ArticleClinical and translational gastroenterology2014
Predicting the risk of recurrent adenoma and incident colorectal cancer based on findings of the baseline colonoscopy.
Article in Clinical and translational gastroenterology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Recommendations for Follow-Up After Colonoscopy and Polypectomy: A Consensus Update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2020Guideline
- Guideline
- Evaluation of the Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Personalized Surveillance After Colorectal Adenomatous Polypectomy.Epidemiologic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Navigating the Terrain of Post-Polypectomy Surveillance: Charting the Complex Landscape of Guidelines and Recurrence Risks.Canadian journal of gastroenterology & hepatology · 2026Review
- Unveiling Colorectal Cancer Biomarkers: Harnessing Biosensor Technology for Volatile Organic Compound Detection.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Risk of advanced neoplasia after removal of colorectal adenomas with high-grade dysplasia.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Summary and comparison of recently updated post-polypectomy surveillance guidelines.Intestinal research · 2023Review
- Large serrated polyps indicate a greater risk of advanced metachronous colorectal neoplasia than high-grade adenomas.Endoscopy international open · 2023Article
- Article
- Korean Guidelines for Postpolypectomy Colonoscopic Surveillance: 2022 revised edition.Intestinal research · 2023Review
- Korean guidelines for postpolypectomy colonoscopic surveillance: 2022 revised edition.Clinical endoscopy · 2022Review
- Development and validation of a nomogram based on neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and fibrinogen-to-lymphocyte ratio for predicting recurrence of colorectal adenoma.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2022Article
- [Korean Guidelines for Postpolypectomy Colonoscopic Surveillance: 2022 Revised Edition].The Korean journal of gastroenterology = Taehan Sohwagi Hakhoe chi · 2022Review
- Adenoma characteristics associated with post-polypectomy proximal colon cancer incidence: a retrospective cohort study.British journal of cancer · 2022Article
- Nomograms to predict cancer-specific mortality in colon adenocarcinoma with different types of villous architecture.International journal of colorectal disease · 2021Article
- Post-polypectomy surveillance colonoscopy: Comparison of the updated guidelines.United European gastroenterology journal · 2021Review
- Outcomes and adverse factors for endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of colorectal polyps in elderly patients.Frontline gastroenterology · 2021Article
- Association Between Age and Complications After Outpatient Colonoscopy.JAMA network open · 2020Article
- Recommendations for Follow-Up After Colonoscopy and Polypectomy: A Consensus Update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer.Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2020Article
- Recommendations for Follow-Up After Colonoscopy and Polypectomy: A Consensus Update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer.Gastroenterology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe decision tree underlying current practice guidelines for post polypectomy surveillance relies on risk stratification based on predictive attributes gleaned from adenomas removed on screening colonoscopy examination. Our primary aim was to estimate the magnitude of association between baseline adenoma attributes and the risk of adenoma recurrence and invasive colorectal adenocarcinoma (CRC). Our secondary aims were to estimate the adenoma detection rate (ADR) of surveillance compared with screening colonoscopies and describe time trends in preventive colonoscopy utilization.
methodsWe used prospective analyses of retrospectively collected clinical data from electronic health records. A cohort of primary care patients eligible for colorectal cancer screening was assembled encompassing 110,452 subjects, of which 3,300 had adenomas removed on screening examination. Of those patients who had a follow-up surveillance colonoscopy (defined as a patient with a documented adenoma on prior colonoscopy) recorded during the study period, 537 had a recurrent adenoma.
resultsOf those recurrent adenomas, 354 had a high-risk attributes. High-risk attributes were described at >3 adenomas, at least one adenoma >10 mm in size, high-grade dysplasia, or villous features. The risk of developing invasive CRC among post polypectomy patients was significantly higher if the baseline adenomas displayed any of the following attributes: more numerous than 3 (4.3-fold higher risk, 95% confidence interval (CI) low, high 1.4, 12.9), larger than 10 mm in size (5.2-fold higher risk, 95% CI low, high 1.8, 15.1), high-grade dysplasia (13.2-fold risk, 95% CI low, high 2.8, 62.1), or villous features (7.4-fold higher risk, 95% CI low, high 2.5, 21.5). These attributes combined added a net value of 22.8% to the probability of correctly predicting CRC. There was a threefold increase in surveillance utilization relative to screening from 2005 to 2011. The ADR of surveillance (34.1%) was 1.5-fold higher than that of screening (23.1%).
conclusionsThese results emphasize the need to mitigate excessive risk by performing timely surveillance colonoscopies in patients with baseline adenomas displaying high-risk attributes as recommended in practice guidelines.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.