scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Seth N. Glick

Bio: Seth N. Glick is an academic researcher from University of Pennsylvania. The author has contributed to research in topics: Barium enema & Colorectal cancer. The author has an hindex of 21, co-authored 77 publications receiving 6565 citations. Previous affiliations of Seth N. Glick include Washington University in St. Louis & Hahnemann University Hospital.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Clinicians should be prepared to offer patients a choice between a screening test that is effective at both early cancer detection and cancer prevention through the detection and removal of polyps and those that can detect cancer early and also can detect adenomatous polyps.

2,876 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In the United States, colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer diagnosed among men and women and the second leading cause of death from cancer CRC largely can be prevented by the detection and removal of adenomatous polyps, and survival is significantly better when CRC is diagnosed while still localized.
Abstract: In the United States, colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer diagnosed among men and women and the second leading cause of death from cancer CRC largely can be prevented by the detection and removal of adenomatous polyps, and survival is significantly better when CRC is diagnosed while still localized In 2006 to 2007, the American Cancer Society, the US Multi Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology came together to develop consensus guidelines for the detection of adenomatous polyps and CRC in asymptomatic average-risk adults In this update of each organization's guidelines, screening tests are grouped into those that primarily detect cancer early and those that can detect cancer early and also can detect adenomatous polyps, thus providing a greater potential for prevention through polypectomy When possible, clinicians should make patients aware of the full range of screening options, but at a minimum they should be prepared to offer patients a choice between a screening test that is effective at both early cancer detection and cancer prevention through the detection and removal of polyps and a screening test that primarily is effective at early cancer detection It is the strong opinion of these 3 organizations that colon cancer prevention should be the primary goal of screening

1,334 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A practical guide to the interpretation of CT colonography results: the CT Colonography Reporting and Data System, or “C-RADS,” is presented, which is coupled to recommendations for follow-up.
Abstract: Computed tomographic (CT) colonography continues to evolve rapidly. Advances in scanning and display technologies, encouraging performance data, and increased utilization necessitate clarification and standardization of results reporting in CT colonography. There are several reasons for this. First and most important, standardized reporting can better assist patients and referring physicians in making management decisions on the basis of the results of CT colonography. The precedent of the mammography Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System, or BI-RADS, schema is a strong incentive to provide a similar structure for CT colonography. Second, as more examinations are performed, the likelihood increases that radiologists interpreting results of a CT colonography examination performed at one center will require comparison to examination results and reports generated at other sites. As has been seen with mammography, a common set of terms facilitates this kind of assessment (1). Third, as utilization of CT colonography increases, our colleagues in other medical specialties, the various third-party payers, and the general public will insist on larger-scale evaluations of examination performance, examination quality, patient outcome, and cost. Here again, a common approach to interpretation will assist us in meeting these demands. Finally, a common scheme for reporting facilitates structured reporting. The purpose of this communication is to facilitate clear and consistent communication of CT colonography results. The authors—an ad hoc group of investigators active in the area of CT colonography—have collaborated to develop a reporting scheme that is coupled to recommendations for follow-up. Our group, the Working Group on Virtual Colonoscopy, includes members of the American College of Radiology Colon Cancer Committee. On the basis of our collective experience and a review of the relevant literature, we present a practical guide to the interpretation of CT colonography results: the CT Colonography Reporting and Data System, or “C-RADS.” Future multidisciplinary collaboration and longitudinal data may lead to a refinement of the terms and concepts we present here; our effort is a starting point in which we attempt to address the needs of current practice. Adequate training and rigorous quality control of examination performance are essential elements for maximizing the potential of CT colonography; however, these related topics will not be discussed here. Instead, we will focus on the interpretation and follow-up of CT colonography results in three parts: first, a description of terms useful for reporting the size, morphologic features, and location of polyps and masses; second, a description of a classification scheme for colonic lesions and suggestions for follow-up; Published online 10.1148/radiol.2361041926 Radiology 2005; 236:3–9 1 From the Division of Abdominal Imaging and Intervention, Department of Radiology/ White 270, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA 02114 (M.E.Z.). The complete list of author affiliations is at the end of this article. Received November 12, 2004; accepted November 15. Address correspondence to M.E.Z. (e-mail: mzalis@partners.org).

595 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The Quality Assurance Task Group of the National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable developed a reporting and data system for colonoscopy based on continuous quality improvement indicators that provides a tool that can be used for efforts in continuousquality improvement within and across practices that use colonoscopes.

