The publication data currently available has been vetted by Vanderbilt faculty, staff, administrators and trainees. The data itself is retrieved directly from NCBI's PubMed and is automatically updated on a weekly basis to ensure accuracy and completeness.
If you have any questions or comments, please contact us.
The rising prevalence of noncommunicable diseases globally, with a strikingly disproportionate increase in prevalence and related mortality in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), is a major threat to sustainable development. The epidemiologic trend of cancers in LMICs is of particular concern. Despite a lower incidence of cancer in LMICs compared with high-income countries, total cancer-related mortality is significantly higher in LMICs, especially in people younger than 65 years of age. The enormous economic impact of premature mortality and lost productive life years highlights the critical importance of galvanizing cancer prevention and management to achieve sustainable development. The rising burden of cancer in LMICs stresses an already weak health care and economic infrastructure and poses unique challenges. Although the WHO acknowledges that the effective management of cancer relies on early detection, accurate diagnosis, and access to appropriate multimodal therapy, the placement of priority on early detection cannot be assumed to be effective in LMICs, where limited downstream resources may be overwhelmed by the inevitable increases in number of diagnoses. This review discusses several factors and considerations that may compromise the success of cancer control programs in LMICs, particularly if the focus is only on early detection through screening and surveillance. It is intended to guide optimal implementation of cancer control programs by accentuating challenges common in LMICs and by emphasizing the importance of cancer prevention where relevant so that communities and stakeholders can work together to devise optimal means of combatting the growing burden of cancer.
BACKGROUND & AIMS - Patients with inflammatory bowel diseases who have postinflammatory polyps (PIPs) have an increased risk of colorectal neoplasia (CRN). European guidelines propose that patients with PIPs receive more frequent surveillance colonoscopies, despite limited evidence of this increased risk. We aimed to define the risk of CRN and colectomy in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases and PIPs.
METHODS - We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study of patients with inflammatory bowel diseases who underwent colonoscopic surveillance for CRN, from January 1997 through January 2017, at 5 academic hospitals and 2 large nonacademic hospitals in New York or the Netherlands. Eligible patients had confirmed colonic disease with duration of at least 8 years (or any duration, if they also had primary sclerosing cholangitis) and no history of advanced CRN (high-grade dysplasia or colorectal cancer) or colectomy. The primary outcome was occurrence of advanced CRN according to PIP status; secondary outcomes were occurrence of CRN (inclusive of low-grade dysplasia) and colectomy.
RESULTS - Of 1582 eligible patients, 462 (29.2%) had PIPs. PIPs were associated with more severe inflammation (adjusted odds ratio 1.32; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.13-1.55), greater disease extent (adjusted odds ratio 1.92; 95% CI 1.34-2.74), and lower likelihood of primary sclerosing cholangitis (adjusted odds ratio 0.38; 95% CI 0.26-0.55). During a median follow-up period of 4.8 years, the time until development of advanced CRN did not differ significantly between patients with and those without PIPs. PIPs did not independently increase the risk of advanced CRN (adjusted hazard ratio 1.17; 95% CI 0.59-2.31). The colectomy rate was significantly higher in patients with PIPs (P = .01).
CONCLUSIONS - In a retrospective analysis of data from 2 large independent surveillance cohorts, PIPs were associated with greater severity and extent of colon inflammation and higher rates of colectomy, but were not associated with development of any degree of CRN. Therefore, intervals for surveillance should not be shortened based solely on the presence of PIPs.
Copyright © 2019 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Background/Aims - Statins have been postulated to lower the risk of colorectal neoplasia. No studies have examined any possible chemopreventive effect of statins in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) undergoing colorectal cancer (CRC) surveillance. This study examined the association of statin exposure with dysplasia and CRC in patients with IBD undergoing dysplasia surveillance colonoscopies.
