45-49岁患者的结肠镜检查结果为阳性

IF 503.1 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians Pub Date : 2022-11-05 DOI:10.3322/caac.21762
Mike Fillon
{"title":"45-49岁患者的结肠镜检查结果为阳性","authors":"Mike Fillon","doi":"10.3322/caac.21762","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In response to the increase in colon cancer rates in younger individuals in 2018, the ACS—with other organizations following suit—recommended lowering the age for starting colorectal cancer screening of average-risk individuals to 45 years. Researchers from the Stanford University School of Medicine in California believe that enough time has now passed to begin assessing the impact of this change. Specifically, they wanted to examine any changes in the proportion of younger people screened in Stanford endoscopy clinics and whether the inclusion of the younger subjects would dilute the ADR. The study appears in <i>Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology</i> (doi:10.1016/j.cgh.2022.04.037.)</p><p>The researchers used data from Stanford’s Colonoscopy Quality Assurance Program, which collects information from four of the university’s Northern California endoscopy clinics. The researchers compared subjects who underwent screening colonoscopy during two periods. Period 1 covers October 2017 through December 2018 and represents the time before the 2018 ACS guideline. Period 2 covers January 2019 through August 2021, after dissemination of the new guideline. Subjects from each time period were divided into several groups: patients between the ages of 45 and 49 years and those 50 years old or older (in five-year age groups) at their initial colonoscopies as well as patients in the same age groups who were undergoing rescreening colonoscopy.</p><p>For each group and by time period, the researchers compared detection rates for adenomas, advanced adenomas, sessile serrated lesions (SSLs), and advanced SSLs; the mean number of adenomas per colonoscopy; and the mean number of lesions per colonoscopy.</p><p>Dr Ladabaum, who is the lead author of the study, and his colleagues compared detection rates from Period 2 to Period 1 for patients aged 45–50 years to explore whether patients at low risk for colorectal neoplasia might be self-selecting for screening in Period 2. “When the ACS guidelines were first published, concerns were raised that the 45- to 49-yearolds who would present for screening might be health-conscious persons with the best access to medical services, and that these persons might in fact be a low-risk group.”</p><p>The researchers also compared Period 2 detection rates among the younger patients with those of the older groups (those who underwent initial screening or rescreening) for whom colorectal cancer screening is encouraged under new and previous guidelines.</p><p>From records of 29,166 unique colonoscopies, the study selected patients who had undergone colonoscopy with documentation of the extent of examination to the cecum and a Boston Bowel Preparation Score of at least 2 in each segment (indicating bowel preparation that was adequate for visualizing the bowel lining). The final study data set included 7990 patients who had undergone colonoscopies from October 2017 through August 2021; 4266 were first-time colonoscopies, and 3724 were rescreening colonoscopies. The median age of the patients was 56–58 years, and approximately 53% were female.</p><p>The researchers found that the proportion of first-time screening colonoscopies performed in patients aged 45–49 years increased from 41 of 1183 during Period 1 to 350 of 3005 during Period 2 (3.5% and 11.6%, respectively; i.e., a 3-fold increase.) They also found that for Period 1, 55.2% of first-time screening colonoscopies were performed on patients between the ages of 50 and 54 years, and 53.9% were performed for the same age group during Period 2. These numbers indicate that the vast majority of initial screenings are being performed in the first five years after the patients become eligible on the basis of the previous screening starting age of 50 years.</p><p>They also discovered that rescreening colonoscopies were shifted to older age groups with a bell-shaped distribution around the 60- to 64-year-old group, which probably reflects second screenings among those who had their first colonoscopy in their early 50s. This accounted for the largest proportion of rescreening colonoscopies in both periods (24.8% for Period 1 and 26.1% for Period 2).</p><p>Lesion detection rates in the 45- to 49-year category versus the 50- to 54-year category increased to a similar extent from Period 1 to Period 2. The study authors attribute this finding to quality improvement programs at their clinics.</p><p>“Our results suggest that screening at ages 45 to 49 is likely to yield substantial long-term benefits, lending support to the recent change in guidelines,” says Dr Ladabaum. “We also believe that 45- to 49-year-olds should be included when calculating ADR.”</p><p>Dr Ladabaum also says that this study addresses some of the central concerns regarding the updated screening policy: Will endoscopy units be overwhelmed? Will the yield be low when patients aged 45–49 years are screened, especially if lowrisk people self-select for screening? Should the calculation of the ADR— the key colonoscopy quality metric— include these patients?