Prevalence of Colonic Polyps Detected by Colonoscopy in Symptomatic Patients and Comparison Between Different Age Groups. What Age Should be Considered for Investigation?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<b>Introduction:</b> The Burden of Colorectal cancer (CRC) as one of the most common malignancies is considerable worldwide, with 1.8 million diagnoses each year. Although it is well established that most CRCs arise from colonic polyps, guidelines and recommendations indicate different ages as starting points for endoscopic examination of the colon, either as cancer screening programs or in symptomatic patients. Most standard guidelines adapt the cut-off age of 50. However, this has been challenged by the results of recent studies. This multicentric prospective study aimed to investigate the frequency, distribution, and histopathological findings of colonic polyps in patients who underwent colonoscopy with special attention to the age group of 40-49-year-olds compared with 50-59 in the population.</br></br> <b>Material and methods:</b> This multicentric, prospective study was designed to enroll adult patients referred to three universityaffiliated endoscopy units. As many as 723 patients met all the inclusion criteria. Data analysis was performed on endoscopic and histopathological characteristics of all detected lesions, including colonic polyps and neoplastic lesions.</br></br> <b>Results:</b> A total of 723 patients with a mean age of 46.03 (16.8) years were included in this study. Rectal bleeding was the most frequent symptom (40.9%). One hundred and thirteen patients (15.6%) were found to have colonic polyps, and 11 cases (1.52%) of CRC were detected. Most polyps were located in the left colon (67.5%). There was no statistical difference in the prevalence of adenomatous polyps between the age group of 40-49 years and 50-59 years (P = 0.77). Detailed examination of data using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis not only showed age is a risk factor for the presence of colonic polyps but also revealed the cut-off age of 42.5 for the presence of all types of colonic polyps (44.5 years for adenomatous polyps).</br></br> <b>Conclusion:</b> This study has showed a similar polyp prevalence in the age group of 40-49 years as compared to 50-59. Our study suggests that appropriate colon examination should be performed at a younger age to achieve early detection of colonic polyps, specifically in patients with red flag symptoms.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".