Colorectal Cancer Symptoms Research Articles

Decision-making about participation in colorectal cancer screening in Sweden: Autonomous, value-dependent but uninformed?

ObjectiveTo investigate knowledge, values and preferences, and involvement among screening participants and non-participants in relation to colorectal cancer (CRC) and screening decision. MethodsIndividuals (N = 2748) from the Screening of Swedish Colons trial were invited to respond to the SCREESCO questionnaire, assessing information/knowledge, values/preferences, and involvement. ResultsRespondents’ (screening participants, n = 1320; non-participants, n = 161) knowledge varied across items; 90 % recognised faecal blood as a CRC symptom, but less than half cited overweight, smoking, alcohol, and physical inactivity as risk factors. Incidence and case fatality were often over- and underestimated, respectively (>45 and 40 %). Non-participants were more uncertain about their CRC risk (p = 0.015) and less convinced that screening reduces the risk of dying from CRC (p < 0.001). In decision-making, screening participants took most into consideration the importance of early detection and CRC worry, and non-participants the risk of discomfort and complications due to the screening examination (p < 0.001). Most individuals made the decision without involving others. ConclusionFor informed and shared decisions, efforts need to be made to increase public knowledge about CRC and to develop interventions to support individuals in decision-making. Practice implicationsThese results can inform and guide future initiatives to facilitate high quality decisions and CRC screening uptake in Sweden.

COVID-19: An Opportunity to Reimagine Colorectal Cancer Diagnostic Testing—A New Paradigm Shift

ABSTRACT Colorectal cancer is the third leading cause of cancer related deaths and to date, the COVID-19 pandemic has led to major disruptions of the diagnosis and treatment pathways of this cancer, which may adversely affect survival outcomes for many years. Colorectal cancer pathways must be maintained at a near normal throughput with urgent attention to the backlog of patients to avoid a potential crisis of avoidable cancer deaths. A radical review and revamping of endoscopy services to improve efficiency during COVID-19 is urgently required. To date most endoscopy units have severely restricted their activity, except for time-critical diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. In the post- COVID-19 recovery phase, access to endoscopy services will increase but capacity will be reduced compared to before the pandemic, due to infection control measures. A pragmatic and safe strategy is urgently needed to clear the backlog of endoscopic procedures and for managing the new symptomatic referrals. We propose the use of non-invasive tests, such as FIT and mSEPT9 combined with “safety netting” to “rule out” colorectal cancer and to reduce the utilization of colonoscopy by up to 80% and limit the procedure to those patients at high risk of cancer.

Faecal immunochemical testing for adults with symptoms of colorectal cancer attending English primary care: a retrospective cohort study of 14487 consecutive test requests.

Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) is recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) to triage symptomatic primary care patients for further investigation of colorectal cancer. To ascertain the diagnostic performance of FIT in symptomatic adult primary care patients. Faecal samples from routine primary care practice in Oxfordshire, UK were analysed using the HM-JACKarc FIT method between March 2017 and March 2020. Clinical details were recorded. Patients were followed for up to 36months in linked hospital records for evidence of benign and serious (colorectal cancer, high-risk adenomas and bowel inflammation) colorectal disease. The diagnostic accuracy of FIT is reported by gender, age group and FIT threshold. In 9896 adult patients with at least 6-month follow-up, a FIT result ≥10µg Hb/g faeces had a sensitivity for colorectal cancer of 90.5% (95% CI 84.9%-96.1%), specificity 91.3% (90.8%-91.9%), positive predictive value (PPV) 10.1% (8.15%-12.0%) and negative predictive value (NPV) 99.9% (99.8%-100.0%). The PPV and specificity for serious colorectal disease were higher and the sensitivity and NPV lower than for colorectal cancer alone. The area under the curve for all adults did not change substantially by gender or by increasing the minimum age of testing. Using ≥10µg Hb/g faeces, 10% of adults would be investigated to detect 91% of cancers, a number needed to scope of ten to detect one cancer. Using ≥7, ≥50 and ≥150µg Hb/g faeces, 11%, 4% and 3% of adults would be investigated, and 91%, 74% and 54% cancers detected, respectively. A FIT threshold of ≥10µg Hb/g faeces would be appropriate to triage adult patients presenting to primary care with symptoms of serious colorectal disease. FIT may be used to reprioritise patients referred with colorectal cancer symptoms whose investigations have been delayed by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Colorectal cancer awareness and its predictors among adults aged 50–74 years attending primary healthcare in the State of Qatar: a cross-sectional study

ObjectiveThe current study aimed to assess the awareness of colorectal cancer (CRC) symptoms and risk factors among the at-risk population visiting the primary healthcare (PHC) centres in Qatar. The secondary...

Patient-reported and doctor-reported symptoms when faecal immunochemical tests are requested in primary care in the diagnosis of colorectal cancer and inflammatory bowel disease: a prospective study

BackgroundRectal bleeding and a change in bowel habits are considered to be alarm symptoms for colorectal cancer and they are also common symptoms for inflammatory bowel disease. However, most patients with these symptoms do not have any of these diseases. Faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for haemoglobin are used as triage tests in Sweden and other countries but little is known about the symptoms patients have when FITs are requested.ObjectiveFirstly, to determine patients’ symptoms when FITs are used as triage tests in primary care and whether doctors record the symptoms that patients report, and secondly to evaluate the association between symptoms, FIT results and possible prediction of colorectal cancer or inflammatory bowel disease.Methods and materialsThis prospective study included 364 consecutive patients for whom primary care doctors requested a FIT. Questionnaires including gastrointestinal symptoms were completed by patients and doctors.ResultsConcordance between symptoms reported from patients and doctors was low. Rectal bleeding was recorded by 43.5% of patients versus 25.6% of doctors, FITs were negative in 58.3 and 52.7% of these cases respectively. The positive predictive value (PPV) of rectal bleeding recorded by patients for colorectal cancer or inflammatory bowel disease was 9.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.2–14.7); for rectal bleeding combined with a FIT the PPV was 22.6% (95% CI 12.2–33.0) and the negative predictive value (NPV) was 98.9% (95% CI 96.7–100). For patient-recorded change in bowel habits the PPV was 6.1% (95% CI 2.4–9.8); for change in bowel habits combined with a FIT the PPV was 18.2% (95% CI 9.1–30.9) and the NPV 100% (95% CI 90.3–100).ConclusionsDoctors should be aware that, during consultations, they do not record all symptoms experienced by patients. FITs requested in primary care, when found positive, may potentially be of help in prioritising referrals, also when patients present with rectal bleeding or change in bowel habits.

Can FIT rule out colorectal cancer in symptomatic patients? Diagnostic test accuracy results from 9,822 patients in the NICE FIT study.

4093 Background: The faecal immunochemical test (FIT) is a non-invasive quantitative test that measures occult blood in faeces (faecal haemoglobin, FHb). FIT is already used worldwide in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes. Bowel symptoms have low specificity for CRC; to diagnose one patient with CRC, a large number of symptomatic patients require investigation. A negative FIT test, when blood is not detected, could be used to rule out CRC in symptomatic patients without invasive investigations such as colonoscopy. We report on the largest diagnostic accuracy study to date of FIT in symptomatic patients. Methods: Patients were eligible for recruitment if they experienced bowel symptoms meeting national high-risk criteria and were triaged to investigation with colonoscopy. Patients were excluded from analysis if they did not provide a valid FIT or did not undergo complete colonoscopy. Colonoscopy results were compared to FIT measurements of FHb, and the conduct of the tests was double-blinded. Quality assurance of endoscopy and clinical data was performed by senior clinicians. External statisticians analysed anonymised data. Results: 9822 patients from 50 sites across England participated in the study between October 2017 to March 2019. The most common colonoscopy finding was absence of any colorectal disease (31%). The prevalence of CRC at colonoscopy was 3.3%. The sensitivity of FIT at FHb thresholds of 2, 10 and 150 μg/g significantly decreased from 97.0% to 90.9% and 70.8% respectively (p &lt; 0.01). FIT positivity rate at these thresholds increased from 7.6%, to 19% and 37.2% respectively (p &lt; 0.01). The positive predictive value of FIT for CRC at FHb thresholds of 2, 10 and 150 μg/g was 8.7%, 16.1% and 31.1% respectively and the negative predictive value of FIT at these thresholds was 99.8%, 99.6% and 98.9% respectively. Conclusions: The results of this study support the use of FIT at the threshold of detectable blood (2μg/g) as an initial CRC rule-out test to triage patients with high risk CRC symptoms, reducing the number of unnecessary investigations. This is the first study to report that at the lowest threshold of detectable blood, FIT sensitivity is equivalent to the current gold standard investigation of colonoscopy. Clinical trial information: ISRCTN49676259 .

