Yield of colonoscopy for advanced neoplasia in a population-based setting Bernard DENIS, Jacques PICOT, Jean François VIES, Marjorie MUSSO, Paul François.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
A guaiac- based faecal occult blood colorectal cancer screening program involving general practitioners is feasible and cost-effective for mass population.
Advertisements

Organized colorectal cancer screening program with FOBT: participation and diagnostic yield deteriorate with time Results – yield Aim To assess the short.
Colorectal Cancer Screening and Surveillance FDA Advisory Committee March, 2002 David Lieberman MD Chief, Division of Gastroenterology Oregon Health Sciences.
Treatment of large and giant colorectal polyps in the real world Stéphanie HUSSON, Guy VENTRE, Frédéric VAGNE, Jean François VIES, Marjorie MUSSO, Jean.
Spotlight on Colorectal Cancer Screening 1 1. Home Screening for Colon Cancer
Complications after Colonoscopy and Risk Factors Xinliang “Albert” Liu, PhD Latarsha Chisholm, PhD Department of Health Management and Informatics University.
Assessment of pathologic interpretation of colorectal polyps by general pathologists in community practice Bernard DENIS, Carol PETERS, Catherine CHAPELAIN,
Direct Access Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Pathway for GPs
Surveillance colonoscopy after polypectomy – how frequent? Dr Chu Ming Leong Tuen Mun Hospital 1.
Screening for Colorectal Cancer Cancer Symposium: Measuring the Benefits of Screening and Treatment October 2007.
USPSTF Screening Recommendations: Implications for Adults at Higher Risk NYFAHC Roundtable, June 18, 2013 Robert A. Smith, PhD Senior Director, Cancer.
COLONOSCOPY VERSUS FECAL IMMUNOCHEMICAL TESTING IN COLORECTAL-CANCER SCREENING The New England Journal of Medicine february 23, 2012.
CCE 4: Bridging Clinical Expertise Using Predictive Computational Cancer Models CRC screening and follow-up – Semi-mechanistic model of CRC development.
DR Jameel Tariq Miro.  Lifetime incidence 5%  90% of cases occur after age 50  One-third of patients with colorectal cancer die from the disease 
Is upper endoscopy indicated in persons with a positive FOBT and a negative colonoscopy in a population-based colorectal cancer screening program ? Bernard.
CT COLONOSCOPY. Turki Alhazmi,MB.CHB, FRCPC, dABR Interventional Radiology-Body MRI Ass. Prof. Faculty of Medicine Umm Al Qura University Makkah-Saudi.
Adverse effects of colorectal cancer screening with fecal occult blood test: a population-based organized program Results – serious adverse effects Adverse.

 2 nd overall leading cause of cancer death in the United States › 3 rd in each sex  Approximately 6% of individuals in the US will develop a cancer.
Colorectal cancer in Norway Maria Mai Ingvild Hvalby.
Clinical Practice Screening for Colorectal Cancer David A. Lieberman, M.D. N Engl J Med Volume 361(12): September 17, 2009.
Sharp L, Tilson L, Whyte S, Ó Céilleachair A
Colorectal cancer Khayal AlKhayal MD,FRCSC
Bowel Screening in Scotland – Current Challenges and Possible Solutions Prof. Bob Steele Ninewells Hospital, University of Dundee.
Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) in Europe L. Hol 1, E.J.Kuipers 1,2 1 Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology and 2 Department of Internal.
General Medicine Subspecialty Conference Colon Cancer Screening General Medicine Subspecialty Conference Colon Cancer Screening Selim Krim, MD Assistant.
Colonoscopic surveillance for prevention of colorectal cancer in people with ulcerative colitis, Crohn’s disease or adenomas NICE CG March 2011.
High risk population in GI field how we can find them? Ahmad Shavakhi MD Associate professor of gastroenterology.
Colonoscopy; Surveillance Indications
Colorectal cancer screening by primary care physicians: a prospective chart audit Bernard DENIS, Guillaume SCHON, Marcel RUETSCH, Jean Christian GRALL,
TREATMENT OF LARGE AND GIANT COLORECTAL POLYPS IN THE REAL WORLD UEGW, PARIS, 2007 Association pour le Dépistage du Cancer colorectal dans le Haut-Rhin.
CONFIDENTIAL PillCam ™ COLON PillCam™ COLON has received a CE Mark, but is not cleared for marketing or available for commercial distribution in the USA.
Gender differences in colorectal cancer screening, attitudes and information preferences Joan M. Griffin, PhD Greta Friedemann-Sánchez, PhD Diana Burgess,
Slides last updated: June 2015 CRC: CLINICAL FEATURES.
Results and cost of a population-based biennial faecal occult blood colorectal cancer screening program Bernard DENIS, Philippe PERRIN, Jean François VIES,
COMPARING YIELD AND COST OF FOBT AND FS IN AN AVERAGE RISK POPULATION: RESULTS AFTER 2 SCREENING ROUNDS N.Segnan MD, Ms Epi Center for Cancer Prevention.
