Original Article
Five-Year Risk of Colorectal Neoplasia after Negative Screening Colonoscopy
N Engl J Med 2008; 359:1218-1224September 18, 2008DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa0803597
- Abstract
Background
The appropriate interval for endoscopic rescreening after a negative colonoscopic examination is uncertain.
Methods
We identified persons with no adenomas on baseline screening colonoscopy who returned at 5 years for follow-up colonoscopy. Findings were categorized according to the most advanced lesion present: no polyp, a hyperplastic polyp, a tubular adenoma less than 1 cm in diameter, an advanced adenoma (a tubular adenoma ≥1 cm in diameter or a polyp with villous histologic features or high-grade dysplasia), or a cancer.
Results
Baseline screening colonoscopy had identified 2436 persons with no adenomas; 1256 of them (51.6%) were rescreened a mean (±SD) of 5.34±1.34 years later. The mean age of this group at baseline was 56.7 years; 56.7% of its members were men. No cancers were found on rescreening (95% confidence interval [CI] for the detection rate, 0 to 0.24%). One or more adenomas were found in 201 persons (16.0%). A total of 19 advanced adenomas, of which 10 (52.6%) were distal to the splenic flexure, were found in 16 persons (1.3%). The risk of an advanced adenoma did not differ significantly between persons with no polyps at baseline and those with hyperplastic polyps at baseline (1.1% [12 of 1057] and 2.0% [4 of 199], respectively; P=0.30). Men were more likely than women to have any adenoma (tubular less than 1 cm in diameter or advanced) (relative risk, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.42 to 2.51) and to have an advanced adenoma (relative risk, 3.31; 95% CI, 1.02 to 10.8).
Conclusions
Among persons with no colorectal neoplasia on initial screening colonoscopy, the 5-year risk of colorectal cancer is extremely low. The risk of advanced adenoma is also low, although it is higher among men than among women. Our findings support a rescreening interval of 5 years or longer after a normal colonoscopic examination.
Media in This Article
Table 1
Baseline Characteristics of 1256 Subjects Who Underwent Follow-up Colonoscopy at 5 Years, According to Findings on Baseline Colonoscopy.Table 2
Characteristics of 19 Advanced Adenomas in 16 Subjects on Rescreening Colonoscopy.Article Activity
- Article
Colonoscopy has gained widespread acceptance and even some preference as the primary screening method for the detection of colorectal cancer and precancerous polyps.1-4 There is concern about whether adequate resources exist to satisfy the demand for colonoscopy,5-7 and some data suggest that colonoscopy may be performed too frequently and for inappropriate indications.8,9 Determination of the appropriate frequency of rescreening for persons with normal findings on initial screening colonoscopy could have a substantial effect on the cost of colonoscopy and the capacity to provide it.
Guidelines for colorectal cancer screening from the U.S. Multisociety Task Force on Colorectal Cancer and the American Cancer Society include, among other strategies, sigmoidoscopy every 5 years and colonoscopy every 10 years. 3,4 The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force also recommends colonoscopy as a screening test but does not specify a test interval.1 Evidence supporting the 10-year interval comes largely from case–control studies that suggest that screening by sigmoidoscopy reduces mortality from distal colorectal cancer for up to 10 years.10,11 However, there are no direct data with which to assess the validity of this recommendation. To provide direct data that can be used to inform decision making about an appropriate rescreening interval, we determined the incidence of any neoplasia and of advanced neoplasia on 5-year rescreening colonoscopy among persons who had no neoplasia on baseline screening colonoscopy.
Methods
Study Design
This study consisted of a retrospective examination of data obtained as part of routine clinical care of persons in the Lilly Colorectal Cancer Prevention Program; identifying information was removed from all data. A total of 36 gastroenterologists and gastrointestinal surgeons at seven sites in central Indiana participate in the program. The protocol was approved by the institutional review board of Indiana University. In September 1995, Eli Lilly began providing screening colonoscopy as a health benefit for employees, retirees, and dependents 40 years of age or older who had no personal history of colorectal cancer, adenomatous polyps, or inflammatory bowel disease and who were asymptomatic (i.e., reported no recent visible rectal bleeding, no change in bowel habits, and no recent or current lower abdominal pain). Until October 2004, it was the program's policy to rescreen persons with negative results of colonoscopy (i.e., no adenomatous polyps) 5 years after the initial colonoscopy.
Subjects were eligible for inclusion in the study if they were 50 years of age or older, were asymptomatic, and had undergone first-time screening colonoscopy between September 1995 and June 2000, with no adenomatous polyps identified. The study group consisted of persons who underwent follow-up colonoscopy at 5 years, between October 2000 and July 2005. The methods of bowel preparation and of determining the location, size, and histologic features of a polyp are described elsewhere.12,13 An advanced adenoma was defined as a tubular adenoma 1 cm or larger in diameter, a polyp with a villous component of at least 25%, or a polyp with high-grade dysplasia. Persons with more than one polyp in any segment of the colon were categorized according to the most histologically advanced lesion proximally and distally.
If persons who had undergone an initial screening colonoscopy did not return for follow-up colonoscopy at 5 years, the screening program sent a reminder letter; if there was no response, we attempted to obtain follow-up information about subsequent colorectal-cancer screening and findings by sending a questionnaire. Endoscopy and pathology reports were obtained for persons who permitted examination of their medical records. For persons reported to be deceased, we obtained follow-up information on the cause of death from the National Death Index (www.cdc.gov/nchs/ndi.htm).
Statistical Analysis
Demographic features of the rescreened group were compared with those of the group that was not rescreened. Descriptive statistics were used to express the risk (or 5-year incidence) of any neoplasia and of advanced neoplasia (advanced adenoma and adenocarcinoma) overall and stratified according to baseline features. Student's t-test and either the chi-square test or Fisher's exact test were used to compare means and proportions, respectively, between the groups. We used multiple logistic regression to adjust for differences in age, sex, and baseline findings (no polyps vs. hyperplastic polyps).
