Search

Background: Stool-based screening with fecal immunochemical (FIT) or multitarget-stool DNA (mt-sDNA) tests is associated with increased colonoscopy polyp yield. mt-sDNA includes methylated markers, which improve detection of serrated polyps (SP) versus FIT. We compared SP detection in colonoscopies performed for positive FIT or mt-sDNA tests, as well as in colonoscopies without a preceding stool test, using the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry, a comprehensive statewide population-based registry. Methods: Across the three groups, we compared the frequency of clinically relevant SPs (CRSP: sessile SPs, hyperplastic polyps ≥10 mm, and traditional serrated adenomas). We also compared SP size, histology, number, and bulk (combined sizes). Results: Our sample included 560 mt-sDNA+ (age ± SD: 66.5 ± 7.9), 414 FIT+ (age ± SD: 66.3 ± 8.8), and 59,438 colonoscopy-only patients (age ± SD: 61.7 ± 8.0). mt-sDNA+ patients were more likely to have a higher yield of CRSPs and CRSP bulk than FIT+ (P < 0.0001) or colonoscopy-only patients (P < 0.0001). More mt-sDNA+ patients had CRSPs without large adenomas or colorectal cancers (17.9% vs. 9.9% of FIT+ and 8% of colonoscopy-only patients). After adjusting for synchronous large adenomas, colorectal cancers, and other risk factors, mt-sDNA+ patients were more likely (OR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.18–2.85) than FIT+ patients to have CRSPs. Conclusions: mt-sDNA+ patients had a higher SP yield than FIT+ or colonoscopy-only patients, particularly in the absence of synchronous large adenomas or colorectal cancer. Impact: Our results suggest that screening with mt-sDNA tests could improve colorectal cancer screening by identifying more patients at increased risk from the serrated pathway.

Supplementary Table from Colonoscopy Findings in FIT+ and mt-sDNA+ Patients versus in Colonoscopy-only Patients: New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry Data

Few studies compare fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and multi-target stool DNA (mt-sDNA) outcomes in practice. We compared colonoscopy yield following FIT+ or mt-sDNA+ tests to colonoscopies without preceding stool tests in the comprehensive population-based New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry (NHCR). Outcomes were any neoplasia and an ordered outcome: adenocarcinoma, advanced neoplasia (adenoma/serrated polyp ≥ 1 cm/villous/high-grade dysplasia), nonadvanced neoplasia, or normal. Our total sample included 306 mt-sDNA+ (average age ± SD 67.0 ± 7.9), 276 FIT+ (66.6 ± 8.7), and 50,990 colonoscopy-only patients (61.8 ± 8.1). Among average-risk patients (N = 240 mt-sDNA+, N = 194 FIT+, N = 26,221 colonoscopy only), mt-sDNA+ patients had a higher risk for any neoplasia (67.1%) compared with FIT+ (54.6%, P = 0.00098) or colonoscopy (40.8%, P < 0.0001). Severity of findings and histology subtypes differed across the three groups (P < 0.0001 for both), with a higher yield of advanced findings in mt-sDNA+ patients. In particular, clinically relevant serrated polyps (hyperplastic polyps ≥10 mm/traditional serrated adenomas/sessile serrated polyps) were detected at a higher frequency in mt-sDNA+ patients as compared with FIT+ or colonoscopy-only patients. Even after adjustment, patients with positive mt-sDNA [OR = 2.82; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.00–4.02] or FIT+ tests (OR = 1.67; 95% CI, 1.19–2.36) were more likely to have histologically more advanced findings than colonoscopy alone. At follow-up colonoscopy, mt-sDNA+ tests were more likely to predict neoplasia than FIT+, largely due to increased detection of serrated polyps.Prevention Relevance: Colorectal cancer screening options include colonoscopy and stool-based tests, including the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and the multi-target stool DNA (mt-sDNA) test which, if positive, must be followed by a colonoscopy. Assessing “real-world” outcomes of colonoscopies following positive stool tests can inform their clinical use.See related Spotlight, p. 417

