Displaying publications 21 - 27 of 27 in total

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Wong MCS, Rerknimitr R, Lee Goh K, Matsuda T, Kim HS, Wu DC, et al.
    Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2021 01;19(1):119-127.e1.
    PMID: 31923642 DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2019.12.031
    BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients found to be at high risk of advanced proximal neoplasia (APN) after flexible sigmoidoscopy screening should be considered for colonoscopy examination. We developed and validated a scoring system to identify persons at risk for APN.

    METHODS: We collected data from 7954 asymptomatic subjects (age, 50-75 y) who received screening colonoscopy examinations at 14 sites in Asia. We randomly assigned 5303 subjects to the derivation cohort and the remaining 2651 to the validation cohort. We collected data from the derivation cohort on age, sex, family history of colorectal cancer, smoking, drinking, body mass index, medical conditions, and use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or aspirin. Associations between the colonoscopic findings of APN and each risk factor were examined using the Pearson χ2 test, and we assigned each participant a risk score (0-15), with scores of 0 to 3 as average risk and scores of 4 or higher as high risk. The scoring system was tested in the validation cohort. We used the Cochran-Armitage test of trend to compare the prevalence of APN among subjects in each group.

    RESULTS: In the validation cohort, 79.5% of patients were classified as average risk and 20.5% were classified as high risk. The prevalence of APN in the average-risk group was 1.9% and in the high-risk group was 9.4% (adjusted relative risk, 5.08; 95% CI, 3.38-7.62; P < .001). The score included age (61-70 y, 3; ≥70 y, 4), smoking habits (current/past, 2), family history of colorectal cancer (present in a first-degree relative, 2), and the presence of neoplasia in the distal colorectum (nonadvanced adenoma 5-9 mm, 2; advanced neoplasia, 7). The c-statistic of the score was 0.74 (95% CI, 0.68-0.79), and for distal findings alone was 0.67 (95% CI, 0.60-0.74). The Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test statistic was greater than 0.05, indicating the reliability of the validation set. The number needed to refer was 11 (95% CI, 10-13), and the number needed to screen was 15 (95% CI, 12-17).

    CONCLUSIONS: We developed and validated a scoring system to identify persons at risk for APN. Screening participants who undergo flexible sigmoidoscopy screening with a score of 4 points or higher should undergo colonoscopy evaluation.

  2. Singh R, Jayanna M, Wong J, Lim LG, Zhang J, Lv J, et al.
    Endosc Int Open, 2015 Feb;3(1):E14-8.
    PMID: 26134765 DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1377610
    The advent and utility of new endoscopic imaging modalities for predicting the histology of Barrett's esophagus (BE) in real time with high accuracy appear promising and could potentially obviate the need to perform random biopsies where guidelines are poorly adhered to. We embarked on evaluating the performance characteristics of white-light endoscopy with magnification (WLE-z), narrow-band imaging with magnification (NBI-z) and a combination of both modalities.
  3. Wong MC, Ching JY, Chiu HM, Wu KC, Rerknimitr R, Li J, et al.
    Am J Gastroenterol, 2016 11;111(11):1621-1629.
    PMID: 26977757 DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2016.52
    OBJECTIVES: We tested the hypothesis that the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC), advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACN), and colorectal adenoma among screening participants with different first-degree relatives (FDRs) affected by CRC was similar.

    METHODS: A multi-center, prospective colonoscopy study involving 16 Asia-Pacific regions was performed from 2008 to 2015. Consecutive self-referred CRC screening participants aged 40-70 years were recruited, and each subject received one direct optical colonoscopy. The prevalence of CRC, ACN, and colorectal adenoma was compared among subjects with different FDRs affected using Pearson's χ2 tests. Binary logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate the risk of these lesions, controlling for recognized risk factors including age, gender, smoking habits, alcohol drinking, body mass index, and the presence of diabetes mellitus.

    RESULTS: Among 11,797 asymptomatic subjects, the prevalence of CRC was 0.6% (none: 0.6%; siblings: 1.1%; mother: 0.5%; father: 1.2%; ≥2 members: 3.1%, P<0.001), that of ACN was 6.5% (none: 6.1%; siblings: 8.3%; mother: 7.7%; father: 8.7%; ≥2 members: 9.3%, P<0.001), and that of colorectal adenoma was 29.3% (none: 28.6%; siblings: 33.5%; mother: 31.8%; father: 31.1%; ≥2 members: 38.1%, P<0.001). In multivariate regression analyses, subjects with at least one FDR affected were significantly more likely to have CRC (adjusted odds ratio (AOR)=2.02-7.89), ACN (AOR=1.55-2.06), and colorectal adenoma (AOR=1.31-1.92) than those without a family history. The risk of CRC (AOR=0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34-2.35, P=0.830), ACN (AOR=1.07, 95% CI 0.75-1.52, P=0.714), and colorectal adenoma (AOR=0.96, 95% CI 0.78-1.19, P=0.718) in subjects with either parent affected was similar to that of subjects with their siblings affected.