Computed tomography colonography versus colonoscopy for detection of colorectal cancer: a diagnostic performance study

BackgroundColonoscopy is the reference standard for the detection of colorectal cancer but it is an invasive technique and has the risk of bowel perforation and bleeding. Unlike colonoscopy, sedation is not required in computed tomography colonography and requires additional reassurance endoscopy. The objectives of the study were to compare the diagnostic performance of computed tomography colonography against colonoscopy for a diagnosis of colorectal cancer.MethodsData regarding any polyp ≥10 mm diameter (ø) and < 10 mm ø but suspicious polyps of computed tomography colonography (n = 318), colonoscopy (n = 318), and surgical pathology (n = 77) for symptomatic colorectal cancer patients were collected and analyzed. Lesion ulceration, extramural invasion, and/ or lesion shouldering was considered as a suspicious polyp. Beneficial scores for decision making of curative surgeries were evaluated for each modality. The cost of diagnosis of colorectal cancer was also evaluated.ResultsEither of diagnosis showed polyps ≥10 mm ø in 27 patients and polyps of 50 patients were < 10 mm ø but suspicious. Therefore, a total of 77 patients were subjected to surgery. With respect to surgical pathology, sensitivities for computed tomographic colonography and colonoscopy were 0.961 and 0.831. For detection of ≥10 mm ø polyp, benefit score for computed tomographic colonography and colonoscopy were 0–0.906 diagnostic confidence and 0.035–0.5 diagnostic confidence. For polyps, ≥ 10 mm ø but not too many large polyps, colonoscopy had the risk of underdiagnosis. For < 10 mm ø but suspicious polyps, < 0.6 mm ø and < 2.2 mm ⌀ polyps could not be detected by computed tomographic colonography and colonoscopy, respectively. The computed tomographic colonography had less cost than colonoscopy (1345 ± 135 ¥/ patient vs. 1715 ± 241 ¥/ patient, p < 0.0001) for diagnosis of colorectal cancer.ConclusionComputed tomographic colonography would be a non-inferior alternative than colonoscopy for a diagnosis of colorectal cancer.Level of evidenceIII.

Faecal immunochemical test to triage patients with abdominal symptoms for suspected colorectal cancer in primary care: review of international use and guidelines.

Recently, faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) have been introduced for investigation of primary care patients with low-risk symptoms of colorectal cancer (CRC), but recommendations vary across the world. This systematic review of clinical practice guidelines aimed to determine how FITs are used in symptomatic primary care patients and the underpinning evidence for these guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase and TRIP databases were systematically searched, from 1 November 2008 to 1 November 2018 for guidelines on the assessment of patients with symptoms suggestive of CRC. Known guideline databases, websites and references of related literature were searched. The following questions were addressed: (i) which countries use FIT for symptomatic primary care patients; (ii) in which populations is FIT used; (iii) what is the cut-off level used for haemoglobin in the faeces (FIT) and (iv) on what evidence are FIT recommendations based. The search yielded 2433 publications; 25 covered initial diagnostic assessment of patients with symptoms of CRC in 15 countries (Asia, n = 1; Europe, n = 13; Oceania, n = 4; North America, n = 5; and South America, n = 2). In three countries (Australia, Spain and the UK), FIT was recommended for patients with abdominal symptoms, unexplained weight loss, change in bowel habit or anaemia despite a low level of evidence in the symptomatic primary care patient population. Few countries recommend FITs in symptomatic patients in primary care either because of limited evidence or because symptomatic patients are directly referred to secondary care without triage. These results demonstrate a clear need for research on FIT in the symptomatic primary care population.

