Made by DATEXIS (Data Science and Text-based Information Systems) at Beuth University of Applied Sciences Berlin
Deep Learning Technology: Sebastian Arnold, Betty van Aken, Paul Grundmann, Felix A. Gers and Alexander Löser. Learning Contextualized Document Representations for Healthcare Answer Retrieval. The Web Conference 2020 (WWW'20)
Funded by The Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy; Grant: 01MD19013D, Smart-MD Project, Digital Technologies
In the United States screening is typically recommended between the age of 50 and 75 years. For those between 76 and 85 years of age the decision to screen should be individualized. A number of screening methods can be used including stool based tests every 3 years, sigmoidoscopy every 5 years and colonoscopy every 10 years. For those at high risk, screenings usually begin at around 40. It is unclear which of these two methods is better. Colonoscopy may find more cancers in the first part of the colon but is associated with greater cost and more complications. For people with average risk who have had a high-quality colonoscopy with normal results, the American Gastroenterological Association does not recommend any type of screening in the 10 years following the colonoscopy. For people over 75 or those with a life expectancy of less than 10 years, screening is not recommended. It takes about 10 years after screening for one out of a 1000 people to benefit.
In Canada, among those 50 to 75 at normal risk, fecal immunochemical testing or FOBT is recommended every two years or sigmoidoscopy every 10 years. Colonoscopy is less preferred.
Some countries have national colorectal screening programs which offer FOBT screening for all adults within a certain age group, typically starting between age 50 and 60. Examples of countries with organised screening include the United Kingdom, Australia and the Netherlands.
Aspirin and celecoxib appear to decrease the risk of colorectal cancer in those at high risk. Aspirin is recommended in those who are 50 to 60 years old, do not have an increased risk of bleeding, and are at risk for cardiovascular disease to prevent colorectal cancer. It is not recommended in those at average risk. There is tentative evidence for calcium supplementation, but it is not sufficient to make a recommendation. Vitamin D intake and blood levels are associated with a lower risk of colon cancer.
An important anatomic landmark in anal cancer is the pectinate line (dentate line), which is located about 1–2 cm from the anal verge (where the anal mucosa of the anal canal becomes skin). Anal cancers located above this line (towards the head) are more likely to be carcinomas, whilst those located below (towards the feet) are more likely to be squamous cell carcinomas that may ulcerate. Anal cancer is strongly associated with ulcerative colitis and the sexually transmissible infections HPV and HIV. Anal cancer may be a cause of constipation or tenesmus, or may be felt as a palpable mass, although it may occasionally present as an ulcerative form.
Anal cancer is investigated by biopsy and may be treated by excision and radiotherapy, or with external beam radiotherapy and adjunctive chemotherapy. The five-year survival rate with the latter procedure is above 70%.
Colorectal cancer is a disease of old age: It typically originates in the secretory cells lining the gut, and risk factors include diets low in vegetable fibre and high in fat. If a younger person gets such a cancer, it is often associated with hereditary syndromes like Peutz-Jegher's, hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer or familial adenomatous polyposis. Colorectal cancer can be detected through the bleeding of a polyp, colicky bowel pain, a bowel obstruction or the biopsy of a polyp at a screening colonoscopy. A constant feeling of having to go to the toilet or anemia might also point to this kind of cancer.
Use of a colonoscope can find these cancers, and a biopsy can reveal the extent of the involvement of the bowel wall. Removal of a section of the colon is necessary for treatment, with or without chemotherapy. Colorectal cancer has a comparatively good prognosis when detected early.
Screening methods for colon cancer depend on detecting either precancerous changes such as certain kinds of polyps or on finding early and thus more treatable cancer. The extent to which screening procedures reduce the incidence of gastrointestinal cancer or mortality depends on the rate of precancerous and cancerous disease in that population. gFOBT (guaiac fecal occult blood test) and flexible sigmoidoscopy screening have each shown benefit in randomized clinical trials. Evidence for other colon cancer screening tools such as iFOBT (immunochemical fecal occult blood test) or colonoscopy is substantial and guidelines have been issued by several advisory groups but does not include randomized studies.
