Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Practical Opportunities to Improve Early Detection and Prevention of Colorectal Cancer (CRC) in Members of High-Risk Families

  • Review
  • Published:
Digestive Diseases and Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality are steadily declining and CRC screening rates are increasing in the United States. Although this a very good news, several definable groups still have very low screening rates including younger (under age 50) members of high-risk CRC families. This opinion piece describes five strategies that could be incorporated into routine practice to improve identification and guideline-based screening in members of high-risk families. Routine incorporation of a simple family history screening tool and outreach to high-risk family members could substantially improve guideline-based screening in this population. Identification of CRCs and advanced adenomas in the endoscopy suite defines another group of high-risk families for similar outreach. Lynch syndrome families can be identified by testing CRCs and selected adenomas for microsatellite instability or loss of DNA repair protein expression. Finally, selective addition of aspirin to surveillance endoscopy can decrease the risk of new adenomas and CRCs. The rationale for these strategies as well as mechanisms for their implementation and evaluation in clinical practice is described.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Patel S, Ahnen D. Screening for colon polyps and cancer. In: Miller AB, ed. Epidemiologic studies in cancer prevention and screening. Vol 79. New York: Springer, 2013:233–261.

  2. Siegel R, Desantis C, Jemal A. Colorectal cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin. 2014;64:104–117.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Edwards BK, Ward E, Kohler BA, et al. Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975–2006, featuring colorectal cancer trends and impact of interventions (risk factors, screening, and treatment) to reduce future rates. Cancer. 2010;116:544–573.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Levin B, Lieberman DA, McFarland B, et al. Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology. Gastroenterology. 2008;134:1570–1595.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Rex DK, Johnson DA, Anderson JC, et al. American College of Gastroenterology guidelines for colorectal cancer screening 2009 [corrected]. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;104:739–750.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. NCCN. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Colorectal Cancer Screening; vol. 2014. http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/colorectal_screening.pdf, 2013.

  7. Davila RE, Rajan E, Baron TH, et al. ASGE guideline: colorectal cancer screening and surveillance. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;63:546–557.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Giardiello FM, Allen JI, Axilbund JE, et al. Guidelines on genetic evaluation and management of Lynch syndrome: a consensus statement by the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Am J Gastroenterol. 2014;109:1159–1179.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ait Ouakrim D, Lockett T, Boussioutas A, et al. Screening participation for people at increased risk of colorectal cancer due to family history: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fam Cancer. 2013;12:459–472.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Rees G, Martin PR, Macrae FA. Screening participation in individuals with a family history of colorectal cancer: a review. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2008;17:221–232.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Hampel H, de la Chapelle A. The search for unaffected individuals with Lynch syndrome: do the ends justify the means? Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2011;4:1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Claes E, Denayer L, Evers-Kiebooms G, et al. Predictive testing for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer: subjective perception regarding colorectal and endometrial cancer, distress, and health-related behavior at one year post-test. Genet Test. 2005;9:54–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Collins V, Meiser B, Gaff C, et al. Screening and preventive behaviors one year after predictive genetic testing for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal carcinoma. Cancer. 2005;104:273–281.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hadley DW, Jenkins JF, Dimond E, et al. Colon cancer screening practices after genetic counseling and testing for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:39–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Halbert CH, Lynch H, Lynch J, et al. Colon cancer screening practices following genetic testing for hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer (HNPCC) mutations. Arch Intern Med. 2004;164:1881–1887.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Johnson KA, Trimbath JD, Petersen GM, et al. Impact of genetic counseling and testing on colorectal cancer screening behavior. Genet Test. 2002;6:303–306.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Wagner A, van Kessel I, Kriege MG, et al. Long term follow-up of HNPCC gene mutation carriers: compliance with screening and satisfaction with counseling and screening procedures. Fam Cancer. 2005;4:295–300.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lowery JT, Marcus A, Kinney A, et al. The Family Health Promotion Project (FHPP): design and baseline data from a randomized trial to increase colonoscopy screening in high risk families. Contemp Clin Trials. 2012;33:426–435.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Vernon SW. Participation in colorectal cancer screening: a review. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1997;89:1406–1422.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Lowery JT, Horick N, Kinney AY, et al. A randomized trial to increase colonoscopy screening in members of high-risk families in the colorectal cancer family registry and cancer genetics network. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2014;23:601–610.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Fletcher RH, Lobb R, Bauer MR, et al. Screening patients with a family history of colorectal cancer. J Gen Intern Med. 2007;22:508–513.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kumaravel V, Heald B, Lopez R, et al. Patients do not recall important details about polyps, required for colorectal cancer prevention. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013;11:e1–e2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Brock AS, Wallace K, Romagnuolo J, et al. Patients’ short-term knowledge of personal polyp history inadequate despite systematic notification of results after polypectomy. South Med J. 2013;106:285–289.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Grover S, Stoffel EM, Bussone L, et al. Physician assessment of family cancer history and referral for genetic evaluation in colorectal cancer patients. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2004;2:813–819.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Sweet KM, Bradley TL, Westman JA. Identification and referral of families at high risk for cancer susceptibility. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:528–537.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Tyler CV Jr, Snyder CW. Cancer risk assessment: examining the family physician’s role. J Am Board Fam Med. 2006;19:468–477.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Use of electronic medical records to facilitate colorectal cancer screening in community health centers. Volume 2014: National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable; American Cancer Society; National Association of Community Health Center.