Few studies compare fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and multi-target stool DNA (mt-sDNA) outcomes in practice. We compared colonoscopy yield following FIT+ or mt-sDNA+ tests to colonoscopies without preceding stool tests in the comprehensive population-based New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry (NHCR). Outcomes were any neoplasia and an ordered outcome: adenocarcinoma, advanced neoplasia (adenoma/serrated polyp ≥ 1 cm/villous/high-grade dysplasia), nonadvanced neoplasia, or normal. Our total sample included 306 mt-sDNA+ (average age ± SD 67.0 ± 7.9), 276 FIT+ (66.6 ± 8.7), and 50,990 colonoscopy-only patients (61.8 ± 8.1). Among average-risk patients (N = 240 mt-sDNA+, N = 194 FIT+, N = 26,221 colonoscopy only), mt-sDNA+ patients had a higher risk for any neoplasia (67.1%) compared with FIT+ (54.6%, P = 0.00098) or colonoscopy (40.8%, P < 0.0001). Severity of findings and histology subtypes differed across the three groups (P < 0.0001 for both), with a higher yield of advanced findings in mt-sDNA+ patients. In particular, clinically relevant serrated polyps (hyperplastic polyps ≥10 mm/traditional serrated adenomas/sessile serrated polyps) were detected at a higher frequency in mt-sDNA+ patients as compared with FIT+ or colonoscopy-only patients. Even after adjustment, patients with positive mt-sDNA [OR = 2.82; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.00–4.02] or FIT+ tests (OR = 1.67; 95% CI, 1.19–2.36) were more likely to have histologically more advanced findings than colonoscopy alone. At follow-up colonoscopy, mt-sDNA+ tests were more likely to predict neoplasia than FIT+, largely due to increased detection of serrated polyps. Prevention Relevance: Colorectal cancer screening options include colonoscopy and stool-based tests, including the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and the multi-target stool DNA (mt-sDNA) test which, if positive, must be followed by a colonoscopy. Assessing “real-world” outcomes of colonoscopies following positive stool tests can inform their clinical use. See related Spotlight, p. 417

Background and Aims: Higher adenoma detection rates reduce the risk of postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC). Clinically significant serrated polyps (CSSPs; defined as any sessile serrated polyp, traditional serrated adenoma, large [≥1 cm] or proximal hyperplastic polyp >5 mm) also lead to PCCRC, but there are no data on associated CSSP detection rates (CSSDRs). We used data from the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry (NHCR) to investigate the association between PCCRC risk and endoscopist CSSDR. Methods: We included NHCR patients with 1 or more follow-up events: either a colonoscopy or a colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosis identified through linkage with the New Hampshire State Cancer Registry. We defined our outcome, PCCRC, in 3 time periods: CRC diagnosed 6 to 36 months, 6 to 60 months, or all examinations (6 months or longer) after an index examination. We excluded patients with CRC diagnosed at or within 6 months of the index examination, with incomplete examinations, or with inflammatory bowel disease. The exposure variable was endoscopist CSSDR at the index colonoscopy. Cox regression was used to model the hazard of PCCRC on CSSDR controlling for age, sex, index findings, year of examination, personal history of colorectal neoplasia, and having more than 1 surveillance examination. Results: One hundred twenty-eight patients with CRC diagnosed at least 6 months after their index examination were included. Our cohort included 142 endoscopists (92 gastroenterologists). We observed that the risk for PCCRC 6 months or longer after the index examination was significantly lower for examinations performed by endoscopists with CSSDRs of 3% to

BACKGROUND The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) includes multitarget stool DNA (mt-sDNA) testing as a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening option in average-risk individuals, but data on colonoscopy outcomes after positive mt-sDNA tests in community settings are needed. AIM The aim of this study was to investigate colonoscopy outcomes and quality following positive mt-sDNA in the population-based New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry. METHODS We compared colonoscopy outcomes and quality between age-matched, sex-matched, and risk-matched patients from 30 endoscopy practices with and without a preceding positive mt-sDNA test. Main outcomes were colonoscopy findings of CRC, advanced noncancerous neoplasia, nonadvanced neoplasia, or normal examination. Quality measures included withdrawal time, bowel preparation quality, examination completion, and percentage of average-risk individuals with normal colonoscopies receiving a USPSTF-recommended 10 year rescreening interval. RESULTS Individuals with positive mt-sDNA tests (N=306, average age 67.0 y; 61.8% female) were significantly more likely than colonoscopy-only patients (N=918, 66.2 y; 61.8% female) to have CRC (1.3% vs. 0.4%) or advanced noncancerous neoplasia (27.1% vs. 8.2%) (P

Introduction: While colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality have decreased for older adults, the rates are increasing in adults younger than 50 years of age in the United States as well as ...

