Results of Repeat Sigmoidoscopy 3 Years After a Negative Examination | Cancer Screening, Prevention, Control | JAMA | JAMA Network
[Skip to Navigation]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
Winawer  S, Fletcher  R, Rex  D,  et al.  Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance: clinical guidelines and rationale: update based on new evidence.  Gastroenterology. 2003;124:544-560. PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Selby  JV, Friedman  GD, Quesenberry  CP, Weiss  NS.  A case-control study of screening sigmoidoscopy and mortality from colorectal cancer.  N Engl J Med. 1992;326:653-657. PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Muller  AD, Sonnenberg  A.  Prevention of colorectal cancer by flexible endoscopy and polypectomy: a case-control study of 32,702 veterans.  Ann Intern Med. 1995;123:904-910. PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Muller  AD, Sonnenberg  A.  Protection by endoscopy against death from colorectal cancer: a case-control study among veterans.  Arch Intern Med. 1995;155:1741-1748. PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Smith  RA, von Eschenbach  AC, Wender  R,  et al.  American Cancer Society guidelines for the early detection of cancer: update of early detection guidelines for prostate, colorectal, and endometrial cancers  CA Cancer J Clin. 2001;51:38-75. [published correction appears in CA Cancer J Clin. 2001;51:150]. PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Rex  DK, Lehman  GA, Ulbright  TM, Smith  JJ, Hawes  RH.  The yield of a second screening flexible sigmoidoscopy in average-risk persons after one negative examination.  Gastroenterology. 1994;106:593-595. PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Riff  ER, Dehaan  K, Garewal  GS.  The role of sigmoidoscopy for asymptomatic patients: results of three annual screening sigmoidoscopies, polypectomy, and subsequent surveillance colonoscopy in a primary-care setting.  Cleve Clin J Med. 1990;57:131-136. PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Brint  SL, DiPalma  JA, Herrera  JL.  Colorectal cancer screening: is one-year surveillance sigmoidoscopy necessary?  Am J Gastroenterol. 1993;88:2019-2021. PubMedGoogle Scholar
Krevsky  B, Fisher  RS.  Yield of rescreening for colonic polyps using flexible sigmoidoscopy.  Am J Gastroenterol. 1994;89:1165-1168. PubMedGoogle Scholar
Maule  WF.  Screening for colorectal cancer by nurse endoscopists.  N Engl J Med. 1994;330:183-187. PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Schoen  RE.  Surveillance after positive and negative colonoscopy examinations: issues, yields, and use.  Am J Gastroenterol. 2003;98:1237-1246.Google ScholarCrossref
Rex  DK, Cummings  OW, Helper  DJ,  et al.  5-year incidence of adenomas after negative colonoscopy in asymptomatic average-risk persons.  Gastroenterology. 1996;111:1178-1181. PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Squillace  S, Berggreen  P, Jaffe  P,  et al.  A normal initial colonoscopy after age 50 does not predict a polyp-free status for life.  Am J Gastroenterol. 1994;89:1156-1159. PubMedGoogle Scholar
Neugut  AI, Jacobson  JS, Ahsan  H,  et al.  Incidence and recurrence rates of colorectal adenomas: a prospective study.  Gastroenterology. 1995;108:402-408. PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Hixson  LJ, Fennerty  MB, Sampliner  RE, Garewal  HS.  Prospective blinded trial of the colonoscopic miss-rate of large colorectal polyps.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1991;37:125-127. PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Rex  DK, Cutler  CS, Lemmel  GT,  et al.  Colonoscopic miss rates of adenomas determined by back-to-back colonoscopies.  Gastroenterology. 1997;112:24-28. PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Prorok  PC, Andriole  GL, Bresalier  RS,  et al.  Design of the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial.  Control Clin Trials. 2000;21(6 suppl):273S-309S.Google ScholarCrossref
Weissfeld  JL, Ling  BS, Schoen  RE,  et al.  Adherence to repeat screening flexible sigmoidoscopy in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial.  Cancer. 2002;94:2569-2576. PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Schoen  RE, Weissfeld  JL, Bowen  NJ, Switzer  G, Baum  A.  Patient satisfaction with screening flexible sigmoidoscopy.  Arch Intern Med. 2000;160:1790-1796. PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Bresalier  RS, Pinsky  PF, Weissfeld  JL,  et al.  Effectiveness of nurse endoscopists in the prostate, lung, colorectal, and ovarian (PLCO) cancer screening trial [abstract].  Gastroenterology. 2002;122:T1552.Google ScholarCrossref
Lieberman  DA, Weiss  DG, Bond  JH, Ahnen  DJ, Garewal  H, Chejfec  G.  Use of colonoscopy to screen asymptomatic adults for colorectal cancer: Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study Group 380.  N Engl J Med. 2000;343:162-168. PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Imperiale  TF, Wagner  DR, Lin  CY, Larkin  GN, Rogge  JD, Ransohoff  DF.  Risk of advanced proximal neoplasms in asymptomatic adults according to the distal colorectal findings.  N Engl J Med. 2000;343:169-174. PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Marshall  JR, Fay  D, Lance  P.  Potential costs of flexible sigmoidoscopy-based colorectal cancer screening.  Gastroenterology. 1996;111:1411-1417. PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Rex  DK, Johnson  DA, Lieberman  DA, Burt  RW, Sonnenberg  A.  Colorectal cancer prevention 2000: screening recommendations of the American College of Gastroenterology.  Am J Gastroenterol. 2000;95:868-877. PubMedGoogle Scholar
Cooper  GS, Yuan  Z, Landefeld  CS, Johanson  JF, Rimm  AA.  A national population-based study of incidence of colorectal cancer and age: implications for screening in older Americans.  Cancer. 1995;75:775-781. PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Slattery  ML, Friedman  GD, Potter  JD, Edwards  S, Caan  BJ, Samowitz  W.  A description of age, sex, and site distributions of colon carcinoma in three geographic areas.  Cancer. 1996;78:1666-1670. PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Traverso  G, Shuber  A, Levin  B,  et al.  Detection of APC mutations in fecal DNA from patients with colorectal tumors.  N Engl J Med. 2002;346:311-320. PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Dong  SM, Traverso  G, Johnson  C,  et al.  Detecting colorectal cancer in stool with the use of multiple genetic targets.  J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001;93:858-865. PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Fenlon  HM, Nunes  DP, Schroy  PC, Barish  MA, Clarke  PD, Ferrucci  JT.  A comparison of virtual and conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps.  N Engl J Med. 1999;341:1496-1503. PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Simpson  NK, Johnson  CC, Ogden  SL,  et al.  Recruitment strategies in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial: the first six years.  Control Clin Trials. 2000;21(6 suppl):356S-378S.Google ScholarCrossref
Pinsky  PF, Schoen  RE, Weissfeld  JL, Bresalier  RS, Hayes  RB, Gohagan  JK.  Predictors of advanced proximal neoplasia in persons with abnormal screening flexible sigmoidoscopy.  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2003;1:103-110.Google ScholarCrossref
Atkin  WS, Cook  CF, Patel  R.  Variability in yield of neoplasia in average risk individuals undergoing flexible sigmoidoscopy screening [abstract].  Gastroenterology. 2001;120:A66.Google ScholarCrossref
Rex  DK.  Screening for colorectal cancer and polyps in average-risk patients.  In: Schapiro  M, Lehman  GA, eds.  Flexible Sigmoidoscopy. Baltimore, Md: Williams & Wilkins; 1990:185-196.Google Scholar
Schoenfeld  P, Lipscomb  S, Crook  J,  et al.  Accuracy of polyp detection by gastroenterologists and nurse endoscopists during flexible sigmoidoscopy: a randomized trial.  Gastroenterology. 1999;117:312-318. PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Original Contribution
July 2, 2003

