Natural History of Colorectal Cancer
Molecular Events Associated With Colon Carcinogenesis
Family History as a Risk Factor for Colorectal Cancer
Inheritance of Colorectal Cancer Predisposition
Difficulties in Identifying a Family History of Colorectal Cancer Risk
Other Risk Factors for Colorectal Cancer
Interventions
        State of the evidence base
        Rationale for screening
        Identification of persons at high genetic risk of colorectal cancer
Primary Prevention of Familial Colorectal Cancer
        Chemoprevention
        Modifying behavioral risk factors

 [Note: Many of the medical and scientific terms used in this summary are found in the NCI Dictionary of Genetics Terms. When a linked term is clicked, the definition will appear in a separate window.]

Colorectal cancer is a commonly diagnosed cancer in both men and women. In 2008, an estimated 148,810 new cases will be diagnosed, and 49,960 deaths from colorectal cancer will occur.[1] Two kinds of observations indicate a genetic contribution to colorectal cancer risk: (1) increased incidence of colorectal cancer among persons with a family history of colorectal cancer; and (2) families in which multiple family members are affected with colorectal cancer, in a pattern indicating autosomal dominant inheritance of cancer susceptibility.[2-6] About 75% of patients with colorectal cancer have sporadic disease, with no apparent evidence of having inherited the disorder. The remaining 25% of patients have a family history of colorectal cancer that suggests a genetic contribution, common exposures among family members, or a combination of both. Genetic mutations have been identified as the cause of inherited cancer risk in some colon cancer–prone families; these mutations are estimated to account for only 5% to 6% of colorectal cancer cases overall. It is likely that other undiscovered major genes and background genetic factors contribute to the development of colorectal cancer, in conjunction with nongenetic risk factors.

Colorectal tumors present with a broad spectrum of neoplasms, ranging from benign growths to invasive cancer, and are predominantly epithelial-derived tumors (i.e., adenomas or adenocarcinomas). Pathologists have classified the lesions into three groups: nonneoplastic polyps, neoplastic polyps (adenomatous polyps, adenomas), and cancers. While most adenomas are polypoid, flat and depressed lesions may be more prevalent than previously recognized. Large flat and depressed lesions may be more likely to be severely dysplastic, although this remains to be clearly proven.[7,8] Specialized techniques may be needed to identify, biopsy, and remove such lesions.[9] The nonneoplastic polyps include hyperplastic, juvenile, hamartomatous, inflammatory, and lymphoid polyps, which have not generally been thought of as precursors of cancer. Research, however, suggests increased colorectal cancer risk in some families with multiple members affected with juvenile polyposis and hyperplastic polyposis.[10-12]

Epidemiologic studies have shown that a personal history of colon adenomas places one at an increased risk of developing colon cancer.[13] Two complementary interpretations of this observation are (1) the adenoma may reflect an innate or acquired tendency of the colon to form tumors, and (2) adenomas are the primary precursor lesion of colon cancer. More than 95% of colorectal cancers are carcinomas, and about 95% of these are adenocarcinomas. It is well recognized that adenomatous polyps are benign tumors that may undergo malignant transformation. They have been classified into three histologic types, with increasing malignant potential: tubular, tubulovillous, and villous. While there is no direct proof that most colorectal cancers arise from adenomas, adenocarcinomas are generally considered to arise from adenomas,[14-18] based upon these important observations: (1) benign and malignant tissue occur within colorectal tumors;[19] and (2) when patients with adenomas were followed for 20 years, the risk of cancer at the site of the adenoma was 25%, a rate much higher than that expected in the normal population.[20] Also, three characteristics of adenomas that are highly correlated with the potential to transform into cancer include large size, villous pathology, and the degree of dysplasia within the adenoma.[19] In addition, removal of adenomatous polyps is associated with reduced colorectal cancer incidence.[21,22]

The transition from normal epithelium to adenoma to carcinoma is associated with acquired molecular events.[23-25] This tumor progression model was deduced from comparison of genetic alterations seen in normal colon epithelium, adenomas of progressively larger size, and malignancies.[26,27] At least five to seven major deleterious molecular alterations may occur when a normal epithelial cell progresses in a clonal fashion to carcinoma. There are at least two major pathways by which these molecular events can lead to colorectal cancer. About 85% of colorectal cancers are due to events that result in chromosomal instability (CIN) and the remaining 15% are due to events that result in microsatellite instability (MSI or MIN, also known as replication error [RER]).[25,28,29]