Methods - A cohort of patients with IBD undergoing colonoscopic surveillance for dysplasia and CRC at a single academic medical center were studied. The inclusion criteria were IBD involving the colon for ≥8 years (or any colitis duration if associated with primary sclerosing cholangitis [PSC]) and at least two colonoscopic surveillance exams. The exclusion criteria were CRC or high-grade dysplasia (HGD) prior to or at enrollment, prior colectomy, or limited (<30%) colonic disease. The primary outcome was the frequency of dysplasia and/or CRC in statin-exposed versus nonexposed patients.
Results - A total of 642 patients met the inclusion criteria (57 statin-exposed and 585 nonexposed). The statin-exposed group had a longer IBD duration, longer follow-up period, and more colonoscopies but lower inflammatory scores, less frequent PSC and less use of thiopurines and biologics. There were no differences in low-grade dysplasia, HGD, or CRC development during the follow-up period between the statin-exposed and nonexposed groups (21.1%, 5.3%, 1.8% vs 19.2%, 2.9%, 2.9%, respectively). Propensity score analysis did not alter the overall findings.
Conclusions - In IBD patients undergoing surveillance colonoscopies, statin use was not associated with reduced dysplasia or CRC rates. The role of statins as chemopreventive agents in IBD remains controversial.
BACKGROUND & AIMS - There are marked racial and ethnic differences in non-cardia gastric cancer prevalence within the United States. Although gastric cancer screening is recommended in some regions of high prevalence, screening is not routinely performed in the United States. Our objective was to determine whether selected non-cardia gastric cancer screening for high-risk races and ethnicities within the United States is cost effective.
METHODS - We developed a decision analytic Markov model with the base case of a 50-year-old person of non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, Hispanic, or Asian race or ethnicity. The cost effectiveness of a no-screening strategy (current standard) for non-cardia gastric cancer was compared with that of 2 endoscopic screening modalities initiated at the time of screening colonoscopy for colorectal cancer: upper esophagogastroduodenoscopy with biopsy examinations and continued surveillance only if intestinal metaplasia or more severe pathology is identified or esophagogastroduodenoscopy with biopsy examinations continued every 2 years even in the absence of identified pathology. We used prevalence rates, transition probabilities, costs, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) from publications and public data sources. Outcome measures were reported in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, with a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY.
RESULTS - Compared with biennial and no screening, screening esophagogastroduodenoscopy with continued surveillance only when indicated was cost effective for non-Hispanic blacks ($80,278/QALY), Hispanics ($76,070/QALY), and Asians ($71,451/QALY), but not for non-Hispanic whites ($122,428/QALY). The model was sensitive to intestinal metaplasia prevalence, transition rates from intestinal metaplasia to dysplasia to local and regional cancer, cost of endoscopy, and cost of resection (endoscopic or surgical).
CONCLUSIONS - Based on a decision analytic Markov model, endoscopic non-cardia gastric cancer screening for high-risk races and ethnicities could be cost effective in the United States.
Copyright © 2018 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND & AIMS - The presence of specific single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) can be used to calculate an individual's risk for colorectal cancer (CRC), called a genetic risk score (GRS). We investigated whether GRS can identify individuals with clinically relevant neoplasms in a screening colonoscopy population.
METHODS - We derived a GRS based on 48 SNPs associated with CRC, identified in a comprehensive literature search. We obtained genetic data from 1043 participants (50-79 years old) in a screening colonoscopy study in Germany, recruited from 2005 through 2013 (294 with advanced neoplasms, 249 with non-advanced adenoma (NAAs), and 500 without neoplasms). Each participant was assigned a GRS by aggregating their risk alleles (0, 1, or 2). Risk of advanced neoplasms and NAA according to GRS was calculated by multiple logistic regression. Risk advancement periods were calculated. We replicated our findings using data from a subset of the Tennessee Colorectal Polyp Study.