Montminy EM, Zhou M, Maniscalco L, et al. Contributions of adenocarcinoma and carcinoid tumors to early-onset colorectal cancer incidence rates in the United States. Ann Intern Med 2021;174:157–166.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: National guidelines for colonoscopy screening and surveillance assume adequate bowel preparation. We used New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry (NHCR) data to investigate the influence of bowel preparation quality on endoscopist recommendations for follow-up intervals in average-risk patients following normal screening colonoscopies. METHODS: The analysis included 9170 normal screening colonoscopies performed on average risk individuals aged 50 and above between February 2005 and September 2013. The NHCR Procedure Form instructs endoscopists to score based on the worst prepped segment after clearing all colon segments, using the following categories: excellent (essentially 100% visualization), good (very unlikely to impair visualization), fair (possibly impairing visualization), and poor (definitely impairing visualization). We categorized examinations into 3 preparation groups: optimal (excellent/good) (n = 8453), fair (n = 598), and poor (n = 119). Recommendations other than 10 years for examinations with optimal preparation, and > 1 year for examinations with poor preparation, were considered nonadherent. RESULTS: Of all examinations, 6.2% overall received nonadherent recommendations, including 5% of examinations with optimal preparation and 89.9% of examinations with poor preparation. Of normal examinations with fair preparation, 20.7% of recommendations were for an interval

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common cause of cancer death in the United States. Every 3 years, the American Cancer Society provides an update of CRC occurrence based on incidence data (available through 2016) from population-based cancer registries and mortality data (through 2017) from the National Center for Health Statistics. In 2020, approximately 147,950 individuals will be diagnosed with CRC and 53,200 will die from the disease, including 17,930 cases and 3,640 deaths in individuals aged younger than 50 years. The incidence rate during 2012 through 2016 ranged from 30 (per 100,000 persons) in Asian/Pacific Islanders to 45.7 in blacks and 89 in Alaska Natives. Rapid declines in incidence among screening-aged individuals during the 2000s continued during 2011 through 2016 in those aged 65 years and older (by 3.3% annually) but reversed in those aged 50 to 64 years, among whom rates increased by 1% annually. Among individuals aged younger than 50 years, the incidence rate increased by approximately 2% annually for tumors in the proximal and distal colon, as well as the rectum, driven by trends in non-Hispanic whites. CRC death rates during 2008 through 2017 declined by 3% annually in individuals aged 65 years and older and by 0.6% annually in individuals aged 50 to 64 years while increasing by 1.3% annually in those aged younger than 50 years. Mortality declines among individuals aged 50 years and older were steepest among blacks, who also had the only decreasing trend among those aged younger than 50 years, and excluded American Indians/Alaska Natives, among whom rates remained stable. Progress against CRC can be accelerated by increasing access to guideline-recommended screening and high-quality treatment, particularly among Alaska Natives, and elucidating causes for rising incidence in young and middle-aged adults.

Background and study aims Adenoma detection rate (ADR), the proportion of an endoscopist’s screening colonoscopies in which at least one adenoma is found, is an established quality metric. Several publications have suggested that a technique referred to as “one and done,” where less attention is paid to additional polyp detection following discovery of one likely adenoma, may be occurring 1 2 3. To investigate whether this practice occurs and provide additional context to the significance of ADR, we examined ADR by single and multiple adenomas in the statewide New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry (NHCR). Patients and methods A total of 25,324 NHCR patients receiving screening colonoscopies between 2009 and 2014 by 69 endoscopists were analyzed. ADR was dichotomized into high (≥ 20 %) and low ( 1 adenoma) was dichotomized at mean values into high (≥ 1.5) and low ( Results Among endoscopists with an ADR ≥ 20 %, only 5 (7.2 %) had low ADR-plus values and were classified as “one and done.” Results for serrated polyp detection were similar. ADR and ADR-plus decreased monotonically with increasing years since residency (P values for trend ADR = 0.02; ADR-plus = 0.003) after adjusting for patient risk factors. Conclusion “One and done” infrequently occurred among endoscopists with high ADR in a large statewide registry. The need to replace ADR with other polyp detection metrics (such as ADR-plus) to accurately ascertain performance quality is not supported by these findings.

