Abstract
Objective Ulcerative colitis (UC) patients diagnosed with low-grade dysplasia (LGD) have increased risk of developing advanced neoplasia (AN; high-grade dysplasia or colorectal cancer). We aimed to develop and validate a predictor of AN risk in UC patients with LGD and create a visual web-tool to effectively communicate the risk.
Design In our retrospective multi-centre validated cohort study, adult UC patients with an index diagnosis of LGD, identified from four UK centres between 2001-2019, were followed until progression to AN. In the discovery cohort (n=246), a multivariate risk prediction model was derived from clinicopathological features using Cox regression. Validation used data from 3 external centres (n=198). The validated model was embedded in a web-tool to calculate patient-specific risk.
Results Four clinicopathological variables were significantly associated with AN progression in the discovery cohort: endoscopically visible LGD > 1 cm (HR = 2.7; 95% CI 1.2-5.9), unresectable or incomplete endoscopic resection (HR = 3.4; 95% CI 1.6-7.4), moderate/severe histological inflammation within 5 years of LGD diagnosis (HR = 3.1; 95% CI 1.5-6.7), and multifocality (HR = 2.9; 95% CI 1.3-6.2). In the validation cohort, this 4-variable model accurately predicted future AN cases with overall calibration Observed/Expected = 1 (95% CI 0.63-1.5), and achieved 100% specificity for the lowest risk group over 13 years of available follow-up.
Conclusion Multi-cohort validation confirms that patients with large, unresected, multifocal LGD and recent moderate/severe inflammation are at highest risk of developing AN. Personalised risk prediction provided via the Ulcerative Colitis-Cancer Risk Estimator (www.UC-CaRE.uk) can support treatment decision-making.
What is already known about this subject?
The risk of ulcerative colitis-associated low-grade dysplasia (LGD) progression to more advanced neoplasia is currently not clearly defined. The literature consists of historical data from small heterogenous observational studies with limited follow-up or lack of information on endoscopic resection status.
What are the new findings?
We present the results from the largest multi-centre cohort study to evaluate LGD long-term prognosis based on clinicopathological factors that are reflective of modern surveillance techniques.
Recent moderate or severe active inflammation or LGD that is large, not fully resectable or is multifocal remain independent predictors of advanced neoplasia progression, even when stratified to reflect the most modern era of high definition endoscopic imaging, chromoendoscopy and advanced polypectomy techniques.
Colorectal cancer incidence after endoscopic resection of unifocal polypoid and non-polypoid dysplasia is 0.6 per 100 patient-years.
Long-term incidence of advanced neoplasia is similar if LGD is invisible or if LGD is visible but not completely endoscopically resected.
Using these data, we have designed and externally validated a cancer risk prediction tool for ulcerative colitis patients with LGD.
How might it impact on clinical practice in the foreseeable future?
The UC-CaRE (Ulcerative Colitis-Cancer Risk Estimator) tool can be used to calculate and communicate individualised numerical cancer risk estimates to colitis patients with LGD.
It facilitates the risk stratification of the lowest-risk patients, who can be reassured by undergoing continued surveillance, and those at the highest-risk who may benefit from a prophylactic colectomy.
This visual aid presents the calculated risk in a graphical and pictorial form to optimise risk comprehension and informed treatment choices.
Competing Interest Statement
KC, MK, JOL, JH, MJ, RV, STG, AW and TAG declare no potential conflicts of interest. JEE: Speaker FALK; consultant/shareholder Satisfai Health.
Funding Statement
KC received funding from the MRC HDR-UK programme (UKRI Rutherford Fund Fellowship). TAG acknowledges funding from Cancer Research UK (A19771 and A25901). TAG also acknowledges funding from the Barts Charity (472/2300). JEE was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Oxford Biomedical Research Centre. AL: Infrastructure support for this research was provided by the NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the National Health Service, the NIHR or the Department of Health. Oxford IBD cohort study investigators: Philip Allan, Tim Ambrose, Carolina Arancibia-Cárcamo, Adam Bailey, Ellie Barnes, Elizabeth Bird-lieberman, Jan Bornschein, Barbara Braden, Oliver Brain, Jane Collier, Emma Culver, James East, Alessandra Geremia, Bruce George, Lucy Howarth, Kelsey Jones, Paul Klenerman, Simon Leedham, Rebecca Palmer, Fiona Powrie, Astor Rodrigues, Jack Satsangi, Alison Simmons, Simon Travis, Holm Uhlig, Alissa Walsh
Author Declarations
All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.
Yes
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
↵* joint first authors
↵# joint senior authors
Conflict of interest statement: KC, MK, JOL, JH, MJ, RV, STG, AW and TAG declare no potential conflicts of interest.
JEE: Speaker FALK; consultant/shareholder Satisfai Health.
MK: study concept and design; acquisition of data; analysis and interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content; statistical analysis
IAB: acquisition of data; analysis and interpretation of data
CHRC: acquisition of data; investigation of data
JH, MJ, Oxford IBD Cohort Study Investigators: acquisition of data
JEE: acquisition of data; interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript; obtained funding
JOL: acquisition of data; interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript
RV, JW: acquisition of data; interpretation of data; critical revision of the manuscript
STG: interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript
AW: study concept and design; study supervision; interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content
TAG: study concept and design; study supervision; obtained funding; interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content
AH: study concept and design; study supervision; interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content
Additional analyses added to enhance findings.
Data Availability
All relevant clinical data summaries and statistical model outputs to reproduce results are supplied in the text, tables, and supplementary material.
