SlideShare ist ein Scribd-Unternehmen logo
1 von 1
Downloaden Sie, um offline zu lesen
CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY 2012;10:1179 –1180




LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Readers are encouraged to write letters to the editor concerning articles that have been published in CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY AND
HEPATOLOGY. Short, general comments are also considered, but use of the Letters to the Editor section for publication of original data in
preliminary form is not encouraged. Letters should be typewritten and submitted electronically to http://www.editorialmanager.com/cgh.




Challenges in Calculating the Risk for                                 1.01–3.0) with a median follow-up of 10 years. This is remark-
Colorectal Cancer in Patients With                                     able, because the similar range of SIRs across different geo-
                                                                       graphic areas—including now Eastern Europe—may support
Ulcerative Colitis                                                     that chronic inflammation contributes in a similar, additive
Dear Editor:                                                           manner to the initiation of carcinogenesis in the colon, irre-
   We read with interest the report by Jess et al1 on the meta-        spective of the pre-existing baseline risk or geographic differ-
analysis of the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) in patients with       ences. Second, previous studies have identified multiple risk
ulcerative colitis (UC) in population-based cohort studies. The        factors for UC-associated CRC. In the study by Jess et al,1 males
major finding of the study was that the risk of UC in popula-           (SIR, 2.6; 95% CI, 2.2–3.0 vs females: SIR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.5–2.3)
tion-based cohorts was increased. However, it was significantly         and patients with extensive colitis (SIR, 4.8; 95% CI, 3.9 –5.9)
lower than previously reported in the landmark meta-analysis           had a greater risk, similar to recent Swedish data. In the pop-
by Eaden et al.2 In the present meta-analysis, an average of 1.6%      ulation-based Hungarian cohort, the SIR was also increased in
of patients with UC were diagnosed with CRC during the first            patients with extensive colitis (SIR, 4.1; 95% CI, 2.0 – 8.1), and a
14 years of follow-up. The pooled standardized incidence ratio         tendency of increased SIRs was seen in females and males.
(SIR) was 2.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1–2.7). Neverthe-        Other potential risk factors include age at onset, disease dura-
less, it is important to highlight potential limitations of the        tion, primary sclerosing cholangitis, and medication history
study before accepting the above general conclusion. One of the        (including exposure to 5-aminosalicylates/azathioprine).
most important possible confounders is the high percentage of             In summary, communication of cancer risk in ulcerative
proctitis (45%– 60%) in about half of the cohorts. In addition,        colitis and patient management strategies should be tailored to
the rate of colectomy was exceedingly high (16%–31%), espe-            specific patients based on age, sex, disease extent, disease dura-
cially compared with the relatively short median follow-up             tion, geographic area, and presence of factors including age at
period. Geographic imbalance is also apparent, with 5 out of 8         onset, disease duration, and primary sclerosing cholangitis.
studies coming from the Nordic countries. Furthermore, al-                       PETER L. LAKATOS, MD, PhD
though authors interpreted the positive association between                      First Department of Medicine
cohort size and CRC risk as a confirmatory factor against                         Semmelweis University
publication bias, an alternative explanation is that the patient                 Budapest, Hungary
population in the study by Söderlund et al was significantly
different from other cohorts included in this meta-analysis with                 LASZLO LAKATOS, MD, PhD
only 27% of patients having proctitis at diagnosis.3 Interest-                   Department of Medicine
ingly, other population-based cohorts from Scandinavia also                      Csolnoky F. Province Hospital
reported a lower percentage of proctitis at diagnosis, and com-                  Veszprem, Hungary
parable data (25.3%) were reported by our group from Eastern
                                                                       1.   Jess T, et al. Clin Hepatol Gastroenterol 2012;10:639 – 645.
Europe.4 In addition, colectomy rates have shown large geo-            2.   Eaden JA, et al. Gut 2001;48:526 –535.
graphic variation with significantly lower rates reported from          3.   Söderlund S, et al. Gastroenterology 2009;136:1561–1567.
the Mediterranean and Eastern Europe in previous studies.              4.   Lakatos L, et al. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2006;12:205–211.
Consequently, in contrast to the meta-analysis by Eaden et al,2
the present meta-analysis potentially underestimated the actual
CRC risk in UC. Generalizability of results is therefore ques-
tionable, and geographic restrictions may also apply.                  Conflicts of interest
   Nevertheless, communicating only the overall SIR to the               The authors disclose no conflicts.
patients can be misleading because of at least 2 reasons. First,                   http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2012.04.021
there is substantial variation in the incidence of sporadic CRC
worldwide. The incidence of sporadic CRC in the Western world          Reply. We thank Drs Lakatos and Lakatos for commenting on
is approximately 30 to 40 per 100,000. In contrast, correspond-        our meta-analysis on risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) in patients
ing numbers (eg, in Hungary) are 81 per 100,000 in males and           with ulcerative colitis (UC).1 We agree that the results of our
50 per 100,000 in females. This is one of the highest sporadic         meta-analysis are different from those of the meta-analysis by
CRC incidences reported worldwide. Therefore, a similar SIR            Eaden and colleagues from 2001.2 We believe that this differ-
may correspond to considerable different absolute CRC risk in          ence is explained by the unselected nature of the cohort studies
different geographic areas (eg, the cumulative risk of developing      included in the present meta-analysis. Reassuringly for patients,
CRC after a disease duration of 15 and 20 years was 2.6% and           we observed a more modestly increased risk of CRC in UC than
5.4% in the Hungarian cohort).4 After the original publication,        in the former meta-analysis, which included selected patient
SIR rates were calculated for the Hungarian UC patients. In            series.2 Due to the strict inclusion criteria in the present meta-
concordance with the results of the above meta-analysis, the           analysis, we believe that our results are inherently more gener-
overall SIR in this Eastern European cohort was 1.74 (95% CI,          alizable to the broad spectrum of UC patients and especially to

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Mehr von empite

2013+Calendar.pdf
2013+Calendar.pdf2013+Calendar.pdf
2013+Calendar.pdfempite
 
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfAdobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfempite
 
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfAdobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfempite
 
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfAdobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfempite
 
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfAdobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfempite
 
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfAdobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfempite
 
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfAdobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfempite
 
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfAdobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfempite
 
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfAdobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfempite
 
Pediatric-Cardiology-101.ppt
Pediatric-Cardiology-101.pptPediatric-Cardiology-101.ppt
Pediatric-Cardiology-101.pptempite
 
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfAdobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfempite
 
best-of-smashing-magazine.pdf
best-of-smashing-magazine.pdfbest-of-smashing-magazine.pdf
best-of-smashing-magazine.pdfempite
 
AppDevelopmentProposal.docx
AppDevelopmentProposal.docxAppDevelopmentProposal.docx
AppDevelopmentProposal.docxempite
 
AppDevelopmentProposal.docx
AppDevelopmentProposal.docxAppDevelopmentProposal.docx
AppDevelopmentProposal.docxempite
 
AppDevelopmentProposal.docx
AppDevelopmentProposal.docxAppDevelopmentProposal.docx
AppDevelopmentProposal.docxempite
 
AppDevelopmentProposal.docx
AppDevelopmentProposal.docxAppDevelopmentProposal.docx
AppDevelopmentProposal.docxempite
 
10+Haematology.DOC
10+Haematology.DOC10+Haematology.DOC
10+Haematology.DOCempite
 
endocrine_system-pdf.pdf
endocrine_system-pdf.pdfendocrine_system-pdf.pdf
endocrine_system-pdf.pdfempite
 
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfAdobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfempite
 

Mehr von empite (20)

pdf
pdfpdf
pdf
 
2013+Calendar.pdf
2013+Calendar.pdf2013+Calendar.pdf
2013+Calendar.pdf
 
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfAdobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
 
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfAdobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
 
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfAdobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
 
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfAdobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
 
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfAdobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
 
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfAdobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
 
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfAdobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
 
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfAdobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
 
Pediatric-Cardiology-101.ppt
Pediatric-Cardiology-101.pptPediatric-Cardiology-101.ppt
Pediatric-Cardiology-101.ppt
 
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfAdobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
 
best-of-smashing-magazine.pdf
best-of-smashing-magazine.pdfbest-of-smashing-magazine.pdf
best-of-smashing-magazine.pdf
 
AppDevelopmentProposal.docx
AppDevelopmentProposal.docxAppDevelopmentProposal.docx
AppDevelopmentProposal.docx
 
AppDevelopmentProposal.docx
AppDevelopmentProposal.docxAppDevelopmentProposal.docx
AppDevelopmentProposal.docx
 
AppDevelopmentProposal.docx
AppDevelopmentProposal.docxAppDevelopmentProposal.docx
AppDevelopmentProposal.docx
 
AppDevelopmentProposal.docx
AppDevelopmentProposal.docxAppDevelopmentProposal.docx
AppDevelopmentProposal.docx
 
10+Haematology.DOC
10+Haematology.DOC10+Haematology.DOC
10+Haematology.DOC
 
endocrine_system-pdf.pdf
endocrine_system-pdf.pdfendocrine_system-pdf.pdf
endocrine_system-pdf.pdf
 
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdfAdobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
Adobe_Dreamweaver_CS5.5_Studio_Techniques.pdf
 

PIIS1542356512005289.pdf

  • 1. CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY 2012;10:1179 –1180 LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Readers are encouraged to write letters to the editor concerning articles that have been published in CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY. Short, general comments are also considered, but use of the Letters to the Editor section for publication of original data in preliminary form is not encouraged. Letters should be typewritten and submitted electronically to http://www.editorialmanager.com/cgh. Challenges in Calculating the Risk for 1.01–3.0) with a median follow-up of 10 years. This is remark- Colorectal Cancer in Patients With able, because the similar range of SIRs across different geo- graphic areas—including now Eastern Europe—may support Ulcerative Colitis that chronic inflammation contributes in a similar, additive Dear Editor: manner to the initiation of carcinogenesis in the colon, irre- We read with interest the report by Jess et al1 on the meta- spective of the pre-existing baseline risk or geographic differ- analysis of the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) in patients with ences. Second, previous studies have identified multiple risk ulcerative colitis (UC) in population-based cohort studies. The factors for UC-associated CRC. In the study by Jess et al,1 males major finding of the study was that the risk of UC in popula- (SIR, 2.6; 95% CI, 2.2–3.0 vs females: SIR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.5–2.3) tion-based cohorts was increased. However, it was significantly and patients with extensive colitis (SIR, 4.8; 95% CI, 3.9 –5.9) lower than previously reported in the landmark meta-analysis had a greater risk, similar to recent Swedish data. In the pop- by Eaden et al.2 In the present meta-analysis, an average of 1.6% ulation-based Hungarian cohort, the SIR was also increased in of patients with UC were diagnosed with CRC during the first patients with extensive colitis (SIR, 4.1; 95% CI, 2.0 – 8.1), and a 14 years of follow-up. The pooled standardized incidence ratio tendency of increased SIRs was seen in females and males. (SIR) was 2.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1–2.7). Neverthe- Other potential risk factors include age at onset, disease dura- less, it is important to highlight potential limitations of the tion, primary sclerosing cholangitis, and medication history study before accepting the above general conclusion. One of the (including exposure to 5-aminosalicylates/azathioprine). most important possible confounders is the high percentage of In summary, communication of cancer risk in ulcerative proctitis (45%– 60%) in about half of the cohorts. In addition, colitis and patient management strategies should be tailored to the rate of colectomy was exceedingly high (16%–31%), espe- specific patients based on age, sex, disease extent, disease dura- cially compared with the relatively short median follow-up tion, geographic area, and presence of factors including age at period. Geographic imbalance is also apparent, with 5 out of 8 onset, disease duration, and primary sclerosing cholangitis. studies coming from the Nordic countries. Furthermore, al- PETER L. LAKATOS, MD, PhD though authors interpreted the positive association between First Department of Medicine cohort size and CRC risk as a confirmatory factor against Semmelweis University publication bias, an alternative explanation is that the patient Budapest, Hungary population in the study by Söderlund et al was significantly different from other cohorts included in this meta-analysis with LASZLO LAKATOS, MD, PhD only 27% of patients having proctitis at diagnosis.3 Interest- Department of Medicine ingly, other population-based cohorts from Scandinavia also Csolnoky F. Province Hospital reported a lower percentage of proctitis at diagnosis, and com- Veszprem, Hungary parable data (25.3%) were reported by our group from Eastern 1. Jess T, et al. Clin Hepatol Gastroenterol 2012;10:639 – 645. Europe.4 In addition, colectomy rates have shown large geo- 2. Eaden JA, et al. Gut 2001;48:526 –535. graphic variation with significantly lower rates reported from 3. Söderlund S, et al. Gastroenterology 2009;136:1561–1567. the Mediterranean and Eastern Europe in previous studies. 4. Lakatos L, et al. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2006;12:205–211. Consequently, in contrast to the meta-analysis by Eaden et al,2 the present meta-analysis potentially underestimated the actual CRC risk in UC. Generalizability of results is therefore ques- tionable, and geographic restrictions may also apply. Conflicts of interest Nevertheless, communicating only the overall SIR to the The authors disclose no conflicts. patients can be misleading because of at least 2 reasons. First, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2012.04.021 there is substantial variation in the incidence of sporadic CRC worldwide. The incidence of sporadic CRC in the Western world Reply. We thank Drs Lakatos and Lakatos for commenting on is approximately 30 to 40 per 100,000. In contrast, correspond- our meta-analysis on risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) in patients ing numbers (eg, in Hungary) are 81 per 100,000 in males and with ulcerative colitis (UC).1 We agree that the results of our 50 per 100,000 in females. This is one of the highest sporadic meta-analysis are different from those of the meta-analysis by CRC incidences reported worldwide. Therefore, a similar SIR Eaden and colleagues from 2001.2 We believe that this differ- may correspond to considerable different absolute CRC risk in ence is explained by the unselected nature of the cohort studies different geographic areas (eg, the cumulative risk of developing included in the present meta-analysis. Reassuringly for patients, CRC after a disease duration of 15 and 20 years was 2.6% and we observed a more modestly increased risk of CRC in UC than 5.4% in the Hungarian cohort).4 After the original publication, in the former meta-analysis, which included selected patient SIR rates were calculated for the Hungarian UC patients. In series.2 Due to the strict inclusion criteria in the present meta- concordance with the results of the above meta-analysis, the analysis, we believe that our results are inherently more gener- overall SIR in this Eastern European cohort was 1.74 (95% CI, alizable to the broad spectrum of UC patients and especially to