In 2009 the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG) suggest that colon cancer screening modalities that are also directly preventive by removing precursor lesions should be given precedence, and prefer a colonoscopy every 10 years in average-risk individuals, beginning at age 50. The ACG suggests that cancer detection tests such as any type of FOB are an alternative that is less preferred, and if a colonoscopy is declined, the FIT (fecal immunochemical test, or iFOBT) should be offered instead. Two other recent guidelines, from the US Multisociety Task Force (MSTF) and the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), while permitting immediate colonoscopy as an option, did not categorize it as preferred. The ACG and MSTF also included CT colonography every five years, and fecal DNA testing as considerations. All three recommendation panels recommended replacing any older low-sensitivity, guaiac-based fecal occult blood testing (gFOBT) with either newer high-sensitivity guaiac-based fecal occult blood testing (hs gFOBT) or fecal immunochemical testing (FIT). MSTF looked at six studies that compared high sensitivity gFOBT (Hemoccult SENSA) to FIT, and concluded that there was no clear difference in overall performance between these methods.
The American College of Gastroenterology has recommended the abandoning of gFOBT testing as a colorectal cancer screening tool, in favor of the fecal immunochemical test. Though the FIT test is preferred, even the guaiac FOB testing of average risk populations may have been sufficient to reduce the mortality associated with colon cancer by about 25%. With this lower efficacy, it was not always cost effective to screen a large population with gFOBT.
If colon cancer is suspected in an individual (such as in someone with an unexplained anemia) fecal occult blood tests may not be clinically helpful. If a doctor suspects colon cancer, more rigorous investigation is necessary, whether or not the test is positive.
In 2006, the Australian Government introduced the National Bowel Cancer Program which has been updated several times since; targeted screening will be done of all Australians aged over 50 to 74 by 2017–2018. Cancer Council Australia recommended that FOBT should be done every two years. Gradually government fund disbursement meant that some people are not yet eligible for the national program and should pay for a FOBT by themselves.
The Canadian Cancer Society recommends that men and women age 50 and over have a FOBT at least every 2 years.
In colon cancer screening, using only one sample of feces collected by a doctor performing a digital rectal examination is discouraged.
The use of the M2-PK Test is encouraged over gFOBT for routine screening as it may pick up tumors that are both bleeding and non bleeding. It is able to pick up 80 percent of colorectal cancer and 44 percent for adenoma > 1 centimeter, while gFOBT picks up 13 to 50 percent of colorectal cancers.
Diet and lifestyle are believed to play a large role in whether colorectal polyps form. Studies show there to be a protective link between consumption of cooked green vegetables, brown rice, legumes, and dried fruit and decreased incidence of colorectal polyps.
Genetic testing for mutations in DNA mismatch repair genes is expensive and time-consuming, so researchers have proposed techniques for identifying cancer patients who are most likely to be HNPCC carriers as ideal candidates for genetic testing. The Amsterdam Criteria (see below) are useful, but do not identify up to 30% of potential Lynch syndrome carriers. In colon cancer patients, pathologists can measure microsatellite instability in colon tumor specimens, which is a surrogate marker for DNA mismatch repair gene dysfunction. If there is microsatellite instability identified, there is a higher likelihood for a Lynch syndrome diagnosis. Recently, researchers combined microsatellite instability (MSI) profiling and immunohistochemistry testing for DNA mismatch repair gene expression and identified an extra 32% of Lynch syndrome carriers who would have been missed on MSI profiling alone. Currently, this combined immunohistochemistry and MSI profiling strategy is the most advanced way of identifying candidates for genetic testing for the Lynch syndrome.
Genetic counseling and genetic testing are recommended for families that meet the Amsterdam criteria, preferably before the onset of colon cancer.
These aggressive tumors are generally diagnosed at advanced stages and survival is generally shorter. The prognosis of SRCC and its chemosensitivity with specific regimens are still controversial as SRCC is not specifically identified in most studies and its poor prognosis may be due to its more advanced stage. One study suggests that its dismal prognosis seems to be caused by its intrinsic tumor biology, suggesting an area for further research.
Resection is sometimes a part of a treatment plan, but duodenal cancer is difficult to remove surgically because of the area that it resides in—there are many blood vessels supplying the lower body. Chemotherapy is sometimes used to try to shrink the cancerous mass. Other times intestinal bypass surgery is tried to reroute the stomach to intestine connection around the blockage.