Efficacy of Real-Time Computer-Aided Detection of Colorectal Neoplasia in a Randomized Trial

One-fourth of colorectal neoplasias are missed during screening colonoscopies; these can develop into colorectal cancer (CRC). Deep learning systems allow for real-time computer-aided detection (CADe) of polyps with high accuracy. We performed a multicenter, randomized trial to assess the safety and efficacy of a CADe system in detection of colorectal neoplasias during real-time colonoscopy. We analyzed data from 685 subjects (61.32 ± 10.2 years old; 337 men) undergoing screening colonoscopies for CRC, post-polypectomy surveillance, or workup due to positive results from a fecal immunochemical test or signs or symptoms of CRC, at 3 centers in Italy from September through November 2019. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to groups who underwent high-definition colonoscopies with the CADe system or without (controls). The CADe system included an artificial intelligence-based medical device (GI-Genius, Medtronic) trained to process colonoscopy images and superimpose them, in real time, on the endoscopy display a green box over suspected lesions. A minimum withdrawal time of 6 minutes was required. Lesions were collected and histopathology findings were used as the reference standard. The primary outcome was adenoma detection rate (ADR, the percentage of patients with at least 1 histologically proven adenoma or carcinoma). Secondary outcomes were adenomas detected per colonoscopy, non-neoplastic resection rate, and withdrawal time. The ADR was significantly higher in the CADe group (54.8%) than in the control group (40.4%) (relative risk [RR], 1.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14-1.45). Adenomas detected per colonoscopy were significantly higher in the CADe group (mean, 1.07 ±1.54) than in the control group (mean 0.71 ± 1.20) (incidence rate ratio, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.15-1.86). Adenomas 5 mm or smaller were detected in a significantly higher proportion of subjects in the CADe group (33.7%) than in the control group (26.5%; RR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.01-1.52), as were adenomas of 6 to 9 mm (detected in 10.6% of subjects in the CADe group vs 5.8% in the control group; RR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.09-2.86), regardless of morphology or location. There was no significant difference between groups in withdrawal time (417 ± 101 seconds for the CADe group vs 435 ± 149 for controls; P= .1) or proportion of subjects with resection of non-neoplastic lesions (26.0% in the CADe group vs 28.7% of controls; RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.90-1.12). In a multicenter, randomized trial, we found that including CADe in real-time colonoscopy significantly increases ADR and adenomas detected per colonoscopy without increasing withdrawal time. ClinicalTrials.gov no: 04079478.

Estimating the Screening-Eligible Population Size, Ages 45–74, at Average Risk to Develop Colorectal Cancer in the United States

Colorectal cancer is a growing burden in adults less than 50 years old. In 2018, the American Cancer Society published a guideline update recommending a reduction in the colorectal cancer screening start age for average-risk individuals from 50 to 45. Implementing these recommendations would have important implications for public health. However, the approximate number of people impacted by this change, the average-risk population ages 45-49, is not well-described in the literature. Here, we provide methodology to conservatively estimate the average-risk and screening-eligible population in the United States, including those who would be impacted by a lowered colorectal cancer screening start age. Using multiple data sources, we estimated the current average-risk population by subtracting individuals with symptomatic colorectal cancer, with a family history of colorectal cancer, and with inflammatory bowel disease and hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer from the total population. Within this population, we estimated the number of screening-eligible individuals by subtracting those with previous colorectal cancer screening (45- to 49-year-old) or up to date with colorectal cancer screening (50- to 74-year-old). The total average-risk population is estimated between 102.1 and 106.5 million people, of whom 43.4-45.2 million people are eligible for colorectal cancer screening. Lowering the screening age would add roughly 19 million people to the average-risk population and increase the current number of screening-eligible individuals on immediate implementation by over 60% (from 27 to 44 million). Estimating the population size impacted by lowering the recommended colorectal cancer screening start age enables more accurate decision-making for policymakers and epidemiologists focused on cancer prevention.