We used absolute risks to calculate the number needed to screen for the outcome of advanced neoplasia. Adapted from the number needed to treat,14 the number needed to screen is the number of persons who would need to undergo 5-year rescreening colonoscopy in order for one advanced neoplasm to be detected. Data were managed with Microsoft Excel 2003, version 11 (Microsoft), and analyzed with SPSS software, version 15.0 (SPSS). Exact methods were used to calculate 95% confidence intervals for all proportions.
Because of the large percentage of people who did not undergo follow-up colonoscopy and the resulting potential for biased risk estimates, we performed a sensitivity analysis. We assumed that among subjects who did not undergo follow-up colonoscopy, the detection rates for any adenoma and for an advanced adenoma ranged from half to twice the rates among subjects who underwent follow-up colonoscopy.
Results
Characteristics of the Study Group
From September 1995 through June 2000, a total of 2983 persons 50 years of age or older underwent screening colonoscopy for the first time; 2436 (81.7%) had no adenomas. Of those who had no adenomas on baseline colonoscopy, 1256 (51.6%) underwent follow-up colonoscopy at 5 years; 544 (43.3%) were women, and 712 (56.7%) were men. The mean (±SD) age at the baseline screening colonoscopy was 56.7±7.5 years; the men were slightly younger than the women (56.4±7.3 years and 57.1±7.7 years, respectively; P=0.43). The mean time to rescreening was 5.3±1.3 years (median, 5.4; interquartile range, 5.0 to 6.0). The group of people who underwent rescreening was younger at the time of the baseline colonoscopy than the group of 1180 persons who did not undergo rescreening (56.7±7.5 years vs. 58.3±8.9 years, P<0.001) but included a similar proportion of women (43.3% and 46.9%, respectively). Among those who were rescreened, 1057 persons had had no polyps and 199 had had hyperplastic polyps on baseline colonoscopy. Characteristics of these subgroups are shown in Table 1Table 1
Baseline Characteristics of 1256 Subjects Who Underwent Follow-up Colonoscopy at 5 Years, According to Findings on Baseline Colonoscopy.. Colonoscopy to the cecum was documented for 1186 persons (94.4%) at the baseline examination and for 1213 (96.6%) at the follow-up examination. No serious complications were reported, at either the baseline or the follow-up examination.Subjects Who Were Not Rescreened
Contact information was available for 1042 of the 1180 persons (88.3%) who did not undergo follow-up colonoscopy at 5 years through the screening program. The response rate for the survey was 30.2%. Of the 315 persons who responded, 101 (32.1%) indicated that they had undergone subsequent colonoscopy outside the screening program (24 because of the development of symptoms and 77 for screening), and 71 (22.5%) indicated that they had not undergone subsequent colorectal cancer screening; the remaining 143 persons (45.4%) did not respond to the question. Among the 143 persons who did not respond to the question about colonoscopy, 23 were reported to be deceased, with the cause of death not given. With the use of the National Death Index, we ascertained the cause of death for 21 of these 23 persons; none had died from colorectal cancer. Of the 101 persons who had undergone subsequent colonoscopy outside the screening program, 26 indicated that the findings were normal (i.e., no polyps); the remaining 75 indicated either that they had polyps or that they were uncertain of the findings. Pathology reports for 44 of the 75 (58.7%) were obtained; 29 persons had normal findings, 9 had hyperplastic polyps, and 6 had neoplasia (4 had small tubular adenomas, 1 had a 1-cm tubular adenoma, and 1 had a 4-mm villous adenoma). Because of incomplete follow-up, these findings were not included in our analyses.
Colonoscopic Findings in Rescreened Subjects
Among the 1256 persons who were rescreened as part of the screening program, no cancers were discovered (upper 95% confidence limit for the detection rate, 0.24%). One or more neoplastic polyps were found in 201 persons (16.0%), of whom 67 (33.3%) had only distal neoplastic polyps, 80 (39.8%) had only proximal neoplastic polyps, and 54 (26.9%) had both proximal and distal neoplastic polyps. A total of 19 advanced neoplasms were found in 16 persons (1.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 2.1); the characteristics of the advanced neoplasms that were found are shown in Table 2Table 2
Characteristics of 19 Advanced Adenomas in 16 Subjects on Rescreening Colonoscopy..At least one adenomatous polyp was present in 47 of 199 persons (23.6%) who had had hyperplastic polyps on baseline colonoscopy, as compared with 154 of 1057 persons (14.6%) who had had no polyps on baseline colonoscopy (relative risk, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.21 to 2.15). The 5-year risk of any neoplasia was greater for men than for women (Table 3Table 3
Risk of Any Adenoma among Subjects Who Underwent Follow-up Colonoscopy at 5 Years.). Male sex and the presence of hyperplastic polyps at baseline were independent risk factors for any adenoma on follow-up colonoscopy. Advanced adenomas were found in 4 of 199 persons (2.0%) who had had hyperplastic polyps on baseline colonoscopy, as compared with 12 of 1057 (1.1%) who had had no polyps at baseline (relative risk, 1.77; 95% CI, 0.61 to 5.14). Men had a higher incidence of advanced adenomas than women (Table 4Table 4
Risk of Advanced Adenoma among Subjects Who Underwent Follow-up Colonoscopy at 5 Years.).Table 5Table 5
Number of Persons with Normal Findings on Baseline Screening Colonoscopy Who Would Need to Be Rescreened at 5 Years to Detect One Advanced Adenoma. shows the numbers of persons who would need to be rescreened in order for one advanced adenoma to be detected. Among all 1256 persons, 79 would need to be rescreened at 5 years to detect one advanced adenoma (95% CI, 49 to 137). Among men, 55 would need to be rescreened, whereas among women, 182 would need to be rescreened. For persons with hyperplastic polyps at baseline, the number who would need to be rescreened is 50, whereas among those with no polyps at baseline, the number is 88.Assuming, in the sensitivity analysis, that the detection rates for any adenoma and for advanced adenoma among the 1180 subjects who did not undego follow-up colonoscopy through the screening program were two times as high as the rates among the subjects who did, the 5-year risks for the entire group of 2436 persons would be 23.8% (95% CI, 22.1 to 25.5) for any adenoma (detected in 579 of the 2436 subjects), and 1.9% (95% CI, 1.4 to 2.5) for an advanced adenoma (detected in 46 subjects). The number of subjects who would need to be rescreened to detect one advanced adenoma is 53 (95% CI, 40 to 72). Assuming that the detection rates among the 1180 persons who did not undergo follow-up colonoscopy through the screening program were half as high as the rates among the persons who did, the 5-year risks would be 12.1% (95% CI, 10.8 to 13.5) for any adenoma (detected in 295 of 2436 subjects) and 1.0% (95% CI, 0.6 to 1.5) for an advanced adenoma (detected in 24 subjects). The number who would need to be rescreened in order to detect one advanced adenoma is 101 (95% CI, 68 to 159).
