Using colorectal cancer screening evidence to stratify for personal risk among those with a family history of colorectal cancer: a 42-year cohort study
King, D. W.; King, P. E.; Blanchard, M. W.; Ning, N. W.; King, S. K.; Grimm, M. C.; Ha, T.; Eagar, K.
Show abstract
Objective To determine if it is possible to assess individual patient risk of the development of colorectal cancer (CRC) in people in high-risk groups due to their family history. Design/Method Retrospective observational study of prospectively collected data from consecutive patients referred for a colonoscopy. 2,478 consecutive patients were referred to a single colorectal surgical practice in Sydney, Australia between 1977 and 2018 for a colonoscopy because of a family history of CRC. Of these, 1,963 have been followed for more than 10 years and are the subject of this paper. Histopathological findings categorised as normal (N), non-advanced adenoma (NAA) or advanced neoplasia (AN) with AN proven to be the precursor to CRC. Intervention Colonoscopic screening on the basis of contemporary practice to 2006 and subsequently according to Australian National Health and Medical Research Council guidelines. Results Participants with normal or low-risk findings in the first decade remain at lower risk of CRC for 30 years from the commencement of screening. Conclusion It is possible to stratify individual patients in a high relative risk cohort into those with high or low personal risk of CRC based on colonoscopic findings in the first 10 years of surveillance. Those with no AN in the first ten years have a lower 30-year risk of developing AN than the general community. This offers the possibility of structuring surveillance programs around individual risk rather than group risk, lessening the need for multiple surveillance colonoscopies in the majority of such patients and improving the cost effectiveness of CRC screening at the population level.
Matching journals
The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Ability of known colorectal cancer susceptibility SNPs to predict colorectal cancer risk: A cohort study within the UK Biobank 93%
- Colorectal cancer in patients with single versus double positive faecal immunochemical test results: A retrospective cohort study 92%
- Lymph Node Morphology in Stage II Colorectal Cancer 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- WNT and TGF-Beta Pathway Alterations in Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer Among Hispanic/Latino Populations 93%
- Molecular Heterogeneity in Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer: Pathway-Specific Insights in High-Risk Populations 93%
- Deep sequencing of early T stage colorectal cancers reveals disruption of homologous recombination repair in microsatellite stable tumours with high mutational burdens 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Molecular subtyping improves prognostication of Stage 2 colorectal cancer 92%
- Assessing awareness of blood cancer symptoms and barriers to symptomatic presentation: Measure development and results from a population survey in the UK 91%
- Enrichment of colibactin-associated mutational signatures in unexplained colorectal polyposis patients 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Construction of tongue image-based machine learning model for screening patients with gastric precancerous lesions 88%
- Defining the Critical Components of Informed Consent for Genetic Testing: A Delphi Study 87%
- Calcium-Sensing Receptor Polymorphisms at rs1801725 are Associated with Increased Risk of Secondary Malignancies 86%
Similar papers in this journal
- Determining the feasibility of calculating pancreatic cancer risk scores for people with new-onset diabetes in primary care (DEFEND PRIME): study protocol 91%
- Patterns of peritoneal dissemination and response to systemic chemotherapy in common and rare peritoneal tumors treated by cytoreductive surgery: Study protocol of a prospective, multi-center, observational study 91%
- Cohort profile: The Swedish Inception Cohort in inflammatory bowel disease (SIC-IBD) 89%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.