Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| Societat Catalana de Digestologia | UNKNOWN |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) - ulcerative colitis or Crohn's disease - have a higher risk of developing colorectal cancer than the general population. For this reason, regular colonoscopies are recommended to look for early warning signs, such as abnormal areas of tissue called dysplasia, which can develop into cancer over time.
Finding these abnormal areas during colonoscopy can be difficult because IBD causes ongoing inflammation that can make the bowel mucosa look irregular, hiding subtle changes. Doctors currently use a technique called narrow-band imaging (NBI), a special light setting on the colonoscope that enhances the visibility of the bowel, to help spot these areas more easily.
A newer tool, artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted detection, has shown promise in helping doctors find more polyps during routine colonoscopies in the general population. However, this AI tool was developed and tested mostly in people without IBD, so it is not yet known whether it works as well in people with IBD, whose bowel can look very different due to chronic inflammation.
This study will directly compare the AI tool (CADe; ENDO-AID, Olympus) with narrow-band imaging to see which one is better at finding abnormal areas during colonoscopy in patients with long-standing ulcerative colitis or Crohn's disease who are having their routine cancer surveillance exam.
Each participant will have one colonoscopy in which the bowel is examined twice in a row, once with each technique, by two different doctors, in random order. This lets researchers compare both methods directly within the same patient, which is the fairest comparison.
The study aims to enroll 60 patients at Vall d'Hebron University Hospital in Barcelona, Spain. Researchers hope the results will help determine whether AI tools - which are widely available and easier to use than NBI - can be a reliable alternative for IBD surveillance, potentially making this important cancer-screening exam more accessible in the future.
Background and Rationale
Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) remain at increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) compared with the general population, and colonoscopic surveillance has been shown to reduce both CRC incidence and CRC-related mortality. Although high-definition dye-based chromoendoscopy is recommended by most guidelines as the surveillance technique of choice, its uptake remains limited due to training requirements, added procedure time, and cost. As a result, several guidelines continue to accept virtual chromoendoscopy techniques, including narrow-band imaging (NBI), and high-definition white-light endoscopy as alternatives.
Computer-aided detection (CADe) systems based on artificial intelligence have demonstrated meaningful improvements in adenoma and polyp detection in non-IBD populations. However, the convolutional neural network-based algorithms underlying these systems have largely been trained on datasets that excluded patients with IBD, so the real-world performance of currently available non-IBD-trained CADe systems for detecting colitis-associated dysplasia remains unknown. Existing evidence in this area has relied mainly on retrospective analyses of still-image datasets, without prospective, real-time comparison against validated comparators such as chromoendoscopy or NBI. A direct, prospective comparison is therefore needed.
Study Design This is a unicentric, two-arm, open-label, randomized, crossover clinical trial conducted at the IBD Clinic of the Gastroenterology Department, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain. Each participant undergoes a single colonoscopy in which the entire colon is examined twice, consecutively, by two different endoscopists using the two study techniques (CADe and NBI) in randomized order, allowing each patient to act as their own control and minimizing between-patient confounding.
Study Procedures Each participant is examined on the same day by two endoscopists with expertise in IBD endoscopic surveillance. Endoscopist 1 examines the entire colon using either AI (ENDO-AID CADe System, Olympus, Tokyo, Japan) or NBI, per the randomization sequence. Before lesion assessment, endoscopic remission is confirmed using the Mayo endoscopic score (UC) or the Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease (SES-CD), requiring a score of 0. Lesions identified are documented and managed accordingly (resection or biopsy). Endoscopist 2, blinded to the findings of Endoscopist 1, re-examines the entire colon using the alternate technique, documents any additional findings, and manages any lesions missed during the first examination. Both endoscopists perform an equal number of examinations with each technique as the first or second pass, and all procedures use the same high-definition endoscope and processor (Olympus CF-HQ190L, EVIS X1).
All lesions resected or biopsied, regardless of detection order, are categorized using the Paris classification, with location and size recorded. Specimens are assessed by pathologists with expertise in IBD as part of standard care; adenocarcinoma, serrated adenoma, tubular adenoma, and any dysplasia are classified as neoplastic lesions. Biopsies are systematically obtained from previously identified colitic segments in all patients to assess the impact of histological inflammatory activity on neoplasia detection. Withdrawal time, defined as the interval between the start of inspection at the cecum and the end of the procedure, is recorded separately for each technique and examination order.
