Clinical implications of low grade dysplasia found during inflammatory bowel disease surveillance: a retrospective study comparing chromoendoscopy and white-light endoscopy
Joren R. ten Hove
1
Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
,
Erik Mooiweer
1
Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
,
Andrea E. van der Meulen de Jong
2
Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
,
Evelien Dekker
3
Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
,
Cyriel Y. Ponsioen
3
Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
,
Peter D. Siersema
1
Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
4
Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Radboud University Medical Center, Utrecht, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
,
Bas Oldenburg
1
Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
Background and study aims Current guidelines recommend the use of pancolonic chromoendoscopy for surveillance of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). It is currently unknown whether low grade dysplasia (LGD) found using chromoendoscopy carries a similar risk of high grade dysplasia (HGD) or colorectal cancer (CRC) compared with LGD detected using white-light endoscopy (WLE). The aim of this study was to compare the risk of advanced neoplasia, a combined endpoint of HGD and CRC, during follow-up after detection of lesions containing LGD identified with either chromoendoscopy or WLE.
Patients and methods A retrospective cohort was established to identify patients who underwent IBD surveillance for ulcerative colitis or colonic Crohn’s disease between 2000 and 2014. Subgroups were identified, based on the endoscopic technique (standard definition resolution WLE, high definition resolution WLE or chromoendoscopy). LGD detected in random biopsies was considered invisible LGD. Patients were followed until detection of advanced neoplasia, colectomy, death, or the last known surveillance colonoscopy.
Results Of 1065 patients undergoing IBD surveillance, 159 patients underwent follow-up for LGD, which was visible in 133 cases and invisible in 26 cases. On follow-up, five cases of HGD and five cases of CRC were detected. The overall incidence rate of advanced neoplasia was 1.34 per 100 patient-years with a median follow-up of 4.7 years and a median time to advanced neoplasia of 3.3 years. There were no significant differences in the incidence of advanced neoplasia between chromoendoscopy-detected and WLE-detected LGD.
Conclusion Advanced neoplasia was found to develop infrequently after detection of LGD in patients undergoing endoscopic surveillance for IBD. LGD lesions detected with either chromoendoscopy or WLE carry similar risks of advanced neoplasia over time.
References
1
Bernstein CN,
Blanchard JF,
Kliewer E.
et al. Cancer risk in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a population-based study. Cancer 2001; 91: 854-862
2
Soetikno RM,
Lin OS,
Heidenreich PA.
et al. Increased risk of colorectal neoplasia in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis and ulcerative colitis: a meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2002; 56: 48-54
3
Choi C-HR,
Rutter MD,
Askari A.
et al. Forty-year analysis of colonoscopic surveillance program for neoplasia in ulcerative colitis: an updated overview. Am J Gastroenterol 2015; 110: 1022-1034
4
Lutgens MWMD,
van Oijen MGH,
van der Heijden GJMG.
et al. Declining risk of colorectal cancer in inflammatory bowel disease: an updated meta-analysis of population-based cohort studies. Inflamm Bowel Dis 19: 789-799
5
Jess T,
Simonsen J,
Jørgensen KT.
et al. Decreasing risk of colorectal cancer in patients with inflammatory bowel disease over 30 years. Gastroenterology 2012; 143: 375-381.e1 ; quiz e13–e14
9
Cairns SR,
Scholefield JH,
Steele RJ.
et al. Guidelines for colorectal cancer screening and surveillance in moderate and high risk groups (update from 2002). Gut 2010; 59: 666-689
10
Marion JF,
Waye JD,
Israel Y.
et al. Chromoendoscopy is more effective than standard colonoscopy in detecting dysplasia during long-term surveillance of patients with colitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2016; 14: 713-719
11
Subramanian V,
Mannath J,
Ragunath K.
et al. Meta-analysis: the diagnostic yield of chromoendoscopy for detecting dysplasia in patients with colonic inflammatory bowel disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2011; 33: 304-312
12
Kiesslich R,
Fritsch J,
Holtmann M.
et al. Methylene blue-aided chromoendoscopy for the detection of intraepithelial neoplasia and colon cancer in ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology 2003; 124: 880-888
13
Mooiweer E,
van der Meulen-de Jong AE,
Ponsioen CY.
et al. Chromoendoscopy for surveillance in inflammatory bowel disease does not increase neoplasia detection compared with conventional colonoscopy with random biopsies: results from a large retrospective study. Am J Gastroenterol 2015; 110: 1014-1021
14
Venkatesh PGK,
Jegadeesan R,
Gutierrez NG.
et al. Natural history of low grade dysplasia in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis and ulcerative colitis. J Crohn’s Colitis 2013; 7: 968-973
15
Zisman TL,
Bronner MP,
Rulyak S.
et al. Prospective study of the progression of low-grade dysplasia in ulcerative colitis using current cancer surveillance guidelines. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2012; 18: 2240-2246
16
Thomas T,
Abrams KA,
Robinson RJ.
et al. Meta-analysis: cancer risk of low-grade dysplasia in chronic ulcerative colitis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2007; 25: 657-668
17
Navaneethan U,
Jegadeesan R,
Gutierrez NG.
et al. Progression of low-grade dysplasia to advanced neoplasia based on the location and morphology of dysplasia in ulcerative colitis patients with extensive colitis under colonoscopic surveillance. J Crohns Colitis 2013; 7: e684-e691
18
Choi C-HR,
Ignjatovic-Wilson A,
Askari A.
et al. Low-grade dysplasia in ulcerative colitis: risk factors for developing high-grade dysplasia or colorectal cancer. Am J Gastroenterol 2015; 110: 1461-1471
19
Wanders LK,
Dekker E,
Pullens B.
et al. Cancer risk after resection of polypoid dysplasia in patients with longstanding ulcerative colitis: a meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2014; 12: 756-764
20
Goldstone R,
Itzkowitz S,
Harpaz N.
et al. Progression of low-grade dysplasia in ulcerative colitis: effect of colonic location. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 74: 1087-1093
21
Lai KK,
Horvath B,
Xie H.
et al. Risk for colorectal neoplasia in patients with inflammatory bowel disease and mucosa indefinite for dysplasia. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2015; 21: 378-384
22
Van Schaik FDM,
ten Kate FJW,
Offerhaus GJA.
et al. Misclassification of dysplasia in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: consequences for progression rates to advanced neoplasia. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2011; 17: 1108-1116
23
Marion JF,
Sands BE.
The SCENIC consensus statement on surveillance and management of dysplasia in inflammatory bowel disease: praise and words of caution. Gastroenterology 2015; 148: 462-467
24
Leedham SJ,
Graham TA,
Oukrif D.
et al. Clonality, founder mutations, and field cancerization in human ulcerative colitis-associated neoplasia. Gastroenterology 2009; 136: 542-550
27
Blackstone MO,
Riddell RH,
Rogers BH.
et al. Dysplasia-associated lesion or mass (DALM) detected by colonoscopy in long-standing ulcerative colitis: an indication for colectomy. Gastroenterology 1981; 80: 366-374
28
Mooiweer E,
van der Meulen-de Jong AE,
Ponsioen CY.
et al. Incidence of interval colorectal cancer among inflammatory bowel disease patients undergoing regular colonoscopic surveillance. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2015; 13: 1656-1661