounds of fecal testing were interval CRCs: nine following a negative FIT or gFOBT and one following a negative colonoscopy. In an evaluation of the National Health Service Bowel Cancer Screening Programme in England, in 534,411 participants, 192 of 1336 CRCs (14.4%) identified were interval CRCs, all of them following a negative gFOBT.…”

Section: -63mentioning

confidence: 99%

Quest for the best : quality of colonoscopy and colorectal cancer diagnosis in clinical practice

Clercq

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People interested in the research are advised to contact the author for the final version of the publication, or visit the DOI to the publisher's website.• The final author version and the galley proof are versions of the publication after peer review.• The final published version features the final layout of the paper including the volume, issue and page numbers. Link to publication General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal.If the publication is distributed under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the "Taverne" license above, please follow below link for the End User Agreement:

show abstract

Sa1689 Microsatellite Instability, BRAF and KRAS Mutation in Postcolonoscopy Cancers: An Explorative Study

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Type 2 diabetes mellitus and post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer: clinical and molecular characteristics and survival

Type 2 diabetes mellitus and post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer: clinical and molecular characteristics and survival

Type 2 diabetes mellitus and post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer: Clinical and molecular characteristics and survival

Quest for the best : quality of colonoscopy and colorectal cancer diagnosis in clinical practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About