Randomization and Blinding Patients are consecutively allocated in a 1:1 alternating sequence to either the "NBI first followed by AI" arm or the "AI first followed by NBI" arm, with allocation performed by Endoscopist 1 prior to the procedure. Blinding of endoscopists to the technique itself is not feasible given that the AI overlay is visible on screen; however, Endoscopist 2 remains blinded to the findings of the first examination, preserving the integrity of the tandem comparison.
Data Collection Patient and disease characteristics collected include age, sex, IBD type, age at diagnosis, disease location and behavior (Montreal classification for CD; extent for UC), presence of perianal disease, presence of primary sclerosing cholangitis, current and past medication, personal history of dysplasia, previous IBD-related surgery, and time elapsed since the last surveillance colonoscopy. Procedural data collected include the randomization arm, order of techniques, all detected lesions (technique, endoscopist, morphology, size, location), histological findings, withdrawal times, and any procedure-related complications.
Sample Size and Statistical Analysis In the absence of prior data on CADe performance in IBD surveillance colonoscopy, the sample size was pragmatically set at 60 evaluable patients, based on previously published crossover studies comparing dye-based chromoendoscopy and NBI in this population. A 20% dropout rate was anticipated to account for incomplete explorations, withdrawal of consent, and suboptimal bowel preparation, so recruitment was planned for approximately 72 patients. Lesion-level detection (paired binary outcomes) will be compared using the McNemar test, while per-patient dysplastic lesion counts will be compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Because most lesions are sampled immediately upon detection, only missed or unresected lesions can be identified during the second examination, precluding fully paired analyses for some comparisons; individual lesions are therefore treated as statistically independent observations in those cases. Quantitative variables are compared using Student's t-test or the Mann-Whitney U test as appropriate, and proportions using the χ² test or Fisher's exact test, with Bonferroni correction applied for multiple comparisons involving lesion location and histology. All p-values are two-sided, with p < 0.05 considered statistically significant. Analyses are performed using SPSS version 16 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL).
Ethical and Regulatory Considerations This protocol was approved by the Drug Research Ethics Committee (Comité de Ética de la Investigación con Medicamentos) of Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron under code PR(AG)237/2023. All participants provide written informed consent prior to enrolment, and the study is conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and applicable national and institutional regulations. No patients or members of the public were involved in the design, conduct, reporting, or dissemination of this research. Any immediate or delayed procedure-related complications are recorded and reported according to institutional adverse event monitoring protocols.
Funding This work is supported by the Societat Catalana de Digestologia through the Ajut per a la Iniciació a la Recerca grant. The funder has no role in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or manuscript decisions. The investigators declare no relevant conflicts of interest.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| NBI first followed by AI | Experimental | Patients were consecutively allocated in a 1:1 alternating sequence to either the "NBI first followed by AI" arm or the "AI first followed by NBI" arm. Allocation was performed prior to the procedure by endoscopist 1. Blinding was not feasible owing to the nature of the intervention. |
|