Change in public awareness of colorectal cancer symptoms following the Be Cancer Alert Campaign in the multi-ethnic population of Malaysia

BackgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) cases are detected late in Malaysia similar to most Asian countries. The Be Cancer Alert Campaign (BCAC) was a culturally adapted mass media campaign designed to improve CRC awareness and reduce late detection in Malaysia. The evaluation of the BCAC-CRC aimed to assess campaign reach, campaign impact and health service use.MethodsParticipants aged ≥40 years (n = 730) from randomly selected households in Selangor State Malaysia, completed interview-based assessments. Campaign reach was assessed in terms of responses to an adapted questionnaire that was used in evaluations in other countries. The impact of the campaign was assessed in terms of awareness, confidence to detect symptoms and self-efficacy to discuss symptoms with a doctor as captured by the Cancer Awareness Measure (CAM). CAM was administered before-and-after campaign implementation and responses by BCAC recognisers (i.e. participants who recognised one or more of the BCAC television, radio or print advertisements when prompted) and non-recognisers (i.e. participants who did not recognise any of the BCAC advertisements) were compared analytically. Logistic regression analysed comparative differences in cancer awareness by socio-demographic characteristics and recognition of the BCAC materials.ResultsOver 65% of participants (n = 484) recognised the BCAC-CRC. Campaign-recognisers were significantly more likely to be aware of each CRC symptom at follow-up and were more confident about noticing symptoms (46.9% vs 34.9%, p = 0.018) compared to non-recognisers. There was no difference between groups in terms of self-efficacy to see a doctor about symptoms. Improved symptoms awareness at follow-up was lower for Indians compared to Malays (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.53, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.34, 0.83, p = 0.005). Health service use data did not indicate an increase in screening activity during or immediately after the campaign months.ConclusionOverall, the findings of the evaluation indicated that the culturally adapted, evidence-based mass media intervention improved CRC symptom awareness among the Malaysian population; and that impact is more likely when a campaign operates a differentiated approach that matches modes of communication to the ethnic and social diversity in a population.

Demographic trends in the incidence of young-onset colorectal cancer: a population-based study.

BackgroundEvidence is emerging that the incidence of colorectal cancer is increasing in young adults, but the descriptive epidemiology required to better understand these trends is currently lacking.MethodsA population‐based cohort study was carried out including all adults aged 20–49 years diagnosed with colorectal cancer in England between 1974 and 2015. Data were extracted from the National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service database using ICD‐9/10 codes for colorectal cancer. Temporal trends in age‐specific incidence rates according to sex, anatomical subsite, index of multiple deprivation quintile and geographical region were analysed using Joinpoint regression.ResultsA total of 56 134 new diagnoses of colorectal cancer were analysed. The most sustained increase in incidence rate was in the group aged 20–29 years, which was mainly driven by a rise in distal tumours. The magnitude of incident rate increases was similar in both sexes and across Index of Multiple Deprivation quintiles, although the most pronounced increases in incidence occurred in the southern regions of England.ConclusionColorectal cancer should no longer be considered a disease of older people. Changes in incidence rates should be used to inform future screening policy, preventative strategies and research agendas, as well as increasing public understanding that younger people need to be aware of the symptoms of colorectal cancer.

Biomarkers for detecting colorectal cancer non-invasively: DNA, RNA or proteins?

