Uri Ladabaum

The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy PIVI (Preservation and Incorporation of Valuable Endoscopic Innovations) on real-time endoscopic assessment of the histology of diminutive colorectal polyps

The PIVI (Preservation and Incorporation of Valuable endoscopic Innovations) initiative is an ASGE program whose objectives are to identify important clinical questions related to endoscopy and to establish a priori diagnostic and/or therapeutic thresholds for endoscopic technologies designed to resolve these clinical questions. Additionally, PIVIs may also outline the data and or the research study design required for proving an established threshold is met. Once endoscopic technologies meet an established PIVI threshold, those technologies are appropriate to incorporate into clinical practice presuming the appropriate training in that endoscopic technology has been achieved. The ASGE encourages and supports the appropriate use of technologies that meet its established PIVI thresholds. The PIVI initiative was developed primarily to direct endoscopic technology development toward resolving important clinical issues in endoscopy. The PIVI initiative is also designed to minimize the possibility that potentially valuable innovations are prematurely abandoned due to lack of utilization and to avoid widespread use of an endoscopic technology before clinical studies documenting their effectiveness have been performed. The following document, or PIVI, is one of a series of statements defining the diagnostic or therapeutic threshold that must be met for a technique or device to become considered appropriate for incorporation into clinical practice. It is also meant to serve as a guide for researchers or those seeking to develop technologies that are designed to improve digestive health outcomes. An ad hoc committee under the auspices of the existing ASGE Technology and Standards of Practice Committees Chairs develops PIVIs. An expert in the subject area chairs the PIVI, with additional committee members chosen for their individual expertise. In preparing this document, evidence-based methodology was employed, using a MEDLINE and PubMed literature search to identify pertinent clinical studies on the topic. PIVIs are ultimately submitted to the ASGE Governing Board for approval, as is done for all Technology and Standards of Practice documents. This document is provided solely for educational and informational purposes and to support incorporating these endoscopic technologies into clinical practice. It should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care.

Clinical Evaluation of a Multiple-Gene Sequencing Panel for Hereditary Cancer Risk Assessment

PURPOSE Multiple-gene sequencing is entering practice, but its clinical value is unknown. We evaluated the performance of a customized germline-DNA sequencing panel for cancer-risk assessment in a representative clinical sample. METHODS Patients referred for clinical BRCA1/2 testing from 2002 to 2012 were invited to donate a research blood sample. Samples were frozen at -80° C, and DNA was extracted from them after 1 to 10 years. The entire coding region, exon-intron boundaries, and all known pathogenic variants in other regions were sequenced for 42 genes that had cancer risk associations. Potentially actionable results were disclosed to participants. RESULTS In total, 198 women participated in the study: 174 had breast cancer and 57 carried germline BRCA1/2 mutations. BRCA1/2 analysis was fully concordant with prior testing. Sixteen pathogenic variants were identified in ATM, BLM, CDH1, CDKN2A, MUTYH, MLH1, NBN, PRSS1, and SLX4 among 141 women without BRCA1/2 mutations. Fourteen participants carried 15 pathogenic variants, warranting a possible change in care; they were invited for targeted screening recommendations, enabling early detection and removal of a tubular adenoma by colonoscopy. Participants carried an average of 2.1 variants of uncertain significance among 42 genes. CONCLUSION Among women testing negative for BRCA1/2 mutations, multiple-gene sequencing identified 16 potentially pathogenic mutations in other genes (11.4%; 95% CI, 7.0% to 17.7%), of which 15 (10.6%; 95% CI, 6.5% to 16.9%) prompted consideration of a change in care, enabling early detection of a precancerous colon polyp. Additional studies are required to quantify the penetrance of identified mutations and determine clinical utility. However, these results suggest that multiple-gene sequencing may benefit appropriately selected patients.

Strategies to Identify the Lynch Syndrome Among Patients With Colorectal Cancer: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

BACKGROUND Testing has been advocated for all persons with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer to identify families with the Lynch syndrome, an autosomal dominant cancer-predisposition syndrome that is a paradigm for personalized medicine. OBJECTIVE To estimate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of strategies to identify the Lynch syndrome, with attention to sex, age at screening, and differential effects for probands and relatives. DESIGN Markov model that incorporated risk for colorectal, endometrial, and ovarian cancers. DATA SOURCES Published literature. TARGET POPULATION All persons with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer and their relatives. TIME HORIZON Lifetime. PERSPECTIVE Third-party payer. INTERVENTION Strategies based on clinical criteria, prediction algorithms, tumor testing, or up-front germline mutation testing, followed by tailored screening and risk-reducing surgery. OUTCOME MEASURES Life-years, cancer cases and deaths, costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS The benefit of all strategies accrued primarily to relatives with a mutation associated with the Lynch syndrome, particularly women, whose life expectancy could increase by approximately 4 years with hysterectomy and salpingo-oophorectomy and adherence to colorectal cancer screening recommendations. At current rates of germline testing, screening, and prophylactic surgery, the strategies reduced deaths from colorectal cancer by 7% to 42% and deaths from endometrial and ovarian cancer by 1% to 6%. Among tumor-testing strategies, immunohistochemistry followed by BRAF mutation testing was preferred, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of

Obesity, Abdominal Obesity, Physical Activity, and Caloric Intake in US Adults: 1988 to 2010

36,200 per life-year gained. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS The number of relatives tested per proband was a critical determinant of both effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, with testing of 3 to 4 relatives required for most strategies to meet a threshold of

Trends in Colonoscopy for Colorectal Cancer Screening

50,000 per life-year gained. Immunohistochemistry followed by BRAF mutation testing was preferred in 59% of iterations in probabilistic sensitivity analysis at a threshold of

Colorectal neoplasia screening with virtual colonoscopy: when, at what cost, and with what national impact?

