Background
Despite the recent advances in therapeutic modalities for colorectal cancer (CRC), it remains a major cause of mortality worldwide [
1]. In most cases, CRC develops through the adenoma–carcinoma sequence, which serves as the rationale for screening and prevention of CRC by colonoscopic examinations. Colonoscopy with removal of adenomas is a powerful tool to reduce the mortality of CRC [
1‐
3]. Surveillance colonoscopy is also recommended after the initial endoscopic removal of adenoma, because of the possibility of development of new tumors [
2,
3].
In Japan, no guidelines have been established yet for surveillance colonoscopies. However, in the United States, the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) guidelines are adopted as the basic protocols for colonoscopic surveillance after initial screening/removal of adenomas. These guidelines recommend stratification of patients at the time of the initial colonoscopy into groups at a low and high risk of subsequent development of more advanced tumors [
2]. Patients who have advanced adenomas or multiple (3 or more) adenomas are classified into the high-risk group. Advanced adenomas are defined as adenomas that show high-grade dysplasia or >20% villous component or measure ≥1 cm in size. Follow-up colonoscopy every 3 years is recommended for the high-risk group. Patients with other adenomas, namely, 1 or 2 small (<1 cm) tubular adenomas that do not show high-grade dysplasia, are classified into the low-risk group, and follow-up colonoscopy every 5–10 years is recommended for this group. In patients with hyperplastic polyps and those with only average risk, follow-up colonoscopy every 10 years is considered adequate.
Recently, in some studies, metabolic factors were shown to be associated with an increased prevalence of colorectal tumors. Limburg et al. and Elwing et al. demonstrated the association between diabetes mellitus and colorectal tumors [
4,
5]. Otani et al. and Liu et al. showed a relationship between dyslipidemia and colorectal tumors [
6,
7]. Kim et al. and Orranapalai et al. proved that metabolic syndrome was associated with colorectal tumors [
8,
9]. The incidence rates of metabolic factors have dramatically increased in developed countries as a result of the high prevalence of obesity [
10]. Therefore, metabolic factors rank as important risk factors for the increase of prevalence of colorectal tumors. Metabolic factors have also been suggested as risk factors for recurrence after endoscopic removal of colorectal adenomas. To the best of our knowledge, however, no study as yet has discussed whether the presence of metabolic factors might accelerate the development of recurrence after endoscopic removal of colorectal adenomas.
The aim of this study was to identify the risk factors for colorectal adenoma recurrence, focusing on metabolic factors, in addition to those adenoma-related factors that the AGA guidelines have established. We therefore constructed a scoring system with the identified risk factors for recurrence that could predict the recurrence rate according to the risk score.
Discussion
As suggested by the AGA guidelines, we confirmed with a multivariate analysis in this study that advanced adenomas or the presence of ≥3 adenomas were associated with an increased risk of colorectal adenoma recurrence [
2] (note that villous features were nearly statistically significant). Furthermore, our multivariate analysis also revealed that age, 2 metabolic factors (elevated BMI, increased FBG) and adenomas in the right-sided colon at the initial colonoscopy were associated with an increased risk of colorectal adenoma recurrence.
Age and gender have been reported as risk factors for the prevalence of colorectal tumors [
1]. Zauber et al. demonstrated that the presence of colorectal adenomas was higher in men and among elderly people [
3]. However, age and sex still remain controversial from the point of view of the risk of recurrence of adenomas [
2]. In our study, age was also identified as a risk factor of recurrence, while sex was not statistically significant for recurrence.
Among patients in whom colorectal adenomas were removed at the time of the initial colonoscopy, the estimated recurrence rate at surveillance colonoscopy performed within 3–4 years has been reported as 15–60% [
16,
17]. In Japan, Yamaji et al. estimated a colorectal tumor recurrence rate of 7.2% per year in cases with no initial tumors, 19.3% per year in those with small adenomas, and 22.9% per year in those with advanced lesions [
18]. In our study, the recurrence rate during a 2-year follow-up period after the initial screening colonoscopy was 42.4%, being largely consistent with previous reports.
At the time of surveillance colonoscopy, it is often difficult to differentiate between actual recurrence and detection of an adenoma missed in the earlier examination. On the other hand, from the clinical standpoint, strict differentiation between the two is not always necessary. Irrespective of whether the lesions identified on surveillance colonoscopy are recurrent or missed lesions, the lesions need to be removed. In our study, the recurrence rate at the 1-year surveillance colonoscopy was 28.2%, while that at the 2-year surveillance colonoscopy was 14.2%. This is possibly because of a substantial reduction of the miss rate resulting from the 2-year surveillance colonoscopy having been conducted after 2 earlier colonoscopies (initial and at 1 year). For the same reason, the recurrence rate at the 2-year surveillance colonoscopy (14.2%) is more likely to be closer to the actual recurrence rate per year. This rate is largely consistent with the rate reported by Yamaji et al. [
18]. Furthermore, the difference in the recurrence rate between the 1-year and 2-year follow-up colonoscopies was 14.0% (=28.2%–14.2%), which may correspond to the miss rate of detection. Rex et al. reported that the miss rate for adenomas ≥10 mm in diameter was 6%, for adenomas 6–9 mm in diameter was 13%, and for adenomas ≤5 mm in diameter was 27% [
19]. Pickhardt et al. reported from their virtual colonoscopy study that conventional colonoscopy failed to detect 12% of lesions ≥10 mm in diameter [
20]. Our results were consistent with these miss rates.