Discussion
Our data provide information on the 5-year risk of colorectal neoplasia among persons with an average risk of colorectal cancer who had no neoplasia on baseline screening colonoscopy. No cancers were discovered on rescreening colonoscopy. However, at least one adenomatous polyp was found in nearly 16% of the subjects, more frequently in men than in women (19.5% vs. 11.0%). Advanced adenomas, which were present in 1.3% of the persons overall, were also more prevalent in men.
The low rates of cancer and of advanced adenomas 5 years after an initial colonoscopic examination showing no abnormal findings provide support for rescreening after an interval of 5 years or longer. Our study did not assess a 10-year rescreening interval, which is the interval that is recommended in some guidelines for colorectal-cancer screening.3,4 Recommendation of the 10-year interval is based on retrospective case–control data stratified according to the time from the screening examination to the discovery of cancer among the cases.10,11 There are no data from prospective studies of sufficient size and duration to permit a direct assessment of the recommendation. However, at least two studies15,16 provide strong indirect support. One was a retrospective cohort study in which the investigators used billing-claims data to calculate standardized incidence ratios for the incidence of colorectal cancer in a group of 32,203 persons with no neoplasia on colonoscopy, as compared with the incidence in the general population. The standardized incidence ratios were 0.66 at 1 year, 0.55 at 5 years, and 0.28 at 10 years.16 In that study, 33% of the subjects were younger than 50 years of age when they underwent colonoscopy, a fact that may limit the generalizability of the findings. The second study was a population-based case–control study in which control subjects without colorectal cancer were 3.5 times as likely to have had normal findings on previous colonoscopy as were case subjects with colorectal cancer.15 The adjusted odds ratio for colorectal cancer developing in control subjects was 0.26 (95% CI, 0.16 to 0.40); previous colonoscopy was protective for up to 20 years.
Our findings are similar to those in previous studies of interval rescreening colonoscopy among persons with normal findings on baseline colonoscopy.17-19 Among three studies with 29 subjects,19 99 subjects,17 and 154 subjects18 and with a mean time to follow-up ranging from 5.4 to 5.7 years, no cancers were discovered. The incidence rates for any adenoma were 41%, 24%, and 27%, respectively. In one study, persons with hyperplastic polyps at baseline did not have an increased risk of subsequent adenomas.18
Our findings are also similar to those in studies that have measured incident findings after a negative sigmoidoscopic examination.20-22 As compared with studies of repeat colonoscopy, the sigmoidoscopy studies have had larger samples, ranging from 250 subjects20 to 9317 subjects,21 and more variable follow-up times, ranging from 3 years21 to between 5 and 6 years.22 In one study, 6% of the subjects had adenomas on follow-up sigmoidoscopy; none of the adenomas were advanced.20 Another study involved two cohorts: one underwent a follow-up examination at 3 to 4 years, and the other at 5 to 6 years. The respective risks of advanced neoplasia were 0.9% (detected in 12 of 1300 subjects) and 1.1% (in 30 of 2710), including two cancers (one in each group) among 4010 persons, representing a cancer risk of 0.05%.22 In a 3-year follow-up study of 9317 persons in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial, 286 persons (3.1%) had any neoplasia, including 72 (0.8%) with advanced adenomas and 6 (0.06%) with cancer.21 The interval detection rates in these studies are consistent with those in the current study, and all the rates are extremely low. In the sigmoidoscopy studies, some of the interval cancers may be explained by variation in the insertion depth of the instrument if some of the cancers were present in a precursor lesion proximal to the farthest point of insertion at the initial examination.
This study has several limitations. First, the sample was small. Given the low 5-year incidence of advanced neoplasia, even a study with more than 1000 subjects has imprecise risk estimates. A study population an order of magnitude greater than that in our study would be needed for more precise risk estimates. Second, the follow-up information for persons who did not return for a 5-year follow-up examination is incomplete. The risk of neoplasia may differ between persons who returned for follow-up colonoscopy and those who did not, although the direction of risk (either higher or lower) and its magnitude are uncertain. In sensitivity analyses, we estimated that the risk of advanced neoplasia would increase from 1.3% to 1.9% if the rate in the group that did not return for a follow-up colonoscopy were twice the rate in the rescreened group and would decrease to 1.0% if the rate were half the rate in the rescreened group.
In addition, the generalizability of our findings is uncertain. The study cohort was composed primarily of compliant, middle-class to upper-middle-class whites; the extent to which the study findings apply to different groups is unknown. Furthermore, the Lilly Colorectal Cancer Prevention Program includes 36 experienced gastroenterologists and gastrointestinal surgeons who attain high cecal intubation rates. These results may not apply to less experienced groups.
