Search

BackgroundFlexible sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy are both recommended colorectal cancer screening options, but their relative effectiveness needs clarification. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of colonoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy for reduction of colorectal cancer incidence.MethodsWe conducted a case-control study within the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database. Cases were subjects age 70-85 years in the SEER-Medicare database diagnosed with CRC during 2004-2013. Up to 3 controls were matched to each case by birth year, sex, race, and SEER region. Receipt of screening colonoscopy or flexible sigmoidoscopy was ascertained from Medicare claims. Conditional logistic regression models were developed to estimate the odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for a history of screening in cases vs. controls. We conducted secondary analyses by sex, race, endoscopist characteristics, and with varying timing and duration of the look-back period.ResultsReceipt of screening colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy was associated with a 59% (OR 0.41, 95%CI 0.39, 0.43) and 22% reduction (OR 0.78, 95%CI 0.67, 0.92) in colorectal cancer incidence, respectively. Colonoscopy was associated with greater reduction in the distal colorectal cancer incidence (OR 0.22, 95%CI 0.20, 0.24) than proximal colorectal cancer incidence (OR 0.62, 95%CI 0.59, 0.66). Sigmoidoscopy was associated with a 52% reduction in distal colorectal cancer incidence (OR 0.48, 95%CI 0.37, 0.63), but with no reduction in proximal colorectal cancer incidence. These associations were stronger in men than in women. No differences by race or endoscopist characteristics were observed.ConclusionBoth screening colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy were associated with reductions in overall colorectal cancer incidence, with a greater magnitude of reduction observed with colonoscopy.

Objective: Arterial and ventricular stiffening are characteristics of diabetes and aging which confer significant morbidity and mortality; advanced glycation endproducts (AGE) are implicated in this stiffening pathophysiology. We examined the association between HbA1c, an AGE, with arterial and ventricular stiffness measures in older individuals without diabetes. Research Design & Methods: Baseline HbA1c was measured in 830 participants free of diabetes defined by fasting glucose or medication use in the Cardiovascular Health Study, a population-based cohort study of adults aged $65 years. We performed cross-sectional analyses using baseline exam data including echocardiography, ankle and brachial blood pressure measurement, and carotid ultrasonography. We examined the adjusted associations between HbA1c and multiple arterial and ventricular stiffness measures by linear regression models and compared these results to the association of fasting glucose (FG) with like measures. Results: HbA1c was correlated with fasting and 2-hour postload glucose levels (r=0.21; p,0.001 for both) and positively associated with greater body-mass index and black race. In adjusted models, HbA1c was not associated with any measure of arterial or ventricular stiffness, including pulse pressure (PP), carotid intima-media thickness, ankle-brachial index, endarterial elastance, or left ventricular mass (LVM). FG levels were positively associated with systolic, diastolic and PP and LVM. Conclusions: In this sample of older adults without diabetes, HbA1c was not associated with arterial or ventricular stiffness measures, whereas FG levels were. The role of AGE in arterial and ventricular stiffness in older adults may be better assessed using alternate AGE markers.