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a global problem affecting millions of people worldwide. This disease is unique because of its slow progress that makes it preventable and often curable. CRC symptoms usually emerge only at advanced stages of the disease, consequently its early detection can be achieved only through active population screening, which markedly reduces mortality due to this cancer. CRC screening tests that employ non-invasively detectable biomarkers are currently being actively developed and, in most cases, samples of either stool or blood are used. However, alternative biological substances that can be collected non-invasively (colorectal mucus, urine, saliva, exhaled air) have now emerged as new sources of diagnostic biomarkers. The main categories of currently explored CRC biomarkers are: (1) Proteins (comprising widely used haemoglobin); (2) DNA (including mutations and methylation markers); (3) RNA (in particular microRNAs); (4) Low molecular weight metabolites (comprising volatile organic compounds) detectable by metabolomic techniques; and (5) Shifts in gut microbiome composition. Numerous tests for early CRC detection employing such non-invasive biomarkers have been proposed and clinically studied. While some of these studies generated promising early results, very few of the proposed tests have been transformed into clinically validated diagnostic/screening techniques. Such DNA-based tests as Food and Drug Administration-approved multitarget stool test (marketed as Cologuard®) or blood test for methylated septin 9 (marketed as Epi proColon® 2.0 CE) show good diagnostic performance but remain too expensive and technically complex to become effective CRC screening tools. It can be concluded that, despite its deficiencies, the protein (haemoglobin) detection-based faecal immunochemical test (FIT) today presents the most cost-effective option for non-invasive CRC screening. The combination of non-invasive FIT and confirmatory invasive colonoscopy is the current strategy of choice for CRC screening. However, continuing intense research in the area promises the emergence of new superior non-invasive CRC screening tests that will allow the development of improved disease prevention strategies.

Public preferences for using quantitative faecal immunochemical test versus colonoscopy as diagnostic test for colorectal cancer: evidence from an online survey.

BackgroundThere has been interest in using the non-invasive, home-based quantitative faecal immunochemical test (FIT) to rule out colorectal cancer (CRC) in high-risk symptomatic patients.AimTo elicit public preferences for FIT versus colonoscopy (CC) and its delivery in primary care.Design & settingA cross-sectional online survey in England.MethodA total of 1057 adults (without CRC symptoms and diagnosis) aged 40–59 years were invited from an English online survey panel. Responders were asked to imagine they had been experiencing CRC symptoms that would qualify them for a diagnostic test. Participants were presented with choices between CC and FIT in ascending order of number of CRCs missed by FIT (from 1–10%). It was measured at what number of missed CRCs responders preferred CC over FIT.ResultsWhile 150 participants did not want either of the tests when both missed 1% CRCs, the majority (n = 741, 70.0%) preferred FIT to CC at that level of accuracy. However, this preference reduced to 427 (40.4%) when FIT missed one additional cancer. Women were more likely to tolerate missing CRC when using FIT. Having lower numeracy and perceiving a higher level of risk meant participants were less likely to tolerate a false negative test. Most of those who chose FIT preferred to return it by mail (62.2%), to be informed about normal test results by letter (42.1%), and about abnormal test results face to face (32.5%).ConclusionWhile the majority of participants preferred FIT over CC when both tests had the same sensitivity, tolerance for missed CRCs was low.

Symptom Experiences in Colorectal Cancer Survivors After Cancer Treatments: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

With improved survivorship rates for colorectal cancer (CRC), more CRC survivors are living with long-term disease and treatment side effects. Little research exists on CRC symptoms or symptom management guidelines to support these individuals after cancer treatments. The aims of this study were to systematically review symptom experiences, risk factors, and the impact of symptoms and to examine the pooled frequency and severity of symptoms via meta-analyses in CRC survivors after cancer treatments. Relevant studies were systematically searched in 7 databases from 2009 to 2019. Meta-analysis was conducted for pooled estimates of symptom frequency and severity. Thirty-five studies met the inclusion criteria. Six studies assessed multiple CRC symptoms, whereas 29 focused on a single symptom, including peripheral neuropathy, psychological distress, fatigue, body image distress, cognitive impairment, and insomnia. The pooled mean frequency was highest for body image distress (78.5%). On a scale of 0 to 100, the pooled mean severity was highest for fatigue (50.1). Gastrointestinal and psychological symptoms, peripheral neuropathy, and insomnia were also major problems in CRC survivors. Multiple factors contributed to adverse symptoms, such as younger age, female gender, and lack of family/social support. Symptoms negatively impacted quality of life, social and sexual functioning, financial status, and caregivers' physical and mental conditions. Colorectal cancer survivors experienced multiple adverse symptoms related to distinct risk factors. These symptoms negatively impacted patients and caregivers' well-being. Healthcare providers can use study findings to better assess and monitor patient symptoms after cancer treatments. More research is needed on CRC-specific symptoms and their effective management.