| AI first followed by NBI | Experimental | Patients were consecutively allocated in a 1:1 alternating sequence to either the "NBI first followed by AI" arm or the "AI first followed by NBI" arm. Allocation was performed prior to the procedure by endoscopist 1. Blinding was not feasible owing to the nature of the intervention. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ENDO-AID CADe System (Olympus, Tokyo, Japan) (AI device) | Device | Each participant was examined by two endoscopists with expertise in endoscopic surveillance in IBD on the same day consecutively in a randomized manner. Both endoscopists alternated between AI and NBI. Endoscopist 1 evaluated the entire colon using either AI -ENDO-AID CADe System (Olympus, Tokyo, Japan)- or NBI. Before lesion assessment, Endoscopist 1 first confirmed endoscopic remission, defined as a Mayo endoscopic score and a Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease (SES-CD) for UC and CD, respectively, of 0. Then, lesions were documented and managed accordingly - resection or biopsy. Endoscopist 2, blinded to the previous findings, re-examined the entire colon with the alternate method, documented additional findings, and treated any lesions missed by Endoscopist 1. Both endoscopists performed the same number of explorations with NBI and AI as first or second exploration. High-definition endoscopes and the same processor were used for all procedures (Olympus CF-- HQ19). |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Neoplasia miss rate (NMR) assessed in a per-lesion analysis | Calculated as the number of neoplastic lesions missed during the first examination and detected on the second examination, divided by the total number of neoplastic lesions detected across both examinations. | Periprocedural. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Neoplasia miss rate (NMR) evaluated in a per-patient analysis | Defined as the number of patients with at least one neoplastic lesion missed during the first examination and detected on the second examination, divided by the total number of unique patients with at least one neoplastic lesion detected across both examinations | Periprocedural. |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Natalia Borruel, MD, PhD | Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain | Study Chair |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vall d'Hebron University Hospital | Barcelona | Catalonia | 08035 | Spain |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 16948808 | Background | Simmons DT, Harewood GC, Baron TH, Petersen BT, Wang KK, Boyd-Enders F, Ott BJ. Impact of endoscopist withdrawal speed on polyp yield: implications for optimal colonoscopy withdrawal time. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2006 Sep 15;24(6):965-71. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2006.03080.x. | |
| 17167136 | Background | Barclay RL, Vicari JJ, Doughty AS, Johanson JF, Greenlaw RL. Colonoscopic withdrawal times and adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy. N Engl J Med. 2006 Dec 14;355(24):2533-41. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa055498. |
| Label | URL |
|---|---|
| URL to investigational product. | View source |
| ID | Type | URL | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Study Protocol | Study Protocol | View IPD |
The data underlying this article will be shared on reasonable request to the corresponding author.
Upon reasonable request.
Upon reasonable request.
Not provided
| Type | Includes Protocol | Includes SAP | Includes ICF | Document Label | Document Date | Document Uploaded Date | Document File Name |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prot_SAP | Yes | Yes | No | Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan | Apr 24, 2023 |
Not provided
Each participant was examined by two endoscopists with expertise in endoscopic surveillance in IBD on the same day consecutively in a randomized manner. Both endoscopists alternated between AI and NBI. Endoscopist 1 evaluated the entire colon using either AI -ENDO-AID CADe System (Olympus, Tokyo, Japan)- or NBI. Before lesion assessment, Endoscopist 1 first confirmed endoscopic remission, defined as a Mayo endoscopic score and a Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease (SES-CD) for UC and CD, respectively, of 0. Then, lesions were documented and managed accordingly - resection or biopsy. Endoscopist 2, blinded to the previous findings, re-examined the entire colon with the alternate method, documented additional findings, and treated any lesions missed by Endoscopist 1. Both endoscopists performed the same number of explorations with NBI and AI as first or second exploration. High-definition endoscopes and the same processor were used for all procedures.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
|
| Withdrawal time |
Time from cecal intubation to colonoscope withdrawal, including therapeutic maneuvers. |
| Periprocedural. |