The spectrum of somatic mutations contributing to the pathogenesis of colorectal cancer is likely to be far more extensive than previously appreciated. A comprehensive study that sequenced more than 13,000 genes in a series of colorectal cancers found that tumors accumulate an average of approximately 90 mutant genes. Sixty-nine genes were highlighted as relevant to the pathogenesis of colorectal cancer, and individual colorectal cancers harbored an average of nine mutant genes per tumor. In addition, each tumor studied had a distinct mutational gene signature.[30]

Key changes in CIN cancers include widespread alterations in chromosome number (aneuploidy) and detectable losses at the molecular level of portions of chromosome 5q, chromosome 18q, and chromosome 17p; and mutation of the KRAS oncogene. The important genes involved in these chromosome losses are APC(5q), DCC/MADH2/MADH4(18q), and TP53(17p),[24,31] and chromosome losses are associated with instability at the molecular and chromosomal level.[25] Among the earliest events in the colorectal tumor progression pathway is loss of the APC gene, which appears to be consistent with its important role in predisposing persons with germline APC mutations to colorectal tumors. Acquired or inherited mutations of DNA damage-repair genes also play a role in predisposing colorectal epithelial cells to mutations. Furthermore, the specific genes that undergo somatic mutations and the specific type of mutations the tumor acquires may influence the rate of tumor growth or type of pathologic change in the tumors.[31] For example, the rate of adenoma-to-carcinoma progression appears to be faster in microsatellite-unstable tumors compared with microsatellite-stable tumors. Characteristic histologic changes such as increased mucin production can be seen in tumors that demonstrate MSI, suggesting that at least some molecular events contribute to the histologic features of the tumors.

The key characteristics of MSI cancers are that they are tumors with a largely intact chromosome complement and that, as a result of defects in the DNA mismatch repair system, they more readily acquire mutations in important cancer-associated genes compared with cells that have an effective DNA mismatch repair system. These types of cancers are detectable at the molecular level by alterations in repeating units of DNA that occur normally throughout the genome, known as DNA microsatellites. Mitotic instability of microsatellites is the hallmark of MSI cancers.

The knowledge derived from the study of inherited colorectal cancer syndromes has provided important clues regarding the molecular events that mediate tumor initiation and tumor progression in people without germline abnormalities. Among the earliest events in the colorectal tumor progression pathway (both MSI and CIN) is loss of function of the APC gene product, which appears to be consistent with its important role in predisposing persons with germline APC mutations to colorectal tumors. Acquired or inherited mutations of DNA damage-repair genes also play a role in predisposing colorectal epithelial cells to mutations.

Among the earliest studies of family history of colorectal cancer were those of Utah families that reported a higher number of deaths from colorectal cancer (3.9%) among the first-degree relatives of patients who had died from colorectal cancer, compared with sex-matched and age-matched controls (1.2%).[32] This difference has since been replicated in numerous studies that have consistently found that first-degree relatives of affected cases are themselves at a twofold to threefold increased risk of colorectal cancer. Despite the various study designs (case-control, cohort), sampling frames, sample sizes, methods of data verification, analytic methods, and countries where the studies originated, the magnitude of risk is consistent.[33-38]

Population-based studies have shown a familial association for close relatives of colon cancer patients to develop colorectal cancer and other cancers.[39] Using data from a cancer family clinic patient population, the relative and absolute risk of colorectal cancer for different family history categories was estimated (Table 1).[40,41]

A systematic review and meta-analysis of familial colorectal cancer risk was reported.[41] Of 24 studies included in the analysis, all but one reported an increased risk of colorectal cancer if there was an affected first-degree relative. The relative risk (RR) for colorectal cancer in the pooled study was 2.25 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.00–2.53) if there was an affected first-degree family member. In 8 of 11 studies, if the index cancer arose in the colon, the risk was slightly higher than if it arose in the rectum. The pooled analysis revealed a RR in relatives of colon and rectal cancer patients of 2.42 (95% CI, 2.20–2.65) and 1.89 (95% CI, 1.62–2.21) respectively. The analysis did not reveal a difference in RR for colon cancer based on location of the tumor (right side vs. left side).