282 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
01 Apr 2017-Gut
TL;DR: Pattern and trends in CRC incidence and mortality correlate with present human development levels and their incremental changes might reflect the adoption of more western lifestyles, pointing towards widening disparities and an increasing burden in countries in transition.
Abstract: Objective The global burden of colorectal cancer (CRC) is expected to increase by 60% to more than 2.2 million new cases and 1.1 million deaths by 2030. In this study, we aim to describe the recent CRC incidence and mortality patterns and trends linking the findings to the prospects of reducing the burden through cancer prevention and care. Design Estimates of sex-specific CRC incidence and mortality rates in 2012 were extracted from the GLOBOCAN database. Temporal patterns were assessed for 37 countries using data from Cancer Incidence in Five Continents (CI5) volumes I–X and the WHO mortality database. Trends were assessed via the annual percentage change using joinpoint regression and discussed in relation to human development levels. Results CRC incidence and mortality rates vary up to 10-fold worldwide, with distinct gradients across human development levels, pointing towards widening disparities and an increasing burden in countries in transition. Generally, CRC incidence and mortality rates are still rising rapidly in many low-income and middle-income countries; stabilising or decreasing trends tend to be seen in highly developed countries where rates remain among the highest in the world. Conclusions Patterns and trends in CRC incidence and mortality correlate with present human development levels and their incremental changes might reflect the adoption of more western lifestyles. Targeted resource-dependent interventions, including primary prevention in low-income, supplemented with early detection in high-income settings, are needed to reduce the number of patients with CRC in future decades.

3,321 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Clinicians should be prepared to offer patients a choice between a screening test that is effective at both early cancer detection and cancer prevention through the detection and removal of polyps and those that can detect cancer early and also can detect adenomatous polyps.

2,876 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Findings support the hypothesis that colonoscopic removal of adenomatous polyps prevents death from colorectal cancer.
Abstract: BACKGROUND In the National Polyp Study (NPS), colorectal cancer was prevented by colonoscopic removal of adenomatous polyps. We evaluated the long-term effect of colonoscopic polypectomy in a study on mortality from colorectal cancer. METHODS We included in this analysis all patients prospectively referred for initial colonoscopy (between 1980 and 1990) at NPS clinical centers who had polyps (adenomas and nonadenomas). The National Death Index was used to identify deaths and to determine the cause of death; follow-up time was as long as 23 years. Mortality from colorectal cancer among patients with adenomas removed was compared with the expected incidence-based mortality from colorectal cancer in the general population, as estimated from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Program, and with the observed mortality from colorectal cancer among patients with nonadenomatous polyps (internal control group). RESULTS Among 2602 patients who had adenomas removed during participation in the study, after a median of 15.8 years, 1246 patients had died from any cause and 12 had died from colorectal cancer. Given an estimated 25.4 expected deaths from colorectal cancer in the general population, the standardized incidence-based mortality ratio was 0.47 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.26 to 0.80) with colonoscopic polypectomy, suggesting a 53% reduction in mortality. Mortality from colorectal cancer was similar among patients with adenomas and those with nonadenomatous polyps during the first 10 years after polypectomy (relative risk, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.1 to 10.6). CONCLUSIONS These findings support the hypothesis that colonoscopic removal of adenomatous polyps prevents death from colorectal cancer. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others.)

2,381 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
21 Jun 2016-JAMA
TL;DR: It is concluded with high certainty that screening for colorectal cancer in average-risk, asymptomatic adults aged 50 to 75 years is of substantial net benefit.
Abstract: Importance Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States. In 2016, an estimated 134 000 persons will be diagnosed with the disease, and about 49 000 will die from it. Colorectal cancer is most frequently diagnosed among adults aged 65 to 74 years; the median age at death from colorectal cancer is 73 years. Objective To update the 2008 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on screening for colorectal cancer. Evidence Review The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on the effectiveness of screening with colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, computed tomography colonography, the guaiac-based fecal occult blood test, the fecal immunochemical test, the multitargeted stool DNA test, and the methylated SEPT9 DNA test in reducing the incidence of and mortality from colorectal cancer or all-cause mortality; the harms of these screening tests; and the test performance characteristics of these tests for detecting adenomatous polyps, advanced adenomas based on size, or both, as well as colorectal cancer. The USPSTF also commissioned a comparative modeling study to provide information on optimal starting and stopping ages and screening intervals across the different available screening methods. Findings The USPSTF concludes with high certainty that screening for colorectal cancer in average-risk, asymptomatic adults aged 50 to 75 years is of substantial net benefit. Multiple screening strategies are available to choose from, with different levels of evidence to support their effectiveness, as well as unique advantages and limitations, although there are no empirical data to demonstrate that any of the reviewed strategies provide a greater net benefit. Screening for colorectal cancer is a substantially underused preventive health strategy in the United States. Conclusions and Recommendations The USPSTF recommends screening for colorectal cancer starting at age 50 years and continuing until age 75 years (A recommendation). The decision to screen for colorectal cancer in adults aged 76 to 85 years should be an individual one, taking into account the patient’s overall health and prior screening history (C recommendation).

2,100 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This update focused on screening in asymptomatic, average-risk adults (aged 50 years), but also considered previous recommendations for persons at increased or high risk for CRC, including persons with a history of adenomatous polyps or a previous curative resection of CRC.

2,051 citations