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy is the most widely used colorectal cancer (CRC) screening test in the United States. Through the detection and removal of potentially precancerous polyps, it can prevent CRC. However, CRC screening remains low among adults who are recommended for screening. The New Hampshire Colorectal Cancer Screening Program implemented a patient navigation (PN) intervention to increase colonoscopy screening among low-income patients in health centers in New Hampshire. In the current study, the authors examined the cost-effectiveness of this intervention. METHODS: A decision tree model was constructed using Markov state transitions to calculate the costs and effectiveness associated with PN. Costs were calculated for the implementation of PN in a statewide public health program and in endoscopy centers. The main study outcome was colonoscopy screening completion. The main decision variable was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio associated with the PN intervention compared with usual care. RESULTS: The average cost per screening with PN was $1089 (95% confidence interval, $1075-$1103) compared with $894 with usual care (95% confidence interval, $886-$908). Among patients who were navigated, approximately 96.2% completed colonoscopy screening compared with 69.3% of those receiving usual care (odds ratio, 11.2; P

Although colorectal cancer (CRC) can be prevented or detected early through screening and surveillance, barriers that lower adherence to screening significantly limit its effectiveness. Therefore, implementation of interventions that address and overcome adherence barriers is critical to efforts to decrease morbidity and mortality from CRC. This article reviews the current available evidence about interventions to increase adherence to CRC screening.

GOAL To examine screening adenoma detection rates (ADR) and serrated detection rates (SDR) among smokers and obese adults in the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry. BACKGROUND ADR, a quality measure for screening colonoscopies, is associated with protection from interval colorectal cancer. Currently, only sex-specific ADR benchmarks are reported. However, obesity and smoking ≥20 pack-years are strong predictors for colorectal neoplasia, as highlighted by the 2009 American College of Gastroenterology CRC Screening Guidelines. Data comparing ADR in smokers and obese adults to those without these risks are limited. STUDY We calculated ADR, SDR, and 95% confidence intervals for screening colonoscopies in participants ≥50 years. Sex-specific and sex-age-specific rates were compared by smoking exposure (never vs.

BACKGROUND To investigate uniformly successful results from a statewide program of patient navigation (PN) for colonoscopy, this comparison study evaluated the effectiveness of the PN intervention by comparing outcomes for navigated versus non-navigated patients in one of the community health clinics included in the statewide program. Outcomes measured included screening completion, adequacy of bowel preparation, missed appointments and cancellations, communication of test results, and consistency of follow-up recommendations with clinical guidelines. METHODS The authors compared a subset of 131 patients who were navigated to a screening or surveillance colonoscopy with a similar subset of 75 non-navigated patients at one endoscopy clinic. The prevalence and prevalence odds ratios were computed to measure the association between PN and each study outcome measure. RESULTS Patients in the PN intervention group were 11.2 times more likely to complete colonoscopy than control patients (96.2% vs 69.3%; P