The number of affected family members and age at cancer diagnosis correlated with the colorectal cancer risk. In studies reporting more than one first-degree relative with colorectal cancer, the RR was 3.76 (95% CI, 2.56–5.51). The highest RR was observed when the index case was diagnosed in individuals younger than 45 years for family members of index cases diagnosed at ages 45 to 59 years, and for family members of index cases diagnosed at age 60 years or older respectively (RR 3.87, 95% CI, 2.40–6.22 vs. RR 2.25, 95% CI, 1.85–2.72 vs. RR 1.82, 95% CI, 1.47–2.25). In this meta-analysis, the familial risk of colorectal cancer associated with adenoma in a first degree relative was analyzed. The pooled analysis demonstrated an RR for colorectal cancer of 1.99 (95% CI, 1.55–2.55) in individuals who had a first-degree relative with an adenoma.[41] Other studies have reported that age at diagnosis of the adenoma influences the colorectal cancer risk, with younger age at adenoma diagnosis associated with higher RR.[42,43] As with any meta-analysis, there could be potential biases which might affect the results of the analysis, including incomplete and non-random ascertainment of studies included, publication bias, and heterogeneity between studies relative to design, target populations, and control selection. This study is reinforcement that there are significant associations between familial colorectal cancer risk, age at diagnosis of both colorectal cancer and adenomas, and multiplicity of affected family members.

When the family history includes two or more relatives with colorectal cancer, the possibility of a genetic syndrome is increased substantially. The first step in this evaluation is a detailed review of the family history to determine the number of relatives affected, their relationship to each other, the age at which the colorectal cancer was diagnosed, the presence of multiple primary colorectal cancer, and the presence of any other cancers consistent with an inherited colorectal cancer syndrome. (Refer to the Major Genetic Syndromes section of this summary for more information.) Young subjects who report a positive family history of colorectal cancer are more likely to represent a high-risk pedigree than older individuals who report a positive family history.[44] Computer models are now available to estimate the probability of developing colorectal cancer. These models can be helpful in providing genetic counseling to individuals at average risk as well as high risk of developing cancer. At least three validated models are also available for predicting the probability of carrying a mutation in a mismatch repair gene.[45-47]

Several genes associated with colorectal cancer risk have been identified; these are described in detail in the Colon Cancer Genes section of this summary. Almost all gene mutations known to cause a predisposition to colorectal cancer are inherited in an autosomal dominant fashion.[2] Thus, the family characteristics that suggest autosomal dominant inheritance of cancer predisposition are important indicators of high risk and of the possible presence of a cancer-predisposing mutation. These include the following:

1. Vertical transmission of cancer predisposition. (Vertical transmission refers to the presence of a genetic predisposition in sequential generations.)



2. Inheritance risk of 50% for both males and females. When a parent carries an autosomal dominant genetic predisposition, each child has a 50% chance of inheriting the predisposition. The risk is the same for both male and female children.



3. Other clinical characteristics also suggest inherited risk:
   • Cancers in people with an autosomal dominant predisposition typically occur at an earlier age than sporadic (nongenetic) cases.
   
   
   
   • An autosomal dominant predisposition to colorectal cancer may include a predisposition to other cancers, such as endometrial cancer, as detailed in the Major Genetic Syndromes section of this summary.
   
   
   
   • In addition, two or more primary cancers may occur in a single individual. These could be multiple primary cancers of the same type (e.g., two separate primary colorectal cancers) or primary cancer of different types (e.g., colorectal and endometrial cancer in the same individual).
   
   
   

Hereditary colorectal cancer has two well-described forms: familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP, including an attenuated form of polyposis [AFAP]), due to germline mutations in the APC gene,[48-55] and Lynch syndrome (also called hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer [HNPCC]), which is caused by germline mutations in DNA mismatch repair genes.[56-59] Many other families exhibit aggregation of colorectal cancer and/or adenomas, but with no apparent association with an identifiable hereditary syndrome, and are known collectively as familial colorectal cancer.[2]

The accuracy and completeness of family history data must be taken into account in using family history to assess individual risk in clinical practice, and in identifying families appropriate for cancer research. A reported family history may be erroneous, or a person may be unaware of relatives with cancer.[60] In addition, small family sizes and premature deaths may limit how informative a family history may be. Also, some persons may carry a genetic predisposition to colorectal cancer but do not develop cancer, giving the impression of skipped generations in a family tree.

When family histories of colon cancer were checked in a research study, a sensitivity of 73% (95% CI, 54%–86%) was obtained.[61] In this study of Utah patients, the investigators compared self-reported family history of colon cancer with a computerized Utah Population Database, which was created by linking genealogical records with the state cancer registry. The kappa score, a measure of overall agreement between the reported family history and the database, was 0.56 (95% CI, 0.45–0.66), indicating moderately good agreement. Thus, what patients tell clinicians about their family histories is a reasonably good indicator of actual history.