  28. Kastrinos F, Allen JI, Stockwell DH, et al. Development and validation of a colon cancer risk assessment tool for patients undergoing colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;104:1508–1518.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Kastrinos F, Steyerberg EW, Balmana J, et al. Comparison of the clinical prediction model PREMM(1,2,6) and molecular testing for the systematic identification of Lynch syndrome in colorectal cancer. Gut. 2013;62:272–279.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Khan O, Blanco A, Conrad P et al. Performance of Lynch syndrome predictive models in a multi-center US referral population. Am J Gastroenterol. 2011;106:1822–1827; quiz 1828.

  31. Nathanson JW, Zisman TL, Julian C, et al. Identification of patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer in an open access endoscopy center. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2008;42:1025–1031.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Klabunde CN, Vernon SW, Nadel MR, et al. Barriers to colorectal cancer screening: a comparison of reports from primary care physicians and average-risk adults. Med Care. 2005;43:939–944.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Rex DK, Kahi CJ, Levin B, et al. Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after cancer resection: a consensus update by the American Cancer Society and the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology. 2006;130:1865–1871.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Lieberman DA, Rex DK, Winawer SJ, et al. Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after screening and polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology. 2012;143:844–857.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Rex D, Schoenfeld P, Cohen J et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;81:31–53.

  36. Austin GL, Goldstein JI, Peters SL, et al. Are colorectal cancer screening recommendations for first-degree relatives of patients with adenomas too aggressive? Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011;9:308–313.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Hewitt M, Greenfield S, Ellen Stovall (eds). Committee on Cancer Survivorship: Improving Care and Quality of Life, National Cancer Policy Board. From cancer patient to cancer survivor: lost in transition. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2005.

  38. de Vos tot Nederveen Cappel WH, Jarvinen HJ, Lynch PM, et al. Colorectal surveillance in Lynch syndrome families. Fam Cancer. 2013;12:261–265.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Ladabaum U, Wang G, Terdiman J, et al. Strategies to identify the Lynch syndrome among patients with colorectal cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155:69–79.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Lynch HT, Krush AJ. Cancer family “G” revisited: 1895–1970. Cancer. 1971;27:1505–1511.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Rodriguez-Bigas MA, Boland CR, Hamilton SR, et al. A National Cancer Institute workshop on hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer syndrome: meeting highlights and Bethesda guidelines. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1997;89:1758–1762.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Teutsch SM, Bradley LA, Palomaki GE, et al. The evaluation of genomic applications in practice and prevention (EGAPP) initiative: methods of the EGAPP working group. Genet Med. 2009;11:3–14.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Parry S, Win AK, Parry B, et al. Metachronous colorectal cancer risk for mismatch repair gene mutation carriers: the advantage of more extensive colon surgery. Gut. 2011;60:950–957.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Natarajan N, Watson P, Silva-Lopez E, et al. Comparison of extended colectomy and limited resection in patients with Lynch syndrome. Dis Colon Rectum. 2010;53:77–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Fadhil W, Ibrahem S, Seth R, et al. The utility of diagnostic biopsy specimens for predictive molecular testing in colorectal cancer. Histopathology. 2012;61:1117–1124.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Walsh MD, Buchanan DD, Pearson SA, et al. Immunohistochemical testing of conventional adenomas for loss of expression of mismatch repair proteins in Lynch syndrome mutation carriers: a case series from the Australasian site of the colon cancer family registry. Mod Pathol. 2012;25:722–730.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Yurgelun MB, Goel A, Hornick JL, et al. Microsatellite instability and DNA mismatch repair protein deficiency in Lynch syndrome colorectal polyps. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2012;5:574–582.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Pino MS, Mino-Kenudson M, Wildemore BM, et al. Deficient DNA mismatch repair is common in Lynch syndrome-associated colorectal adenomas. J Mol Diagn. 2009;11:238–247.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Meijer TW, Hoogerbrugge N, Nagengast FM, et al. In Lynch syndrome adenomas, loss of mismatch repair proteins is related to an enhanced lymphocytic response. Histopathology. 2009;55:414–422.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Beamer LC, Grant ML, Espenschied CR, et al. Reflex immunohistochemistry and microsatellite instability testing of colorectal tumors for Lynch syndrome among US cancer programs and follow-up of abnormal results. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:1058–1063.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Wei EK, Colditz GA, Giovannucci EL, et al. Cumulative risk of colon cancer up to age 70 years by risk factor status using data from the Nurses’ Health Study. Am J Epidemiol. 2009;170:863–872.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Colorectal Cancer 2011 Report. Volume 2014: World cancer research fund global network, 2011.

