Whole-colon investigation vs. flexible sigmoidoscopy for suspected colorectal cancer based on presenting symptoms and signs: a multicentre cohort study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Patients with suspected colorectal cancer (CRC) usually undergo colonoscopy. Flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) may be preferred if proximal cancer risk is low. We investigated which patients could undergo FS alone.Methods
Cohort study of 7375 patients (≥55 years) referred with suspected CRC to 21 English hospitals (2004-2007), followed using hospital records and cancer registries. We calculated yields and number of needed whole-colon examinations (NNE) to diagnose one cancer by symptoms/signs and subsite. We considered narrow (haemoglobin <11 g/dL men; <10 g/dL women) and broad (<13 g/dL men; <12 g/dL women) anaemia definitions and iron-deficiency anaemia (IDA).Results
One hundred and twenty-seven proximal and 429 distal CRCs were diagnosed. A broad anaemia definition identified 80% of proximal cancers; a narrow definition with IDA identified 39%. In patients with broad definition anaemia and/or abdominal mass, proximal cancer yield and NNE were 4.8% (97/2022) and 21. In patients without broad definition anaemia and/or abdominal mass, with rectal bleeding or increased stool frequency (41% of cohort), proximal cancer yield and NNE were 0.4% (13/3031) and 234.Conclusion
Most proximal cancers are accompanied by broad definition anaemia. In patients without broad definition anaemia and/or abdominal mass, with rectal bleeding or increased stool frequency, proximal cancer is rare and FS should suffice.
SUBMITTER: Cross AJ
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6342953 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe diagnostic yield of the faecal immunochemical test and sigmoidoscopy in detecting proximal serrated polyps in a colorectal cancer screening programme has not been fully assessed.AimWe determined the detection rate of proximal serrated polyps by simulated sigmoidoscopy and faecal immunochemical test compared with total colonoscopy in a population-based, multicentre, nationwide, randomised controlled trial (ColonPrev study).MethodsSigmoidoscopy yield was simulated based on the UK-Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Trial for total colonoscopy referral. Definitions were: proximal serrated polyp (proximal serrated polyp): sessile serrated polyp or hyperplastic polyp of any size and proximal at-risk serrated polyp (at-risk proximal serrated polyp): sessile serrated polyp of any size or hyperplastic polyp ≥ 10 mm, both located proximally to the splenic flexure.ResultsA total of 10,611 individuals underwent faecal immunochemical test and 5059 underwent total colonoscopy and were evaluated by simulated sigmoidoscopy. Sigmoidoscopy and faecal immunochemical test were less accurate in detecting proximal serrated polyps (odds ratio: 0.13; 95% confidence interval: 0.10-0.18 and 0.13; 0.09-0.18, p < 0.0001, respectively). Both tests were inferior to colonoscopy in detecting at-risk proximal serrated polyps, and sigmoidoscopy was inferior to faecal immunochemical test in detecting these lesions (odds ratio: 0.17; 95% confidence interval: 0.10-0.30 and 0.25; 0.17-0.37, p < 0.0001, respectively).ConclusionSigmoidoscopy and faecal immunochemical test are less accurate in detecting proximal serrated polyps than colonoscopy, particularly in women.
| S-EPMC6297927 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In 1992, two well-conducted case-control studies used data from two different health maintenance organizations and demonstrated a 59-79% reduction in mortality from colorectal cancer (CRC) following exposure to sigmoidoscopy. These studies highlight the possibility of reducing mortality from CRC using population-based endoscopic screening. The development of fiber optics improved the technology, and the ease of performing flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) with widespread adoption of this screening modality. To date, FS is the only endoscopic screening modality that has been shown to reduce mortality in randomized clinical trials. This article reviews the development of sigmoidoscopy, its use in CRC screening and the current reduced role of this proven screening modality, and explores new frontiers for population-based FS screening.
