Search

Contains fulltext : 305449.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), Definitive chemoradiation is the recommended treatment for locally advanced, irresectable oesophageal cancer and a valid alternative to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) with surgery in oesophageal squamous cell cancer (OSCC) patients. In case of locoregional recurrence, salvage treatment can be considered in fit and resectable patients. Salvage surgery is a valid option but associated with significant morbidity. Therefore, for tumors confined to the mucosa or submucosal layers endoscopic resection is a good and less-invasive alternative. Over the last decade several case-series have demonstrated a high technical success rate of endoscopic treatment after definitive CRT. In this review we summarize the clinical outcomes and challenges of endoscopic treatment of early recurrence after definitive CRT in oesophageal cancer.

Background: Colonoscopy surveillance intervals are based on the predicted risk of metachronous colorectal cancer (CRC) after polyp removal. However, risk estimation per polyp subtype is difficult due to the fact that many patients have multiple polyps. To enable risk estimation per polyp subtypes we examined the metachronous CRC risk of subgroups based on presence or absence of co-occurring findings. Methods: Using high-quality screening colonoscopies performed after a positive fecal immunochemical test between 2014 and 2020 within the Dutch CRC screening program, we applied Cox regression analysis to evaluate the association between findings at baseline colonoscopy and metachronous CRCs. For our primary outcome, we appointed each patient to unique subgroups based on removed polyp subtypes that were present or absent at baseline colonoscopy and used the groups without polyps as reference. High-risk subgroups were individuals with high-risk serrated polyps, defined as serrated polyp ≥10 mm, sessile serrated lesions with dysplasia, or traditional serrated adenomas, as well as high-risk adenomas, defined as adenoma ≥10 mm or containing high-grade dysplasia. Findings: In total 253,833 colonoscopies were included. Over a median follow-up of 36 months (IQR, 21–57), we identified 504 metachronous CRCs. Hazard ratios for metachronous CRC was 1.70 (95% CI, 1.07–2.69) for individuals with high-risk serrated polyps without high-risk adenomas, 1.22 (0.96–1.55) for individuals with high-risk adenomas without high-risk serrated polyps, and 2.00 (1.19–3.39) for individuals with high-risk serrated polyps and high-risk adenomas, compared to patients without polyps. Interpretation: Accounting for co-occurring findings, we observed an increased metachronous CRC risk for individuals that had high-risk serrated polyps with the presence of high-risk adenomas, or individuals with high-risk serrated polyps without high-risk adenomas. These findings could provide more evidence to support

n/a

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The population prevalence of gastrointestinal (GI) disease is unclear and difficult to assess in an asymptomatic population. The aim of this study was to determine prevalence of GI lesions in a largely asymptomatic population undergoing colon capsule endoscopy (CCE).METHODS: Participants aged between 50-75 years were retrieved from the Rotterdam Study, a longitudinal epidemiological study, between 2017-2019. Participants received CCE with bowel preparation. Abnormalities defined as clinically relevant were Barrett segment >3cm, severe ulceration, polyp >10 mm or >= 3 polyps in small bowel (SB) or colon, and cancer.RESULTS: Of 2800 invited subjects, 462 (16.5%) participants (mean age 66.8 years, female 53.5%) ingested the colon capsule. A total of 451 videos were analyzed, and in 94.7% the capsule reached the descending colon. At least 1 abnormal finding was seen in 448 (99.3%) participants. The prevalence of abnormalities per GI segment, and the most common type of abnormality, were as follows: Esophageal 14.8% (Barrett's esophagus <3 cm in 8.3%), gastric 27.9% (fundic gland polyps in 18.1%), SB abnormalities 33.9% (erosions in 23.8%), colon 93.3% (diverticula in 81.2%). A total of 54 participants (12%) had clinically relevant abnormalities, 3 (0.7%) in esophagus/stomach (reflux esophagitis grade D, Mallory Weiss lesion and severe gastritis), 5 (1.1%) in SB (polyps > 10 mm; n = 4, severe ulcer n = 1,) and 46 (10.2%) in colon (polyp > 10 mm or >= 3 polyps n = 46, colorectal cancer n = 1).CONCLUSIONS: GI lesions are very common in a mostly asymptomatic Western population, and clinically relevant lesions were found in 12% at CCE. These findings provide a frame of reference for the prevalence rates of GI lesions in the general population.