As we have indicated previously,12,13 there is uncertainty about the clinical importance of “advanced adenoma” and its appropriateness as a target in programs of screening and surveillance. In a study in which 226 persons were directly followed over time, large polyps (defined as ≥1 cm in diameter) that were left intact progressed to colorectal cancer at a rate of about 1% per year.23 However, the histologic features of the polyps were not known; some may have already been cancerous at baseline, resulting in an overestimation of the rate of progression to cancer. On the other hand, length–time bias (unintentionally preferential detection of slow-growing lesions) may have resulted in an underestimation of this rate. For lesions smaller than 1 cm, it is unclear whether polyps with villous histologic features progress to cancer and, if so, at what rate. A recent registry-based study estimated the risk of progression of advanced adenomas to colorectal cancer by examining the prevalence of advanced adenoma and the incidence of cancer in groups stratified according to sex and 5-year age category.24 Projected rates of transition from advanced adenoma to cancer increased with age, from 2.6% annually and 25% at 10 years among women 55 to 59 years of age to 5.1% and 39.7%, respectively, among men 80 years of age or older. However, this study did not follow persons directly, and it made assumptions that could have substantially affected the risk estimates. The appropriateness of advanced adenoma as a target outcome would be clearer if its natural history were known.
Although this study provides data for direct assessment of the risk of advanced neoplasia after a negative colonoscopic examination, the appropriate rescreening interval after a negative colonoscopic examination is uncertain. Given the low risk of advanced neoplasia, we believe that 5 years is probably the minimal duration of protection for nearly all persons who do not have a family history of colorectal cancer. However, the protective effect of a normal colonoscopic examination is likely to be a function of both the quality of the baseline colonoscopy and patient-specific features. Whether factors such as age,24 diet, frequency and intensity of exercise, smoking status, and body-mass index affect the subsequent risk of advanced neoplasia and rate of transition to cancer among persons with a normal baseline colonoscopic examination is unknown. Finally, although it is important to have information on the risk of advanced neoplasia in a person with normal findings on screening colonoscopy, recommendations about the screening interval will also be affected by factors of safety, cost, access, infrastructure, and other considerations not addressed here.
We conclude that among persons previously screened with colonoscopy who have no colorectal neoplasia, the 5-year risk of colorectal cancer is extremely low. The risk of advanced neoplasia is low, and it is lower for women than for men. These findings suggest that among persons who are at average risk for colorectal cancer, rescreening colonoscopy need not be performed sooner than 5 years after an initial colonoscopic examination with normal findings. However, the follow-up interval for this study was only 5 years; we did not assess the appropriateness of the recommended 10-year rescreening interval for colonoscopy.
Supported by a grant from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (K24 DK02756).
No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.
This article (10.1056/NEJMoa0803597) was updated on November 10, 2009, at NEJM.org.
Source Information
From the Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine (T.F.I., C.L.-C.); the Regenstrief Institute (T.F.I.); the Indianapolis Gastroenterology Research Foundation (E.A.G., J.D.R.); and Eli Lilly (G.N.L.) — all in Indianapolis; and the Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill (D.F.R.).
Address reprint requests to Dr. Imperiale at the Regenstrief Institute, Indiana University Medical Center, 1050 Wishard Blvd., 6th Fl., Indianapolis, IN 46202-5121.
- References
References
1
Pignone M ,Rich M ,Teutsch SM ,Berg AO ,Lohr KN . Screening for colorectal cancer in adults at average risk: a summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 2002;137:132-141
Web of Science | Medline2
Rex DK ,Johnson DA ,Lieberman DA ,Burt RW ,Sonnenberg A . Colorectal cancer prevention 2000: screening recommendations of the American College of Gastroenterology. Am J Gastroenterol 2000;95:868-877
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline3
Smith RA ,Cokkinides V ,Eyre HJ . American Cancer Society guidelines for the early detection of cancer, 2006. CA Cancer J Clin 2006;56:11-25, 49
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline4
Winawer S ,Fletcher R ,Rex D , et al. Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance: clinical guidelines and rationale -- update based on new evidence. Gastroenterology 2003;124:544-560
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline5
Brown ML ,Klabunde CN ,Mysliwiec P . Current capacity for endoscopic colorectal cancer screening in the United States: data from the National Cancer Institute Survey of Colorectal Cancer Screening Practices. Am J Med 2003;115:129-133
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline6
Seeff LC ,Manninen DL ,Dong FB , et al. Is there endoscopic capacity to provide colorectal cancer screening to the unscreened population in the United States? Gastroenterology 2004;127:1661-1669
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline7
Seeff LC ,Richards TB ,Shapiro JA , et al. How many endoscopies are performed for colorectal cancer screening? Results from CDC's survey of endoscopic capacity. Gastroenterology 2004;127:1670-1677