INCIDENCE AND SURVIVAL TRENDS OF COLORECTAL CANCER FROM 2002 TO 2011 BE Ansa; E Alema-Mensah; MD Claridy; JQ Sheats; B Fontenot, and SA Smith Georgia Regents.
Population Screening for Colorectal Cancer - update of evidences
An Evidence Based Approach to Colorectal Cancer Screening J. C. Ryan, M.D. Associate Professor of Medicine UCSF and SF VAMC 9/22/2014.
Prevention and Health Promotion Administration May Overview of Colorectal Cancer Maryland Department of Health & Mental Hygiene Prevention and Health.
Colorectal cancer screening with the addition of flexible sigmoidoscopy to guaiac-based fecal occult blood testing: a population-based controlled trial.
 Subhendu De, Wonsuk Yoo Institute of Public and Preventative Health (IPPH), Georgia Regents University On Summer Public Health Scholars Program (SPHSP)
Diagnostic accuracy systematic review of rectal bleeding in combination with other symptoms, signs and tests in relation to colorectal cancer Olde Bekkink.
A National Bowel Screening Programme Anticipated Colonoscopy Volumes Susan Parry Gastroenterologist, Clinical Director, MOH Bowel Cancer Programme Emmanuel.
Perspectives from the Waitemata Bowel Screening Pilot team -The Endoscopic view Paul Frankish Lead Endoscopist.
MARK COLEMAN MBChB FRCS (Gen Surg) MD hon FRCPSG Consultant Colorectal Surgeon
Modeling Efforts to Inform Countries’ Screening Decisions Ann Graham Zauber, Iris Vogelaar, Marjolein van Ballegooijen, Deb Schrag, Rob Boer, Dik Habbema,
Colorectal Cancer Screening Colorectal Cancer Screening VT SGNA Conference VT SGNA Conference October 24, 2015 October 24, 2015 Lynn Butterly, MD Lynn.
Do all colorectal polyps require pathological examination? Aim To assess whether it is possible to omit the pathological examination of some polyps without.
Flexible Sigmoidoscopy And Whole Colon Imaging In The Diagnosis Of Cancer In Patients With Colorectal Symptoms Peter O’Leary Journal Club 13/10/08.
CT Colonography vs Colonoscopy for the Detection of Advanced Neoplasia David H. Kim, M.D., Perry J. Pickhardt, M.D., Andrew J. Taylor, M.D., Winifred K.
High Quality Screening Colonoscopy Colonoscopy is a common endoscopic procedure, with more than 3 million examinations performed in the United States annually.
D EPARTMENT of F AMILY M EDICINE Colorectal Cancer Screening: Update on Guidelines and Projects Barcey T. Levy, PhD, MD Professor, Department of Family.
First results of a pilot population-based faecal occult blood colorectal cancer screening program B. DENIS, P. PERRIN, J.F. EBELIN, P. WEBER, E. KALTENBACH,
R1 임형석 The risk of colorectal cancer after an attack of uncomplicated diverticulitis BJARKI T. ALEXANDERSSON1, JOHANN P. HREINSSON1,4, TRYGGVI STEFANSSON2,
Am J Gastroenterol 2012; 107:1213– June 2012 R3. 김동희 /prof. 이창균.
High Quality Screening Colonoscopy Colonoscopy is a common endoscopic procedure, with more than 3 million examinations performed in the United States annually.
Clinical process indicators
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم.