</p><p>“So far, the screening volume in 45- to 49-year-olds has increased only modestly in our unit, and it is still far lower than at ages 50 to 54,” he adds. “Importantly, the detection rates for all, and, crucially, also for advanced precancerous lesions, were only slightly lower at age 45 to 49 years versus age 50 to 54 years, and they were comparable to the yield at repeat screening at ages 60 to 64 years. We think 45- to 49-yearolds should absolutely be included when calculating the ADR.”</p><p>Dr Ladabaum notes that it remains to be seen if endoscopic resources will be strained. “We must ensure that screening older, currently unscreened persons is not neglected, and that we ensure access to prompt colonoscopies for all persons with an abnormal noninvasive colorectal cancer screening test, such as an abnormal fecal immunochemical test.”</p><p>Rebecca Siegel, MPH, senior scientific director of surveillance research at the ACS in Kennesaw, Georgia, who was not involved with the study, says that the research is important because there were very little data on colorectal cancer screening in average-risk people aged 45–49 years, and many clinicians and researchers were skeptical about screening people younger than 50 years.</p><p>“Beforehand,” she says, “the belief was that the risk was too low in people 45 to 49 years old and that there wasn’t evidence that screening would be effective for that population. This study is a vindication for the ACS, which received substantial criticism when it was the first to lower the screening age, and verification for the US Preventive Services Taskforce, which issued a similar guideline last year.”</p><p>“Screening has resulted in steep declines in colorectal cancer incidence and mortality in people 50 and older, and now we know the net should be cast wider to include younger people who are now at increasingly higher risk for cancer,” she continues. “This study is facility based and limited geographically, so future research is needed to confirm these findings in a population-based cohort.” The Stanford researchers agree with this limitation, and they also note that they were unable to capture demographic information beyond sex and age.</p><p>Siegel says that guidance about colorectal cancer screening, as well as justification for the lower age, can be found on the ACS website (https://www.cancer.org/cancer/colon-rectalcancer/detection-diagnosis-staging/acs-recommendations.html), in the ACS guideline (https://acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.3322/caac.21457), and on the US Preventive Services Task Force website (https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/recommendation/colorectal-cancer-screening), where the modeling study and evidence summary can be accessed.</p>","PeriodicalId":137,"journal":{"name":"CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":503.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.3322/caac.21762","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Colonoscopies for patients aged 45–49 years yield positive results\",\"authors\":\"Mike Fillon\",\"doi\":\"10.3322/caac.21762\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>In response to the increase in colon cancer rates in younger individuals in 2018, the ACS—with other organizations following suit—recommended lowering the age for starting colorectal cancer screening of average-risk individuals to 45 years. Researchers from the Stanford University School of Medicine in California believe that enough time has now passed to begin assessing the impact of this change. Specifically, they wanted to examine any changes in the proportion of younger people screened in Stanford endoscopy clinics and whether the inclusion of the younger subjects would dilute the ADR. The study appears in <i>Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology</i> (doi:10.1016/j.cgh.2022.04.037.)</p><p>The researchers used data from Stanford’s Colonoscopy Quality Assurance Program, which collects information from four of the university’s Northern California endoscopy clinics. The researchers compared subjects who underwent screening colonoscopy during two periods. Period 1 covers October 2017 through December 2018 and represents the time before the 2018 ACS guideline. Period 2 covers January 2019 through August 2021, after dissemination of the new guideline. Subjects from each time period were divided into several groups: patients between the ages of 45 and 49 years and those 50 years old or older (in five-year age groups) at their initial colonoscopies as well as patients in the same age groups who were undergoing rescreening colonoscopy.</p><p>For each group and by time period, the researchers compared detection rates for adenomas, advanced adenomas, sessile serrated lesions (SSLs), and advanced SSLs; the mean number of adenomas per colonoscopy; and the mean number of lesions per colonoscopy.</p><p>Dr Ladabaum, who is the lead author of the study, and his colleagues compared detection rates from Period 2 to Period 1 for patients aged 45–50 years to explore whether patients at low risk for colorectal neoplasia might be self-selecting for screening in Period 2. “When the ACS guidelines were first published, concerns were raised that the 45- to 49-yearolds who would present for screening might be health-conscious persons with the best access to medical services, and that these persons might in fact be a low-risk group.”</p><p>The researchers also compared Period 2 detection rates among the younger patients with those of the older groups (those who underwent initial screening or rescreening) for whom colorectal cancer screening is encouraged under new and previous guidelines.