Recent increases in colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence in adults younger than 50 years of age have led to more colonoscopies in this age group. As a result, there may be an increasing number of adults 50 years old with polyps detected. There is concern that younger adults may require closer follow-up. Our goal was to use data from the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry (NHCR) to examine the risk for metachronous advanced adenomas (AAs) and large (1 cm) serrated polyps in younger versus older adults who return for a follow-up colonoscopy.Our cohort consisted of NHCR participants with at least 1 polyp on index examination and a follow-up colonoscopy at least 1 year after the index examination. Outcomes were the risks for metachronous AAs (adenomas ≥1 cm, with villous elements or high-grade dysplasia, or CRC) and large (≥1 cm) serrated polyps. We present absolute risk and adjusted risks from a logistic regression model stratified by age at index colonoscopy (40, 40-49, 50-59, and 60+ [reference]). Covariates included index findings, endoscopist adenoma detection rates, sex, smoking, body mass index, follow-up time (months), bowel preparation quality, and family history of CRC.In our sample of 12,380 adults, absolute risk for metachronous AA was lower for younger patients than for patients aged ≥60. After adjusting for covariates, when comparing with the 60+ group (reference), the lowest risk was observed in those younger than 40 years (odds ratio, .19; 95% confidence interval, .05-.80). Of note, similar risks were observed in the 40 to 49 age group (odds ratio, .61; 95% confidence interval, .41-.92) and 50 to 59 age group (odds ratio, .71; 95% confidence interval, .58-.86). The risk for large metachronous serrated polyps was not associated with age.Younger adults aged 40 with index adenomas had a lower risk for metachronous AAs than those aged ≥60. The 40- to 49-year age group was found to have metachronous risk similar to the 50- to 59-year age group, with both less than the ≥60 age group. These data suggest that current surveillance interval guidelines for patients aged ≥50 years may appropriately be used with younger adults.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Because data on metachronous risk for patients with index proximal 5- to 9-mm hyperplastic polyps (HPs) are limited, the clinical significance of these polyps is unclear. Conversely, published data suggest that sessile serrated polyps (SSPs), traditional serrated adenomas (TSAs), and large (≥1 cm) HPs are high-risk lesions requiring close surveillance. We used data from the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry (NHCR) to examine the risk of metachronous large SPs and advanced neoplasia in patients with 5- to 9- mm proximal HPs. METHODS: We included adults with at least 1 polyp resected at index colonoscopy and a surveillance examination 12 months or more after index. Outcomes were risk for metachronous large (≥1 cm) SPs and advanced neoplasia (≥1 cm, villous elements, high-grade dysplasia or colorectal cancer [CRC]). Individuals were hierarchically stratified by the most significant index SP. The risks for adults with proximal 5- to 9-mm HPs at index examination were compared with individuals with index findings of large (≥1 cm) HPs or any SSPs or TSAs, nonsignificant HPs (

Background A recent study demonstrated the effectiveness of the New Hampshire Colorectal Cancer Screening Program’s (NHCRCSP) patient navigation (PN) program. The PN intervention was delivered by telephone with navigators following a rigorous, six-topic protocol to support low-income patients to complete colonoscopy screening. We applied the RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, maintenance) framework to examine implementation processes and consider potential scalability of this intervention. Methods A mixed-methods evaluation study was conducted including 1) a quasi-experimental, retrospective, comparison group study examining program effectiveness, 2) secondary analysis of NHCRCSP program data, and 3) a case study. Data for all navigated patients scheduled and notified of their colonoscopy test date between July 1, 2012 and September 30, 2013 (N = 443) were analyzed. Researchers were provided in-depth call details for 50 patients randomly selected from the group of 443. The case study included review of program documents, observations of navigators, and interviews with 27 individuals including staff, patients, and other stakeholders. Results Program reach was state-wide, with navigators serving patients from across the state. The program successfully recruited patients from the intended priority population who met the established age, income, and insurance eligibility guidelines. Analysis of the 443 NHCRCSP patients navigated during the study period demonstrated effectiveness with 97.3% completing colonoscopy, zero missed appointments (no-shows), and 0.7% late cancellations. Trained and supervised nurse navigators spent an average of 124.3 min delivering the six-topic PN protocol to patients. Navigators benefited from a real-time data system that allowed for patient tracking, communication across team members, and documentation of service delivery. Evaluators identified several factors supporting program maintenance including consistent funding support from CDC, a strong program infrastructure, and partnerships. Conclusions Factors supporting implementation included funding for colonoscopies, use of registered nurses, a clinical champion, strong partnerships with primary care and endoscopy sites, fidelity to the PN protocol, significant intervention dose, and a real-time data system. Further study is needed to assess scalability to other locations.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Limited data are available to investigate the impact of index adenoma size on the risk of metachronous advanced adenomas. Our goal was to examine the impact of having small (5–9 mm) versus diminutive (1cm or those with villous elements or high-grade dysplasia and colorectal cancer (CRC). Outcomes were the absolute and adjusted risk of meta chronous advanced adenomas. Covariates included age, sex, body mass index, family history of CRC, lifestyle factors, presence of serrated polyps, and time since the index examination. RESULTS: After adjusting for the covariates, we observed that having 1 to 2 adenomas with at least one 5 to 9 mm adenoma (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.54; 95% CI, 1.12–2.11), 3 to 10 diminutive adenomas (AOR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.03–2.95), 3 to 10 adenomas