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline8
Boolchand V ,Olds G ,Singh J ,Singh P ,Chak A ,Cooper GS . Colorectal screening after polypectomy: a national survey study of primary care physicians. Ann Intern Med 2006;145:654-659
Web of Science | Medline9
Mysliwiec PA ,Brown ML ,Klabunde CN ,Ransohoff DF . Are physicians doing too much colonoscopy? A national survey of colorectal surveillance after polypectomy. Ann Intern Med 2004;141:264-271
Web of Science | Medline10
Newcomb PA ,Norfleet RG ,Storer BE ,Surawicz TS ,Marcus PM . Screening sigmoidoscopy and colorectal cancer mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst 1992;84:1572-1575
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline11
Selby JV ,Friedman GD ,Quesenberry CP Jr ,Weiss NS . A case-control study of screening sigmoidoscopy and mortality from colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 1992;326:653-657
Free Full Text | Web of Science | Medline12
Imperiale TF ,Wagner DR ,Lin CY ,Larkin GN ,Rogge JD ,Ransohoff DF . Risk of advanced proximal neoplasms in asymptomatic adults according to the distal colorectal findings. N Engl J Med 2000;343:169-174
Free Full Text | Web of Science | Medline13
Imperiale TF ,Wagner DR ,Lin CY ,Larkin GN ,Rogge JD ,Ransohoff DF . Using risk for advanced proximal colonic neoplasia to tailor endoscopic screening for colorectal cancer. Ann Intern Med 2003;139:959-965
Web of Science | Medline14
Laupacis A ,Sackett DL ,Roberts RS . An assessment of clinically useful measures of the consequences of treatment. N Engl J Med 1988;318:1728-1733
Full Text | Web of Science | Medline15
Brenner H ,Chang-Claude J ,Seiler CM ,Sturmer T ,Hoffmeister M . Does a negative screening colonoscopy ever need to be repeated? Gut 2006;55:1145-1150
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline16
Singh H ,Turner D ,Xue L ,Targownik LE ,Bernstein CN . Risk of developing colorectal cancer following a negative colonoscopy examination: evidence for a 10-year interval between colonoscopies. JAMA 2006;295:2366-2373
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline17
Neugut AI ,Jacobson JS ,Ahsan H , et al. Incidence and recurrence rates of colorectal adenomas: a prospective study. Gastroenterology 1995;108:402-408
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline18
Rex DK ,Cummings OW ,Helper DJ , et al. 5-Year incidence of adenomas after negative colonoscopy in asymptomatic average-risk persons. Gastroenterology 1996;111:1178-1181
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline19
Squillace S ,Berggreen P ,Jaffe P , et al. A normal initial colonoscopy after age 50 does not predict a polyp-free status for life. Am J Gastroenterol 1994;89:1156-1159
Web of Science | Medline20
Rex DK ,Lehman GA ,Ulbright TM ,Smith JJ ,Hawes RH . The yield of a second screening flexible sigmoidoscopy in average-risk persons after one negative examination. Gastroenterology 1994;106:593-595
Web of Science | Medline21
Schoen RE ,Pinsky PF ,Weissfeld JL , et al. Results of repeat sigmoidoscopy 3 years after a negative examination. JAMA 2003;290:41-48
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline22
Strum WB . Incidence of advanced adenomas of the rectosigmoid colon three years and five years after negative flexible sigmoidoscopy in 4010 patients. Dig Dis Sci 2003;48:2278-2283
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline23
Stryker SJ ,Wolff BG ,Culp CE ,Libbe SD ,Ilstrup DM ,MacCarty RL . Natural history of untreated colonic polyps. Gastroenterology 1987;93:1009-1013
Web of Science | Medline24
Brenner H ,Hoffmeister M ,Stegmaier C ,Brenner G ,Altenhofen L ,Haug U . Risk of progression of advanced adenomas to colorectal cancer by age and sex: estimates based on 840,149 screening colonoscopies. Gut 2007;56:1585-1589
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline
- Citing Articles (69)
Citing Articles
1
Nirav Thosani, Sushovan Guha, Harminder Singh. (2013) Colonoscopy and Colorectal Cancer Incidence and Mortality. Gastroenterology Clinics of North America
2
Irina Blumenstein, Wolfgang Tacke, Herbert Bock, Natalie Filmann, Elena Lieber, Stefan Zeuzem, Jörg Trojan, Eva Herrmann, Oliver Schröder. (2013) Prevalence of colorectal cancer and its precursor lesions in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients undergoing total colonoscopy. European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology 25:5, 556-561
3
Cristina Álvarez, Montserrat Andreu, Antoni Castells, Enrique Quintero, Luis Bujanda, Joaquín Cubiella, Dolores Salas, Ángel Lanas, Fernando Carballo, Juan Diego Morillas, Cristina Hernández, Rodrigo Jover, Cristina Sarasqueta, José M. Enriquéz-Navascués, Vicent Hernández, Pamela Estévez, Ramiro Macenlle, Teresa Sala, Francesc Balaguer, Maria Pellisé, Leticia Moreira, Inés Gil, Antonio Peris, Francisca González-Rubio, Ángel Ferrández, Carmen Poves, Marta Ponce, Jaume Grau, Anna Serradesanferm, Akiko Ono, José Cruzado, Francisco Pérez-Riquelme, Inmaculada Alonso-Abreu, Marta Carrillo-Palau, Cecilio Santander, José Díaz Tasende, Alberto Herreros, Guillermo Cacho, Luis Eugenio Barranco, Xavier Bessa. (2013) Relationship of colonoscopy-detected serrated polyps with synchronous advanced neoplasia in average-risk individuals. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
4
Philip S. Schoenfeld, Jonathan Cohen. (2013) Quality indicators for colorectal cancer screening for colonoscopy. Techniques in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 15:2, 59-68
5
David Nicolás-Pérez, Adolfo Parra-Blanco, Antonio Z. Gimeno-García, Juan A. Ortega-Sánchez, Marta Carrillo-Palau, Alejandro Jiménez-Sosa, Enrique Quintero-Carrion. (2013) Risk factors associated with colorectal flat adenoma detection. European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology 25:3, 302-308
6
Charles J. Kahi, Joseph C. Anderson, Douglas K. Rex. (2013) Screening and surveillance for colorectal cancer: state of the art. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 77:3, 335-350
7
J. Aranda Hernández, A.L. Aguilar-Shea, J. Walsh. (2013) Cáncer colorrectal de intervalo y criterios de calidad de colonoscopia: a propósito de un caso. SEMERGEN - Medicina de Familia 39:1, 52-55
8
Paul Ritvo, Ronald E Myers, Lawrence Paszat, Mardie Serenity, Daniel F Perez, Linda Rabeneck. (2013) Gender differences in attitudes impeding colorectal cancer screening. BMC Public Health 13:1, 500
9
Yinglong Huang, Xiaohua Li, Zhaoyang Wang, Bingzhong Su. (2012) Five-year risk of colorectal neoplasia after normal baseline colonoscopy in asymptomatic Chinese Mongolian over 50 years of age. International Journal of Colorectal Disease 27:12, 1651-1656
10
Gail Wilkes, Kevan Hartshorn. (2012) Clinical Update: Colon, Rectal, and Anal Cancers. Seminars in Oncology Nursing 28:4, e1-e22
11
Silvia Bacchiddu, Ana Cristina Álvarez-Urturri, Xavier Bessa Caserras. (2012) Pólipos colorrectales. FMC - Formación Médica Continuada en Atención Primaria 19:8, 472-480
12
Douglas K Rex, Dennis J Ahnen, John A Baron, Kenneth P Batts, Carol A Burke, Randall W Burt, John R Goldblum, José G Guillem, Charles J Kahi, Matthew F Kalady, Michael J O′Brien, Robert D Odze, Shuji Ogino, Susan Parry, Dale C Snover, Emina Emilia Torlakovic, Paul E Wise, Joanne Young, James Church. (2012) Serrated Lesions of the Colorectum: Review and Recommendations From an Expert Panel. The American Journal of Gastroenterology 107:9, 1315-1329
13
David A. Lieberman, Douglas K. Rex, Sidney J. Winawer, Francis M. Giardiello, David A. Johnson, Theodore R. Levin. (2012) Guidelines for Colonoscopy Surveillance After Screening and Polypectomy: A Consensus Update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology 143:3, 844-857
14
Silvia Sanduleanu, Ad M. Masclee, Gerrit A. Meijer. (2012) Interval cancers after colonoscopy—insights and recommendations. Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology 9:9, 550-554
15
Shahab Ahmed, Cathy Eng. Colorectal Cancer. In: Handbook of Gastrointestinal Cancer. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2012:86-136.
16
Leo G.M. van Rossum. (2012) Colorectal Cancer Screening: How to Stop a Moving Target. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 10:6, 570-572
17
Zhen-Hua Wang, Qin-Yan Gao, Jing-Yuan Fang. (2012) Repeat Colonoscopy Every 10 Years or Single Colonoscopy for Colorectal Neoplasm Screening in Average-risk Chinese: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention 13:5, 1761-1766
18
Eun Ran Kim, Dong Hyun Sinn, Jin Yong Kim, Dong Kyung Chang, Poong-Lyul Rhee, Jae J. Kim, Jong Chul Rhee, Young-Ho Kim. (2012) Factors associated with adherence to the recommended postpolypectomy surveillance interval. Surgical Endoscopy
19
Zauber , Ann G. , Winawer , Sidney J. , O'Brien , Michael J. , Lansdorp-Vogelaar , Iris , van Ballegooijen , Marjolein , Hankey , Benjamin F. , Shi , Weiji , Bond , John H. , Schapiro , Melvin , Panish , Joel F. , Stewart , Edward T. , Waye , Jerome D. , . (2012) Colonoscopic Polypectomy and Long-Term Prevention of Colorectal-Cancer Deaths. New England Journal of Medicine 366:8, 687-696
Free Full Text20
Quintero , Enrique , Castells , Antoni , Bujanda , Luis , Cubiella , Joaquín , Salas , Dolores , Lanas , Ángel , Andreu , Montserrat , Carballo , Fernando , Morillas , Juan Diego , Hernández , Cristina , Jover , Rodrigo , Montalvo , Isabel , Arenas , Juan , Laredo , Eva , Hernández , Vicent , Iglesias , Felipe , Cid , Estela , Zubizarreta , Raquel , Sala , Teresa , Ponce , Marta , Andrés , Mercedes , Teruel , Gloria , Peris , Antonio , Roncales , María-Pilar , Polo-Tomás , Mónica , Bessa , Xavier , Ferrer-Armengou , Olga , Grau , Jaume , Serradesanferm , Anna , Ono , Akiko , Cruzado , José , Pérez-Riquelme , Francisco , Alonso-Abreu , Inmaculada , de la Vega-Prieto , Mariola , Reyes-Melian , Juana Maria , Cacho , Guillermo , Díaz-Tasende , José , Herreros-de-Tejada , Alberto , Poves , Carmen , Santander , Cecilio , González-Navarro , Andrés , . (2012) Colonoscopy versus Fecal Immunochemical Testing in Colorectal-Cancer Screening. New England Journal of Medicine 366:8, 697-706
Free Full Text21
J. L. Weissfeld, R. E. Schoen, P. F. Pinsky, R. S. Bresalier, V. P. Doria-Rose, A. O. Laiyemo, T. Church, L. A. Yokochi, S. Yurgalevitch, J. Rathmell, G. L. Andriole, S. Buys, E. D. Crawford, M. Fouad, C. Isaacs, L. Lamerato, D. Reding, P. C. Prorok, C. D. Berg, . (2012) Flexible Sigmoidoscopy in the Randomized Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial: Added Yield from a Second Screening Examination. JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute
22
Bo In Lee, Sung Pil Hong, Seong-Eun Kim, Se Hyung Kim, Hyun-Soo Kim, Sung Noh Hong, Dong-Hoon Yang, Sung Jae Shin, Suck-Ho Lee, Young-Ho Kim, Dong Il Park, Hyun Jung Kim, Suk-Kyun Yang, Hyo Jong Kim, Hae Jeong Jeon, . (2012) Korean Guidelines for Colorectal Cancer Screening and Polyp Detection. The Korean Journal of Gastroenterology 59:2, 65
23
Bo-In Lee, Sung Pil Hong, Seong-Eun Kim, Se Hyung Kim, Hyun-Soo Kim, Sung Noh Hong, Dong-Hoon Yang, Sung Jae Shin, Suck-Ho Lee, Dong Il Park, Young-Ho Kim, Hyun Jung Kim, Suk-Kyun Yang, Hyo Jong Kim, Hae Jeong Jeon, . (2012) Korean Guidelines for Colorectal Cancer Screening and Polyp Detection. Clinical Endoscopy 45:1, 25
24
David Lieberman. Colorectal Cancer Screening and Surveillance. In: Clinical Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Elsevier, 2012:458-466.