    CONCLUSIONS: The risk of colorectal neoplasia was similar among subjects with different FDRs affected. These findings do not support the need to discriminate proband identity in screening participants with affected FDRs when their risks of colorectal neoplasia were estimated.

  4. Koo JH, Leong RW, Ching J, Yeoh KG, Wu DC, Murdani A, et al.
    Gastrointest Endosc, 2012 Jul;76(1):126-35.
    PMID: 22726471 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2012.03.168
    BACKGROUND: The rapid increase in the incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) in the Asia-Pacific region in the past decade has resulted in recommendations to implement mass CRC screening programs. However, the knowledge of screening and population screening behaviors between countries is largely lacking.
    OBJECTIVE: This multicenter, international study investigated the association of screening test participation with knowledge of, attitudes toward, and barriers to CRC and screening tests in different cultural and sociopolitical contexts.
    METHODS: Person-to-person interviews by using a standardized survey instrument were conducted with subjects from 14 Asia-Pacific countries/regions to assess the prevailing screening participation rates, knowledge of and attitudes toward and barriers to CRC and screening tests, intent to participate, and cues to action. Independent predictors of the primary endpoint, screening participation was determined from subanalyses performed for high-, medium-, and low-participation countries.
    RESULTS: A total of 7915 subjects (49% male, 37.8% aged 50 years and older) were recruited. Of the respondents aged 50 years and older, 809 (27%) had undergone previous CRC testing; the Philippines (69%), Australia (48%), and Japan (38%) had the highest participation rates, whereas India (1.5%), Malaysia (3%), Indonesia (3%), Pakistan (7.5%), and Brunei (13.7%) had the lowest rates. Physician recommendation and knowledge of screening tests were significant predictors of CRC test uptake. In countries with low-test participation, lower perceived access barriers and higher perceived severity were independent predictors of participation. Respondents from low-participation countries had the least knowledge of symptoms, risk factors, and tests and reported the lowest physician recommendation rates. "Intent to undergo screening" and "perceived need for screening" was positively correlated in most countries; however, this was offset by financial and access barriers.
    LIMITATIONS: Ethnic heterogeneity may exist in each country that was not addressed. In addition, the participation tests and physician recommendation recalls were self-reported.
    CONCLUSIONS: In the Asia-Pacific region, considerable differences were evident in the participation of CRC tests, physician recommendations, and knowledge of, attitudes toward, and barriers to CRC screening. Physician recommendation was the uniform predictor of screening behavior in all countries. Before implementing mass screening programs, improving awareness of CRC and promoting the physicians' role are necessary to increase the screening participation rates.
  5. Mak JWY, Sun Y, Limsrivilai J, Abdullah M, Kaibullayeva J, Balderramo D, et al.
    BMC Med Res Methodol, 2023 May 25;23(1):129.
    PMID: 37231405 DOI: 10.1186/s12874-023-01944-2
    BACKGROUND: There is a rapid increase in the incidence of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) in newly industrialized countries, yet epidemiological data is incomplete. We herein report the methodology adopted to study the incidence of IBD in newly industrialized countries and to evaluate the effect of environmental factors including diet on IBD development.

    METHODS: Global IBD Visualization of Epidemiology Studies in the 21st Century (GIVES-21) is a population-based cohort of newly diagnosed persons with Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis in Asia, Africa, and Latin America to be followed prospectively for 12 months. New cases were ascertained from multiple sources and were entered into a secured online system. Cases were confirmed using standard diagnostic criteria. In addition, endoscopy, pathology and pharmacy records from each local site were searched to ensure completeness of case capture. Validated environmental and dietary questionnaires were used to determine exposure in incident cases prior to diagnosis.

    RESULTS: Through November 2022, 106 hospitals from 24 regions (16 Asia; 6 Latin America; 2 Africa) have joined the GIVES-21 Consortium. To date, over 290 incident cases have been reported. All patients have demographic data, clinical disease characteristics, and disease course data including healthcare utilization, medication history and environmental and dietary exposures data collected. We have established a comprehensive platform and infrastructure required to examine disease incidence, risk factors and disease course of IBD in the real-world setting.