RESULTS - An increased GRS was associated with higher prevalence of advanced neoplasms, but not NAAs. Participants in the middle and upper tertiles of GRS had a 2.2-fold and 2.7-fold increase in risk, respectively, of advanced neoplasms compared to those in the lower tertile. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) were 1.09 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76-1.57) for NAA in the middle tertile and 1.05 (95% CI, 0.70-1.55) for NAA in the upper tertile. The ORs were largest for proximal advanced neoplasms for participants in the middle tertile (OR, 3.55; 95% CI 1.85-6.82) and the upper tertile (OR, 3.61; 95% CI 1.84-7.10). The risk advancement period for medium vs low GRS was 13.4 years (95% CI 4.8-22.0) and for high vs low GRS was 17.5 years (95% CI, 7.8-27.3).
CONCLUSIONS - In a genetic analysis of participants in a CRC screening study in Germany, an increased GRS (based on CRC-associated SNPs) was associated with increased prevalence of advanced neoplasms. These findings might be used in defining risk-adapted screening ages.
Copyright © 2018 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
OBJECTIVES - This study assessed the utility of the pooled cohort equation (PCE) and/or coronary artery calcium (CAC) for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk assessment in smokers, especially those who were lung cancer screening eligible (LCSE).
BACKGROUND - The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommended and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services currently pays for annual screening for lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography scans in a specified group of cigarette smokers. CAC can be obtained from these low-dose scans. The incremental utility of CAC for ASCVD risk stratification remains unclear in this high-risk group.
METHODS - Of 6,814 MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis) participants, 3,356 (49.2% of total cohort) were smokers (2,476 former and 880 current), and 14.3% were LCSE. Kaplan-Meier, Cox proportional hazards, area under the curve, and net reclassification improvement (NRI) analyses were used to assess the association between PCE and/or CAC and incident ASCVD. Incident ASCVD was defined as coronary death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or fatal or nonfatal stroke.
RESULTS - Smokers had a mean age of 62.1 years, 43.5% were female, and all had a mean of 23.0 pack-years of smoking. The LCSE sample had a mean age of 65.3 years, 39.1% were female, and all had a mean of 56.7 pack-years of smoking. After a mean of 11.1 years of follow-up 13.4% of all smokers and 20.8% of LCSE smokers had ASCVD events; 6.7% of all smokers and 14.2% of LCSE smokers with CAC = 0 had an ASCVD event during the follow-up. One SD increase in the PCE 10-year risk was associated with a 68% increase risk for ASCVD events in all smokers (hazard ratio: 1.68; 95% confidence interval: 1.57 to 1.80) and a 22% increase in risk for ASCVD events in the LCSE smokers (hazard ratio: 1.22; 95% confidence interval: 1.00 to 1.47). CAC was associated with increased ASCVD risk in all smokers and in LCSE smokers in all the Cox models. The C-statistic of the PCE for ASCVD was higher in all smokers compared with LCSE smokers (0.693 vs. 0.545). CAC significantly improved the C-statistics of the PCE in all smokers but not in LCSE smokers. The event and nonevent net reclassification improvements for all smokers and LCSE smokers were 0.018 and -0.126 versus 0.16 and -0.196, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS - In this well-characterized, multiethnic U.S. cohort, CAC was predictive of ASCVD in all smokers and in LCSE smokers but modestly improved discrimination over and beyond the PCE. However, 6.7% of all smokers and 14.2% of LCSE smokers with CAC = 0 had an ASCVD event during follow-up.
Copyright © 2019 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Metastatic cancers impose significant burdens on patients, affecting quality of life, morbidity, and mortality. Even during remission, microscopic metastases can lurk, but few therapies directly target tumor cell metastasis. Agents that interfere with this process would represent a new paradigm in cancer management, changing the 'waiting game' into a time of active prevention. These therapies could take multiple forms based on the pathways involved in the metastatic process. For example, a phenome-wide association study showed that a single nucleotide polymorphism in the gene TBXA2R is associated with increased metastasis in multiple primary cancers (P = 0.003), suggesting clinical applicability of TBXA2R antagonists. Emerging data related to the role of platelets in metastasis are concordant with our sense that these pathways present significant opportunities for therapeutic development. However, before real progress can be made toward clinical targeting of the metastatic process, foundational work is needed to define informative measures of critical elements such as circulating tumor cells and tumor DNA, and circulatory vs. lymphatic spread. These challenges require an expansion of team science and composition to obtain competitive funding. At our academic medical center, we have implemented a Cancer Metastasis Inhibition (CMI) program investigating this approach across multiple cancers.