| Degree of histological inflammatory activity | Histological inflammatory activity will be graded using the Nancy Histological Index, applied to biopsies systematically obtained from previously identified colitic segments. | Periprocedural. |
| Rate of colorectal neoplasia detection | Proportion of biopsied or resected lesions classified as neoplastic (adenocarcinoma, serrated adenoma, tubular adenoma, or dysplasia) on histopathological assessment, stratified by Nancy Histological Index grade. | Periprocedural. |
| Size of detected neoplastic lesions, by detection technique | Maximum lesion diameter, measured endoscopically in millimeters, will be recorded for each neoplastic lesion and compared between lesions detected by CADe and lesions detected by NBI. | Periprocedural. |
| Morphological classification of detected neoplastic lesions, by detection technique | Lesion morphology will be classified according to the Paris classification and compared between lesions detected by CADe and lesions detected by NBI. | Periprocedural. |
| Histological classification of detected neoplastic lesions, by detection technique | Lesions will be histologically classified (e.g., tubular adenoma, serrated adenoma, adenocarcinoma, or other dysplasia) by pathologists with expertise in IBD, and compared between lesions detected by CADe and lesions detected by NBI. | Periprocedural. |
| 12094842 | Background | Rex DK, Bond JH, Winawer S, Levin TR, Burt RW, Johnson DA, Kirk LM, Litlin S, Lieberman DA, Waye JD, Church J, Marshall JB, Riddell RH; U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Quality in the technical performance of colonoscopy and the continuous quality improvement process for colonoscopy: recommendations of the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Am J Gastroenterol. 2002 Jun;97(6):1296-308. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2002.05812.x. No abstract available. |
| 23918622 | Background | van den Broek FJ, Kuiper T, Dekker E, Zwinderman AH, Fockens P, Reitsma JB. Study designs to compare new colonoscopic techniques: clinical considerations, data analysis, and sample size calculations. Endoscopy. 2013 Nov;45(11):922-7. doi: 10.1055/s-0033-1344434. Epub 2013 Aug 5. |
| 39819862 | Background | Te Groen M, Wijnands AM, den Broeder N, de Jong DJ, van Dop WA, Duijvestein M, Fidder HH, van Schaik F, Hirdes MMC, van der Meulen-de Jong AE, Maljaars PWJ, Voorneveld PW, de Boer KHN, Peters CP, Oldenburg B, Hoentjen F; Dutch Initiative on Crohn and Colitis. Surveillance in inflammatory bowel disease: white light endoscopy with segmental re-inspection versus dye-based chromoendoscopy - a multi-arm randomised controlled trial (HELIOS). Gut. 2025 Mar 6;74(4):547-556. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2024-333446. |
| 39675405 | Background | Sinopoulou V, Nigam GB, Gordon M, Ganeshan M, Tokonyai MR, Dolwani S, Iacucci M, Rutter M, Subramanian V, Wilson A, East JE; British Society of Gastroenterology Colorectal IBD Surveillance Guideline Development Group. Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Endoscopic Modalities for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2025 Nov;23(12):2128-2143. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2024.11.008. Epub 2024 Dec 13. |
| 39303733 | Background | Hassan C, Rizkala T, Mori Y, Spadaccini M, Misawa M, Antonelli G, Rondonotti E, Dekker E, Houwen BBSL, Pech O, Baumer S, Li JW, von Renteln D, Haumesser C, Maselli R, Facciorusso A, Correale L, Menini M, Schiliro A, Khalaf K, Patel H, Radadiya DK, Bhandari P, Kudo SE, Sultan S, Vandvik PO, Sharma P, Rex DK, Foroutan F, Repici A; CADx analysis study group. Computer-aided diagnosis for the resect-and-discard strategy for colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2024 Nov;9(11):1010-1019. doi: 10.1016/S2468-1253(24)00222-X. Epub 2024 Sep 17. |
| 38395438 | Background | Abdelrahim M, Siggens K, Iwadate Y, Maeda N, Htet H, Bhandari P. New AI model for neoplasia detection and characterisation in inflammatory bowel disease. Gut. 2024 Apr 5;73(5):725-728. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2023-330718. No abstract available. |
| 26408903 | Background | Deepak P, Hanson GJ, Fletcher JG, Tremaine WJ, Pardi DS, Kisiel JB, Schroeder KW, Wong Kee Song LM, Harmsen WS, Loftus EV Jr, Bruining DH. Incremental diagnostic yield of chromoendoscopy and outcomes in inflammatory bowel disease patients with a history of colorectal dysplasia on white-light endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2016 May;83(5):1005-12. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2015.09.021. Epub 2015 Sep 25. |