Other risk factors that may influence the development of adenomatous polyps and colorectal cancer risk include diet, use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), postmenopausal hormone use, cigarette smoking, colonoscopy with removal of adenomatous polyps, and physical activity.

• Dietary factors that appear to be associated with developing adenomatous polyps and an increased incidence of colorectal cancer risk include a diet high in total fat [62-64] and meat (both red and white meat).[64-75]



• Some,[76-78] but not all,[79] studies have reported an association between aspirin use and decreased adenomatous polyp development and colon cancer incidence. In addition, studies have suggested a decreased risk of colon cancer among users of postmenopausal female hormone supplements.[80,81]



• Cigarette smoking is associated with an increased tendency to form adenomas that develop into colorectal cancer.[82,83]



• Colonoscopy with removal of adenomatous polyps may reduce the risk of colorectal cancer.[21]



• A sedentary lifestyle has been associated in some,[84-86] but not all,[87] studies with an increased risk of colorectal cancer.

(Refer to the PDQ Summary on Prevention of Colorectal Cancer for more information.)

Genetic factors appear to influence the age at onset of colorectal cancer. People who have a first-degree relative with colorectal cancer are estimated to have an average onset of colorectal cancer about 10 years earlier than people with sporadic colorectal cancer.[33] The increased cancer risk conferred by a family history of colorectal cancer appears to manifest itself primarily in people younger than 60 years.[33] Markedly early onset of cancer is seen in hereditary conditions conferring an increased risk of colorectal cancer with a mean age at diagnosis of colorectal cancer in the early 30s for FAP and in the 40s for Lynch syndrome.[2,3]

For the most part, the effects of other nongenetic risk factors have not been evaluated in people who are genetically susceptible to colorectal cancer. Studies of carcinogen metabolic polymorphisms, such as glutathione-s transferase, N-acetyl transferase and steroid 17-hydroxylase/17,20-lyase (CYP17), suggest that there may be some influence on the risk of colorectal cancer through interactions with micronutrients or other environmental factors; however, these data are too preliminary to apply in a clinical setting.[65,88-91]

In practical terms, knowing that a person is at an increased risk of colorectal cancer because of a germline abnormality is most useful if the knowledge can be used to prevent the development of cancer or cancer-related morbidity and mortality once it has developed. While one can also use the information for family planning, decisions about work and retirement, and other important life decisions, prevention is usually the central concern.

This section covers screening: testing in the absence of symptoms for colorectal cancer and its precursors (i.e., adenomatous polyps) to identify people with an increased probability of developing colorectal cancer. Those with abnormalities should undergo diagnostic testing to see if they have an occult cancer, followed by treatment if cancer or a precursor is found. Taken together, this set of activities is aimed at either preventing the development of colorectal cancer by finding and removing its precursor, the adenomatous polyp, or increasing the likelihood of cure by early detection and treatment.

Primary prevention (eliminating the causes of colorectal cancer in people with genetically increased risk) is addressed later in this section.

Currently there are no published randomized controlled trials of screening in people with a genetically increased risk of colorectal cancer and few controlled comparisons. While a randomized trial with a no-screening arm is not feasible, there is a need for well-designed studies comparing various screening methods or differing periods of time between screening procedures. A published observational study that compared screened with unscreened (by choice) controls evaluated a 15-year experience with 252 relatives at risk for Lynch syndrome, 119 of whom declined screening. Eight of 133 (6%) in the screened group developed colorectal cancer, compared with 19 in the unscreened group (16%, P = .014).[92] In general, however, people with genetic risk have been excluded from the trials of colorectal cancer screening that have been published thus far, so it is not possible to estimate effectiveness by subgroup analyses. Therefore, prevention in these patients cannot be based on strong evidence of effectiveness, as is ordinarily relied on by expert groups when suggesting screening guidelines.

Given these considerations, clinical decisions are based on clinical judgment. These decisions take into account the biologic and clinical behavior of each kind of genetic condition, as well as possible parallels with patients at average risk, for whom screening is known to be effective.