</p><p>From records of 29,166 unique colonoscopies, the study selected patients who had undergone colonoscopy with documentation of the extent of examination to the cecum and a Boston Bowel Preparation Score of at least 2 in each segment (indicating bowel preparation that was adequate for visualizing the bowel lining). The final study data set included 7990 patients who had undergone colonoscopies from October 2017 through August 2021; 4266 were first-time colonoscopies, and 3724 were rescreening colonoscopies. The median age of the patients was 56–58 years, and approximately 53% were female.</p><p>The researchers found that the proportion of first-time screening colonoscopies performed in patients aged 45–49 years increased from 41 of 1183 during Period 1 to 350 of 3005 during Period 2 (3.5% and 11.6%, respectively; i.e., a 3-fold increase.) They also found that for Period 1, 55.2% of first-time screening colonoscopies were performed on patients between the ages of 50 and 54 years, and 53.9% were performed for the same age group during Period 2. These numbers indicate that the vast majority of initial screenings are being performed in the first five years after the patients become eligible on the basis of the previous screening starting age of 50 years.</p><p>They also discovered that rescreening colonoscopies were shifted to older age groups with a bell-shaped distribution around the 60- to 64-year-old group, which probably reflects second screenings among those who had their first colonoscopy in their early 50s. This accounted for the largest proportion of rescreening colonoscopies in both periods (24.8% for Period 1 and 26.1% for Period 2).</p><p>Lesion detection rates in the 45- to 49-year category versus the 50- to 54-year category increased to a similar extent from Period 1 to Period 2. The study authors attribute this finding to quality improvement programs at their clinics.</p><p>“Our results suggest that screening at ages 45 to 49 is likely to yield substantial long-term benefits, lending support to the recent change in guidelines,” says Dr Ladabaum. “We also believe that 45- to 49-year-olds should be included when calculating ADR.”</p><p>Dr Ladabaum also says that this study addresses some of the central concerns regarding the updated screening policy: Will endoscopy units be overwhelmed? Will the yield be low when patients aged 45–49 years are screened, especially if lowrisk people self-select for screening? Should the calculation of the ADR— the key colonoscopy quality metric— include these patients?</p><p>“So far, the screening volume in 45- to 49-year-olds has increased only modestly in our unit, and it is still far lower than at ages 50 to 54,” he adds. “Importantly, the detection rates for all, and, crucially, also for advanced precancerous lesions, were only slightly lower at age 45 to 49 years versus age 50 to 54 years, and they were comparable to the yield at repeat screening at ages 60 to 64 years. We think 45- to 49-yearolds should absolutely be included when calculating the ADR.”</p><p>Dr Ladabaum notes that it remains to be seen if endoscopic resources will be strained. “We must ensure that screening older, currently unscreened persons is not neglected, and that we ensure access to prompt colonoscopies for all persons with an abnormal noninvasive colorectal cancer screening test, such as an abnormal fecal immunochemical test.”</p><p>Rebecca Siegel, MPH, senior scientific director of surveillance research at the ACS in Kennesaw, Georgia, who was not involved with the study, says that the research is important because there were very little data on colorectal cancer screening in average-risk people aged 45–49 years, and many clinicians and researchers were skeptical about screening people younger than 50 years.</p><p>“Beforehand,” she says, “the belief was that the risk was too low in people 45 to 49 years old and that there wasn’t evidence that screening would be effective for that population. This study is a vindication for the ACS, which received substantial criticism when it was the first to lower the screening age, and verification for the US Preventive Services Taskforce, which issued a similar guideline last year.”</p><p>“Screening has resulted in steep declines in colorectal cancer incidence and mortality in people 50 and older, and now we know the net should be cast wider to include younger people who are now at increasingly higher risk for cancer,” she continues. “This study is facility based and limited geographically, so future research is needed to confirm these findings in a population-based cohort.” The Stanford researchers agree with this limitation, and they also note that they were unable to capture demographic information beyond sex and age.</p><p>Siegel says that guidance about colorectal cancer screening, as well as justification for the lower age, can be found on the ACS website (https://www.cancer.org/cancer/colon-rectalcancer/detection-diagnosis-staging/acs-recommendations.html), in the ACS guideline (https://acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.3322/caac.21457), and on the US Preventive Services Task Force website (https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/recommendation/colorectal-cancer-screening), where the modeling study and evidence summary can be accessed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":137,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":503.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.3322/caac.21762\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.3322/caac.21762\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.3322/caac.21762","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

