Nonpolypoid colorectal neoplasms: a challenge in endoscopic surveillance of patients with Lynch syndrome

E. J. A. Rondagh; S. Gulikers; E. B. Gómez-García; Y. Vanlingen; Y. Detisch; B. Winkens; H. F. A. Vasen; A. A. M. Masclee; S. Sanduleanu

doi:10.1055/s-0032-1326195

Endoscopy, Table of Contents

Endoscopy 2013; 45(04): 257-264
DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1326195

Original article

Nonpolypoid colorectal neoplasms: a challenge in endoscopic surveillance of patients with Lynch syndrome

E. J. A. Rondagh^*

¹Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands

²NUTRIM, School for Nutrition, Toxicology and Metabolism, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands

,

S. Gulikers^*

¹Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands

³Department of Internal Medicine, Máxima Medical Center, Veldhoven/Eindhoven, The Netherlands

,

E. B. Gómez-García

⁴Department of Clinical Genetics, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands

,

Y. Vanlingen

¹Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands

,

Y. Detisch

⁴Department of Clinical Genetics, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands

,

B. Winkens

⁵Department of Methodology and Statistics, CAPHRI, School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands

,

H. F. A. Vasen

⁶Dutch Foundation for the Detection of Hereditary Tumors and Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands

,

A. A. M. Masclee

¹Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands

²NUTRIM, School for Nutrition, Toxicology and Metabolism, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands

,

S. Sanduleanu

¹Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands

⁷GROW, School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands

› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Background and study aims: Patients with Lynch syndrome may develop colorectal cancer (CRC), despite intensive colonoscopic surveillance. Nonpolypoid colorectal neoplasms might be a major contributor to the occurrence of these cancers. The aim of this case – control study was to compare the endoscopic appearance of colorectal neoplasms between patients with Lynch syndrome and control individuals at average risk for CRC.

Patients and methods: The endoscopists at the Maastricht University Medical Center were first given training to ensure familiarity with the appearance and classification of nonpolypoid lesions. Patients with Lynch syndrome and patients at average risk for CRC who underwent elective colonoscopy at the Center were prospectively included. Nonpolypoid lesions were defined as lesions with a height of less than half the diameter, and advanced histology was defined as the presence of high grade dysplasia or early cancer.

Results: A total of 59 patients with Lynch syndrome (mean age 48.7 years, 47.5 % men) and 590 matched controls (mean age 50.2 years, 47.5 % men) were included. In patients with Lynch syndrome, adenomas were significantly more likely to be nonpolypoid than they were in controls: 43.3 % vs. 16.9 % (OR 3.60, 95 %CI 1.90 – 6.83; P < 0.001). This was particularly true for proximal adenomas: 58.1 % vs. 16.3 % (OR 6.93, 95 %CI 2.92 – 16.40; P < 0.001). Adenomas containing advanced histology were more often nonpolypoid in patients with Lynch syndrome than in controls (4/5, 80.0 % vs. 5/17, 29.4 %; P = 0.19). Serrated polyps were also more often nonpolypoid in patients with Lynch syndrome than in controls: 49.2 % vs. 20.4 % (OR 3.57, 95 %CI 1.91 – 6.68; P < 0.001).

Conclusions: In patients with Lynch syndrome, colorectal neoplasms are more likely to have a nonpolypoid shape than those from average risk patients, especially in the proximal colon. These findings suggest that proficiency in recognition and endoscopic resection of nonpolypoid colorectal lesions are needed to ensure colonoscopic prevention against CRC in this high risk population.