The evidence base for the effectiveness of screening in average-risk people (those without apparent genetic risk) is the benchmark for considering an approach to people at increased risk. (Refer to the PDQ summary on Screening for Colorectal Cancer for more information.) In average-risk people, screening programs based on several different kinds of tests have been shown, with various degrees of persuasiveness, to prevent death from colorectal cancer:[20]

• Fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) is supported by three randomized controlled trials.[93-95]



• Sigmoidoscopy screening is supported by four case-control studies.[22,96-98]



• Colonoscopy has been shown to be effective in reducing the incidence of colorectal cancer in two cohort studies of patients with adenomatous polyps.[21,99]



• Double-contrast barium enema may be effective, considering that it allows examination of the entire bowel, but it has low sensitivity for large polyps and cancers.[20]

The fact that screening of average-risk persons reduces the risk of dying from colorectal cancer forms the basis for recommending screening in persons at a higher genetic risk of colorectal cancer. As logical as this approach seems, it is important to note that randomized trials of screening have not been performed in this special population, though observational studies performed on families with Lynch syndrome [100,101] and FAP [102] support the value of screening. These studies suggest a stage shift towards earlier stages and a probable reduction in colorectal cancer mortality among screen-detected cancers.

Widely accepted criteria (1–3 below) for appropriate screening apply as much to diseases with a strong genetic component (more than one affected first-degree relative or one first-degree relative diagnosed at younger than 60 years) as they do to other diseases.[103,104] Additional criteria (4 and 5) were added below.[105]

1. A high burden of suffering, in terms of morbidity, mortality, and loss of function.
2. A screening test that is sufficiently sensitive, specific, safe, convenient, and inexpensive.
3. Evidence that treating the condition when it is detected early, by screening, results in a better prognosis than treatment after it is detected because of symptoms.
4. Evidence on the extent to which screening test and treatment do harm.
5. The value judgment that the screening test does more good than harm.

Of these criteria, the first and second are satisfied in genetically determined colorectal cancer. The harms of screening (criterion 4), especially major complications of diagnostic colonoscopy (perforation and major bleeding), are also known. Evidence that early intervention results in better outcomes (criterion 3) is limited, but suggests benefit. One study in the setting of Lynch syndrome found earlier stage/local tumors in the screened individuals.[92]

Clinical criteria may be used to identify persons who are candidates for genetic testing to determine whether an inherited susceptibility to colorectal cancer is present. These criteria include:

• A strong family history of colorectal cancer and/or polyps.
• Multiple primary cancers in a patient with colorectal cancer.
• Existence of other cancers within the kindred consistent with known syndromes causing an inherited risk of colorectal cancer, such as endometrial cancer.
• Early age at diagnosis of colorectal cancer.

When such persons are identified, options tailored to the patient situation are considered. (Refer to the Major Genetic Syndromes section of this summary for information on specific interventions for individual syndromes.)

At this time, the use of mutation testing to identify genetic susceptibility to colorectal cancer is not recommended as a screening measure in the general population. The rarity of mutations in the APC- and Lynch syndrome-associated mismatch repair genes, and the limited sensitivity of current testing strategies, render general population testing potentially misleading and not cost effective.

Rather detailed recommendations for surveillance in FAP and Lynch syndrome have been provided by several organizations representing various medical specialties and societies. These guidelines are readily available through the National Guideline Clearinghouse:

• American Cancer Society.[106]
• U.S. Multisociety (American Gastroenterological Association [AGA], American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy [ASGE]) Task Force on Colorectal Cancer.[107]
• American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS).[108]
• National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN).[109]
• Gene Reviews.

The evidence bases for recommendations are generally included within the statements of guidelines. In many instances, these guidelines reflect expert opinion resting on studies that are rarely randomized prospective trials.

Observational studies of average-risk people have suggested that the use of some drugs and supplements (NSAIDs, estrogens, folic acid, and calcium) might prevent the development of colorectal cancer.[110] (Refer to the PDQ summary on Prevention of Colorectal Cancer for more information.) None of the evidence is convincing enough to lead expert groups to recommend these drugs and supplements specifically to prevent colorectal cancer, and few studies specifically enrolled people with an inherited predisposition for colorectal cancer. Although antioxidants are hypothesized to prevent cancer, a randomized controlled trial of antioxidant vitamins (beta carotene, vitamin C, and vitamin E) has shown no effect on colorectal cancer incidence.[111]