Background: Gastric and colorectal cancer (CRC) are both one of the most common cancers worldwide. In many countries fecal immunochemical tests (FIT)-based CRC screening has been implemented. We investigated if FIT can also be applied for detection of H. pylori, the main risk factor for gastric cancer. Methods: This prospective study included participants over 18 years of age referred for urea breath test (UBT). Patients were excluded if they had used antibiotics/bismuth in the past 4 weeks, or a proton pomp inhibitor (PPI) in the past 2 weeks. Participants underwent UBT, ELISA stool antigen test in standard feces tube (SAT), ELISA stool antigen test in FIT tube (Hp-FIT), and blood sampling, and completed a questionnaire on user friendliness. UBT results were used as reference. Results: A total of 182 patients were included (37.4% male, median age 52.4 years (IQR 22.4)). Of these, 60 (33.0%) tested H. pylori positive. SAT and Hp-FIT showed comparable overall accuracy 71.1% (95%CI 63.2–78.3) vs. 77.6% (95%CI 70.4–83.8), respectively (p = 0.97). Sensitivity of SAT was 91.8% (95%CI 80.4–97.7) versus 94.2% (95%CI 84.1–98.9) of Hp-FIT (p = 0.98). Serology scored low with an overall accuracy of 49.7% (95%CI 41.7–57.7). Hp-FIT showed the highest overall user convenience. Conclusions: FIT can be used with high accuracy and sensitivity for diagnosis of H. pylori and is rated as the most convenient test. Non-invasive Hp-FIT test is highly promising for combined upper and lower gastrointestinal (pre-) cancerous screening. Further research should investigate the clinical implications, benefits and cost-effectiveness of such an approach.

BACKGROUND: Many screening programs for colorectal cancer (CRC) use the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) to triage individuals for colonoscopy. Although these programs reduce CRC incidence and CRC-related mortality, the detection of advanced precursor lesions (advanced adenomas and advanced serrated polyps) by FIT could be improved. As an alternative for FIT, the antibody-based multitargetFIT (mtFIT) has been proposed. The mtFIT measures three protein markers: hemoglobin, calprotectin, and serpin family F member 2. In a retrospective diagnostic accuracy study in a large colonoscopy-controlled series (n = 1284), mtFIT showed increased sensitivity for advanced neoplasia (AN), at equal specificity, compared to FIT (42.9% versus 37.3%; p = 0.025). This increase was mainly due to a higher sensitivity of mtFIT for advanced adenomas (37.8% versus 28.1% for FIT; p = 0.006). The present mtFIT study aims to prospectively validate these findings in the context of the Dutch national CRC screening program. METHOD: The mtFIT study is a cross-sectional intervention study with a paired design. Eligible subjects for the Dutch FIT-based national CRC screening program are invited to perform mtFIT in addition to FIT. Samples are collected at home, from the same bowel movement, and are shipped to a central laboratory by postal mail. If either one or both tests are positive, participants are referred for colonoscopy. Detailed colonoscopy and pathology data are centrally stored in a national screening database (ScreenIT; Topicus, Deventer, the Netherlands) that is managed by the screening organization, and will be retrieved for this study. We aim to determine the relative sensitivity for AN, comprising of CRC, advanced adenomas and advanced serrated polyps, of mtFIT compared to FIT at an equal positivity rate. Additionally, we will use the Adenoma and Serrated Pathway to Colorectal CAncer model to predict lifetime health effects and costs for programmatic mtFIT- versus FIT-based screeni