Computational analyses on genetic alterations in the NSD genes family and the implications for colorectal cancer development.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a prevalent tumour throughout the world. CRC symptoms appear only in advanced stages causing decrease in survival of patients. Therefore, it is necessary to establish new strategies to detect CRC through subclinical screening. Genetic alterations and differential expression of genes that codify histone methyltransferases (HMTs) are linked to tumourigenesis of CRC. One important group of genes that codify HMTs are the NSD family composed of NSD1, NSD2 and NSD3 genes. This family participates in several cancer processes as oncogenes, harbouring several genetic alterations and presenting differential expression in tumour cells. To investigate the implications of NSD genes in CRC cancer, we described the genomic landscape of all NSD family members in a cohort of CRC patients from publicly available cancer datasets. We identified associations among recurrent copy number alterations (CNAs), mutations and differential gene expression concerning clinical outcome. We found in CRC repositories that NSD1 harbours a missense mutation in SET domain—the catalytic region—that probably could decrease its activity. In addition, we found an association between the low expressions of NSD1 and NSD2 and decrease of survival probability in CRC patients. Finally, we reported that NSD3 showed the highest rate of gene amplification, which was highly correlated to its mRNA expression, a common feature of many cancer drivers. Our results highlight the potential use of the NSD1 and NSD2 gene as prognostic markers of poor prognosis in CRC patients. Additionally, we appointed the use of the NSD3 gene as a putative cancer driver gene in CRC given that this gene harbours the highest rate of genetic amplification. All our findings are leading to novel strategies to predict and control CRC, however, some studies need to be conducted to validate these findings.

Knowledge, attitude and practice towards early screening of colorectal cancer in Riyadh.

Background and Aims:Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a common cause of mortality worldwide. It is preventable, treatable when detected early. The aim of this study is to assess knowledge, attitude and practice (KAP) of the participants toward CRC and its early screening, and identify the sources of information on the subjects.Methods:We conducted a cross-sectional study on the people 40y old and above at the primary care clinics at King Saud university medical city (KSUMC) in Riyadh. The estimated sample size was 245 subjects whom we requested to complete a self-administered Arabic questionnaire, which consisted of three parts. These were: 1. Demographic data, 2. KAP toward CRC, its early detection. 3 sources of information of the public about colorectal cancer.Results:A total of 231 subjects participated; (54.5%) were male (mean age = 50.7 ± 9.8). About 47% of the participants heard about cancer screening, and 45% knew that colonoscopy is used for such purposes. Another 24.2% were aware that occult blood in the stool test is a method of early detection of colon cancer. About 40% to 50% of the subjects were knowledgeable about hazardous factors and cautioning symptoms for CRC. Only 6.5% of the subjects did an early screening for CRC, but 82.9% would do it if their doctor advised them to do so.Conclusion:The participant's knowledge and early checkups of CRC are inadequate. They would undergo early screening if their doctors advised them to do so. It is time to develop a national policy for CRC screening involving primary care doctors and utilizing social media to improve people's information.