Full Text

References

References
1 Vasen HF. Review article: the Lynch syndrome (hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer). Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2007; 26: 113-126
2 Lindor NM, Petersen GM, Hadley DW et al. Recommendations for the care of individuals with an inherited predisposition to Lynch syndrome: a systematic review. JAMA 2006; 296: 1507-1517
3 De Jong AE, Morreau H, Van Puijenbroek M et al. The role of mismatch repair gene defects in the development of adenomas in patients with HNPCC. Gastroenterology 2004; 126: 42-48
4 Edelstein DL, Axilbund J, Baxter M et al. Rapid development of colorectal neoplasia in patients with Lynch syndrome. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2011; 9: 340-343
5 de Vos tot Nederveen Cappel WH, Nagengast FM, Griffioen G et al. Surveillance for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer: a long-term study on 114 families. Dis Colon Rectum 2002; 45: 1588-1594
6 Jarvinen HJ, Renkonen-Sinisalo L, Aktan-Collan K et al. Ten years after mutation testing for Lynch syndrome: cancer incidence and outcome in mutation-positive and mutation-negative family members. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27: 4793-4797
7 Mecklin JP, Aarnio M, Laara E et al. Development of colorectal tumors in colonoscopic surveillance in Lynch syndrome. Gastroenterology 2007; 133: 1093-1098
8 Vasen HF, Abdirahman M, Brohet R et al. One to 2-year surveillance intervals reduce risk of colorectal cancer in families with Lynch syndrome. Gastroenterology 2010; 138: 2300-2306
9 Soetikno RM, Barro J, Friedland S et al. Diagnosis of flat and depressed colorectal neoplasms. ASGE Endoscopic Learning Library. 2006 Available at: http://portal.asge.org/products/details.aspx?catid=77&prodid=16
10 Rondagh EJ, Bouwens MW, Riedl RG et al. Endoscopic appearance of proximal colorectal neoplasms and potential implications for colonoscopic cancer prevention. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 75: 1218-1225
11 Rondagh EJ, Masclee AA, Bouwens MW et al. Endoscopic red flags for the detection of high-risk serrated polyps: an observational study. Endoscopy 2011; 43: 1052-1058
12 Heresbach D, Barrioz T, Lapalus MG et al. Miss rate for colorectal neoplastic polyps: a prospective multicenter study of back-to-back video colonoscopies. Endoscopy 2008; 40: 284-290
13 Chiu HM, Lin JT, Lee YC et al. Different bowel preparation schedule leads to different diagnostic yield of proximal and nonpolypoid colorectal neoplasm at screening colonoscopy in average-risk population. Dis Colon Rectum 2011; 54: 1570-1577
14 Church JM, Muto T, Appau K. Flat lesions of the colorectal mucosa: differences in recognition between Japanese and American endoscopists. Dis Colon Rectum 2004; 47: 1462-1466
15 Kaltenbach T, McGill SK, Kalidindi V et al. Proficiency in the diagnosis of nonpolypoid colorectal neoplasm yields high adenoma detection rates. Dig Dis Sci 2012; 57: 764-770
16 Sanduleanu S, Rondagh EJA, Masclee AA. Development of expertise in the detection and classification of non-polypoid colorectal neoplasia: experience-based data at an academic GI unit. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 2010; 20: 449-460
17 Le Rhun M, Coron E, Parlier D et al. High resolution colonoscopy with chromoscopy versus standard colonoscopy for the detection of colonic neoplasia: a randomized study. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2006; 4: 349-354
18 Huneburg R, Lammert F, Rabe C et al. Chromocolonoscopy detects more adenomas than white light colonoscopy or narrow band imaging colonoscopy in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer screening. Endoscopy 2009; 41: 316-322
19 Hurlstone DP, Karajeh M, Cross SS et al. The role of high-magnification-chromoscopic colonoscopy in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer screening: a prospective “back-to-back” endoscopic study. Am J Gastroenterol 2005; 100: 2167-2173
20 Stoffel EM, Turgeon DK, Stockwell DH et al. Missed adenomas during colonoscopic surveillance in individuals with Lynch syndrome (hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer). Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 2008; 1: 470-475
21 East JE, Suzuki N, Stavrinidis M et al. Narrow band imaging for colonoscopic surveillance in hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer. Gut 2008; 57: 65-70
22 Ramsoekh D, Haringsma J, Poley JW et al. A back-to-back comparison of white light video endoscopy with autofluorescence endoscopy for adenoma detection in high-risk subjects. Gut 2010; 59: 785-793
23 Watanabe T, Muto T, Sawada T et al. Flat adenoma as a precursor of colorectal carcinoma in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal carcinoma. Cancer 1996; 77: 627-634
24 Kwaliteitsinstituut voor de Gezondheidszorg. CBO richtlijn Erfelijke Darmkanker. 2008 Available at: http://www.mdl.nl/uploads/240/495/Richtlijn_erfelijke_darmkanker_definitief_2008.pdf
25 Rex DK. Colonoscopic polypectomy. ASGE Endoscopic Learning Library. 2007 Available at: http://www.asge.org/ell_list.aspx
26 Aronchick CA, Lipshutz WH, Wright SH et al. Validation of an instrument to assess colon cleansing [abstract]. Am J Gastroenterol 1999; 94: 2667
27 Kaminski MF, Regula J, Kraszewska E et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy and the risk of interval cancer. N Engl J Med 2010; 362: 1795-1803
28 Soetikno RM, Kaltenbach T, Rouse RV et al. Prevalence of nonpolypoid (flat and depressed) colorectal neoplasms in asymptomatic and symptomatic adults. JAMA 2008; 299: 1027-1035
29 Park DH, Kim HS, Kim WH et al. Clinicopathologic characteristics and malignant potential of colorectal flat neoplasia compared with that of polypoid neoplasia. Dis Colon Rectum 2008; 51: 43-49
30 Bosman F, Carneiro F, Hruban R, Theise N. WHO classification of tumours of the digestive system. Lyon, France: IARC Press; 2010
31 Nguyen SP, Bent S, Chen YH et al. Gender as a risk factor for advanced neoplasia and colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009; 7: 676-681 e671-673
32 Hennessy S, Bilker WB, Berlin JA et al. Factors influencing the optimal control-to-case ratio in matched case–control studies. Am J Epidemiol 1999; 149: 195-197
33 Sanduleanu S, Driessen A, Gomez-Garcia E et al. In vivo diagnosis and classification of colorectal neoplasia by chromoendoscopy-guided confocal laser endomicroscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009; 8: 371-378
34 Rondagh EJ, Masclee AA, van der Valk ME et al. Nonpolypoid colorectal neoplasms: gender differences in prevalence and malignant potential. Scand J Gastroenterol 2011; 47: 80-88
35 Saitoh Y, Waxman I, West AB et al. Prevalence and distinctive biologic features of flat colorectal adenomas in a North American population. Gastroenterology 2001; 120: 1657-1665
36 Rijcken FE, Hollema H, Kleibeuker JH. Proximal adenomas in hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer are prone to rapid malignant transformation. Gut 2002; 50: 382-386
37 Kudo S, Lambert R, Allen JI et al. Nonpolypoid neoplastic lesions of the colorectal mucosa. Gastrointest Endosc 2008; 68: 3-47
38 Andersen SH, Lykke E, Folker MB et al. Sessile serrated polyps of the colorectum are rare in patients with Lynch syndrome and in familial colorectal cancer families. Fam Cancer 2008; 7: 157-162
39 Kambara T, Simms LA, Whitehall VL et al. BRAF mutation is associated with DNA methylation in serrated polyps and cancers of the colorectum. Gut 2004; 53: 1137-1144
40 Jasperson KW, Tuohy TM, Neklason DW et al. Hereditary and familial colon cancer. Gastroenterology 2010; 138: 2044-2058