25
Stefan Groth, Horst Krause, Rainer Behrendt, Helge Hill, Michael Börner, Murat Bastürk, Nora Plathner, Friedrich Schütte, Ulrich Gauger, Jürgen Riemann, Lutz Altenhofen, Thomas Rösch. (2012) Capsule colonoscopy increases uptake of colorectal cancer screening. BMC Gastroenterology 12:1, 80
26
Ulrike Haug, Amy B. Knudsen, Karen M. Kuntz. (2012) How should individuals with a false-positive fecal occult blood test for colorectal cancer be managed? A decision analysis. International Journal of Cancern/a-n/a
27
David H. Kim, B. Dustin Pooler, Jennifer M. Weiss, Perry J. Pickhardt. (2011) Five year colorectal cancer outcomes in a large negative CT colonography screening cohort. European Radiology
28
Shashideep Singhal, Arun Verma, Kris Anand. (2011) Colonoscopy for Colorectal Cancer Screening Above Age 75: Outcomes in Symptomatic African American and Hispanic Adults. Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer 42:4, 212-216
29
H. Brenner, L. Altenhofen, A. Katalinic, I. Lansdorp-Vogelaar, M. Hoffmeister. (2011) Sojourn Time of Preclinical Colorectal Cancer by Sex and Age: Estimates From the German National Screening Colonoscopy Database. American Journal of Epidemiology 174:10, 1140-1146
30
Sudha Xirasagar, Thomas G. Hurley, James B. Burch, Ali Mansaray, James R. Hébert. (2011) Colonoscopy screening rates among patients of colonoscopy-trained African American primary care physicians. Cancer 117:22, 5151-5160
31
Paul Strock, Joël Mossong, René Scheiden, Jos Weber, Frank Heieck, André Kerschen. (2011) Colorectal cancer incidence is low in patients following a colonoscopy. Digestive and Liver Disease 43:11, 899-904
32
Amanpal Singh, Yong-Fang Kuo, Taylor S. Riall, G. S. Raju, James S. Goodwin. (2011) Predictors of Colorectal Cancer Following a Negative Colonoscopy in the Medicare Population. Digestive Diseases and Sciences 56:11, 3122-3128
33
Krishna C. Vemulapalli, Douglas K. Rex. (2011) Evolving techniques in colonoscopy. Current Opinion in Gastroenterology 27:5, 430-438
34
Javier Aranda Hernández, Antonio L. Aguilar-Shea, José Carlos Marín Gabriel. (2011) ¿Podemos estar tranquilos ante una colonoscopia sin lesiones? Cáncer colorrectal de intervalo. Atención Primaria 43:7, 333-335
35
D. Heresbach, C. Boustière. (2011) La fréquence des cancers coliques d’intervalle est-elle le seul critère pertinent pour la coloscopie ?. Acta Endoscopica 41:3, 160-170
36
Sandeep Krishnan, Jacqueline L Wolf. (2011) Colorectal cancer screening and prevention in women. Women's Health 7:2, 213-226
37
Chung-Wah Cheng, Zhao-Xiang Bian, Li-Xing Zhu, Justin C Y Wu, Joseph J Y Sung. (2011) Efficacy of a Chinese Herbal Proprietary Medicine (Hemp Seed Pill) for Functional Constipation. The American Journal of Gastroenterology 106:1, 120-129
38
Sung Noh Hong, Dong-Hoon Yang, Young-Ho Kim, Seong-Eun Kim, Sung Jae Shin, Sung Pil Hong, Bo In Lee, Suck-Ho Lee, Dong Il Park, Hyun Soo Kim, Suk-Kyun Yang, Hyo Jong Kim, Se Hyung Kim, . (2011) A Survey for Post-polypectomy Surveillance. Intestinal Research 9:2, 118
39
John Bartels Pope. Colonoscopy. In: Pfenninger and Fowler's Procedures for Primary Care. Elsevier, 2011:685-698.