为了应对2018年年轻人结肠癌发病率的上升,acs和其他组织建议将平均风险个体的结直肠癌筛查开始年龄降低至45岁。加州斯坦福大学医学院的研究人员认为,现在已经有足够的时间开始评估这一变化的影响。具体来说,他们想要检查斯坦福大学内窥镜检查诊所中年轻人筛查比例的变化,以及纳入年轻受试者是否会稀释不良反应。该研究发表在《临床胃肠病学和肝病学》(doi:10.1016/j.cgh.2022.04.037)。研究人员使用了斯坦福大学结肠镜检查质量保证项目的数据,该项目收集了该大学北加州四家内窥镜检查诊所的信息。研究人员比较了在两个时期接受筛查性结肠镜检查的受试者。阶段1涵盖2017年10月至2018年12月,代表2018年ACS指南之前的时间。第二阶段为新指南发布后的2019年1月至2021年8月。每个时间段的受试者被分为几组:年龄在45 - 49岁之间的患者,50岁或以上的患者(5岁年龄组)首次进行结肠镜检查,以及同一年龄组进行结肠镜再筛查的患者。对于每一组和时间段,研究人员比较了腺瘤、晚期腺瘤、无根锯齿状病变(SSLs)和晚期SSLs的检出率;每次结肠镜检查腺瘤的平均数目;以及每次结肠镜检查的平均病变数。Ladabaum博士是这项研究的主要作者,他和他的同事们比较了45-50岁患者在第二阶段和第一阶段的检出率,以探索低风险结直肠癌患者是否可以在第二阶段进行自我选择筛查。“当美国癌症学会的指导方针首次发布时,人们就提出了这样的担忧,即45至49岁的人可能是有健康意识的人,他们最容易获得医疗服务,而这些人实际上可能是一个低风险群体。”研究人员还比较了年轻患者和老年患者(接受初次筛查或再筛查的患者)的第二阶段检出率,老年患者在新的和以前的指导方针下鼓励进行结直肠癌筛查。从29,166例独特的结肠镜检查记录中,该研究选择了接受结肠镜检查并记录盲肠检查范围和每个节段波士顿肠准备评分至少为2分的患者(表明肠准备足以观察肠壁)。最终的研究数据集包括7990名从2017年10月到2021年8月接受结肠镜检查的患者;首次结肠镜检查4266例,复诊结肠镜检查3724例。患者的中位年龄为56-58岁,约53%为女性。研究人员发现,45-49岁患者进行首次结肠镜筛查的比例从第1期的1183例中的41例增加到第2期的3005例中的350例(分别为3.5%和11.6%;即增加3倍。)他们还发现,在第一阶段,55.2%的首次结肠镜筛查是在50至54岁的患者中进行的,而在第二阶段,53.9%的患者是在同一年龄段进行的。这些数字表明,绝大多数最初的筛查是在患者根据上一次筛查的起始年龄(50岁)获得资格后的头五年进行的。他们还发现,重新筛查结肠镜检查的人群年龄偏大,在60岁至64岁之间呈钟形分布,这可能反映了那些在50岁出头进行第一次结肠镜检查的人进行了第二次筛查。在这两个时期中,结肠镜再筛查所占的比例最大(第一阶段为24.8%,第二阶段为26.1%)。从第一阶段到第二阶段,45- 49岁年龄组的病变检出率与50- 54岁年龄组的病变检出率的增长幅度相似。该研究的作者将这一发现归因于他们诊所的质量改进项目。Ladabaum博士说:“我们的研究结果表明,在45岁至49岁之间进行筛查可能会产生实质性的长期效益,这为最近指南的变化提供了支持。”“我们还认为,在计算ADR时应将45至49岁的人包括在内。 Ladabaum博士还表示,这项研究解决了有关最新筛查政策的一些核心问题:内窥镜检查单位是否会不堪重负?当45-49岁的患者接受筛查时,尤其是低风险人群自行选择筛查时,筛查率会低吗?不良反应的计算——结肠镜检查质量的关键指标——是否应该包括这些患者?他补充说:“到目前为止,我们部门45岁至49岁人群的筛查量仅略有增加,仍远低于50岁至54岁人群的筛查量。”“重要的是,所有人的检出率,以及至关重要的是晚期癌前病变的检出率,在45至49岁的人群中仅略低于50至54岁的人群,并且与60至64岁人群重复筛查的检出率相当。我们认为,在计算ADR时,45岁至49岁的人绝对应该包括在内。”Ladabaum博士指出,内窥镜资源是否会紧张还有待观察。“我们必须确保不忽视对目前未接受筛查的老年人进行筛查,并确保所有非侵入性结直肠癌筛查检测异常(如粪便免疫化学检测异常)的人都能及时获得结肠镜检查。”乔治亚州肯尼索美国癌症学会监测研究高级科学主任丽贝卡·西格尔(Rebecca Siegel)公共卫生硕士没有参与这项研究,她说这项研究很重要,因为在45-49岁的平均风险人群中进行结直肠癌筛查的数据很少,许多临床医生和研究人员对筛查50岁以下的人持怀疑态度。“在此之前,”她说,“人们认为45岁至49岁人群患乳腺癌的风险太低,而且没有证据表明筛查对这一人群有效。这项研究是对美国癌症学会的证明,该学会在首次降低筛查年龄时受到了大量批评,并为去年发布类似指南的美国预防服务工作组(US Preventive Services Taskforce)进行了验证。她继续说道:“筛查导致50岁及以上人群的结直肠癌发病率和死亡率急剧下降,现在我们知道应该扩大筛查范围,包括现在患癌症风险越来越高的年轻人。”“这项研究是基于设施的,地理位置有限,所以未来的研究需要在基于人群的队列中证实这些发现。”斯坦福大学的研究人员同意这一限制,他们还指出,他们无法捕捉到性别和年龄以外的人口统计信息。西格尔说,对结直肠癌筛查指导,以及理由年龄越低,可以发现在ACS网站(https://www.cancer.org/cancer/colon-rectalcancer/detection-diagnosis-staging/acs-recommendations.html),在ACS指南(https://acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.3322/caac.21457),以及美国预防服务工作组网站(https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/recommendation/colorectal-cancer-screening),其中可以访问建模研究和证据摘要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Colonoscopies for patients aged 45–49 years yield positive results

