One-Year Risk for Advanced Colorectal Neoplasia: U.S. Versus U.K. Risk-Stratification Guidelines

BACKGROUND Guidelines from the United Kingdom and the United States on risk stratification after polypectomy differ, as do recommended surveillance intervals. OBJECTIVE To compare risk for advanced colorectal neoplasia at 1-year colonoscopy among patients cross-classified by U.S. and U.K. surveillance guidelines. DESIGN Pooled analysis of 4 prospective studies between 1984 and 1998. SETTING Academic and private clinics in the United States. PATIENTS 3226 postpolypectomy patients with 6- to 18-month follow-up colonoscopy. MEASUREMENTS Rates of advanced neoplasia (an adenoma ≥1 cm, high-grade dysplasia, >25% villous architecture, or invasive cancer) at 1 year, compared across U.S. and U.K. risk categories. RESULTS Advanced neoplasia was detected 1 year after polypectomy in 3.8% (95% CI, 2.7% to 4.9%) of lower-risk patients and 11.2% (CI, 9.8% to 12.6%) of higher-risk patients by U.S. criteria. According to U.K. criteria, 4.4% (CI, 3.3% to 5.4%) of low-risk patients, 9.9% (CI, 8.3% to 11.5%) of intermediate-risk patients, and 18.7% (CI, 14.8% to 22.5%) of high-risk patients presented with advanced neoplasia; U.K. high-risk patients comprised 12.1% of all patients. All U.S. lower-risk patients were low-risk by U.K. criteria; however, more patients were classified as low-risk, because the U.K. guidelines do not consider histologic features. Higher-risk U.S. patients were distributed across the 3 U.K. categories. Among all patients with advanced neoplasia, 26.3% were reclassified by the U.K. criteria to a higher-risk category and 7.0% to a lower-risk category, with a net 19.0% benefiting from detection 2 years earlier. Overall, substitution of U.K. for U.S. guidelines resulted in an estimated 0.03 additional colonoscopy every 5 years per patient. LIMITATIONS Patients were enrolled 15 to 20 years ago, and quality measures for colonoscopy were unavailable. Patients lacking follow-up colonoscopy or with surveillance colonoscopy after 6 to 18 months and those with cancer or insufficient baseline adenoma characteristics were excluded (2076 of 5302). CONCLUSION Application of the U.K. guidelines in the United States could identify a subset of high-risk patients who may warrant a 1-year clearing colonoscopy without substantially increasing rates of colonoscopy. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE European Union Public Health Programme.

[1]  A. Jemal,et al.  Annual Report to the Nation on the status of cancer, 1975‐2010, featuring prevalence of comorbidity and impact on survival among persons with lung, colorectal, breast, or prostate cancer , 2014, Cancer.

[2]  N Segnan,et al.  European guidelines for quality assurance in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis. First Edition – Colonoscopic surveillance following adenoma removal , 2012, Endoscopy.

[3]  Douglas K Rex,et al.  Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after screening and polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. , 2012, Gastroenterology.

[4]  H. Brenner,et al.  Role of Colonoscopy and Polyp Characteristics in Colorectal Cancer After Colonoscopic Polyp Detection , 2012, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[5]  E. Jacobs,et al.  Primary care physician compliance with colorectal cancer screening guidelines , 2011, Cancer Causes & Control.

[6]  D. Ransohoff,et al.  Recommendations for Post-Polypectomy Surveillance in Community Practice , 2011, Digestive Diseases and Sciences.

[7]  D. Ahnen.  The American College of Gastroenterology Emily Couric Lecture—The Adenoma–Carcinoma Sequence Revisited: Has the Era of Genetic Tailoring Finally Arrived? , 2011, The American Journal of Gastroenterology.

[8]  D. Buckman,et al.  Are Physicians’ Recommendations For Colorectal Cancer Screening Guideline-Consistent? , 2011, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[9]  Ewout W Steyerberg,et al.  Extensions of net reclassification improvement calculations to measure usefulness of new biomarkers , 2011, Statistics in medicine.

[10]  D. Rex.  Colorectal cancer prevention with colonoscopy: recent research and debate. , 2010, Gastroenterology & hepatology.

