MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206558150 · doi:10.1097/dcr.0000000000002069

Understanding the Burden of Colorectal Adenomas in Patients Younger Than 50 Years: A Large Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study

2021· article· en· W4206558150 on OpenAlexaff
Allison Pang, Zineb Harra, Liang Chen, Nancy Morin, Julio Faria, Gabriela Ghitulescu, Marylise Boutros, Carol‐Ann Vasilevsky

Bibliographic record

VenueDiseases of the Colon & Rectum · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineColonoscopyAdenomaInternal medicineRetrospective cohort studyColorectal adenomaColorectal cancerGastroenterologyPopulationRectumCohortCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer is increasing in young adults. Our understanding of the adenoma-carcinoma sequence in young patients aged <50 years is lacking. The yield obtained by lowering the age of screening colonoscopy remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to understand the burden and histology of colorectal polyps in young adults and to explore predictors of adenoma detection in this population. DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Colonoscopies were performed at a single university-affiliated tertiary care center. PATIENTS: This study included adults aged <50 years who underwent a colonoscopy between 2014 and 2019. Patients with inflammatory bowel disease and genetic disorders were excluded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Adenoma detection rates were analyzed according to age. Predictors of adenoma detection were investigated by multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 4475 patients were analyzed. The mean age was 40.2 ± 8.0 years, 56.4% were female, and the mean BMI was 26.3 ± 5.5 kg/m 2 . A family history of colorectal cancer was reported in 23.8% of patients. The overall polyp and adenoma detection rates were 22% and 14%. The majority of polyps were adenomatous (58.9% of all polypectomies) and located in the left colon or rectum (61.4%). The detection rates of adenomas, advanced neoplasias, and adenocarcinomas were highest in patients aged 45 to 49 (19.3%, 4.8%, and 1.3%). On multivariate analysis, variables independently associated with adenoma detection included age (OR 1.08, 95% CI, 1.06-1.1), female sex (OR 1.80, 95% CI, 1.44-2.27), BMI (OR 1.01, 95% CI, 1.01-1.05), and having undergone a diagnostic colonoscopy (OR 1.81, 95% CI, 1.44-2.29). On subgroup analysis of patients aged 45 to 49, the same variables remained associated with adenoma detection except for age. LIMITATIONS: The study was limited due to the retrospective nature with heterogenous data. CONCLUSIONS: Adenoma detection in young adults aged 45 to 49 approaches the current adenoma detection of older adults. Predictors of adenoma detection in these young adults are female gender and BMI, which may help guide colorectal cancer screening guidelines in the future. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B843. COMPRENDER DE LA CARGA DE LOS ADENOMAS COLORRECTALES EN PACIENTES <50 aÑOS: UN ESTUDIO DE COHORTE RETROSPECTIVO DE UN SOLO CENTRO ANTECEDENTES: El cáncer colorrectal está aumentando en adultos jóvenes. No se conoce la secuencia adenoma-carcinoma en pacientes jóvenes <50 años. El rendimiento obtenido al reducir la edad de la colonoscopia de detección sigue sin estar claro. OBJETIVO: Comprender la carga y la histología de los pólipos colorrectales en adultos jóvenes y explorar los predictores de detección de adenomas en esta población. DISEÑO: Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo. AJUSTE: Las colonoscopias se realizaron en un único centro de atención terciario afiliado a la universidad. PACIENTES: Adultos jóvenes <50 años que se sometieron a una colonoscopia entre 2014-2019. Se excluyeron los pacientes con enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal y trastornos genéticos. PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO: Se analizaron las tasas de detección de adenomas según la edad. Los predictores de la detección de adenomas se investigaron mediante regresión logística múltiple. RESULTADOS: Se analizaron 4475 pacientes. La edad media fue de 40,2 ± 8,0 años, el 56,4% eran mujeres y el IMC medio fue de 26,3 ± 5,5 kg / m2. Se informó de antecedentes familiares de cáncer colorrectal en el 23,8% de los pacientes. Las tasas generales de detección de pólipos y adenomas fueron del 22% y el 14%, respectivamente. La mayoría de los pólipos eran adenomatosos (58,9% de todas las polipectomías) y estaban localizados en colon izquierdo o recto (61,4%). Las tasas de detección de adenomas, neoplasias avanzadas y adenocarcinomas fueron más altas en pacientes de 45 a 49 años (19,3%, 4,8% y 1,3%, respectivamente). En el análisis multivariado, las variables asociadas de forma independiente con la detección de adenomas incluyeron: edad (OR 1.08; IC del 95%: 1,06-1,1), sexo femenino (OR 1,80; IC del 95%: 1,44-2,27), IMC (OR 1,01; IC del 95%: 1,01-1,05)) y haber sido sometido a una colonoscopia diagnóstica (OR 1,81; IC 95% 1,44-2,29). En el análisis de subgrupos de pacientes de 45 a 49 años, las mismas variables permanecieron asociadas con la detección de adenomas, excepto la edad. LIMITACIONES: Carácter retrospectivo con datos heterogéneos. CONCLUSIONES: La detección de adenomas en adultos jóvenes de 45 a 49 años se acerca a la detección actual de adenomas en adultos mayores. Los predictores de la detección de adenomas en estos adultos jóvenes son el sexo femenino y el IMC, que pueden ayudar a guiar las pautas de detección del cáncer colorrectal en el futuro. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B843. (Traducción—Dr. Hagerman )

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.362

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.228 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiseases of the Colon & RectumSame topicColorectal Cancer Screening and DetectionFrench-language works237,207