Results of Repeat Sigmoidoscopy 3 Years After a Negative Examination

Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Departments of Medicine and Epidemiology and the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pa (Drs Schoen and Weissfeld); Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (Drs Pinsky, Prorok, and Gohagan); Division of Gastrointestinal Medicine and Nutrition, M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (Dr Bresalier); and Division of Environmental and Occupational Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis (Dr Church).

JAMA. 2003;290(1):41-48. doi:10.1001/jama.290.1.41a

Context  The necessary frequency of endoscopic colorectal cancer screening after a negative examination is uncertain.

Objective  To examine the yield of adenomas and cancer in the distal colon found by repeat flexible sigmoidoscopy (FSG) 3 years after a negative examination.

Design, Setting, and Participants  Participants were drawn from the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial (PLCO), a randomized, controlled community-based study of cancer screening. The mean (SD) age was 65.7 (4.0) years at study entry (1993-1995) and 61.6% were men. Individuals underwent screening FSG at baseline and at 3 years as part of the protocol and were referred to their personal physicians for further evaluation of screen-detected abnormalities. Results from subsequent diagnostic evaluations were tracked in a standardized fashion. Of 11 583 eligible for repeat screening FSG 3 years after an initial negative examination, 9317 (80.4%) returned.

Main Outcome Measures  Polyp or mass detection in distal colon at year 3 repeat FSG; incidence of adenoma or cancer in distal colon at year 3 examination; determination of reason for detection (increased depth of insertion or improved preparation at the year 3 examination or detection in a previously examined area).

Results  A total of 1292 returning participants (13.9%) had a polyp or mass detected by FSG 3 years after the initial examination. In the distal colon, 3.1% (292/9317) were found to have an adenoma or cancer. The incidence of advanced adenoma (n = 72) or cancer (n = 6) in the distal colon was 78 (0.8%) of 9317. Of individuals with advanced distal adenomas detected at the year 3 examination, 80.6% (58/72) had lesions found in a portion of the colon that had been adequately examined at the initial sigmoidoscopy.

Conclusions  Repeat FSG 3 years after a negative examination will detect advanced adenomas and distal colon cancer. Although the overall percentage with detected abnormalities is modest, these data raise concern about the impact of a prolonged screening interval after a negative examination.