Role of Cetuximab Re-introduction and Re-challenge in Later Lines of Treatment in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Case Series

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third-largest cancer in the world and has the second-highest mortality rate, characterized by poor prognosis and high metastasis. The early symptoms of CRC are mostly inconspicuous and it is usually diagnosed in the advanced stages. Nearly half of the patients diagnosed with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are inoperable and have high chances of recurrence and metastasis. Combination therapy with cetuximab and chemotherapy is considered the first-line treatment for mCRC. In patients with Kirsten RAt Sarcoma wild-type mCRC, re-challenge and maintenance therapy with cetuximab was found to be beneficial. However, the disease progression is inevitable. This paper discusses three different cases of metastatic adenocarcinoma in the colon and rectum treated with the re-introduction and re-challenge of cetuximab in combination with chemotherapy. The treatment was found to be effective in treating mCRC in later lines of therapy where treatment options are scarce.

Reaching Rural Residents to Identify Colorectal Cancer Education and Intervention Targets.

Disparities in cancer screening and care in rural communities warrant the need to determine effective ways to reach, engage, and educate the community residents. The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to pilot methods to engage rural residents in colorectal cancer (CRC) research and education activities and assess knowledge of CRC guidelines, symptoms, and screening behaviors in this sample. The community-engaged research approach was employed to develop and distribute a CRC knowledge and screening behavior assessment using various methods such as email and community drop boxes placed throughout the community. Bivariate analysis assessed the relationship between age and CRC knowledge items. Three hundred ninety-one surveys were returned with most received from community drop boxes (60%) followed by educational events (23%). The most ineffective method to distribute surveys was through community events. Most individuals were knowledgeable of CRC symptoms (70%) and screening facts (67%). Bivariate analysis showed that individuals 50 years or older had significantly more knowledge of CRC risks and screening than those under the age of 50. This study highlights the potential of community drop boxes as an effective method for engaging rural communities. Further, findings from the survey highlight the need to focus CRC education on younger individuals in which CRC incidence has increased.

3075 Initial Presentation of Advanced Colorectal Cancer in the Cecum Presenting With Mild Tenesmus

INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a lethal disease. 140,250 new cases of large bowel cancer are diagnosed annually in the USA including 97,220 colon and 43,030 rectal cancers. 50,630 Americans are expected to die of large bowel cancer each year. CRC is the third most common cause of cancer death in the USA in women, and the second leading cause of death in men. Common symptomology include change in bowel habits (74%), rectal bleeding with change in bowel habits (71%), iron deficiency anemia (21%). Appendicitis as the initial symptom of CRC is less than 1% for individuals over 40. CASE DESCRIPTION/METHODS: Patient is a 52 year old man who presents to our facility for general abdominal pain and tenesmus for three months. The patient has no family history of CRC nor colonoscopy. In the ED routine labs negative Imaging revealed acute appendicitis. Laparoscopic appendectomy was performed and the patient was discharged the following day. Patient returned two months later with complaints of tenesmus and abdominal pain. In the ED acute microcytic anemia was discovered. CT Abdomen and pelvis demonstrated diverticulosis without diverticulitis and FOBT positive. Colonoscopy performed and findings consisted of: large 6 cm cecal mass, biopsies taken, 8 mm polyp in transverse colon removed with cold snare, two 5-7 mm polyps in the ascending colon removed by cold snare, and 4 cm polyp removed via the hot snare in the descending colon. The patient then underwent colonic resection of the mass by general surgery. DISCUSSION: What is learned from this case is the importance of CRC screening and rare initial symptom of CRC of appendicitis in a male over the age of 40. The patient is 52 years old with without having CRC screening and acute appendicitis. Had the patient had his diagnostic colonoscopy at the age of 50 the cecal mass would have been discovered sooner and treatment could have been initiated. Another aspect of this case that makes it unusual was the patient did not have any of the more common symptoms of CRC. Our patient presented with general abdominal pain and tenesmus and the latter accounts for less than 1% of all symptomatology along with acute appendicitis. The patient did not have any of the “alarm” symptoms and if not for the appendicitis diagnosed in the hospital the patient “had no intentions” of doing CRC screening. The patient explains he had no family history of gastric or colon cancers, “So why bother?” The acute appendicitis from the cecal mass proved to be critical in the initiation of treatment.