The main pathophysiological abnormality associated with increased levels of metabolic factors is visceral fat deposition. Visceral fat deposition is known to be associated with insulin resistance, hyperinsulinemia and high levels of IGF I, which are thought to influence carcinogenic processes by increasing the cell proliferative activities and reducing apoptosis [
8,
21]. Obesity-related inflammation and oxidative stress are also thought to increase the risk of development of colorectal tumors [
22]. Visceral adipose tissue is considered to be an endocrine tissue, as it releases some inflammatory cytokines such as C-reactive protein, tumor necrosis factor, interleukin-6, and some adipocytokines such as leptin and adiponectin [
23]. These cytokines and adipocytokines are considered to increase the risk of development, as well as the growth, of colorectal tumors. These may be the mechanisms underlying the reported increased prevalence of colorectal adenoma associated with metabolic factors. In this study, we demonstrated with the multivariate analysis that BMI was associated with the risk of recurrence of colorectal adenomas.
Diabetes mellitus is known to be associated with an increased prevalence of CRC [
4], although its association with the prevalence of colorectal adenomas has not yet been sufficiently investigated. Nevertheless, among patients with obesity, a strong correlation has been reported between the presence of adenomas and diabetes mellitus [
5]. Three factors, namely a present history of diabetes mellitus, FBG and HbA1c, had collinearity. In our study, FBG was used in the multivariate analysis, because its odds ratio was maximum in the univariate analysis among these 3 factors. FBG then remained as a statistically significant risk factor of colorectal adenoma recurrence in the multivariate analysis.
Some studies have reported that metabolic factors may be strongly associated with the presence of adenomas in the right-sided colon and multiple (three or more) adenomas [
8,
24]. On the other hand, screening colonoscopy has been found to confer less protection against future development of CRC in the case of right-sided than left-sided adenomas [
16,
25]. Poorer preparation and a more unfavorable anatomic configuration of the right-sided colon compromising the visibility of lesions are possible reasons for the higher miss rates of adenomas in the right-sided colon than in the left-sided colon [
16]. In our study, location of the largest adenoma in the right-sided colon was also identified as a risk factor for recurrence. Therefore, endoscopists should pay particular attention to the right side of the colon, both at the time of the initial screening colonoscopy and at the time of the surveillance colonoscopy. It must be emphasized here that sigmoidoscopy is not adequate for surveillance after removal of adenomas.
Our study demonstrated that the higher the risk score, the higher the recurrence rate. ROC analysis revealed 3 as the optimal cutoff value as the risk score for predicting the risk of colorectal adenoma recurrence during the 2-year period from the initial colonoscopy, as it was associated with a very high AUROC and sensitivity. In those cases where the risk score was ≥3 points (3–10 points), the 2-year colorectal adenoma recurrence rate was calculated to be 59.8% (sensitivity 83.2%). Therefore, surveillance colonoscopy within 2 years may be a safe option for these patients.
Our study had some limitations. We were unable to obtain any waist circumference data. so it was impossible to analyze the association between the presence/absence of metabolic syndrome and colorectal adenoma recurrence.
Recently, colonoscopic quality indicators such as adenoma detection rates, withdrawal time and cecal intubation time are proposed. But these data couldn’t be obtained from medical records retrospectively. Each 5 hospitals conduct 2000–6000 colonoscopies per year, and all of colonoscopists in 5 hospitals were certified from Japan gastroenterological endoscopy society. Then, recurrence rate of adenoma of 5 hospitals ranged from 40.6% to 43.7% (p = 0.9766). There were no significant differences in recurrence rate between 5 hospitals. So, the bias according to the colonoscopists guess to be small.
Most of the participants of this study were followed up for only 2 years after the initial screening colonoscopy; and only a few patients were followed up for 3 years or more. Therefore, we could not collect the 3-year surveillance data.
A recent study has suggested that the use of aspirin or NSAIDs may be associated with a reduced prevalence of adenomas, and probably cancer [
26]. However, among the participants who were eligible for analysis in this study, only 31 were taking aspirin/NSAIDs, and they were excluded from this study because the sample size was too small to allow reasonable analysis.
Family history of CRC has been reported as a risk factor for colorectal adenoma recurrence [
2]. However, according to the medical records, the number of patients with a family history of CRC among the eligible participants was insufficient to allow reliable statistical analysis. Therefore, we did not include this factor in the analyses in our study.
Further prospective studies using larger sample sizes may be warranted to determine the risk of colorectal adenoma recurrence at 3 years or later after screening colonoscopy, as well as that associated with the above factors.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Authors’ contributions
TU, EU, SU, FJ, JH, HN, NM, have made substantial contributions to acquisition of data. YK participated in the design of the study and performed the statistical analysis. LT, TH, HK, YH, HE, HT, AN conceived of the study, and participated in its design and coordination. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.