Persons with a family history (FH) of colorectal cancer (CRC) or adenomas that are not due to known hereditary syndromes have an increased risk for CRC. An understanding of these risks, screening recommendations, and screening behaviors can inform strategies for reducing the CRC burden in these families. A comprehensive review of the literature published within the past 10 years has been performed to assess what is known about cancer risk, screening guidelines, adherence and barriers to screening, and effective interventions in persons with an FH of CRC and to identify FH tools used to identify these individuals and inform care. Existing data show that having 1 affected first-degree relative (FDR) increases the CRC risk 2-fold, and the risk increases with multiple affected FDRs and a younger age at diagnosis. There is variability in screening recommendations across consensus guidelines. Screening adherence is

OBJECTIVES: Although the 2008 US Preventive Services Task Force guidelines recommend against routine colorectal cancer (CRC) screening for adults aged 76‐85, it is unclear what endoscopists recommend in practice. Our goal was to examine current practice around cessation of CRC screening in older adults. METHODS: We included normal screening colonoscopy exams in adults ≥ 50 years old within the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry between 2009 and 2014. The primary outcome was endoscopists' recommendation against further screening. The main exposure variables included patient age, family history of CRC, and endoscopist characteristics. Descriptive statistics and univariate and multivariable logistic regression models were used. RESULTS: Of 13,364 normal screening colonoscopy exams, 2914 (21.8%) were in adults aged ≥ 65 and were performed by 74 endoscopists. Nearly 100% of adults aged 65‐69 undergoing screening colonoscopy were given the recommendation to return for screening colonoscopy in the future. Only 15% of average‐risk patients aged 70‐74 were told to stop receiving screening, while 85% were told to return at a future interval, most frequently in 10 years when they would be 80‐84. In the multivariable model, advancing patient age and the absence of family history of CRC were significantly associated with a recommendation to stop colonoscopy. Gastroenterologists were more likely to recommend stopping colonoscopy in accordance with guidelines than other non‐gastroenterology endoscopists (adjusted OR (95% CI) 2.3 (1.6‐3.4)). CONCLUSIONS: In a large statewide colonoscopy registry, the majority of older adults are told to return for future screening colonoscopy. Having a family history of CRC or a non‐gastroenterology endoscopist increases the likelihood of being told to return for screening at advanced ages.

BACKGROUND: Late-stage colorectal cancer (CRC) is associated with significantly less effective treatment and poorer survival than early-stage colorectal cancer. OBJECTIVE: Identify and assess patient characteristics, demographic factors, and lifestyle factors that are associated with late-stage colorectal cancer at diagnosis. APPROACH: We linked two longstanding statewide, population-based registry databases: the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry and the New Hampshire State Cancer Registry, to assess the associations between patient characteristics and late-stage CRC diagnoses. The State Cancer Registry provided information on cancer stage and the Colonoscopy Registry provided detailed information on patient characteristics and lifestyle factors, allowing these factors to be analyzed in relation to colorectal cancer stage. KEY RESULTS: The risk of late-stage CRC diagnosis was highest among those diagnosed at a young age (

