Cargando…

Long-term colorectal cancer incidence after adenoma removal and the effects of surveillance on incidence: a multicentre, retrospective, cohort study

OBJECTIVE: Postpolypectomy colonoscopy surveillance aims to prevent colorectal cancer (CRC). The 2002 UK surveillance guidelines define low-risk, intermediate-risk and high-risk groups, recommending different strategies for each. Evidence supporting the guidelines is limited. We examined CRC inciden...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cross, Amanda J, Robbins, Emma C, Pack, Kevin, Stenson, Iain, Kirby, Paula L, Patel, Bhavita, Rutter, Matthew D, Veitch, Andrew M, Saunders, Brian P, Duffy, Stephen W, Wooldrage, Kate
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7456728/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31953252
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2019-320036
_version_ 1783575852613632000
author Cross, Amanda J
Robbins, Emma C
Pack, Kevin
Stenson, Iain
Kirby, Paula L
Patel, Bhavita
Rutter, Matthew D
Veitch, Andrew M
Saunders, Brian P
Duffy, Stephen W
Wooldrage, Kate
author_facet Cross, Amanda J
Robbins, Emma C
Pack, Kevin
Stenson, Iain
Kirby, Paula L
Patel, Bhavita
Rutter, Matthew D
Veitch, Andrew M
Saunders, Brian P
Duffy, Stephen W
Wooldrage, Kate
author_sort Cross, Amanda J
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Postpolypectomy colonoscopy surveillance aims to prevent colorectal cancer (CRC). The 2002 UK surveillance guidelines define low-risk, intermediate-risk and high-risk groups, recommending different strategies for each. Evidence supporting the guidelines is limited. We examined CRC incidence and effects of surveillance on incidence among each risk group. DESIGN: Retrospective study of 33 011 patients who underwent colonoscopy with adenoma removal at 17 UK hospitals, mostly (87%) from 2000 to 2010. Patients were followed up through 2016. Cox regression with time-varying covariates was used to estimate effects of surveillance on CRC incidence adjusted for patient, procedural and polyp characteristics. Standardised incidence ratios (SIRs) compared incidence with that in the general population. RESULTS: After exclusions, 28 972 patients were available for analysis; 14 401 (50%) were classed as low-risk, 11 852 (41%) as intermediate-risk and 2719 (9%) as high-risk. Median follow-up was 9.3 years. In the low-risk, intermediate-risk and high-risk groups, CRC incidence per 100 000 person-years was 140 (95% CI 122 to 162), 221 (195 to 251) and 366 (295 to 453), respectively. CRC incidence was 40%–50% lower with a single surveillance visit than with none: hazard ratios (HRs) were 0.56 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.80), 0.59 (0.43 to 0.81) and 0.49 (0.29 to 0.82) in the low-risk, intermediate-risk and high-risk groups, respectively. Compared with the general population, CRC incidence without surveillance was similar among low-risk (SIR 0.86, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.02) and intermediate-risk (1.16, 0.97 to 1.37) patients, but higher among high-risk patients (1.91, 1.39 to 2.56). CONCLUSION: Postpolypectomy surveillance reduces CRC risk. However, even without surveillance, CRC risk in some low-risk and intermediate-risk patients is no higher than in the general population. These patients could be managed by screening rather than surveillance.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7456728
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74567282020-09-04 Long-term colorectal cancer incidence after adenoma removal and the effects of surveillance on incidence: a multicentre, retrospective, cohort study Cross, Amanda J Robbins, Emma C Pack, Kevin Stenson, Iain Kirby, Paula L Patel, Bhavita Rutter, Matthew D Veitch, Andrew M Saunders, Brian P Duffy, Stephen W Wooldrage, Kate Gut Colon OBJECTIVE: Postpolypectomy colonoscopy surveillance aims to prevent colorectal cancer (CRC). The 2002 UK surveillance guidelines define low-risk, intermediate-risk and high-risk groups, recommending different strategies for each. Evidence supporting the guidelines is limited. We examined CRC incidence and effects of surveillance on incidence among each risk group. DESIGN: Retrospective study of 33 011 patients who underwent colonoscopy with adenoma removal at 17 UK hospitals, mostly (87%) from 2000 to 2010. Patients were followed up through 2016. Cox regression with time-varying covariates was used to estimate effects of surveillance on CRC incidence adjusted for patient, procedural and polyp characteristics. Standardised incidence ratios (SIRs) compared incidence with that in the general population. RESULTS: After exclusions, 28 972 patients were available for analysis; 14 401 (50%) were classed as low-risk, 11 852 (41%) as intermediate-risk and 2719 (9%) as high-risk. Median follow-up was 9.3 years. In the low-risk, intermediate-risk and high-risk groups, CRC incidence per 100 000 person-years was 140 (95% CI 122 to 162), 221 (195 to 251) and 366 (295 to 453), respectively. CRC incidence was 40%–50% lower with a single surveillance visit than with none: hazard ratios (HRs) were 0.56 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.80), 0.59 (0.43 to 0.81) and 0.49 (0.29 to 0.82) in the low-risk, intermediate-risk and high-risk groups, respectively. Compared with the general population, CRC incidence without surveillance was similar among low-risk (SIR 0.86, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.02) and intermediate-risk (1.16, 0.97 to 1.37) patients, but higher among high-risk patients (1.91, 1.39 to 2.56). CONCLUSION: Postpolypectomy surveillance reduces CRC risk. However, even without surveillance, CRC risk in some low-risk and intermediate-risk patients is no higher than in the general population. These patients could be managed by screening rather than surveillance. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-09 2020-01-17 /pmc/articles/PMC7456728/ /pubmed/31953252 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2019-320036 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Colon
Cross, Amanda J
Robbins, Emma C
Pack, Kevin
Stenson, Iain
Kirby, Paula L
Patel, Bhavita
Rutter, Matthew D
Veitch, Andrew M
Saunders, Brian P
Duffy, Stephen W
Wooldrage, Kate
Long-term colorectal cancer incidence after adenoma removal and the effects of surveillance on incidence: a multicentre, retrospective, cohort study
title Long-term colorectal cancer incidence after adenoma removal and the effects of surveillance on incidence: a multicentre, retrospective, cohort study
title_full Long-term colorectal cancer incidence after adenoma removal and the effects of surveillance on incidence: a multicentre, retrospective, cohort study
title_fullStr Long-term colorectal cancer incidence after adenoma removal and the effects of surveillance on incidence: a multicentre, retrospective, cohort study
title_full_unstemmed Long-term colorectal cancer incidence after adenoma removal and the effects of surveillance on incidence: a multicentre, retrospective, cohort study
title_short Long-term colorectal cancer incidence after adenoma removal and the effects of surveillance on incidence: a multicentre, retrospective, cohort study
title_sort long-term colorectal cancer incidence after adenoma removal and the effects of surveillance on incidence: a multicentre, retrospective, cohort study
topic Colon
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7456728/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31953252
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2019-320036
work_keys_str_mv AT crossamandaj longtermcolorectalcancerincidenceafteradenomaremovalandtheeffectsofsurveillanceonincidenceamulticentreretrospectivecohortstudy
AT robbinsemmac longtermcolorectalcancerincidenceafteradenomaremovalandtheeffectsofsurveillanceonincidenceamulticentreretrospectivecohortstudy
AT packkevin longtermcolorectalcancerincidenceafteradenomaremovalandtheeffectsofsurveillanceonincidenceamulticentreretrospectivecohortstudy
AT stensoniain longtermcolorectalcancerincidenceafteradenomaremovalandtheeffectsofsurveillanceonincidenceamulticentreretrospectivecohortstudy
AT kirbypaulal longtermcolorectalcancerincidenceafteradenomaremovalandtheeffectsofsurveillanceonincidenceamulticentreretrospectivecohortstudy
AT patelbhavita longtermcolorectalcancerincidenceafteradenomaremovalandtheeffectsofsurveillanceonincidenceamulticentreretrospectivecohortstudy
AT ruttermatthewd longtermcolorectalcancerincidenceafteradenomaremovalandtheeffectsofsurveillanceonincidenceamulticentreretrospectivecohortstudy
AT veitchandrewm longtermcolorectalcancerincidenceafteradenomaremovalandtheeffectsofsurveillanceonincidenceamulticentreretrospectivecohortstudy
AT saundersbrianp longtermcolorectalcancerincidenceafteradenomaremovalandtheeffectsofsurveillanceonincidenceamulticentreretrospectivecohortstudy
AT duffystephenw longtermcolorectalcancerincidenceafteradenomaremovalandtheeffectsofsurveillanceonincidenceamulticentreretrospectivecohortstudy
AT wooldragekate longtermcolorectalcancerincidenceafteradenomaremovalandtheeffectsofsurveillanceonincidenceamulticentreretrospectivecohortstudy