| 28126349 | Background | Leong RW, Ooi M, Corte C, Yau Y, Kermeen M, Katelaris PH, McDonald C, Ngu M. Full-Spectrum Endoscopy Improves Surveillance for Dysplasia in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Diseases. Gastroenterology. 2017 May;152(6):1337-1344.e3. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2017.01.008. Epub 2017 Jan 23. |
| 18844620 | Background | Marion JF, Waye JD, Present DH, Israel Y, Bodian C, Harpaz N, Chapman M, Itzkowitz S, Steinlauf AF, Abreu MT, Ullman TA, Aisenberg J, Mayer L; Chromoendoscopy Study Group at Mount Sinai School of Medicine. Chromoendoscopy-targeted biopsies are superior to standard colonoscopic surveillance for detecting dysplasia in inflammatory bowel disease patients: a prospective endoscopic trial. Am J Gastroenterol. 2008 Sep;103(9):2342-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2008.01934.x. |
| 23899540 | Background | Efthymiou M, Allen PB, Taylor AC, Desmond PV, Jayasakera C, De Cruz P, Kamm MA. Chromoendoscopy versus narrow band imaging for colonic surveillance in inflammatory bowel disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2013 Sep;19(10):2132-8. doi: 10.1097/MIB.0b013e31829637b9. |
| 38740327 | Background | Lopez-Serrano A, Voces A, Lorente JR, Santonja FJ, Algarra A, Latorre P, Del Pozo P, Paredes JM. Artificial intelligence for dysplasia detection during surveillance colonoscopy in patients with ulcerative colitis: A cross-sectional, non-inferiority, diagnostic test comparison study. Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2025 Feb;48(2):502210. doi: 10.1016/j.gastrohep.2024.502210. Epub 2024 May 11. English, Spanish. |
| 37224199 | Background | Rajpurkar P, Lungren MP. The Current and Future State of AI Interpretation of Medical Images. N Engl J Med. 2023 May 25;388(21):1981-1990. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra2301725. No abstract available. |
| 35644932 | Background | Yamamoto S, Kinugasa H, Hamada K, Tomiya M, Tanimoto T, Ohto A, Toda A, Takei D, Matsubara M, Suzuki S, Inoue K, Tanaka T, Hiraoka S, Okada H, Kawahara Y. The diagnostic ability to classify neoplasias occurring in inflammatory bowel disease by artificial intelligence and endoscopists: A pilot study. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022 Aug;37(8):1610-1616. doi: 10.1111/jgh.15904. Epub 2022 Jun 4. |
| 38354499 | Background | Liu X, Reigle J, Prasath VBS, Dhaliwal J. Artificial intelligence image-based prediction models in IBD exhibit high risk of bias: A systematic review. Comput Biol Med. 2024 Mar;171:108093. doi: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2024.108093. Epub 2024 Feb 1. |
| 37855759 | Background | Samarasena J, Yang D, Berzin TM. AGA Clinical Practice Update on the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Colon Polyp Diagnosis and Management: Commentary. Gastroenterology. 2023 Dec;165(6):1568-1573. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2023.07.010. Epub 2023 Oct 17. |
| 35304117 | Background | Wallace MB, Sharma P, Bhandari P, East J, Antonelli G, Lorenzetti R, Vieth M, Speranza I, Spadaccini M, Desai M, Lukens FJ, Babameto G, Batista D, Singh D, Palmer W, Ramirez F, Palmer R, Lunsford T, Ruff K, Bird-Liebermann E, Ciofoaia V, Arndtz S, Cangemi D, Puddick K, Derfus G, Johal AS, Barawi M, Longo L, Moro L, Repici A, Hassan C. Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Miss Rate of Colorectal Neoplasia. Gastroenterology. 2022 Jul;163(1):295-304.e5. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2022.03.007. Epub 2022 Mar 15. |
| 102341 | Background | Piccioni RG, Mauzerall DC. Calcium and photosynthetic oxygen evolution in cyanobacteria. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1978 Dec 7;504(3):384-97. doi: 10.1016/0005-2728(78)90061-0. |
| 38272274 | Background | Lee MCM, Parker CH, Liu LWC, Farahvash A, Jeyalingam T. Impact of study design on adenoma detection in the evaluation of artificial intelligence-aided colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2024 May;99(5):676-687.e16. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2024.01.021. Epub 2024 Jan 24. |
| 30840605 | Background | Rubin DT, Ananthakrishnan AN, Siegel CA, Sauer BG, Long MD. ACG Clinical Guideline: Ulcerative Colitis in Adults. Am J Gastroenterol. 2019 Mar;114(3):384-413. doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000000152. |