| S-EPMC4108216 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundColorectal cancer is the third most common cancer worldwide. Previous analyses have only reported follow-up after flexible sigmoidoscopy for a maximum of 12 years. We aimed to examine colorectal cancer incidence and mortality after a single flexible sigmoidoscopy screening and 17 years of follow-up.MethodsIn this multicentre randomised trial (UK Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening Trial), done between Nov 14, 1994, and March 30, 1999, 170 432 eligible men and women, who had indicated on a previous questionnaire that they would probably attend screening if invited, were randomly assigned (1:2) to an intervention group (offered flexible sigmoidoscopy screening) or a control group (not contacted). Randomisation was done centrally in blocks of 12, and stratified by trial centre, general practice, and household type. The nature of the intervention did not allow the staff to be masked to arm of the trial; however, randomisation was done in batches so that the control group and participants not yet randomised were unaware of their allocation status. The primary outcomes were incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for colorectal cancer incidence and mortality were estimated for intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, number 28352761.FindingsOur cohort analysis included 170 034 people: 112 936 in the control group and 57 098 in the intervention group, 40 621 (71%) of whom were screened and 16 477 (29%) were not screened. During screening and a median of 17·1 years' follow-up, colorectal cancer was diagnosed in 1230 individuals in the intervention group and 3253 in the control group, and 353 individuals in the intervention group versus 996 individuals in the control group died from colorectal cancer. In intention-to-treat analyses, colorectal cancer incidence was reduced by 26% (HR 0·74 [95% CI 0·70-0·80]; p<0·0001) in the intervention group versus the control group and colorectal cancer mortality was reduced by 30% (0·70 [0·62-0·79]; p<0·0001) in the intervention group versus the control group. In per-protocol analyses, adjusted for non-compliance, colorectal cancer incidence and mortality were 35% (HR 0·65 [95% CI 0·59-0·71]) and 41% (0·59 [0·49-0·70]) lower in the screened group.InterpretationA single flexible sigmoidoscopy continues to provide substantial protection from colorectal cancer diagnosis and death, with protection lasting at least 17 years.FundingNational Institute for Health Research Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation.
| S-EPMC6168937 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:The benefits of endoscopic testing for colorectal-cancer screening are uncertain. We evaluated the effect of screening with flexible sigmoidoscopy on colorectal-cancer incidence and mortality. METHODS:From 1993 through 2001, we randomly assigned 154,900 men and women 55 to 74 years of age either to screening with flexible sigmoidoscopy, with a repeat screening at 3 or 5 years, or to usual care. Cases of colorectal cancer and deaths from the disease were ascertained. RESULTS:Of the 77,445 participants randomly assigned to screening (intervention group), 83.5% underwent baseline flexible sigmoidoscopy and 54.0% were screened at 3 or 5 years. The incidence of colorectal cancer after a median follow-up of 11.9 years was 11.9 cases per 10,000 person-years in the intervention group (1012 cases), as compared with 15.2 cases per 10,000 person-years in the usual-care group (1287 cases), which represents a 21% reduction (relative risk, 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72 to 0.85; P<0.001). Significant reductions were observed in the incidence of both distal colorectal cancer (479 cases in the intervention group vs. 669 cases in the usual-care group; relative risk, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.80; P<0.001) and proximal colorectal cancer (512 cases vs. 595 cases; relative risk, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76 to 0.97; P=0.01). There were 2.9 deaths from colorectal cancer per 10,000 person-years in the intervention group (252 deaths), as compared with 3.9 per 10,000 person-years in the usual-care group (341 deaths), which represents a 26% reduction (relative risk, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.87; P<0.001). Mortality from distal colorectal cancer was reduced by 50% (87 deaths in the intervention group vs. 175 in the usual-care group; relative risk, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.64; P<0.001); mortality from proximal colorectal cancer was unaffected (143 and 147 deaths, respectively; relative risk, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.22; P=0.81). CONCLUSIONS:Screening with flexible sigmoidoscopy was associated with a significant decrease in colorectal-cancer incidence (in both the distal and proximal colon) and mortality (distal colon only). (Funded by the National Cancer Institute; PLCO ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00002540.).
| S-EPMC3641846 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Brain tumors can present with various psychiatric symptoms, with or without neurological symptoms, an aspect that complicates the clinical picture. However, no systematic description of symptoms that should prompt a neurological investigation has been provided. This review aims to summarize available case reports describing patients with brain tumors showing psychiatric symptoms before brain tumor diagnosis, in order to provide a comprehensive description of these symptoms as well as their potential relationship with delay in the diagnosis. A systematic literature review on case reports of brain tumors and psychiatric symptoms from 1970 to 2020 was conducted on PubMed, Ovid, Psych Info, and MEDLINE. Exclusion criteria comprised tumors not included in the World Health Organization (WHO) Classification 4th edition and cases in which psychiatric symptoms were absent or followed the diagnosis. A total of 165 case reports were analyzed. In a subset of patients with brain tumors, psychiatric symptoms can be the only manifestation or precede focal neurological signs by months or even years. The appearance of focal or generalized neurological symptoms after, rather than along with, psychiatric symptoms was associated with a significant delay in the diagnosis in adults. A timely assessment of psychiatric symptoms might help to improve early diagnosis of brain tumors.
