Faculty Bibliography

Several bacterial taxa enriched in inflammatory bowel diseases and colorectal cancer (CRC) are found in the oral cavity. We conducted a pilot study nested within a six-week aspirin intervention in a randomized placebo-controlled trial to test their response to aspirin intervention. Fifty healthy subjects, 50-75 years old, were randomized to receive 325 mg aspirin (n = 30) or placebo (n = 20) orally once daily for six weeks. Oral tongue swabs were collected at baseline and week six. We estimated the association between aspirin use and the temporal changes in the relative abundance of pre-specified genus level taxa from pre- to post-treatment. The temporal change in relative abundance differed for eight genus level taxa between the aspirin and placebo groups. In the aspirin group, there were significant increases in the relative abundances of Neisseria, Streptococcus, Actinomyces, and Rothia and significant decreases in Prevotella, Veillonella, Fusobacterium, and Porphyromonas relative to placebo. The log ratio of Neisseria to Fusobacterium declined more in the aspirin group than placebo, signaling a potential marker associated with aspirin intervention. These preliminary findings should be validated using metagenomic sequencing and may guide future studies on the role of aspirin on taxa in various oral ecological niches.

BACKGROUND/AIMS/UNASSIGNED:Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is routinely performed for small colorectal polyps (≤10 mm). However, challenges include insufficient resection depth and immediate bleeding, hindering precise pathological evaluation. We aimed to compare the outcomes of cold endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR) with that of CSP for colorectal polyps ≤10 mm, using data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS/UNASSIGNED:Multiple databases were searched in December 2023 for RCTs reporting outcomes of CSP versus CEMR for colorectal polyps ≤10 mm in size. Our primary outcomes were rates of complete and en-bloc resections, while our secondary outcomes were total resection time (seconds) and adverse events, including immediate bleeding, delayed bleeding, and perforation. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:The complete resection rates did not significantly differ (CSP, 91.8% vs. CEMR 94.6%), nor did the rates of en-bloc resection (CSP, 98.9% vs. CEMR, 98.3%) or incomplete resection (CSP, 6.7% vs. CEMR, 4.8%). Adverse event rates were similarly insignificant in variance. However, CEMR had a notably longer mean resection time (133.51 vs. 91.30 seconds). CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Our meta-analysis of seven RCTs showed that while both CSP and CEMR are equally safe and effective for resecting small (≤10 mm) colorectal polyps, the latter is associated with a longer resection time.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS/OBJECTIVE:Computer-aided detection (CADe) devices have been shown to increase adenoma detection rates and adenomas per colonoscopy compared to standard colonoscopies. Questions remain about whether CADe colonoscopies are mainly increasing the detection of small, nonneoplastic lesions or if they are detecting more pathologically meaningful polyps. In this analysis, we compare the true histology rate (defined as polyps with confirmation of clinically relevant histopathology) of CADe-identified polyps with polyps identified during standard colonoscopies. METHODS:Using data from the SKOUT trial, we compared the true histology rate (THR) between CADe and standard colonoscopies. We also conducted a subgroup analysis by patient, procedural, and endoscopist factors. To account for multiple testing of comparisons, we used the false discovery rate. RESULTS:A total of 1423 participants were included (CADe, n = 714; standard, n = 709). Overall, THR was similar between the CADe and standard colonoscopy arms for adenomas, sessile serrated lesions, and large hyperplastic polyps. Higher THR with CADe colonoscopy was observed in some subgroups for adenomas. Endoscopists with 11 to 20 years of experience and procedures occurring after 12 pm had significantly higher adenoma THRs in the CADe cohort. Patients younger than 65 years, male patients, and procedures with a withdrawal time of ≥8 minutes had borderline significance in the CADe device adenoma THR subgroup. CONCLUSIONS:CADe colonoscopies may hold the key to improving endoscopic quality measures, provided that the polyps identified by the CADe device are those of clinical relevance. Although the benefit and significance in the CADe group were demonstrated in this analysis, further research is warranted to ensure that the true histology is maintained when applied in real-world applications.

Introduction: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths for the overall US population, with over 153,000 new cases annually. It is one the most diagnosed cancers in veterans and accounts for approximately 9 "‹% of all cancers in this population. Methods: This cross-sectional study used weighted data from the BRFSS 2021, a nationally representative US-telephone-based survey. We assessed the rate of endoscopic and stool-based colorectal cancer screening done in the VP compared to the NVP, stratified by age of screening, insurance, health status, primary care and marital status. We used backward stepwise multivariate logistic regression analyses to then assess for potentially predictive factors. Results: A total of 117,227,096 adults were included in the study of which 11.64 "‹% were veterans. We found that a higher proportion of veterans (78.44 "‹%) had endoscopic CRC screening compared to non-veterans (68.62 "‹%). VP were more likely to be screened compared to NVP (OR "‹= "‹1.32, (1.00"“1.74). Only 26.45 "‹% of VP in this study utilized military health coverage and are four-times likely to be screened (OR "‹= "‹3.64, (2.04"“6.52). Lastly, both VP and NVP who were actively followed by their primary care provider (OR "‹= "‹2.80, (2.02"“3.87) were more likely to be screened. Conclusion: A higher proportion of VP had endoscopic colorectal cancer screening, but a screening gap still exists. Active engagement with PCPs is associated with more frequent endoscopic CRC screening in veterans. We recommend more grassroots efforts to get veterans engaged with their PCPs to significantly improve screening coverage.