| 34416977 | Background | Murthy SK, Feuerstein JD, Nguyen GC, Velayos FS. AGA Clinical Practice Update on Endoscopic Surveillance and Management of Colorectal Dysplasia in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: Expert Review. Gastroenterology. 2021 Sep;161(3):1043-1051.e4. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2021.05.063. |
| 36528797 | Background | Gordon H, Biancone L, Fiorino G, Katsanos KH, Kopylov U, Al Sulais E, Axelrad JE, Balendran K, Burisch J, de Ridder L, Derikx L, Ellul P, Greuter T, Iacucci M, Di Jiang C, Kapizioni C, Karmiris K, Kirchgesner J, Laharie D, Lobaton T, Molnar T, Noor NM, Rao R, Saibeni S, Scharl M, Vavricka SR, Raine T. ECCO Guidelines on Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Malignancies. J Crohns Colitis. 2023 Jun 16;17(6):827-854. doi: 10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjac187. No abstract available. |
| 28983504 | Background | Gallinger ZR, Rumman A, Murthy SK, Nguyen GC. Perspectives on endoscopic surveillance of dysplasia in inflammatory bowel disease: a survey of academic gastroenterologists. Endosc Int Open. 2017 Oct;5(10):E974-E979. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-117944. Epub 2017 Oct 4. |
| 33159472 | Background | Gordon C, Chee D, Hamilton B, Heerasing NM, Hendy P, Chanchlani N, Lin S, Wesley E, Daniels IR, Silva N, Osborne M, Kennedy NA, Goodhand JR, Ahmad T. Root-cause analyses of missed opportunities for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2021 Jan;53(2):291-301. doi: 10.1111/apt.16155. Epub 2020 Nov 7. |
| 40306978 | Background | East JE, Gordon M, Nigam GB, Sinopoulou V, Bateman AC, Din S, Iacucci M, Kabir M, Lamb CA, Wilson A, Al Bakir I, Dhar A, Dolwani S, Faiz O, Hart A, Hayee B, Healey C, Leedham SJ, Novelli MR, Raine T, Rutter MD, Shepherd NA, Subramanian V, Vance M, Wakeman R, White L, Trudgill NJ, Morris AJ. British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines on colorectal surveillance in inflammatory bowel disease. Gut. 2025 Apr 30;75(3):e335023. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2025-335023. Online ahead of print. |
| 30353058 | Background | Bye WA, Ma C, Nguyen TM, Parker CE, Jairath V, East JE. Strategies for Detecting Colorectal Cancer in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Cochrane Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2018 Dec;113(12):1801-1809. doi: 10.1038/s41395-018-0354-7. Epub 2018 Oct 23. |
| 33433655 | Background | Wan Q, Zhao R, Xia L, Wu Y, Zhou Y, Wang Y, Cui Y, Shen X, Wu XT. Inflammatory bowel disease and risk of gastric, small bowel and colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis of 26 observational studies. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2021 Apr;147(4):1077-1087. doi: 10.1007/s00432-020-03496-0. Epub 2021 Jan 12. |
| 32066530 | Background | Olen O, Erichsen R, Sachs MC, Pedersen L, Halfvarson J, Askling J, Ekbom A, Sorensen HT, Ludvigsson JF. Colorectal cancer in Crohn's disease: a Scandinavian population-based cohort study. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020 May;5(5):475-484. doi: 10.1016/S2468-1253(20)30005-4. Epub 2020 Feb 14. |
| 31929014 | Background | Olen O, Erichsen R, Sachs MC, Pedersen L, Halfvarson J, Askling J, Ekbom A, Sorensen HT, Ludvigsson JF. Colorectal cancer in ulcerative colitis: a Scandinavian population-based cohort study. Lancet. 2020 Jan 11;395(10218):123-131. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32545-0. |
Upon reasonable request. |
| Jun 30, 2026 |
| Prot_SAP_000.pdf |
| ICF | No | No | Yes | Informed Consent Form | Apr 24, 2023 | Jun 30, 2026 | ICF_001.pdf |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D015212 | Inflammatory Bowel Diseases |
| D003093 | Colitis, Ulcerative |
| D003424 | Crohn Disease |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D005759 | Gastroenteritis |
| D005767 | Gastrointestinal Diseases |
| D004066 | Digestive System Diseases |
| D007410 | Intestinal Diseases |
| D003092 | Colitis |
| D003108 | Colonic Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D062048 | Narrow Band Imaging |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D061848 | Optical Imaging |
| D003952 | Diagnostic Imaging |
| D019937 | Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures |
| D003933 | Diagnosis |
| D008919 | Investigative Techniques |
Not provided
Not provided