40
Jonathan P. Terdiman, Kenneth R. McQuaid. (2010) Surveillance Guidelines Should Be Updated to Recognize the Importance of Serrated Polyps. Gastroenterology 139:5, 1444-1447
41
Robert Wong. (2010) Proximal Tumors Are Associated with Greater Mortality in Colon Cancer. Journal of General Internal Medicine 25:11, 1157-1163
42
Heiko Pohl, Douglas J. Robertson. (2010) Colorectal Cancers Detected After Colonoscopy Frequently Result From Missed Lesions. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 8:10, 858-864
43
Harvey G. Moore. (2010) Colorectal Cancer: What Should Patients and Families Be Told to Lower the Risk of Colorectal Cancer?. Surgical Oncology Clinics of North America 19:4, 693-710
44
René Lambert. (2010) Prevention of gastrointestinal cancer by surveillance endoscopy. The EPMA Journal 1:3, 473-483
45
Hannah L. Miller, Rupa Mukherjee, Jianmin Tian, Anil B. Nagar. (2010) Colonoscopy Surveillance After Polypectomy May be Extended Beyond Five Years. Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology 44:8, e162-e166
46
Ziad F Gellad, David G Weiss, Dennis J Ahnen, David A Lieberman, George L Jackson, Dawn Provenzale. (2010) Colonoscopy Withdrawal Time and Risk of Neoplasia at 5 Years: Results From VA Cooperative Studies Program 380. The American Journal of Gastroenterology 105:8, 1746-1752
47
Klaus Mergener. (2010) The Role of CT Colonography in a Colorectal Cancer Screening Program. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Clinics of North America 20:2, 367-377
48
Reza Akhtar, Michelle Lee, Steven H. Itzkowitz. (2010) Colonoscopy Versus Computed Tomography Colonography for Colorectal Cancer Screening. Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine: A Journal of Translational and Personalized Medicine 77:2, 214-224
49
Harminder Singh, Zoann Nugent, Salaheddin M Mahmud, Alain A Demers, Charles N Bernstein. (2010) Predictors of Colorectal Cancer After Negative Colonoscopy: A Population-Based Study. The American Journal of Gastroenterology 105:3, 663-673
50
Hermann Brenner, Ulrike Haug, Volker Arndt, Christa Stegmaier, Lutz Altenhofen, Michael Hoffmeister. (2010) Low Risk of Colorectal Cancer and Advanced Adenomas More Than 10 Years After Negative Colonoscopy. Gastroenterology 138:3, 870-876
51
Jaume Grau, Anna Serradesanferm, Sandra Polbach, Alberto L. García-Basteiro, Antoni Trilla, Antoni Castells. (2010) Programas de cribado del cáncer colorrectal en la población de riesgo medio en la Unión Europea y España. Gastroenterología y Hepatología 33:2, 111-118
52
N. N. Baxter, L. Rabeneck. (2010) Is the Effectiveness of Colonoscopy "Good Enough" for Population-Based Screening?. JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute 102:2, 70-71
53
G. Rogler, H.-P. Wirth, P. Bauerfeind, B. Müllhaupt, T. Rösch, R. Schöfl, W. Schwizer, M. Fried. (2010) Gastro-Highlights 2009. Der Gastroenterologe 5:1, 72-75
54
Douglas J. Robertson. (2010) Colonoscopy for colorectal cancer prevention: is it fulfilling the promise?. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 71:1, 118-120
55
Shashideep Singhal, Siddharth Mathur, Kris Anand. (2010) Colorectal Cancer Screening in Elderly African-American Patients. Digestive Diseases and Sciences 55:1, 220-221
56
John I. Allen. (2010) Community Colonoscopy: A Gordian Knot?. Gastroenterology 138:1, 27-30
57
Steven H. Itzkowitz, Jonathan Potack. Colonic Polyps and Polyposis Syndromes. In: Sleisenger and Fordtran's Gastrointestinal and Liver Disease. Elsevier, 2010:2155-2189.e7.
58
René Lambert, Shin ei Kudo, Michael Vieth, John I. Allen, Hiroaki Fujii, Takahiro Fujii, Hiroshi Kashida, Takahisa Matsuda, Masaki Mori, Hiroshi Saito, Tadakazu Shimoda, Shinji Tanaka, Hidenobu Watanabe, Joseph J. Sung, Andrew D. Feld, John M. Inadomi, Michael J. O'Brien, David A. Lieberman, David F. Ransohoff, Roy M. Soetikno, Ann Zauber, Claudio Rolim Teixeira, Jean Francois Rey, Edgar Jaramillo, Carlos A. Rubio, Andre Van Gossum, Michael Jung, Jeremy R. Jass, George Triadafilopoulos. (2009) Pragmatic classification of superficial neoplastic colorectal lesions. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 70:6, 1182-1199
59
P. Thermann, T. Seufferlein. (2009) Primäre und sekundäre Prävention sporadischer kolorektaler Karzinome. Der Onkologe 15:12, 1193-1205
60
Lieberman , David A. , . (2009) Screening for Colorectal Cancer. New England Journal of Medicine 361:12, 1179-1187
Full Text61
David Lieberman. (2009) Colon cancer screening and surveillance controversies. Current Opinion in Gastroenterology 25:5, 422-427
62
Wai K Leung, James YW Lau, Bing Yee Suen, Grace LH Wong, Dorothy KL Chow, Larry H Lai, Ka-Fai To, Carmen KM Yim, Envy SF Lee, Kelvin KF Tsoi, Simon SM Ng, Joseph JY Sung. (2009) Repeat-Screening Colonoscopy 5 Years After Normal Baseline-Screening Colonoscopy in Average-Risk Chinese: A Prospective Study. The American Journal of Gastroenterology 104:8, 2028-2034
63
Patricia A Thompson, Eugene W Gerner. (2009) Current concepts in colorectal cancer prevention. Expert Review of Gastroenterology & Hepatology 3:4, 369-382
64
Jean-Francois Rey, Rene Lambert. (2009) SECOND LOOK COLONOSCOPY: INDICATION AND REQUIREMENTS. Digestive Endoscopy 21, S47-S49
65
Douglas J. Robertson. (2009) Is Screening Colonoscopy Effective in Preventing Cancer? Some Answers, More Questions. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 7:7, 714-715
66
Douglas K Rex, David A Johnson, Joseph C Anderson, Phillip S Schoenfeld, Carol A Burke, John M Inadomi. (2009) American College of Gastroenterology Guidelines for Colorectal Cancer Screening 2008. The American Journal of Gastroenterology 104:3, 739-750
67
Kjetil Søreide, Bjørn S Nedrebø, Andreas Reite, Kenneth Thorsen, Hartwig Kørner. (2009) Endoscopy, morphology, morphometry and molecular markers: predicting cancer risk in colorectal adenoma. Expert Review of Molecular Diagnostics 9:2, 125-137
68
(2008) Five-Year Risk of Colorectal Neoplasia after Negative Colonoscopy. New England Journal of Medicine 359:24, 2611-2612
Free Full Text69
Fletcher , Robert H. , . (2008) Colorectal Cancer Screening on Stronger Footing. New England Journal of Medicine 359:12, 1285-1287
Full Text
- Letters