[11]  Charles J. Kahi,et al.  High-Definition Chromocolonoscopy vs. High-Definition White Light Colonoscopy for Average-Risk Colorectal Cancer Screening , 2010, The American Journal of Gastroenterology.

[12]  Marcin Polkowski,et al.  Quality indicators for colonoscopy and the risk of interval cancer. , 2010, The New England journal of medicine.

[13]  R. Steele,et al.  Guidelines for colorectal cancer screening and surveillance in moderate and high risk groups (update from 2002) , 2010, Gut.

[14]  A. Jemal,et al.  Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975‐2006, featuring colorectal cancer trends and impact of interventions (risk factors, screening, and treatment) to reduce future rates , 2010, Cancer.

[15]  A. Jemal,et al.  Worldwide Variations in Colorectal Cancer , 2009, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[16]  Nancy R Cook,et al.  Advances in Measuring the Effect of Individual Predictors of Cardiovascular Risk: The Role of Reclassification Measures , 2009, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[17]  David S Alberts,et al.  A pooled analysis of advanced colorectal neoplasia diagnoses after colonoscopic polypectomy. , 2009, Gastroenterology.

[18]  Douglas K Rex,et al.  Endoscopist Can Be More Powerful than Age and Male Gender in Predicting Adenoma Detection at Colonoscopy , 2007, The American Journal of Gastroenterology.

[19]  J. Johanson,et al.  Colonoscopic withdrawal times and adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy. , 2006, The New England journal of medicine.

[20]  Douglas K Rex,et al.  Maximizing Detection of Adenomas and Cancers During Colonoscopy , 2006, The American Journal of Gastroenterology.

[21]  Pankaj Singh,et al.  Colorectal Screening after Polypectomy: A National Survey Study of Primary Care Physicians , 2006, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[22]  Robert H Fletcher,et al.  Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer and the American Cancer Society. , 2006, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[23]  A. Schatzkin,et al.  Colonoscopic screening of average-risk women for colorectal neoplasia. , 2005, The New England journal of medicine.

[24]  David F Ransohoff,et al.  Are Physicians Doing Too Much Colonoscopy? A National Survey of Colorectal Surveillance after Polypectomy , 2004, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[25]  M. Costantini,et al.  Interobserver agreement in the histologic diagnosis of colorectal polyps. the experience of the multicenter adenoma colorectal study (SMAC). , 2003, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[26]  C. Klabunde,et al.  A national survey of primary care physicians' colorectal cancer screening recommendations and practices. , 2003, Preventive medicine.

[27]  W. Atkin,et al.  Surveillance guidelines after removal of colorectal adenomatous polyps , 2002, Gut.

[28]  A. Neugut,et al.  Reliability in the classification of advanced colorectal adenomas. , 2002, Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology.

[29]  D. Lieberman,et al.  Use of colonoscopy to screen asymptomatic adults for colorectal cancer. Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study Group 380. , 2000, The New England journal of medicine.

[30]  J. Weissfeld,et al.  Lack of effect of a low-fat, high-fiber diet on the recurrence of colorectal adenomas. Polyp Prevention Trial Study Group. , 2000, The New England journal of medicine.

[31]  G. Beck,et al.  Calcium supplements for the prevention of colorectal adenomas. Calcium Polyp Prevention Study Group. , 1999, The New England journal of medicine.

[32]  T A Colacchio,et al.  A clinical trial of antioxidant vitamins to prevent colorectal adenoma. Polyp Prevention Study Group. , 1994, The New England journal of medicine.

[33]  E T Stewart,et al.  Randomized comparison of surveillance intervals after colonoscopic removal of newly diagnosed adenomatous polyps. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. , 1993, The New England journal of medicine.

[34]  Charles J Kahi,et al.  Prevalence and variable detection of proximal colon serrated polyps during screening colonoscopy. , 2011, Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association.

[35]  D. Rex,et al.  Bringing new endoscopic imaging technology into everyday practice: what is the role of professional GI societies? Polyp imaging as a template for moving endoscopic innovation forward to answer key clinical questions. , 2010, Gastrointestinal endoscopy.

[36]  Ames,et al.  Correction: Lack of Effect of a High-Fiber Cereal Supplement on the Recurrence of Colorectal Adenomas. , 2000, The New England journal of medicine.