Randomized controlled trials have shown that NSAIDs (sulindac and celecoxib) induce regression of adenomas in patients with FAP.[112,113] However, in a small study of pediatric patients who were APC gene mutation carriers and who had not yet developed adenomas, sulindac did not yield a significant reduction in adenoma incidence.[114] These drugs may act by inhibiting cyclooxygenase II (COX-2), and therefore the production of prostaglandins, both of which are found in higher concentrations in colorectal cancers than in normal mucosa.[115] They may also act through COX-2–independent pathways that trigger programmed cell death.[116] The NSAID effect apparently stops when the drugs are stopped. The results of these trials are consistent with observational studies showing that aspirin is a protective factor for colorectal cancer.[117] No randomized trial has shown that NSAIDs prevent deaths from colorectal cancer, however, and at least one prospective study showed no association between aspirin use and the incidence of colorectal cancer. The authors concluded “the low dose of aspirin used and the short treatment period may account for the null findings.”[79] Other prospective studies showed a significant reduction in colorectal cancers in health care workers who regularly used aspirin.[118,119] A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in patients who had a personal history of colon adenomas showed a modest but statistically significant reduction in the incidence of colonic adenomas with daily aspirin use.[78] In a double-blind placebo study, daily aspirin use was also associated with reduction in the incidence of colorectal adenomas in patients with previous colorectal cancer.[120] Less is known about the effects of NSAIDs on polyp development in people with other kinds of familial cancer syndromes such as Lynch syndrome and familial aggregation. Polymorphisms in drug-metabolizing genes may contribute to variation in response to NSAIDs. For example, flavin monooxygenase 3 (FMO₃) may reduce the catabolism of sulindac, resulting in an increased efficacy in the prevention of polyps in FAP.[121]

The COX-2 inhibitors celecoxib and rofecoxib have each been shown to inhibit and cause regression of adenomas in FAP.[113,122,123] An effect of similar magnitude has been seen in trials with COX-2 inhibitors with respect to new adenoma formation in individuals with sporadic or nonfamilial adenomas.[124-128] These much larger trials, involving older subjects (older than 50 years), revealed a significant increase in drug-related serious adverse events, specifically heart attack and stroke.[127,128] These risks were duration and dose-dependent, but not clearly related to the presence of underlying cardiovascular risk factors. Publication of these findings led to termination of many cancer prevention trials and temporary suspension of COX-2 trials in FAP. Regulatory approval of celecoxib was withdrawn in some countries. There is some evidence that nonselective NSAIDs may carry cardiovascular risk as well, clouding the future for NSAIDs (with the possible exception of aspirin) in colon cancer chemoprevention.[129,130] Whether the greater risk of colorectal cancer in FAP, compared to the general population, will tilt the risk-benefit equation in FAP families in favor of COX-2 inhibitors and other NSAIDs remains to be seen.

Use of folic acid supplements for more than 15 years has been shown in one observational study to be associated with a 75% lower colorectal cancer rate (RR 0.25, 95% CI, 0.13–0.51).[69] It is hypothesized that since folate is required for DNA synthesis, suboptimal amounts might cause abnormalities in DNA synthesis or repair. Randomized controlled trials are under way to test the hypothesis that folic acid supplements prevent cardiovascular disease (through their effect on homocysteine). When completed, the trials may have enough statistical power, singly or together, to provide stronger evidence on the effect of folic acid supplements on colorectal cancer.

It has been suggested that calcium, by binding bile acids in the bowel lumen, might inhibit their carcinogenic effects.[68,131] A randomized controlled trial of calcium supplementation, with a daily intake of 1,200 mg of elemental calcium for 4 years, reduced the risk of recurrent adenomas in presumably average-risk people with adenomas by 19% (adjusted risk ratio 0.81, 95% CI, 0.67–0.99).[68] It is uncertain whether this finding applies to people with genetically increased risk of colorectal cancer. Similarly, the observational evidence that estrogens are associated with a lower incidence of colorectal cancer does not include information specifically about people with a genetically increased risk of colorectal cancer.[80,132-134]

There may be other reasons for taking drugs, such as aspirin and folic acid to prevent cardiovascular disease or taking calcium and estrogens to prevent osteoporosis. But if these substances are taken solely to prevent colorectal cancer, users should understand that the current evidence is not strong. In the case of NSAIDs, there is a small risk of bleeding complications, such as stroke and upper gastrointestinal ulceration and bleeding, to balance against the possibility of benefit.

Level of evidence for NSAIDs in FAP and nonfamilial adenomas: 1aii

Several components of diet and behavior have been suggested, with various levels of consistency, to be risk factors for colorectal cancer. (Refer to the PDQ summary on Prevention of Colorectal Cancer for more information.) These lifestyle factors may represent potential means of prevention.[110,134,135] Expert groups differ on the interpretation of the evidence for some of these components.

Little is known about whether these same factors are protective in people with a genetically increased risk of colorectal cancer. In one case-control study, physical activity, high energy, and low vegetable intake were significantly related to cancer risk in people with no family history of colorectal cancer but showed no relationship in people with a family history, despite adequate statistical power to do so.[136] One observational study has shown that the use of multivitamins and folate in women with a family history of colorectal cancer was associated with a decreased relative risk of colon cancer.[137]

References

1. American Cancer Society.: Cancer Facts and Figures 2008. Atlanta, Ga: American Cancer Society, 2008. Also available online. Last accessed October 1, 2008. 
   
   
2. Burt RW, Petersen GM: Familial colorectal cancer: diagnosis and management. In: Young GP, Rozen P, Levin B, eds.: Prevention and Early Detection of Colorectal Cancer. London, England: WB Saunders, 1996, pp 171-194. 
   
   
3. Lynch HT, Smyrk T: Hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (Lynch syndrome). An updated review. Cancer 78 (6): 1149-67, 1996.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
4. Utsunomiya J, Lynch HT, eds.: Hereditary Colorectal Cancer: Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on Colorectal Cancer (ISCC-4) November 9-11, 1989, Kobe, Japan. Tokyo, Japan: Springer-Verlag, 1990. 
   
   
5. Herrera L, ed.: Familial Adenomatous Polyposis. New York, NY: Alan R. Liss Inc, 1990. 
   
   
6. Schoen RE: Families at risk for colorectal cancer: risk assessment and genetic testing. J Clin Gastroenterol 31 (2): 114-20, 2000.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
7. O'brien MJ, Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, et al.: Flat adenomas in the National Polyp Study: is there increased risk for high-grade dysplasia initially or during surveillance? Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2 (10): 905-11, 2004.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
8. Zauber AG, O'Brien MJ, Winawer SJ: On finding flat adenomas: is the search worth the gain? Gastroenterology 122 (3): 839-40, 2002.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
9. Rembacken BJ, Fujii T, Cairns A, et al.: Flat and depressed colonic neoplasms: a prospective study of 1000 colonoscopies in the UK. Lancet 355 (9211): 1211-4, 2000.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
10. Howe JR, Mitros FA, Summers RW: The risk of gastrointestinal carcinoma in familial juvenile polyposis. Ann Surg Oncol 5 (8): 751-6, 1998.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
11. Jeevaratnam P, Cottier DS, Browett PJ, et al.: Familial giant hyperplastic polyposis predisposing to colorectal cancer: a new hereditary bowel cancer syndrome. J Pathol 179 (1): 20-5, 1996.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
12. Rashid A, Houlihan PS, Booker S, et al.: Phenotypic and molecular characteristics of hyperplastic polyposis. Gastroenterology 119 (2): 323-32, 2000.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
13. Neugut AI, Jacobson JS, DeVivo I: Epidemiology of colorectal adenomatous polyps. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2 (2): 159-76, 1993 Mar-Apr.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
14. Shinya H, Wolff WI: Morphology, anatomic distribution and cancer potential of colonic polyps. Ann Surg 190 (6): 679-83, 1979.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
15. Fenoglio CM, Lane N: The anatomical precursor of colorectal carcinoma. Cancer 34 (3): suppl:819-23, 1974.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
16. Morson B: President's address. The polyp-cancer sequence in the large bowel. Proc R Soc Med 67 (6): 451-7, 1974.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
17. Muto T, Bussey HJ, Morson BC: The evolution of cancer of the colon and rectum. Cancer 36 (6): 2251-70, 1975.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
18. Stryker SJ, Wolff BG, Culp CE, et al.: Natural history of untreated colonic polyps. Gastroenterology 93 (5): 1009-13, 1987.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
19. O'Brien MJ, Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, et al.: The National Polyp Study. Patient and polyp characteristics associated with high-grade dysplasia in colorectal adenomas. Gastroenterology 98 (2): 371-9, 1990.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
20. Winawer SJ, Stewart ET, Zauber AG, et al.: A comparison of colonoscopy and double-contrast barium enema for surveillance after polypectomy. National Polyp Study Work Group. N Engl J Med 342 (24): 1766-72, 2000.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
21. Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN, et al.: Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. N Engl J Med 329 (27): 1977-81, 1993.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
22. Müller AD, Sonnenberg A: Prevention of colorectal cancer by flexible endoscopy and polypectomy. A case-control study of 32,702 veterans. Ann Intern Med 123 (12): 904-10, 1995.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
23. Fearon ER, Vogelstein B: A genetic model for colorectal tumorigenesis. Cell 61 (5): 759-67, 1990.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
24. Vogelstein B, Kinzler KW: The multistep nature of cancer. Trends Genet 9 (4): 138-41, 1993.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
25. Lengauer C, Kinzler KW, Vogelstein B: Genetic instabilities in human cancers. Nature 396 (6712): 643-9, 1998.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
26. Vogelstein B, Fearon ER, Hamilton SR, et al.: Genetic alterations during colorectal-tumor development. N Engl J Med 319 (9): 525-32, 1988.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
27. Vogelstein B, Fearon ER, Kern SE, et al.: Allelotype of colorectal carcinomas. Science 244 (4901): 207-11, 1989.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
28. Kinzler KW, Vogelstein B: Landscaping the cancer terrain. Science 280 (5366): 1036-7, 1998.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
29. Lindblom A: Different mechanisms in the tumorigenesis of proximal and distal colon cancers. Curr Opin Oncol 13 (1): 63-9, 2001.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
30. Sjöblom T, Jones S, Wood LD, et al.: The consensus coding sequences of human breast and colorectal cancers. Science 314 (5797): 268-74, 2006.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
31. Kinzler KW, Vogelstein B: Colorectal tumors. In: Vogelstein B, Kinzler KW, eds.: The Genetic Basis of Human Cancer. 2nd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 2002, pp 583-612. 
    