BACKGROUND - Molecular biomarkers have the potential to improve the current state of early lung cancer detection. The goal of this project was to develop a policy statement that provides guidance about the level of evidence required to determine that a molecular biomarker, used to support early lung cancer detection, is appropriate for clinical use.
METHODS - An ad hoc project steering committee was formed, to include individuals with expertise in the early detection of lung cancer and molecular biomarker development, from inside and outside of the Assembly on Thoracic Oncology. Key questions, generated from the results of a survey of the project steering committee, were discussed at an in-person meeting. Results of the discussion were summarized in a policy statement that was circulated to the steering committee and revised multiple times to achieve consensus.
RESULTS - With a focus on the clinical applications of lung cancer screening and lung nodule evaluation, the policy statement outlines categories of results that should be reported in the early phases of molecular biomarker development, discusses the level of evidence that would support study of the clinical utility, describes the outcomes that should be proven to consider a molecular biomarker clinically useful, and suggests study designs capable of assessing these outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS - The application of molecular biomarkers to assist with the early detection of lung cancer has the potential to substantially improve our ability to select patients for lung cancer screening, and to assist with the characterization of indeterminate lung nodules. We have described relevant considerations and have suggested standards to apply when determining whether a molecular biomarker for the early detection of lung cancer is ready for clinical use.
Lung cancer screening identifies cancers with heterogeneous behaviors. Some lung cancers will be identified among patients who had prior negative CT screens and upon follow-up scans develop a de novo nodule that was determined to be cancerous. Other lung cancers will be identified among patients who had one or more prior stable positive scans that were not determined to be lung cancer (indeterminate pulmonary nodules), but in follow-up scans was diagnosed with an incidence lung cancer. Using data from the CT arm of the National Lung Screening Trial, this analysis investigated differences in patient characteristics and survival endpoints between prevalence-, interval-, and screen-detected lung cancers, characterized based on sequence of screening results. Lung cancers immediately following a positive baseline (T0), and prior to the T1 screen, formed the prevalence cohort. Interval cancers were diagnosed following a negative screen at any time point prior to the next screening round. Two cohorts of screen-detected lung cancers (SDLC) were identified that had a baseline positive screen that was that was not determined to be lung cancer (i.e., an indeterminate pulmonary nodule), but in follow-up scans was diagnosed with an incidence lung cancer 12 (SDLC1) or 24 (SDLC2) months later. Two other incidence cohorts had screen-detected lung cancers that had baseline negative screen and upon follow-up scans developed a de novo nodule determined to be cancerous at 12 (SDLC3) or 24 (SDLC4) months later. Differences in patient characteristics, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were assessed. The lung cancer-specific death rate was higher for SDLC3/SDLC4 compared to SDLC1/SDLC2 lung cancers (136.6/1,000 person-years vs. 71.3/1,000 person-years, P < 0.001). Moreover, PFS and OS were significantly lower for SDLC3/SDLC4 compared to SDLC1/SDLC2 (P < 0.004; P < 0.002, respectively). The findings were consistent when stratified by stage and histology. Multivariable Cox proportional models revealed that the SDLC3/SDLC4 case groups were associated with significantly poorer PFS (HR = 1.89; 95% CI 1.31-2.74) and OS (HR = 1.80; 95% CI 1.21-2.67) compared to SDLC1/SDLC2 lung cancers (HR = 1.00). Lung cancer patients who develop a de novo nodule that determined to be cancerous (i.e., at least one negative CT screen prior to cancer diagnosis) had poorer survival outcomes compared to patients who had at least one positive screen prior to cancer diagnosis. As such, the observation that de novo screen-detected are associated with poorer survival could be attributed to faster growing, more aggressive cancers that arose from a lung environment previously lacking focal abnormalities.