Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Sep;82(3):529-37.e1.
doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2015.01.053. Epub 2015 May 1.

Protective association of colonoscopy against proximal and distal colon cancer and patterns in interval cancer

Amandeep K Shergill  1 , Erin E Conners  2 , Kenneth R McQuaid  1 , Sara Epstein  3 , James C Ryan  1 , Janak N Shah  1 , John Inadomi  4 , Ma Somsouk  5
Affiliations

Protective association of colonoscopy against proximal and distal colon cancer and patterns in interval cancer

Amandeep K Shergill et al. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 Sep.

Abstract

Background: The protective effect of colonoscopy against proximal colorectal cancer is variable and depends on the detection and complete removal of precancerous polyps.

Objective: To estimate the efficacy of colonoscopy in a medical center with open-access screening colonoscopy since 1998.

Design: Nested case-control study with incidence density sampling.

Setting: University-affiliated Veterans Affairs Medical Center.

Patients: Colorectal cancer (CRC) cases and control subjects selected from screening age patients matched by age, gender, and date of first primary care visit.

Main outcome measurement: Colonoscopy preceding the CRC diagnosis date.

Results: A total of 20.2% of CRC cases had a colonoscopy in the preceding 10 years compared with 49.0% of control subjects (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.11-0.34). Colonoscopy was strongly associated with decreased odds of both distal CRC (aOR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.07-0.34) and proximal CRC (aOR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.11-0.58). The fraction of cases attributed to interval cancers was 10.5%. Missed lesions predominantly localized to the cecum and rectum, and recurrent lesions clustered in the hepatic flexure. Cecal intubation rate was 93% (98% in adequately prepped patients), and the adenoma detection rate was 45.2% in the control group.

Limitations: Single-center, retrospective case-control design.

Conclusion: In an open access colonoscopy program characterized by a high cecal intubation rate and adenoma detection rate, colonoscopy was strongly associated with reduced odds of both distal and proximal CRC. Among interval cancers, missed lesions clustered in the cecum and rectum and recurrent lesions in the hepatic flexure.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Location of interval cancers.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2013. CA Cancer J Clin. 2013;63:11–30. - PubMed
    1. Force USPST. Screening for colorectal cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149:627–37. - PubMed
    1. Mandel JS, Bond JH, Church TR, et al. Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. Minnesota Colon Cancer Control Study. N Engl J Med. 1993;328:1365–71. - PubMed
    1. Shaukat A, Mongin SJ, Geisser MS, et al. Long-term mortality after screening for colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:1106–14. - PubMed
    1. Atkin WS, Edwards R, Kralj-Hans I, et al. Once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy screening in prevention of colorectal cancer: a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2010;375:1624–33. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms