Displaying all 4 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Chiu HM, Ching JY, Wu KC, Rerknimitr R, Li J, Wu DC, et al.
    Gastroenterology, 2016 Mar;150(3):617-625.e3.
    PMID: 26627608 DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2015.11.042
    BACKGROUND & AIMS: Age, sex, smoking, and family history are risk factors for colorectal cancer in Asia. The Asia-Pacific Colorectal Screening (APCS) scoring system was developed to identify subjects with a high risk for advanced neoplasm (AN). We tested an algorithm that combined APCS scores with fecal immunochemical test (FIT) in colorectal cancer screening.
    METHODS: We performed a multicenter prospective study, enrolling asymptomatic individuals older than 40 years old in 12 Asia-Pacific regions from December 2011 to December 2013. APCS scores were calculated for each individual (0-1 = low risk [LR], 2-3 = medium risk [MR], and 4-7 = high risk [HR] for AN). LR and MR subjects were offered FIT and referred for early colonoscopies if FIT results were positive. HR subjects were offered colonoscopies. The proportions of subjects with ANs were determined for each group based on colonoscopy findings; odd ratios for LR and MR subjects were calculated compared to LR individuals. We calculated the sensitivity of the APCS-FIT algorithm in identifying subjects with AN.
    RESULTS: A total of 5657 subjects were recruited: 646 subjects (11.4%) were considered LR, 3243 subjects (57.3%) were considered MR, and 1768 subjects (31.3%) were considered HR for AN. The proportions of individuals with an AN in these groups were 1.5%, 5.1%, and 10.9%, respectively. Compared with LR group, MR and HR subjects had a 3.4-fold increase and a 7.8-fold increase in risk for AN, respectively. A total of 70.6% subjects with AN (95% confidence interval: 65.6%-75.1%) and 95.1% subjects with invasive cancers (95% confidence interval: 82.2%-99.2%) were correctly instructed to undergo early colonoscopy examination.
    CONCLUSIONS: The APCS scoring system, which is based on age, sex, family history, and smoking, is a useful tool for determining risk for colorectal cancer and advanced adenoma in asymptomatic subjects. Use of the APCS score-based algorithm in triaging subjects for FIT or colonoscopy can substantially reduce colonoscopy workload.
  2. Sung JJ, Ng SC, Chan FK, Chiu HM, Kim HS, Matsuda T, et al.
    Gut, 2015 Jan;64(1):121-32.
    PMID: 24647008 DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2013-306503
    OBJECTIVE: Since the publication of the first Asia Pacific Consensus on Colorectal Cancer (CRC) in 2008, there are substantial advancements in the science and experience of implementing CRC screening. The Asia Pacific Working Group aimed to provide an updated set of consensus recommendations.
    DESIGN: Members from 14 Asian regions gathered to seek consensus using other national and international guidelines, and recent relevant literature published from 2008 to 2013. A modified Delphi process was adopted to develop the statements.
    RESULTS: Age range for CRC screening is defined as 50-75 years. Advancing age, male, family history of CRC, smoking and obesity are confirmed risk factors for CRC and advanced neoplasia. A risk-stratified scoring system is recommended for selecting high-risk patients for colonoscopy. Quantitative faecal immunochemical test (FIT) instead of guaiac-based faecal occult blood test (gFOBT) is preferred for average-risk subjects. Ancillary methods in colonoscopy, with the exception of chromoendoscopy, have not proven to be superior to high-definition white light endoscopy in identifying adenoma. Quality of colonoscopy should be upheld and quality assurance programme should be in place to audit every aspects of CRC screening. Serrated adenoma is recognised as a risk for interval cancer. There is no consensus on the recruitment of trained endoscopy nurses for CRC screening.
    CONCLUSIONS: Based on recent data on CRC screening, an updated list of recommendations on CRC screening is prepared. These consensus statements will further enhance the implementation of CRC screening in the Asia Pacific region.
    Matched MeSH terms: Asia
  3. Wong GL, Wong VW, Thompson A, Jia J, Hou J, Lesmana CRA, et al.
    Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2020 08;5(8):776-787.
    PMID: 32585136 DOI: 10.1016/S2468-1253(20)30190-4
    The COVID-19 pandemic has spread rapidly worldwide. It is common to encounter patients with COVID-19 with abnormal liver function, either in the form of hepatitis, cholestasis, or both. The clinical implications of liver derangement might be variable in different clinical scenarios. With growing evidence of its clinical significance, it would be clinically helpful to provide practice recommendations for various common clinical scenarios of liver derangement during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Asia-Pacific Working Group for Liver Derangement during the COVID-19 Pandemic was formed to systematically review the literature with special focus on the clinical management of patients who have been or who are at risk of developing liver derangement during this pandemic. Clinical scenarios covering the use of pharmacological treatment for COVID-19 in the case of liver derangement, and assessment and management of patients with chronic hepatitis B or hepatitis C, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, liver cirrhosis, and liver transplantation during the pandemic are discussed.
  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.
Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator ([email protected])

External Links