A 'Whipple' procedure is a type of surgery that is sometimes possible with this cancer. In this procedure, the duodenum, a portion of the Pancreas (the head), and the gall bladder are usually removed, the small intestine is brought up to the Pylorus (the valve at the bottom of the stomach) and the Liver and Pancreas digestive enzymes and bile are connected to the small intestine below the Pylorus.
The removal of part of the Pancreas often requires taking Pancreatic Enzyme supplements to aid digestion. These are available in the form of capsules by prescription.
It is not unusual for a patient having received a Whipple procedure to feel perfectly well, and to lead his/her normal life without difficulty.
It is important for the procedure to be performed by a surgeon with extensive experience having done and observed the procedure, as specific competence makes a big difference.
Some patients need to be fitted with tubes to either add nutrients (feeding tubes) or drainage tubes to remove excess processed food that can not pass the blockage.
The following are the Amsterdam criteria in identifying high-risk candidates for molecular genetic testing:
"Amsterdam Criteria (all bullet points must be fulfilled):"
- Three or more family members with a confirmed diagnosis of colorectal cancer, one of whom is a first degree (parent, child, sibling) relative of the other two
- Two successive affected generations
- One or more colon cancers diagnosed under age 50 years
- Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) has been excluded
"Amsterdam Criteria II (all bullet points must be fulfilled):"
- Three or more family members with HNPCC-related cancers, one of whom is a first-degree relative of the other two
- Two successive affected generations
- One or more of the HNPCC-related cancers diagnosed under age 50 years
- Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) has been excluded
Little research is conducted on these cancers due to their relative rarity when compared to the more common colorectal cancers. APC-min mice which carry a gene deficiency corresponding to that of humans with FAP also go on to develop small intestinal tumors, though humans do not.
Colorectal polyps can be detected using a faecal occult blood test, flexible sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, virtual colonoscopy, digital rectal examination, barium enema or a pill camera.
Malignant potential is associated with
- degree of dysplasia
- Type of polyp (e.g. villous adenoma):
- Tubular Adenoma: 5% risk of cancer
- Tubulovillous adenoma: 20% risk of cancer
- Villous adenoma: 40% risk of cancer
- Size of polyp:
- <1 cm =<1% risk of cancer
- 1 cm=10% risk of cancer
- 2 cm=15% risk of cancer
Normally an adenoma which is greater than 0.5 cm is treated
The cancerous mass tends to block food from getting to the small intestine. If food cannot get to the intestines, it will cause pain, acid reflux, and weight loss because the food cannot get to where it is supposed to be processed and absorbed by the body.
Patients with duodenal cancer may experience abdominal pain, weight loss, nausea, vomiting, and chronic GI bleeding.
An extensive literature has examined the clinical value of FOBT in iron deficiency anemia.
Monitoring involves the provision of outpatient colonoscopy, and occasionally upper gastric tract esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD, to search for premalignant gastric or duodenal tumors), typically once every 1–3 years, and/or a genetic blood test to definitively confirm or deny susceptibility. A small number of polyps can often be excised (removed) during the procedure, if found, but if there are more severe signs or numbers, in patient surgery may be required.
NCBI states that when an individual is identified as having FAP, or the mutations resulting in FAP: "It is appropriate to evaluate the parents of an affected individual (a) with molecular genetic testing of APC if the disease-causing mutation is known in the proband [person first identified with the condition] or (b) for clinical manifestations of APC-associated polyposis conditions".
Because of the way familial polyposis develops, it is possible to have the genetic condition, and therefore be at risk, but have no polyps or issues so far. Therefore, an individual may be diagnosed "at risk of" FAP, and require routine monitoring, but not (yet) actually have FAP (i.e., carries a defective gene but as yet appears not to have any actual medical issue as a result of this). Clinical management can cover several areas:
- Identifying those individuals who could be at risk of FAP: usually from family medical history or genetic testing
- Diagnosis (confirming whether they have FAP)—this can be done either by genetic testing, which is definitive, or by visually checking the intestinal tract itself.
- Screening / monitoring programs involve visually examining the intestinal tract to check its healthy condition. It is undertaken as a routine matter every few years where there is cause for concern, when either (a) a genetic test has confirmed the risk or (b) a genetic test has not been undertaken for any reason so the actual risk is unknown. Screening and monitoring allows polyposis to be detected visually before it can become life-threatening.
- Treatment, typically surgery of some kind, is involved if polyposis has led to a large number of polyps, or a significant risk of cancer, or actual cancer.