In response to the increase in colon cancer rates in younger individuals in 2018, the ACS—with other organizations following suit—recommended lowering the age for starting colorectal cancer screening of average-risk individuals to 45 years. Researchers from the Stanford University School of Medicine in California believe that enough time has now passed to begin assessing the impact of this change. Specifically, they wanted to examine any changes in the proportion of younger people screened in Stanford endoscopy clinics and whether the inclusion of the younger subjects would dilute the ADR. The study appears in Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology (doi:10.1016/j.cgh.2022.04.037.)

The researchers used data from Stanford’s Colonoscopy Quality Assurance Program, which collects information from four of the university’s Northern California endoscopy clinics. The researchers compared subjects who underwent screening colonoscopy during two periods. Period 1 covers October 2017 through December 2018 and represents the time before the 2018 ACS guideline. Period 2 covers January 2019 through August 2021, after dissemination of the new guideline. Subjects from each time period were divided into several groups: patients between the ages of 45 and 49 years and those 50 years old or older (in five-year age groups) at their initial colonoscopies as well as patients in the same age groups who were undergoing rescreening colonoscopy.

For each group and by time period, the researchers compared detection rates for adenomas, advanced adenomas, sessile serrated lesions (SSLs), and advanced SSLs; the mean number of adenomas per colonoscopy; and the mean number of lesions per colonoscopy.

Dr Ladabaum, who is the lead author of the study, and his colleagues compared detection rates from Period 2 to Period 1 for patients aged 45–50 years to explore whether patients at low risk for colorectal neoplasia might be self-selecting for screening in Period 2. “When the ACS guidelines were first published, concerns were raised that the 45- to 49-yearolds who would present for screening might be health-conscious persons with the best access to medical services, and that these persons might in fact be a low-risk group.”

The researchers also compared Period 2 detection rates among the younger patients with those of the older groups (those who underwent initial screening or rescreening) for whom colorectal cancer screening is encouraged under new and previous guidelines.

From records of 29,166 unique colonoscopies, the study selected patients who had undergone colonoscopy with documentation of the extent of examination to the cecum and a Boston Bowel Preparation Score of at least 2 in each segment (indicating bowel preparation that was adequate for visualizing the bowel lining). The final study data set included 7990 patients who had undergone colonoscopies from October 2017 through August 2021; 4266 were first-time colonoscopies, and 3724 were rescreening colonoscopies. The median age of the patients was 56–58 years, and approximately 53% were female.

