Patients who received flexible sigmoidoscopy from endoscopists with the lowest adenoma detection rates were at elevated risk for interval distal colorectal cancer.
A screening colonoscopy study performed in Poland (N Engl J Med 2010; 362:1795) and an evaluation of a colonoscopy cohort from Ontario (Gastroenterology 2011; 140:65) have both shown that poor adenoma or polyp detection among doctors leads to more patients developing colorectal cancer. Now, investigators evaluate the association between distal adenoma detection, specifically with flexible sigmoidoscopy, and risk for interval distal cancer using data from the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer screening trial. This trial recently demonstrated that flexible sigmoidoscopy is associated with a reduced risk for death from distal colorectal cancer and a modest reduction in risk for proximal colorectal cancer (N Engl J Med 2012; 366:2345).
The distal adenoma detection rate during flexible sigmoidoscopy ranged from 2.0% to 7.2% among endoscopists in the lowest quartile of distal adenoma detection rate compared with 11.2% to 15.8% among endoscopists in the highest quartile. Of 66,711 examinations by 93 endoscopists, 32 interval distal cancers were detected. The rate of interval cancer was 9.0 per 10,000 examinations in patients examined by endoscopists in the lowest quartile of distal adenoma detection compared with 3.0 to 5.4 per 10,000 examinations in patients examined by endoscopists in higher quartiles. The risk for interval distal cancer was increased for patients of endoscopists in the lowest quartile versus all other quartiles (odds ratio, 2.4; P=0.02).
Reviewing Author
DisclosuresConsultant/Advisory BoardOlympus Corporation America; Boston Scientific
Speaker’s BureauOlympus
Grant/Research SupportMedtronic; Boston Scientific; Colonary Solutions; Paion Medical; Medivators; Braintree Laboratories
Editorial BoardsWorld Journal of Gastroenterology; The Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology; Techniques in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy; Gastroenterology & Hepatology; Expert Review of Gastroenterology & Hepatology; Medscape Gastroenterology; World Journal of Gastrointestinal Pharmacology and Therapeutics; Annals of Gastroenterology & Hepatology; World Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology; Comparative Effectiveness Research; Journal of Anesthesia & Clinical Research; Gastroenterology; World Journal of Gastrointestinal Pathophysiology; Gastroenterology Research and Practice; GI & Hepatology News; Gastroenterology Report; Clinical Epidemiology Reviews; JSM Gastroenterology and Hepatology; GI Journal Watch; Austin Journal of Gastroenterology; World Journal of Gastrointestinal Pharmacology & Therapeutics
Leadership Positions in Professional SocietiesAmerican Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (Treasurer); US Multi-Society Task Force (AGA, ACG, ASGE) (Chair)
DisclosuresConsultant/Advisory BoardOlympus Corporation America; Boston Scientific
Speaker’s BureauOlympus
Grant/Research SupportMedtronic; Boston Scientific; Colonary Solutions; Paion Medical; Medivators; Braintree Laboratories
Editorial BoardsWorld Journal of Gastroenterology; The Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology; Techniques in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy; Gastroenterology & Hepatology; Expert Review of Gastroenterology & Hepatology; Medscape Gastroenterology; World Journal of Gastrointestinal Pharmacology and Therapeutics; Annals of Gastroenterology & Hepatology; World Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology; Comparative Effectiveness Research; Journal of Anesthesia & Clinical Research; Gastroenterology; World Journal of Gastrointestinal Pathophysiology; Gastroenterology Research and Practice; GI & Hepatology News; Gastroenterology Report; Clinical Epidemiology Reviews; JSM Gastroenterology and Hepatology; GI Journal Watch; Austin Journal of Gastroenterology; World Journal of Gastrointestinal Pharmacology & Therapeutics
Leadership Positions in Professional SocietiesAmerican Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (Treasurer); US Multi-Society Task Force (AGA, ACG, ASGE) (Chair)
Comment
This is the first study to show an independent effect of adenoma detection on the risk for distal colorectal cancer. These findings add to the now overwhelming evidence that protection of patients requires endoscopists to measure their adenoma detection rates and that adenoma detection is the most important quality indicator of lower bowel endoscopy.