Introduction Primary colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical test (FIT) are the most commonly used colorectal cancer (CRC) screening modalities. Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) might be an alternative. Data on the performance of CCE as a CRC screening tool in a screening population remain scarce. This is the first systematic review to provide an overview of the applicability of CCE as a CRC screening tool. Methods A systematic search was conducted of literature published up to September 2020. Studies reporting on CRC screening by second-generation CCE in an average-risk screening population were included. Results 582 studies were identified and 13 were included, comprising 2485 patients. Eight studies used CCE as a filter test after a positive FIT result and five studies used CCE for primary screening. The polyp detection rate of CCE was 24 % - 74 %. For polyps > 6 mm, sensitivity of CCE was 79 % - 96 % and specificity was 66 % - 97 %. For polyps ≥ 10 mm, sensitivity of CCE was 84 % - 97 %, which was superior to computed tomographic colonography (CTC). The CRC detection rate for completed CCEs was 93 % (25/27). Bowel preparation was adequate in 70 % - 92 % of examinations, and completion rates varied from 57 % to 92 %, depending on the booster used. No CCE-related complications were described. Conclusion CCE appeared to be a safe and effective tool for the detection of CRC and polyps in a screening setting. Accuracy was comparable to colonoscopy and superior to CTC, making CCE a good alternative to colonoscopy in CRC screening programs, although completion rates require improvement.

Background: Guidelines give robust recommendations on which biopsies should be taken when there is endoscopic suggestion of gastric inflammation. Adherence to these guidelines often seems arbitrary. This study aimed to give an overview on current practice in tertiary referral centres across Europe. Methods: Data were collected at 10 tertiary referral centres. Demographic data, the indication for each procedure, endoscopic findings, and the number and sampling site of biopsies were recorded. Findings were compared between centres, and factors influencing the decision to take biopsies were explored. Results: Biopsies were taken in 56.6% of 9,425 procedures, with significant variation between centres (p < 0.001). Gastric biopsies were taken in 43.8% of all procedures. Sampling location varied with the procedure indication (p < 0.001) without consistent pattern across the centres. Fewer biopsies were taken in centres which routinely applied the updated Sydney classification for gastritis assessment (46.0%), compared to centres where this was done only upon request (75.3%, p < 0.001). This was the same for centres stratifying patients according to the OLGA system (51.8 vs. 73.0%, p < 0.001). More biopsies were taken in centres following the MAPS guidelines on stomach surveillance (68.1 vs. 37.1%, p < 0.001). Biopsy sampling was more likely in younger patients in 8 centres (p < 0.05), but this was not true for the whole cohort (p = 0.537). The percentage of procedures with biopsies correlated directly with additional costs charged in case of biopsies (r = 0.709, p = 0.022). Conclusion: Adherence to guideline recommendations for biopsy sampling at gastroscopy was inconsistent across the participating centres. Our data suggest that centre-specific policies are applied instead.

Contains fulltext : 205156.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), BACKGROUND & AIMS: Topically applied methylene blue dye chromoendoscopy is effective in improving detection of colorectal neoplasia. When combined with a pH- and time-dependent multimatrix structure, a per-oral methylene blue formulation (MB-MMX) can be delivered directly to the colorectal mucosa. METHODS: We performed a phase 3 study of 1205 patients scheduled for colorectal cancer screening or surveillance colonoscopies (50-75 years old) at 20 sites in Europe and the United States, from December 2013 through October 2016. Patients were randomly assigned to groups given 200 mg MB-MMX, placebo, or 100 mg MB-MMX (ratio of 2:2:1). The 100-mg MB-MMX group was included for masking purposes. MB-MMX and placebo tablets were administered with a 4-L polyethylene glycol-based bowel preparation. The patients then underwent colonoscopy by an experienced endoscopist with centralized double-reading. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with 1 adenoma or carcinoma (adenoma detection rate [ADR]). We calculated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for differences in detection between the 200-mg MB-MMX and placebo groups. False-positive (resection rate for non-neoplastic polyps) and adverse events were assessed as secondary endpoints. RESULTS: The ADR was higher for the MB-MMX group (273 of 485 patients, 56.29%) than the placebo group (229 of 479 patients, 47.81%) (OR 1.46; 95% CI 1.09-1.96). The proportion of patients with nonpolypoid lesions was higher in the MB-MMX group (213 of 485 patients, 43.92%) than the placebo group (168 of 479 patients, 35.07%) (OR 1.66; 95% CI 1.21-2.26). The proportion of patients with adenomas