Back to Search Start Over

Rationale and design of the European Polyp Surveillance (EPoS) trials

Authors :
Magnus Løberg
David F. Ransohoff
Michal F. Kaminski
Mário Dinis-Ribeiro
Rodrigo Jover
Michael Bretthauer
Carlo Senore
Øyvind Holme
Antoni Castells
Ann G Zauber
Enrique Quintero
Mette Kalager
Eleanor McFadden
Annike Sunde
Louise Emilsson
Hans-Olov Adami
Miguel A. Hernán
Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
Maria Pellise
Jaroslaw Regula
Evelien Dekker
Geir Hoff
Public Health
AGEM - Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism
CCA -Cancer Center Amsterdam
Gastroenterology and Hepatology
Source :
Endoscopy, r-FISABIO. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica, instname, r-FISABIO: Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica, Fundación para el Fomento de la Investigación Sanitaria y Biomédica de la Comunitat Valenciana (FISABIO), r-ISABIAL. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica del Instituto de Investigación Biomédica y Sanitaria de Alicante, Endoscopy, 48(6), 571-578. Georg Thieme Verlag
Publication Year :
2016

Abstract

Background: Current guidelines recommend surveillance colonoscopies after polyp removal depending on the number and characteristics of polyps, but there is a lack of evidence supporting the recommendations. This report outlines the rationale and design of two randomized trials and one observational study investigating evidence-based surveillance strategies following polyp removal. Study design and endpoints: The EPoS studies started to recruit patients in April 2015. EPoS study I randomizes 13 746 patients with low-risk adenomas (1-2 tubular adenomas size = 10mm in diameter, or adenoma with high-grade dysplasia, or >25% villous features) to surveillance after 3, 5, and 10 years, or 5 and 10 years only. EPoS study III offers surveillance after 5 and 10 years to patients with serrated polyps >= 10mm in diameter at any location, or serrated polyps >= 5mm in diameter proximal to the splenic flexure. All polyps are removed before patients enter the trials. The primary end point is colorectal cancer incidence after 10 years. We assume a colorectal cancer risk of 1% for patients in EPoS I, and 2% for patients in EPoS II. Using a noninferiority hypothesis with an equivalence interval of 0.5% for EPoS I and 0.7% for EPoS II, the trials are 90% powered to uncover differences larger than the equivalence intervals. For EPoS III, no power analyses have been performed. Conclusions: The present trials aim to develop evidence-based strategies for polyp surveillance, thereby maximizing effectiveness and minimizing resources.

Details

ISSN :
0013726X
Volume :
48
Issue :
6
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Endoscopy
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....cdf3a3a3e1b4bb8e13d567a704ff9e6c