The researchers found that the proportion of first-time screening colonoscopies performed in patients aged 45–49 years increased from 41 of 1183 during Period 1 to 350 of 3005 during Period 2 (3.5% and 11.6%, respectively; i.e., a 3-fold increase.) They also found that for Period 1, 55.2% of first-time screening colonoscopies were performed on patients between the ages of 50 and 54 years, and 53.9% were performed for the same age group during Period 2. These numbers indicate that the vast majority of initial screenings are being performed in the first five years after the patients become eligible on the basis of the previous screening starting age of 50 years.

They also discovered that rescreening colonoscopies were shifted to older age groups with a bell-shaped distribution around the 60- to 64-year-old group, which probably reflects second screenings among those who had their first colonoscopy in their early 50s. This accounted for the largest proportion of rescreening colonoscopies in both periods (24.8% for Period 1 and 26.1% for Period 2).

Lesion detection rates in the 45- to 49-year category versus the 50- to 54-year category increased to a similar extent from Period 1 to Period 2. The study authors attribute this finding to quality improvement programs at their clinics.

“Our results suggest that screening at ages 45 to 49 is likely to yield substantial long-term benefits, lending support to the recent change in guidelines,” says Dr Ladabaum. “We also believe that 45- to 49-year-olds should be included when calculating ADR.”

Dr Ladabaum also says that this study addresses some of the central concerns regarding the updated screening policy: Will endoscopy units be overwhelmed? Will the yield be low when patients aged 45–49 years are screened, especially if lowrisk people self-select for screening? Should the calculation of the ADR— the key colonoscopy quality metric— include these patients?

“So far, the screening volume in 45- to 49-year-olds has increased only modestly in our unit, and it is still far lower than at ages 50 to 54,” he adds. “Importantly, the detection rates for all, and, crucially, also for advanced precancerous lesions, were only slightly lower at age 45 to 49 years versus age 50 to 54 years, and they were comparable to the yield at repeat screening at ages 60 to 64 years. We think 45- to 49-yearolds should absolutely be included when calculating the ADR.”

Dr Ladabaum notes that it remains to be seen if endoscopic resources will be strained. “We must ensure that screening older, currently unscreened persons is not neglected, and that we ensure access to prompt colonoscopies for all persons with an abnormal noninvasive colorectal cancer screening test, such as an abnormal fecal immunochemical test.”

Rebecca Siegel, MPH, senior scientific director of surveillance research at the ACS in Kennesaw, Georgia, who was not involved with the study, says that the research is important because there were very little data on colorectal cancer screening in average-risk people aged 45–49 years, and many clinicians and researchers were skeptical about screening people younger than 50 years.

“Beforehand,” she says, “the belief was that the risk was too low in people 45 to 49 years old and that there wasn’t evidence that screening would be effective for that population. This study is a vindication for the ACS, which received substantial criticism when it was the first to lower the screening age, and verification for the US Preventive Services Taskforce, which issued a similar guideline last year.”

“Screening has resulted in steep declines in colorectal cancer incidence and mortality in people 50 and older, and now we know the net should be cast wider to include younger people who are now at increasingly higher risk for cancer,” she continues. “This study is facility based and limited geographically, so future research is needed to confirm these findings in a population-based cohort.” The Stanford researchers agree with this limitation, and they also note that they were unable to capture demographic information beyond sex and age.

Siegel says that guidance about colorectal cancer screening, as well as justification for the lower age, can be found on the ACS website (https://www.cancer.org/cancer/colon-rectalcancer/detection-diagnosis-staging/acs-recommendations.html), in the ACS guideline (https://acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.3322/caac.21457), and on the US Preventive Services Task Force website (https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/recommendation/colorectal-cancer-screening), where the modeling study and evidence summary can be accessed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
873.20
自引率
0.10%
发文量
51
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians" has been published by the American Cancer Society since 1950, making it one of the oldest peer-reviewed journals in oncology. It maintains the highest impact factor among all ISI-ranked journals. The journal effectively reaches a broad and diverse audience of health professionals, offering a unique platform to disseminate information on cancer prevention, early detection, various treatment modalities, palliative care, advocacy matters, quality-of-life topics, and more. As the premier journal of the American Cancer Society, it publishes mission-driven content that significantly influences patient care.
期刊最新文献
Bilateral mastectomy may not reduce mortality risk Most young female cancer survivors are at minimal risk for obstetric problems Breast cancer statistics 2024. Breast cancer: The good, the bad, and an important call to effective risk reduction strategies. Reviewer acknowledgement 2024
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1