  53. Von Karsa L, Anttila A, Ronco G et al. Cancer screening in the European Union, report on the implementation of the council recommendation on cancer screening—first report. In: Cancer. IAfRo, ed. Luxembourg: European Commission, 2008.

  54. USPSTF. Screening for colorectal cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149:627–637.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Prevention, Early Detection and Management of Colorectal Cancer. In: Australian National Health & Medical Research Council; Cancer Council Australia ACN, ed, 2005.

  56. Ranger GS. Current concepts in colorectal cancer prevention with cyclooxygenase inhibitors. Anticancer Res. 2014;34:6277–6282.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Kim B, Giardiello FM. Chemoprevention in familial adenomatous polyposis. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2011;25:607–622.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Bertagnolli MM, Eagle CJ, Zauber AG, et al. Celecoxib for the prevention of sporadic colorectal adenomas. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:873–884.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Arber N, Eagle CJ, Spicak J, et al. Celecoxib for the prevention of colorectal adenomatous polyps. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:885–895.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Baron JA, Sandler RS, Bresalier RS, et al. A randomized trial of rofecoxib for the chemoprevention of colorectal adenomas. Gastroenterology. 2006;131:1674–1682.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Baron JA, Sandler RS, Bresalier RS, et al. Cardiovascular events associated with rofecoxib: final analysis of the APPROVe trial. Lancet. 2008;372:1756–1764.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Arber N, Spicak J, Racz I, et al. Five-year analysis of the prevention of colorectal sporadic adenomatous polyps trial. Am J Gastroenterol. 2011;106:1135–1146.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Bertagnolli MM, Eagle CJ, Zauber AG, et al. Five-year efficacy and safety analysis of the Adenoma Prevention with Celecoxib Trial. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2009;2:310–321.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Hawk ET, Limburg PJ, Viner JL. Epidemiology and prevention of colorectal cancer. Surg Clin N Am. 2002;82:905–941.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Cole BF, Logan RF, Halabi S, et al. Aspirin for the chemoprevention of colorectal adenomas: meta-analysis of the randomized trials. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101:256–266.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Algra AM, Rothwell PM. Effects of regular aspirin on long-term cancer incidence and metastasis: a systematic comparison of evidence from observational studies versus randomised trials. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13:518–527.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Rothwell PM, Wilson M, Elwin CE, et al. Long-term effect of aspirin on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality: 20-year follow-up of five randomised trials. Lancet. 2010;376:1741–1750.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Liao X, Lochhead P, Nishihara R, et al. Aspirin use, tumor PIK3CA mutation, and colorectal-cancer survival. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:1596–1606.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Mathers JC, Movahedi M, Macrae F, et al. Long-term effect of resistant starch on cancer risk in carriers of hereditary colorectal cancer: an analysis from the CAPP2 randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13:1242–1249.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Savage RL, Moller PW, Ballantyne CL, et al. Variation in the risk of peptic ulcer complications with nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug therapy. Arthritis Rheum. 1993;36:84–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Garcia Rodriguez LA, Lin KJ, Hernandez-Diaz S, et al. Risk of upper gastrointestinal bleeding with low-dose acetylsalicylic acid alone and in combination with clopidogrel and other medications. Circulation. 2011;123:1108–1115.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Force USPST. Routine aspirin or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for the primary prevention of colorectal cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2007;146:361–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Vandvik PO, Lincoff AM, Gore JM, et al. Primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease: antithrombotic therapy and prevention of thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines. Chest. 2012;141:e637S–e668S.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Cuzick J, Thorat MA, Bosetti C, et al. Estimates of benefits and harms of prophylactic use of aspirin in the general population. Ann Oncol Ann Oncol. 2014;2015:47–57.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Ritov I, Baron J. Reluctance to vaccinate: omission bias and ambiguity. J Behav Decis Mak. 1990;3:263–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Janne PA, Mayer RJ. Chemoprevention of colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:1960–1968.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    S. G. Patel

  2. School of Public Health, University of Colorado, Aurora, CO, USA

    J. T. Lowery

  3. Gastroenterology of the Rockies, Boulder, CO, USA

    D. Gatof & D. J. Ahnen

  4. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA

    D. J. Ahnen

Authors
  1. S. G. Patel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. T. Lowery
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. D. Gatof
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. D. J. Ahnen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to D. J. Ahnen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Patel, S.G., Lowery, J.T., Gatof, D. et al. Practical Opportunities to Improve Early Detection and Prevention of Colorectal Cancer (CRC) in Members of High-Risk Families. Dig Dis Sci 60, 748–761 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-015-3567-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-015-3567-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation