scholarly journals Optimizing Patient Risk Stratification for Colonoscopy Screening and Surveillance of Colorectal Cancer: The Role for Linked Data

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
Author(s):  
David B. Preen ◽  
Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar ◽  
Hooi C. Ee ◽  
Cameron Platell ◽  
Dayna R. Cenin ◽  
...  
Surgery Today ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 47 (8) ◽  
pp. 934-939
Author(s):  
Koji Komori ◽  
Takashi Kinoshita ◽  
Taihei Oshiro ◽  
Seiji Ito ◽  
Tetsuya Abe ◽  
...  

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (11) ◽  
pp. 2762
Author(s):  
Samantha Di Donato ◽  
Alessia Vignoli ◽  
Chiara Biagioni ◽  
Luca Malorni ◽  
Elena Mori ◽  
...  

Adjuvant treatment for patients with early stage colorectal cancer (eCRC) is currently based on suboptimal risk stratification, especially for elderly patients. Metabolomics may improve the identification of patients with residual micrometastases after surgery. In this retrospective study, we hypothesized that metabolomic fingerprinting could improve risk stratification in patients with eCRC. Serum samples obtained after surgery from 94 elderly patients with eCRC (65 relapse free and 29 relapsed, after 5-years median follow up), and from 75 elderly patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) obtained before a new line of chemotherapy, were retrospectively analyzed via proton nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy. The prognostic role of metabolomics in patients with eCRC was assessed using Kaplan–Meier curves. PCA-CA-kNN could discriminate the metabolomic fingerprint of patients with relapse-free eCRC and mCRC (70.0% accuracy using NOESY spectra). This model was used to classify the samples of patients with relapsed eCRC: 69% of eCRC patients with relapse were predicted as metastatic. The metabolomic classification was strongly associated with prognosis (p-value 0.0005, HR 3.64), independently of tumor stage. In conclusion, metabolomics could be an innovative tool to refine risk stratification in elderly patients with eCRC. Based on these results, a prospective trial aimed at improving risk stratification by metabolomic fingerprinting (LIBIMET) is ongoing.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cristiana Iacuzzo ◽  
Paola Germani ◽  
Marina Troian ◽  
Tommaso Cipolat Mis ◽  
Fabiola Giudici ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Andrada Ciucă ◽  
Ramona Moldovan ◽  
Sebastian Pintea ◽  
Dan Dumitrașcu ◽  
Adriana Băban

Background and Aims: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most frequent form of cancer worldwide, and approximately one third of cases have a positive family history of CRC or associated cancers. Colonoscopy is one of the most effective methods of screening for CRC. Uptake of colonoscopy is suboptimal, and many countries lack a national screening programme. Our study aims at exploring and ranking several factual and psychological variables according to their accuracy in discriminating between screeners and non-screeners for CRC in a convenience sample of people over 50 years of age. Methods: The study included 103 individuals aged over 50 years, recruited from day centres for the elderly. We explored socio-demographic variables, frequency of colonoscopy, previous recommendations for screening, health literacy and family history of cancer. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to establish the discriminative value for each variable between the positive and negative decision for colonoscopy screening. Areas under the curve (AUC) and their equivalent Cohen‘s d values were calculated. Results: Almost a quarter (25.75%) of participants reported previous colonoscopy screening. ROC curve analysis shows that colonoscopy uptake is best discriminated by perceived benefits of screening (AUC=0.71, d=0.78, p<0.001), previous recommendations for screening (AUC=0.68, d=0.69, p<0.001) and previous recommendations for preventive measures (AUC=0.67, d=0.64, p<0.001). Conclusions: Recommendations from healthcare professionals lead to improved colonoscopy uptake when emphasising the benefits of screening. Results can further inform psychosocial interventions by bringing empirical evidence to emphasize screening benefits and explicit recommendations for individuals at risk for CRC cancer.


2018 ◽  
Vol 56 ◽  
pp. 90-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wessel van de Veerdonk ◽  
Guido Van Hal ◽  
Marc Peeters ◽  
Isabel De Brabander ◽  
Geert Silversmit ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document