Primary signet-ring cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder is extremely rare and patient survival is very poor and occurs mainly in men ages 38 to 83. However, one such patient treated with a radical cystectomy followed by combined S-1 and Cisplatin adjuvant chemotherapy did demonstrate promising long-term survival of 90 months.
Multiple disorders are found in patients with radiation enteropathy, so guidance including an algorithmic approach to their investigation has been developed. This includes a holistic assessment with investigations including endoscopies, breath tests and other nutritional and gastrointestinal tests. Full investigation is important as many cancer survivors of radiation therapy develop other causes for their symptoms such as colonic polyps, diverticular disease or hemorrhoids.
After the initial diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus is rendered, affected persons undergo annual surveillance to detect changes that indicate higher risk to progression to cancer: development of epithelial dysplasia (or "intraepithelial neoplasia").
Considerable variability is seen in assessment for dysplasia among pathologists. Recently, gastroenterology and GI pathology societies have recommended that any diagnosis of high-grade dysplasia in Barrett be confirmed by at least two fellowship-trained GI pathologists prior to definitive treatment for patients. For more accuracy and reproductibility, it is also recommended to follow international classification system as the "Vienna classification" of gastrointestinal epithelial neoplasia (2000).
Risk factors for small intestine cancer include:
- Crohn's disease
- Celiac disease
- Radiation exposure
- Hereditary gastrointestinal cancer syndromes: familial adenomatous polyposis, hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer, Peutz-Jeghers syndrome
- Males are 25% more likely to develop the disease
Benign tumours and conditions that may be mistaken for cancer of the small bowel:
- Hamartoma
- Tuberculosis
Digestive system neoplasms are tumors which affect the digestive system. Types include:
- esophageal cancer
- gastric cancer
- small intestinal cancer
- colorectal cancer
- anal cancer
Surgical treatment remains the treatment of choice for cats and dogs diagnosed with intestinal tumors who are in otherwise good health.
The veterinarian will typically perform a series of tests such as blood tests and imaging studies. The most definitive way to confirm/rule out intestinal tumors is to perform a medical procedure called endoscopy to visualize the organ and do a tissue biopsy.
An increasing number of people are now surviving cancer, with improved treatments producing cure of the malignancy (cancer survivors). There are now over 14 million such people in the US, and this figure is expected to increase to 18 million by 2022. More than half are survivors of abdominal or pelvic cancers, with about 300,000 people receiving abdominal and pelvic radiation each year. It has been estimated there are 1.6 million people in the US with post-radiation intestinal dysfunction, a greater number than those with inflammatory bowel disease such as Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis.
The presence of goblet cells, called intestinal metaplasia, is necessary to make a diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus. This frequently occurs in the presence of other metaplastic columnar cells, but only the presence of goblet cells is diagnostic. The metaplasia is grossly visible through a gastroscope, but biopsy specimens must be examined under a microscope to determine whether cells are gastric or colonic in nature. Colonic metaplasia is usually identified by finding goblet cells in the epithelium and is necessary for the true diagnosis.
Many histologic mimics of Barrett's esophagus are known (i.e. goblet cells occurring in the transitional epithelium of normal esophageal submucosal gland ducts, "pseudogoblet cells" in which abundant foveolar [gastric] type mucin simulates the acid mucin true goblet cells). Assessment of relationship to submucosal glands and transitional-type epithelium with examination of multiple levels through the tissue may allow the pathologist to reliably distinguish between goblet cells of submucosal gland ducts and true Barrett's esophagus (specialized columnar metaplasia). Use of the histochemical stain Alcian blue pH 2.5 is also frequently used to distinguish true intestinal-type mucins from their histologic mimics. Recently, immunohistochemical analysis with antibodies to CDX-2 (specific for mid and hindgut intestinal derivation) has also been used to identify true intestinal-type metaplastic cells. The protein AGR2 is elevated in Barrett's esophagus and can be used as a biomarker for distinguishing Barrett epithelium from normal esophageal epithelium.
The presence of intestinal metaplasia in Barrett's esophagus represents a marker for the progression of metaplasia towards dysplasia and eventually adenocarcinoma. This factor combined with two different immunohistochemical expression of p53, Her2 and p16 leads to two different genetic pathways that likely progress to dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus.