Colorectal cancer risk after removal of polyps in fecal immunochemical test based screening

Background Colonoscopy surveillance intervals are based on the predicted risk of metachronous colorectal cancer (CRC) after polyp removal. However, risk estimation per polyp subtype is difficult due to the fact that many patients have multiple polyps. To enable risk estimation per polyp subtypes we examined the metachronous CRC risk of subgroups based on presence or absence of co-occurring findings.Methods Using high-quality screening colonoscopies performed after a positive fecal immunochemical test between 2014 and 2020 within the Dutch CRC screening program, we applied Cox regression analysis to evaluate the association between findings at baseline colonoscopy and metachronous CRCs. For our primary outcome, we appointed each patient to unique subgroups based on removed polyp subtypes that were present or absent at baseline colonoscopy and used the groups without polyps as reference. High-risk subgroups were individuals with high-risk serrated polyps, defined as serrated polyp >10 mm, sessile serrated lesions with dysplasia, or traditional serrated adenomas, as well as high-risk adenomas, defined as adenoma >10 mm or containing high-grade dysplasia. Findings In total 253,833 colonoscopies were included. Over a median follow-up of 36 months (IQR, 21-57), we identified 504 metachronous CRCs. Hazard ratios for metachronous CRC was 1.70 (95% CI, 1.07-2.69) for individuals with high-risk serrated polyps without high-risk adenomas, 1.22 (0.96-1.55) for individuals with high-risk adenomas without high-risk serrated polyps, and 2.00 (1.19-3.39) for individuals with high-risk serrated polyps and high-risk adenomas, compared to patients without polyps.Interpretation Accounting for co-occurring findings, we observed an increased metachronous CRC risk for individuals that had high-risk serrated polyps with the presence of high-risk adenomas, or individuals with high-risk serrated polyps without high-risk adenomas. These findings could provide more evidence to support post-polypectomy surveillance guidelines.<br />Copyright & COPY; 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).