The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Long-term risk of colorectal cancer after adenoma removal: a population-based cohort study
Abstract
Background: Previous studies examining the incidence of colorectal cancer after polypectomy have provided discordant findings. The aim of this study was to compare the risk of colorectal cancer after adenoma removal in routine clinical practice with the risk in the general population. Design: Cohort study based on detailed data from a population-based registry that has collected all cases of both colorectal cancers and adenomas diagnosed in a clearly-defined population since 1976. Setting: French administrative area of Côte-d'Or (Burgundy). Methods: Residents of the area diagnosed for the first time with colorectal adenoma between 1990 and 1999 were included (n=5779). Initial and follow-up data until December 2003 were used to calculate the colorectal cancer standardised incidence ratio (SIR) and cumulative probabilities after adenoma removal. Results: After a median follow-up of 7.7 years, 87 invasive colorectal cancers were diagnosed whereas 69 cases were expected. Compared with the general population, the overall SIR was 1.26 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.56). The risk of colorectal cancer depended on the characteristics of the initial adenoma (SIR 2.23 (95% CI 1.67 to 2.92) for advanced adenomas and 0.68 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.99) for non-advanced adenomas). In cases of advanced adenomas, the SIR was 1.10 (95% CI 0.62 to 1.82) in patients with colonoscopic follow-up and 4.26 (95% CI 2.89 to 6.04) in those without. The 10-year cumulative probabilities of colorectal cancer were, respectively, 2.05% (95% CI 1.14% to 3.64%) and 6.22% (95% CI 4.26% to 9.02%). Conclusions: In routine practice, the risk of colorectal cancer after adenoma removal remains high and depends both on initial adenoma features and on colonoscopy surveillance practices. Gastroenterologists should encourage patients to comply with long-term colonoscopic surveillance.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Dekker, E., Tanis, P. J., Vleugels, J. L. A., Kasi, P. M., & Wallace, M. B. (2019) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(19)32319-0 · Cited by 4,974
Lieberman, D. A., Rex, D. K., Winawer, S. J., Giardiello, F. M., Johnson, D. A., & Levin, T. R. (2012) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2012.06.001 · Cited by 1,892
Long-term colorectal-cancer incidence and mortality after lower endoscopy
Nishihara, R., Wu, K., Lochhead, P., Morikawa, T., Liao, X., Qian, Z. R., Inamura, K., Kim, S. A., Kuchiba, A., Yamauchi, M., et al. (2013) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1301969 · Cited by 1,483
Hassan, C., Quintero, E., Dumonceau, J.-M., Regula, J., Brandão, C., Chaussade, S., Dekker, E., Dinis-Ribeiro, M., Ferlitsch, M., Gimeno-García, A., et al. (2013) · Endoscopy · doi:10.1055/s-0033-1344548 · Cited by 554
Belderbos, T., Leenders, M., Moons, L., & Siersema, P. (2014) · Endoscopy · doi:10.1055/s-0034-1364970 · Cited by 403
Metadata
- Authors
- Cottet, V., Jooste, V., Fournel, I., Bouvier, A.-M., Faivre, J., & Bonithon-Kopp, C.
- Venue
- Gut
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2011-11-22
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1180-1186
- ISSN
- 0017-5749 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-3288
- OpenAlex
- W2101521482
- Cited by
- 279
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Long-term risk of colorectal cancer after adenoma removal: a population-based cohort study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/gutjnl-2011-300295
- The paper
- Cottet, V., Jooste, V., Fournel, I., Bouvier, A.-M., Faivre, J., & Bonithon-Kopp, C. (2012). Long-term risk of colorectal cancer after adenoma removal: a population-based cohort study. Gut. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2011-300295
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.