4.5 Article

Colorectal Neoplasia among Patients with and without Human Immunodeficiency Virus

Journal

CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY BIOMARKERS & PREVENTION
Volume 29, Issue 8, Pages 1689-1691

Publisher

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-20-0021

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Cancer Prevention Research Institute of Texas [PP160075]
  2. NCI of the NIH [P30CA142543]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Increasing availability of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) has led to prolonged survival and rising incidence of non-HIV-defining cancers among patients with HIV. Compared with the general population, risk of colorectal cancer may differ among those with HIV due to immunosuppression, oncogenic viral coinfections, and higher prevalence of risk factors. Methods: We identified patients (age >= 50 years) diagnosed with HIV, prescribed HAART for >= 6 months, and receiving care in two large health care systems in Dallas, TX. Patients received a first colonoscopy between January 2009 and December 2017. We calculated a standardized prevalence ratio as the ratio of observed to expected number of advanced neoplasia (high-risk adenoma or colorectal cancer) using an age- and sex-matched cohort of patients without HIV (n = 10,250). Results: Among patients with HIV (n = 839), about two thirds (60.1%) had normal findings at colonoscopy; 6.8% had hyperplastic polyps only, 20.4% had low-risk adenomas, 11.7% had high-risk adenomas, and 1.1% had colorectal cancer. Prevalence of advanced neoplasia was similar between patients with and without HIV, with a standardized prevalence ratio of 0.99 (95% confidence interval, 0.81-1.19). Conclusions: There was no difference in the prevalence of colorectal neoplasia between patients with and without HIV. Impact: Patients with HIV appear to have similar risk of colorectal neoplasia compared to those without HIV and can therefore follow average-risk colorectal cancer screening guidelines.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available