Colorectal Cancer Screening Guidelines
A Quality improvement initiative
Bowel cancer screening update GP education event 28 Nov 2017
Repeat Colonoscopy Recommendations
Colorectal Natural History Model
Reporting in CRC screening
Citation: Cancer Care Ontario
Risks of interval colorectal cancer in a FIT-based screening program
Colorectal 2 week wait pathways and “Getting FIT”
Presentation transcript:

Yield of colonoscopy for advanced neoplasia in a population-based setting Bernard DENIS, Jacques PICOT, Jean François VIES, Marjorie MUSSO, Paul François FOURNIER, Frédéric VAGNE, Jean Louis COLSON, Isabelle GENDRE, Philippe PERRIN Results according to age and gender number needed to explore / colonoscopy to detect 1 advanced neoplasia Implementation of universal colonoscopic colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and surveillance is inappropriate and impossible. Risk stratification is needed for targeted screening. Aim: to assess factors associated with advanced colorectal neoplasia within a defined population. Methods: prospective recording of 2 cohorts composed of all consecutive diagnostic colonoscopic procedures performed by all the 34 endoscopists of the Haut-Rhin area: 1) an all indications (AI) cohort over a 3 month period and 2) a gFOBT cohort over a 3 year period within a CRC screening program with guaiac-based FOBT. Advanced neoplasia was defined as cancer or adenoma ≥ 10 mm, or with villous component or with high-grade dysplasia. Results: 5568 colonoscopic procedures were recorded: 3185 in the gFOBT cohort in people aged 50 to 74 (men 54.7%) and 2383 in the AI cohort (mean age 58.9 y, men 48.1%). Overall, the advanced neoplasia rate was 31.0% in the gFOBT cohort and 12.5% in the AI cohort (p < ). In the latter, indications were symptoms (56.5%), screening (23.5%) and surveillance (20.0%). In the AI cohort, 1099 people (50.4%) had never had any previous colorectal examination. In this group, advanced neoplasia rates were not significantly different between people explored for symptoms (11.4%) and screening (10.6%). In the symptomatic group, abdominal pain and change in bowel habits had the lowest advanced neoplasia rate (6.0%). In the screening group, the advanced neoplasia rate was not significantly different between people with a family history of CRC, even in a first-degree relative < 60 y (9.2%) and without (19.4%). In both cohorts, the advanced neoplasia rate increased with age and was 1.9 time higher in men than in women. In the previously unexplored group of the AI cohort, the advanced neoplasia rate was low in women, similar in the y and y age groups (3.8% and 3.9%) and increased to 10.1% in the y age group. It was respectively 8.5% and 21.3% in men in the y and y age groups. In the y age group, men were four times as likely to have advanced neoplasia compared with women. Conclusion: in our population-based setting, gFOBT is by far the indication with the best yield for advanced neoplasia. Abdominal pain and change in bowel habits are the indications with the lowest yield, significantly lower than screening asymptomatic people. The yield for advanced neoplasia is not significantly influenced by a family history of CRC. The advanced neoplasia rate is about four times higher in men than in women in the y age group and the recommended age at first screening should be postponed in women at least 10 years later than in men. Aim to assess factors associated with advanced colorectal neoplasia in a population-based setting - setting: a French administrative district: Haut-Rhin (0.71 million inhabitants) one of the highest CRC incidence in Europe - prospective recording. all consecutive diagnostic colonoscopic procedures. all the 34 endoscopists practicing in the Haut-Rhin - 2 cohorts 1) an all indications (AI) cohort over a 3 month period 2) a gFOBT cohort within a CRC screening program over a 3 year period (Biennial non rehydrated guaiac-based FOBT (Hemoccult II) for residents aged years) - Advanced neoplasia = cancer or adenoma ≥ 10 mm, or with villous component or with high-grade dysplasia. Conclusions in our population-based setting, the yield for advanced neoplasia was - the highest with a + gFOBT - the lowest with non specific colonic symptoms (significantly lower than screening asymptomatic people) - not significantly influenced by a family history of CRC the recommended age at first screening - should be postponed in women 10 years later than in men for opportunistic endoscopic screening - but should remain the same in women as in men for mass organized screening with gFOBT (i.e. 50 y) Digestive Disease Week, Washington DC, 22 May 2007 Overall results - population Association pour le Dépistage du Cancer colorectal dans le Haut-Rhin (ADECA 68), 39 avenue de la Liberté, Colmar, FRANCE Abstract Results according to indication never explored people (n = % of the all indications cohort ) Methods gFOBT n = 3185 n (%) all indications n = 2383 n (%) p genderwomen1444 (45.3%)1213 (51.9%)< 0.01 age < 50 y0 (0%)584 (24.9%) < – 80 y1444 (100%)1673 (71.2%) > 80 y0 (0%)91 (3.9%) indication screening1444 (100%)508 (23.5%) < 0.01 symptoms0 (0%)1221 (56.5%) surveillance0 (0%)433 (20.0%) yieldadvanced neoplasia986 (31.0%)298 (12.5%)< 0.01 indicationpopulation n advanced neoplasia n (%) p symptoms non specific colonic38123 (6.0%) < 0.01 bleeding / anemia22843 (18.9%) screening + immunochemical FOBT4711 (23.4%) < 0.01 colonoscopic screening22323 (10.3%) relative risk age (yr)menwomen < – – – – > Odds ratio[CI] age1.68[1.43 – 1.96] female gender0.55[0.36 – 0.82] non specific colonic symptoms0.32[0.19 – 0.53] Results – multivariate analysis all indications cohort - never explored people indicationfamily history CRC population n advanced neoplasia n (%) p screening no history316 (19.4%) NS 1st d° < 60y545 (9.3%) 1st d° > 60y or 2nd d°13112 (9.2%) age (yr) advanced neoplasia rate (%)sex ratio m/w menwomen < – – – – > total age (yr) advanced neoplasia rate (%)sex ratio m/w menwomen 50 – – – total Results according to age and gender gFOBT cohort (n = 3185) Results according to family history of CRC all indications cohort - never explored people (n = 1099) number needed to explore / colonoscopy to detect 1 advanced neoplasia