| S-EPMC7997443 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:Colonoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy are both recommended colorectal cancer (CRC) screening strategies, but their relative effectiveness is unclear. We sought to evaluate the ability of each of these two modalities to reduce CRC mortality. METHODS:We conducted a case-control study using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database. Cases were persons aged 70-85 years who died of CRC and were matched to up to three non-CRC controls. Receipt of endoscopy was ascertained from Medicare claims and endoscopy indication assigned using a validated algorithm. Conditional logistic regression models were developed to estimate the association between screening colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy and CRC mortality. We conducted secondary analyses by race, sex, and endoscopist characteristics, and with varying duration of the look-back period. RESULTS:In the initial analysis using all available look-back years, screening flexible sigmoidoscopy was associated with a 35% reduction in CRC mortality (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.48, 0.89), while screening colonoscopy was associated with a 74% reduction (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.23, 0.30). Sigmoidoscopy was not associated with any reduction in proximal CRC mortality. The association between colonoscopy and reduced CRC mortality was stronger in the distal than the proximal colon. Results were similar in analyses using a 5-year look-back period. CONCLUSIONS:Screening colonoscopy was associated with greater reductions in CRC mortality than screening sigmoidoscopy, and with a greater reduction in the distal than the proximal colon. These results provide additional information on the relative benefits of screening for CRC with sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy.
| S-EPMC7071949 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The clinical effectiveness of screening is highly dependent on uptake. Previous randomised controlled trials suggest that non-participant reminders, which highlight the opportunity to re-book an appointment, can improve participation. The present analysis examines the impact of implementing these reminders within the English Flexible Sigmoidoscopy (FS) Screening Programme, which offers once-only FS screening to adults aged 55-59 years. We assessed the screening status of 26,339 individuals invited for once-only FS screening in England. A total of 10,952 (41.6%) had attended screening, and were subsequently ineligible. The remaining 15,387 had not attended screening, and were selected to receive a reminder, 1-2 years after their invitation. Descriptive statistics were used to assess the increase in uptake and the adenoma detection rate (ADR) of those who self-referred, six months after the delivery of the final reminder. Pearson's Chi-Square was used to compare the ADR between those who attended when invited and those who self-referred. Of the 15,387 adults eligible to receive a reminder, 13,626 (88.6%) were sent a reminder as intended (1,761 were not sent a reminder, due to endoscopy capacity). Of these, 8.0% (n = 1,086) booked and attended an appointment, which equated to a 4.1% increase in uptake from 41.6% at baseline, to 45.7% at follow-up. The ADR was significantly higher for those who self-referred, compared with those who attended when invited (13.3% and 9.5%, respectively; X 2 = 16.138, p = 0.000059). The implementation of non-participant reminders led to a moderate increase in uptake. Implementing non-participant reminders could help mitigate the negative effects of COVID-19 on uptake.
| S-EPMC7815459 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:The COVID-19 pandemic has reformed global healthcare delivery. On 25 March 2020, Intercollegiate guidelines were published in the UK to promote safe surgical provision during the COVID-19 outbreak advocating non-operative management or avoidance of laparoscopy when surgery is essential. The effects of this on the investigation and management of appendicitis remain unknown. METHODS:We performed a multicentre, prospective, observational study from the start of the new guidelines to the 6th of May 2020. We included all patients referred to surgical teams with suspected appendicitis. A recent historical cohort was identified for comparison. The primary outcome was the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the use of non-operative management in appendicitis. Secondary outcomes included imaging, negative appendicectomy rate (NAR), length of stay (LOS) and 30-day complications. RESULTS:A total of 63/164 (38%) patients compared to 79/191 (41%) were diagnosed with appendicitis before and after the guidelines were introduced (p?=?0.589). CT scanning increased (71/164 vs 105/191; p?=?0.033) while ultrasound scanning decreased (71/164 vs 62/191; p?=?0.037). Appendicitis was more likely to be managed non-operatively (11/63 vs 51/79; p?<?0.001) and, of those managed surgically, with an open approach (3/52 vs 26/28 p?<?0.001). The NAR also reduced (5/52 vs 0/28; p?=?0.157). LOS was shorter in non-operatively managed patients (1 day vs 3 days; p?<?0.001) without a difference in complications (10/51 vs 4/28; p?=?0.760). CONCLUSION:Introduction of the guidelines was associated with changes in practice. Despite these changes, short-term complications did not increase and LOS decreased. Questions remain on the longer-term complication rates in non-operatively managed patients.