    CONCLUSIONS: The GIVES-21 consortium offers a unique opportunity to investigate the epidemiology of IBD and explores new clinical research questions on the association between environmental and dietary factors and IBD development in newly industrialized countries.

  6. Ng SC, Kaplan GG, Tang W, Banerjee R, Adigopula B, Underwood FE, et al.
    Am J Gastroenterol, 2019 01;114(1):107-115.
    PMID: 30177785 DOI: 10.1038/s41395-018-0233-2
    INTRODUCTION: Living in an urban environment may increase the risk of developing inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). It is unclear if this observation is seen globally. We conducted a population-based study to assess the relationship between urbanization and incidence of IBD in the Asia-Pacific region.

    METHODS: Newly diagnosed IBD cases between 2011 and 2013 from 13 countries or regions in Asia-Pacific were included. Incidence was calculated with 95% confidence interval (CI) and pooled using random-effects model. Meta-regression analysis was used to assess incidence rates and their association with population density, latitude, and longitude.

    RESULTS: We identified 1175 ulcerative colitis (UC), 656 Crohn's disease (CD), and 37 IBD undetermined (IBD-U). Mean annual IBD incidence per 100 000 was 1.50 (95% CI: 1.43-1.57). India (9.31; 95% CI: 8.38-10.31) and China (3.64; 95% CI, 2.97-4.42) had the highest IBD incidence in Asia. Incidence of overall IBD (incidence rate ratio [IRR]: 2.19; 95% CI: 1.01-4.76]) and CD (IRR: 3.28; 95% CI: 1.83-9.12) was higher across 19 areas of Asia with a higher population density. In China, incidence of IBD (IRR: 2.37; 95% CI: 1.10-5.16) and UC (IRR: 2.63; 95% CI: 1.2-5.8) was positively associated with gross domestic product. A south-to-north disease gradient (IRR: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.91-0.98) was observed for IBD incidence and a west-to-east gradient (IRR: 1.14; 95% CI: 1.05-1.24) was observed for CD incidence in China. This study received IRB approval.

    CONCLUSIONS: Regions in Asia with a high population density had a higher CD and UC incidence. Coastal areas within China had higher IBD incidence. With increasing urbanization and a shift from rural areas to cities, disease incidence may continue to climb in Asia.

  7. Buie MJ, Quan J, Windsor JW, Coward S, Hansen TM, King JA, et al.
    Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2023 Aug;21(9):2211-2221.
    PMID: 35863682 DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2022.06.030
    BACKGROUND & AIMS: The evolving epidemiologic patterns of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) throughout the world, in conjunction with advances in therapeutic treatments, may influence hospitalization rates of IBD. We performed a systematic review with temporal analysis of hospitalization rates for IBD across the world in the 21st century.

    METHODS: We systematically reviewed Medline and Embase for population-based studies reporting hospitalization rates for IBD, Crohn's disease (CD), or ulcerative colitis (UC) in the 21st century. Log-linear models were used to calculate the average annual percentage change (AAPC) with associated 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). Random-effects meta-analysis pooled country-level AAPCs. Data were stratified by the epidemiologic stage of a region: compounding prevalence (stage 3) in North America, Western Europe, and Oceania vs acceleration of incidence (stage 2) in Asia, Eastern Europe, and Latin America vs emergence (stage 1) in developing countries.

    RESULTS: Hospitalization rates for a primary diagnosis of IBD were stable in countries in stage 3 (AAPC, -0.13%; 95% CI, -0.72 to 0.97), CD (AAPC, 0.20%; 95% CI, -1.78 to 2.17), and UC (AAPC, 0.02%; 95% CI, -0.91 to 0.94). In contrast, hospitalization rates for a primary diagnosis were increasing in countries in stage 2 for IBD (AAPC, 4.44%; 95% CI, 2.75 to 6.14), CD (AAPC, 8.34%; 95% CI, 4.38 to 12.29), and UC (AAPC, 3.90; 95% CI, 1.29 to 6.52). No population-based studies were available for developing regions in stage 1 (emergence).

    CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalization rates for IBD are stabilizing in countries in stage 3, whereas newly industrialized countries in stage 2 have rapidly increasing hospitalization rates, contributing to an increasing burden on global health care systems.

Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links