100,000 per life-year gained. Screening for the Lynch syndrome with immunohistochemistry followed by BRAF mutation testing only up to age 70 years cost

Barrett's Esophagus with High-Grade Dysplasia

44,000 per incremental life-year gained compared with screening only up to age 60 years, and screening without an upper age limit cost

Sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopy: new practices, new economics.

88,700 per incremental life-year gained compared with screening only up to age 70 years. LIMITATION Other types of cancer, uncertain family pedigrees, and genetic variants of unknown significance were not considered. CONCLUSION Widespread colorectal tumor testing to identify families with the Lynch syndrome could yield substantial benefits at acceptable costs, particularly for women with a mutation associated with the Lynch syndrome who begin regular screening and have risk-reducing surgery. The cost-effectiveness of such testing depends on the participation rate among relatives at risk for the Lynch syndrome. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE National Institutes of Health.

Serological testing for coeliac disease in patients with symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND Obesity and abdominal obesity are associated independently with morbidity and mortality. Physical activity attenuates these risks. We examined trends in obesity, abdominal obesity, physical activity, and caloric intake in US adults from 1988 to 2010. METHODS Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed using National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data. RESULTS Average body mass index (BMI) increased by 0.37% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.30-0.44) per year in both women and men. Average waist circumference increased by 0.37% (95% CI, 0.30-0.43) and 0.27% (95% CI, 0.22-0.32) per year in women and men, respectively. The prevalence of obesity and abdominal obesity increased substantially, as did the prevalence of abdominal obesity among overweight adults. Younger women experienced the greatest increases. The proportion of adults who reported no leisure-time physical activity increased from 19.1% (95% CI, 17.3-21.0) to 51.7% (95% CI, 48.9-54.5) in women, and from 11.4% (95% CI, 10.0-12.8) to 43.5% (95% CI, 40.7-46.3) in men. Average daily caloric intake did not change significantly. BMI and waist circumference trends were associated with physical activity level but not caloric intake. The associated changes in adjusted BMIs were 8.3% (95% CI, 6.9-9.6) higher among women and 1.7% (95% CI, 0.68-2.8) higher among men with no leisure-time physical activity compared with those with an ideal level of leisure-time physical activity. CONCLUSIONS Our analyses highlight important dimensions of the public health problem of obesity, including trends in younger women and in abdominal obesity, and lend support to the emphasis placed on physical activity by the Institute of Medicine.

Comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of screening colonoscopy vs. sigmoidoscopy and alternative strategies.

Background:A major health priority is to increase colorectal cancer screening, and colonoscopy has become an increasingly important method of screening. The Medicare program began coverage for colonoscopy for average risk individuals in 2001. Objectives:We sought to examine whether overall colorectal cancer screening increased over time and whether these increases were a result of increased utilization of all methods or a result of greater use of colonoscopy but reduced use of other methods, whether the enactment of Medicare coverage was associated with an increase in colonoscopy among Medicare enrollees, and whether these trends equally affected subpopulations. Methods:We used nationally representative data from the 2000 and 2003 National Health Interview Surveys and analyzed data using used χ2, difference-in-differences tests, and logistic regression analyses to examine whether screening rates differed between 2000 and 2003. Results:The percentage of individuals being screened for colorectal cancer using any method increased modestly from 2000 to 2003 (3%), with increases a result of increased use of colonoscopy and a reduction in the use of other methods. Increases in colonoscopy use were significant among all populations except the insured, non-Medicare population with low incomes. Among Medicare enrollees with high/middle incomes, colonoscopy use increased 14% from 2000 to 2003 compared with an increase of only 7% among low-income groups, which was a significant difference (P < 0.01). Similarly, among insured, non-Medicare enrollees with high/middle incomes, colonoscopy use increased 11% from 2000 to 2003 compared with an increase of only 4% among low-income groups, which also was a significant difference (P < 0.01). Conclusions:Colorectal cancer screening utilization increased modestly from 2000 to 2003, with the increases that primarily were the result of increased colonoscopy use. Increases in colonoscopy use, however, were primarily among high/middle income groups. Although Medicare coverage may have indirectly facilitated the increase in colonoscopy, we could not determine that coverage directly increased screening rates. Screening rates remain modest and lower income individuals continue to be screened less. Topics for future research include approaches to facilitating screening among low-income individuals and evaluating the impact of policy coverage decisions.