Background & Aims Surveillance guidelines for serrated polyps (SPs) are based on limited data on longitudinal outcomes of patients. We used the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry to evaluate risk of clinically important metachronous lesions associated with SPs detected during index colonoscopies. Methods We collected data from a population-based colonoscopy registry that has been collecting and analyzing data on colonoscopies across the state of New Hampshire since 2004, including rates of adenoma and SP detection. Patients completed a questionnaire to determine demographic characteristics, health history, and risk factors for colorectal cancer, and were followed from index colonoscopy through all subsequent surveillance colonoscopies. Our analyses included 5433 participants (median age, 61 years; 49.7% male) with 2 colonoscopies (median time to surveillance, 4.9 years). We used multivariable logistic regression models to assess effects of index SPs (n = 1016), high-risk adenomas (HRA, n = 817), low-risk adenomas (n = 1418), and no adenomas (n = 3198) on subsequent HRA or large SPs (>1 cm) on surveillance colonoscopy (metachronous lesions). Synchronous SPs, within each index risk group, were assessed for size and by histology. SPs comprise hyperplastic polyps, sessile serrated adenomas/polyps (SSA/Ps), and traditional serrated adenomas. In this study, SSA/Ps and traditional serrated adenomas are referred to collectively as STSAs. Results HRA and synchronous large SP (odds ratio [OR], 5.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.72−18.28), HRA with synchronous STSA (OR, 16.04; 95% CI, 6.95−37.00), and HRA alone (OR, 3.86; 95% CI, 2.77−5.39) at index colonoscopy significantly increased the risk of metachronous HRA compared to the reference group (no index adenomas or SPs). Large index SPs alone (OR, 14.34; 95% CI, 5.03−40.86) or index STSA alone (OR, 9.70; 95% CI, 3.63−25.92) significantly increased the risk of a large metachronous SP. Conclusions In an analysis of data from a population-based colonoscopy registry, we found index large SP or index STSA with no index HRA increased risk of metachronous large SPs but not metachronous HRA. HRA and synchronous SPs at index colonoscopy significantly increased risk of metachronous HRA. Individuals with HRA and synchronous large SP or any STSA could therefore benefit from close surveillance.

Although serrated polyps were historically considered to pose little risk, it is now understood that progression down the serrated pathway could account for as many as 15%–35% of colorectal cancers. The sessile serrated adenoma/polyp (SSA/P) is the most prevalent pre-invasive serrated lesion. Our objective was to identify the CpG loci that are persistently hyper-methylated during serrated carcinogenesis, from the early SSA/P lesion through the later cancer phases of neoplasia development. We queried the loci hyper-methylated in serrated cancers within our right-sided SSA/Ps from the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry, using the Illumina Infinium Human Methylation 450 k panel to comprehensively assess the DNA methylation status. We identified CpG loci and regions consistently hyper-methylated throughout the serrated carcinogenesis spectrum, in both our SSA/P specimens and in serrated cancers. Hyper-methylated CpG loci included the known the tumor suppressor gene RET (p = 5.72 × 10−10), as well as loci in differentially methylated regions for GSG1L, MIR4493, NTNG1, MCIDAS, ZNF568, and RERG. The hyper-methylated loci that we identified help characterize the biology of SSA/P development, and could be useful as therapeutic targets, or for future identification of patients who may benefit from shorter surveillance intervals.

Similar to achieving adenoma detection rate (ADR) benchmarks to prevent colorectal cancer (CRC), achieving adequate serrated polyp detection rates (SDRs) may be essential to the prevention of CRC associated with the serrated pathway. Previous studies have been based on data from high-volume endoscopists at single academic centers. Based on a hypothesis that ADR is correlated with SDR, we stratified a large, diverse group of endoscopists (n = 77 practicing at 28 centers) into high performers and low performers, based on ADR, to provide data for corresponding target SDR benchmarks.By using colonoscopies in adults aged ≥50 years (4/09-12/14), we stratified endoscopists by high and low ADRs (15%, 15%-25%, 25%-35%, ≥35%) to determine corresponding SDRs by using 2 SDR measures, for screening and surveillance colonoscopies separately: (1) Clinically significant SDR (CSSDR), meaning colonoscopies with any sessile serrated adenoma/polyp (SSA/P), traditional serrated adenoma (TSA), or hyperplastic polyp (HP)1 cm anywhere in the colon or HP5 mm in the proximal colon only divided by the total number of screening and surveillance colonoscopies, respectively. (2) Proximal SDR (PSDR) meaning colonoscopies with any serrated polyp (SSA/P, HP, TSA) of any size proximal to the sigmoid colon divided by the total number of screening and surveillance colonoscopies, respectively.A total of 45,996 (29,960 screening) colonoscopies by 77 endoscopists (28 facilities) were included. Moderately strong positive correlation coefficients were observed for screening ADR/CSSDR (P = .69) and ADR/PSDR (P = .79) and a strong positive correlation (P = .82) for CSSDR/PSDR (P .0001 for all) was observed. For ADR ≥25%, endoscopists' median (interquartile range) screening CSSDR was 6.8% (4.3%-8.6%) and PSDR was 10.8% (8.6%-16.1%).Derived from ADR, the primary colonoscopy quality indicator, our results suggest potential SDR benchmarks (CSSDR = 7% and PSDR = 11%) that may guide adequate serrated polyp detection. Because CSSDR and PSDR are strongly correlated, endoscopists could use the simpler PSDR calculation to assess quality.

Background The effect of colon preparation quality on adenoma detection rates (ADRs) is unclear, partly because of lack of uniform colon preparation ratings in prior studies. The New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry collects detailed data from colonoscopies statewide, by using a uniform preparation quality scale after the endoscopist has cleaned the mucosa. Objective To compare the overall and proximal ADR and serrated polyp detection rates (SDR) in colonoscopies with differing levels of colon preparation quality. Design Cross-sectional. Setting New Hampshire statewide registry. Patients Patients undergoing colonoscopy. Interventions We examined colon preparation quality for 13,022 colonoscopies, graded by using specific descriptions provided to endoscopists. ADR and SDR are the number of colonoscopies with at least 1 adenoma or serrated polyp (excluding those in the rectum and/or sigmoid colon) detected divided by the total number of colonoscopies, for the preparation categories: optimal (excellent and/or good), fair, and poor. Main Outcome Measurements Overall/proximal ADR/SDR. Results The overall detection rates in examinations with fair colon preparation quality (SDR 8.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 7.4-10.7, ADR 27.1%; 95% CI, 24.6-30.0) were similar to rates observed in colonoscopies with optimal preparation quality (SDR 8.8%; 95% CI, 8.3-9.4, ADR 26.3%; 95% CI, 25.6-27.2). This finding also was observed for rates in the proximal colon. A logistic regression model (including withdrawal time) found that proximal ADR was statistically lower in the poor preparation category (odds ratio 0.45; 95% CI, 0.24-0.84; P Limitations Homogeneous population. Conclusion In our sample, there was no significant difference in overall or proximal ADR or SDR between colonoscopies with fair versus optimal colon preparation quality. Poor colon preparation quality may reduce the proximal ADR.

Recent studies have shown two distinct non-CIMP methylation clusters in colorectal cancer, raising the possibility that DNA methylation, involving non-CIMP genes, may play a role in the conventional adenoma–carcinoma pathway. A total of 135 adenomas (65 left colon and 70 right colon) were profiled for epigenome-wide DNA methylation using the Illumina HumanMethylation450 BeadChip. A principal components analysis was performed to examine the association between variability in DNA methylation and adenoma location. Linear regression and linear mixed effects models were used to identify locus-specific differential DNA methylation in adenomas of right and left colon. A significant association was present between the first principal component and adenoma location (P = 0.007), even after adjustment for subject age and gender (P = 0.009). A total of 168 CpG sites were differentially methylated between right- and left-colon adenomas and these loci demonstrated enrichment of homeobox genes (P = 3.0 × 10−12). None of the 168 probes were associated with CIMP genes. Among CpG loci with the largest difference in methylation between right- and left-colon adenomas, probes associated with PRAC(prostate cancer susceptibility candidate) gene showed hypermethylation in right-colon adenomas whereas those associated with CDX2(caudal type homeobox transcription factor 2) showed hypermethylation in left-colon adenomas. A subgroup of left-colon adenomas enriched for current smokers (OR = 6.1, P = 0.004) exhibited a methylation profile similar to right-colon adenomas. In summary, our results indicate distinct patterns of DNA methylation, independent of CIMP genes, in adenomas of the right and left colon.