Family history and the natural history of colorectal cancer: systematic review

Henrikson, Nora B.; Webber, Elizabeth M.; Goddard, Katrina A.B.; Scrol, Aaron; Piper, Margaret; Williams, Marc S.; Zallen, Doris T.; Calonge, Ned; Ganiats, Théodore G.; Janssens, A. Cecile J.W.; Zauber, Ann G.; Lansdorp–Vogelaar, Iris; Ballegooijen, Marjolein van; Whitlock, Evelyn P

doi:10.1038/gim.2014.188

Cited by 134 publications

(113 citation statements)

References 57 publications

(131 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

107

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Nine percent of the patients studied had a familial history of cancer (7% of which reported a family history of grade I CRC; data not shown). This frequency is consistent with the overall rates reported in the literature concerning cancer in individuals with or without family history of CRC (Gallegos-Arreola et al, 2009;Henrikson et al, 2015). The body mass index (BMI) of most patients in this study was categorized as normal or underweight.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Association between TNF-α-308G>A and -238G>A gene polymorphisms and TNF-α serum levels in Mexican colorectal cancer patients

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. The objective of this study was to examine the association between TNF-α serum levels and -308G>A and -238G>A polymorphisms in the corresponding gene by comparing healthy subjects to colorectal cancer (CRC) patients from a Mexican population. Serum levels of TNF-α were found to significantly differ between CRC patients and controls (P = 0.001), but no relationship between the -308G>A and -238G>A polymorphisms and increased CRC risk was established (P > 0.05). However, an association between the -308G>A variant and disease became evident when the distribution of AA-GA genotypes was examined in patients with hematologic toxicity (neutropenia) and those without (odds ratio = 3.356, 95% confidence interval = 1.295-8.698, P = 0.013). The GG haplotype was more common in controls than CRC patients, with a frequency of 0.85 among the former, but this difference was not significant (P > 0.05). In conclusion, TNF-α serum levels and AA-AG genotypes of the TNF-α -308G>A polymorphism may significantly contribute to CRC susceptibility in the population examined in this investigation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Association between TNF-α-308G>A and -238G>A gene polymorphisms and TNF-α serum levels in Mexican colorectal cancer patients

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…7 The USPSTF did not specifically review the evidence on screening in populations at increased risk; however, other professional organizations recommend that patients with a family history of colorectal cancer (a first-degree relative with earlyonset colorectal cancer or multiple first-degree relatives with the disease) be screened more frequently starting at a younger age and with colonoscopy.…”

Section: Assessment Of Riskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Screening for Colorectal Cancer

Bibbins‐Domingo

Grossman

Curry

et al. 2016

JAMA

1,787

457

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

US Preventive Services Task Force T he US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) makes recommendations about the effectiveness of specific preventive care services for patients without obvious related signs or symptoms.It bases its recommendations on the evidence of both the benefits and harms of the service and an assessment of the balance. The USPSTF does not consider the costs of providing a service in this assessment.The USPSTF recognizes that clinical decisions involve more considerations than evidence alone. Clinicians should understand the evidence but individualize decision making to the specific patient or situation. Similarly, the USPSTF notes that policy and coverage decisions involve considerations in addition to the evidence of clinical benefits and harms. Summary of Recommendations and EvidenceThe USPSTF recommends screening for colorectal cancer starting at age 50 years and continuing until age 75 years (A recommendation) (Figure 1).The risks and benefits of different screening methods vary. See the Clinical Considerations section later in this article and the Table for details about screening strategies.The decision to screen for colorectal cancer in adults aged 76 to 85 years should be an individual one, taking into account the patient's overall health and prior screening history (C recommendation).• Adults in this age group who have never been screened for colorectal cancer are more likely to benefit. IMPORTANCE Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States. In 2016, an estimated 134 000 persons will be diagnosed with the disease, and about 49 000 will die from it. Colorectal cancer is most frequently diagnosed among adults aged 65 to 74 years; the median age at death from colorectal cancer is 73 years. OBJECTIVE To update the 2008 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on screening for colorectal cancer. EVIDENCE REVIEWThe USPSTF reviewed the evidence on the effectiveness of screening with colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, computed tomography colonography, the guaiac-based fecal occult blood test, the fecal immunochemical test, the multitargeted stool DNA test, and the methylated SEPT9 DNA test in reducing the incidence of and mortality from colorectal cancer or all-cause mortality; the harms of these screening tests; and the test performance characteristics of these tests for detecting adenomatous polyps, advanced adenomas based on size, or both, as well as colorectal cancer. The USPSTF also commissioned a comparative modeling study to provide information on optimal starting and stopping ages and screening intervals across the different available screening methods.FINDINGS The USPSTF concludes with high certainty that screening for colorectal cancer in average-risk, asymptomatic adults aged 50 to 75 years is of substantial net benefit. Multiple screening strategies are available to choose from, with different levels of evidence to support their effectiveness, as well as unique advantages and limitations, although there are no empirica...

show abstract

“…25 Individuals with a positive family history of CRC in their fourth and fifth decades were found to have higher relative risks than age-matched controls with the same positive family history, but with a later onset. 26 The risk of CRC was greater in relatives when index patients developed CRC before the age of 45 years (OR 3.87), 3 or the age of 60 years (hazard ratio 2.11). 27 For this reason, the American Cancer Society recommends that patients with a FDR diagnosed CRC less than 60 years should start CRC screening 10 years earlier than the general population.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%