| S-EPMC7652586 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceRandomized clinical screening trials have shown that sigmoidoscopy screening reduces colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality. Colonoscopy has largely replaced sigmoidoscopy for CRC screening, but long-term results from randomized trials on colonoscopy screening are still lacking.ObjectiveTo estimate the additional screening benefit of colonoscopy compared with sigmoidoscopy.Design, setting, and participantsThis comparative effectiveness simulation study pooled data on 358 204 men and women randomly assigned to sigmoidoscopy screening or usual care in 4 randomized sigmoidoscopy screening trials conducted in Norway, Italy, the US, and UK with inclusion periods in the years 1993 to 2001. The primary analysis of the study was conducted from January 19 to December 30, 2021.InterventionInvitation to endoscopic screening.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary outcomes were CRC incidence and mortality. Using pooled 15-year follow-up data, colonoscopy screening effectiveness was estimated assuming that the efficacy of colonoscopy in the proximal colon was similar to that observed in the distal colon in the sigmoidoscopy screening trials. The simulation model was validated using data from Norwegian participants in a colonoscopy screening trial.ResultsThis analysis included 358 204 individuals (181 971 women [51%]) aged 55 to 64 years at inclusion with a median follow-up time ranging from 15 to 17 years. Compared with usual care, colonoscopy prevented an estimated 50 (95% CI, 42-58) CRC cases per 100 000 person-years, corresponding to 30% incidence reduction (rate ratio, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.66-0.75]), and prevented an estimated 15 (95% CI, 11-19) CRC deaths per 100 000 person-years, corresponding to 32% mortality reduction (rate ratio, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.61-0.76]). The additional benefit of colonoscopy screening compared with sigmoidoscopy was 12 (95% CI, 10-14) fewer CRC cases and 4 (95% CI, 3-5) fewer CRC deaths per 100 000 person-years, corresponding to percentage point reductions of 6.9 (95% CI, 6.0-7.9) for CRC incidence and 7.6 (95% CI, 5.7-9.6) for CRC mortality. The number needed to switch from sigmoidoscopy to colonoscopy screening was 560 (95% CI, 486-661) to prevent 1 CRC case and 1611 (95% CI, 1275-2188) to prevent 1 CRC death.Conclusions and relevanceThe findings of this comparative effectiveness study assessing long-term follow-up after CRC screening suggest that there was an additional preventive effect on CRC incidence and mortality associated with colonoscopy screening compared with sigmoidoscopy screening, but the additional preventive effect was less than what was achieved by introducing sigmoidoscopy screening where no screening existed. The results probably represent the upper limit of what may be achieved with colonoscopy screening compared with sigmoidoscopy screening.
| S-EPMC10905314 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough women are known to have a relatively higher left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) compared with men, a sex-neutral LVEF threshold continues to be used for clinical management. We sought to investigate the relationship among high (>65%), normal (55%-65%) and low (<55%) LVEF and long-term all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) in women presenting with suspected myocardial ischaemia.MethodsA total of 734 women from the Women's Ischemia Syndrome Evaluation (WISE) were analysed. LVEF was calculated by invasive left ventriculography. The relationship between baseline characteristics, LVEF and outcomes was evaluated. A multivariable Cox regression model was used to assess the association of LVEF with outcomes, after adjusting for known risk factors.ResultsLow LVEF was associated with higher rates of mortality and MACE compared with normal and high LVEF (p<0.0001). Normal LVEF was associated with higher mortality (p=0.047) and rate of myocardial infarctions (MIs) compared with high LVEF (p=0.03). Low LVEF remained a significant predictor of mortality compared with high LVEF (p=0.013) in a multivariable regression model and normal compared with high LVEF trended towards higher mortality (p=0.16).ConclusionAmong women with suspected ischaemia, women with LVEF above the defined normal threshold (>65%) had lower rates of all-cause mortality and non-fatal MI. Further investigation is needed to determine the optimal LVEF in women.Trial registration numberNCT00000554.
| S-EPMC10592103 | biostudies-literature