    
32. Woolf CM: A genetic study of carcinoma of the large intestine. Am J Hum Genet 10 (1): 42-7, 1958.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
33. Fuchs CS, Giovannucci EL, Colditz GA, et al.: A prospective study of family history and the risk of colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 331 (25): 1669-74, 1994.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
34. Slattery ML, Kerber RA: Family history of cancer and colon cancer risk: the Utah Population Database. J Natl Cancer Inst 86 (21): 1618-26, 1994.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
35. Negri E, Braga C, La Vecchia C, et al.: Family history of cancer and risk of colorectal cancer in Italy. Br J Cancer 77 (1): 174-9, 1998.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
36. St John DJ, McDermott FT, Hopper JL, et al.: Cancer risk in relatives of patients with common colorectal cancer. Ann Intern Med 118 (10): 785-90, 1993.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
37. Duncan JL, Kyle J: Family incidence of carcinoma of the colon and rectum in north-east Scotland. Gut 23 (2): 169-71, 1982.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
38. Rozen P, Fireman Z, Figer A, et al.: Family history of colorectal cancer as a marker of potential malignancy within a screening program. Cancer 60 (2): 248-54, 1987.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
39. Hemminki K, Chen B: Familial association of colorectal adenocarcinoma with cancers at other sites. Eur J Cancer 40 (16): 2480-7, 2004.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
40. Houlston RS, Murday V, Harocopos C, et al.: Screening and genetic counselling for relatives of patients with colorectal cancer in a family cancer clinic. BMJ 301 (6748): 366-8, 1990 Aug 18-25.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
41. Johns LE, Houlston RS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of familial colorectal cancer risk. Am J Gastroenterol 96 (10): 2992-3003, 2001.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
42. Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Gerdes H, et al.: Risk of colorectal cancer in the families of patients with adenomatous polyps. National Polyp Study Workgroup. N Engl J Med 334 (2): 82-7, 1996.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
43. Ahsan H, Neugut AI, Garbowski GC, et al.: Family history of colorectal adenomatous polyps and increased risk for colorectal cancer. Ann Intern Med 128 (11): 900-5, 1998.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
44. Murff HJ, Peterson NB, Greevy R, et al.: Impact of patient age on family cancer history. Genet Med 8 (7): 438-42, 2006.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
45. Chen S, Wang W, Lee S, et al.: Prediction of germline mutations and cancer risk in the Lynch syndrome. JAMA 296 (12): 1479-87, 2006.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
46. Balmaña J, Stockwell DH, Steyerberg EW, et al.: Prediction of MLH1 and MSH2 mutations in Lynch syndrome. JAMA 296 (12): 1469-78, 2006.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
47. Barnetson RA, Tenesa A, Farrington SM, et al.: Identification and survival of carriers of mutations in DNA mismatch-repair genes in colon cancer. N Engl J Med 354 (26): 2751-63, 2006.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
48. Kinzler KW, Nilbert MC, Su LK, et al.: Identification of FAP locus genes from chromosome 5q21. Science 253 (5020): 661-5, 1991.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
49. Groden J, Thliveris A, Samowitz W, et al.: Identification and characterization of the familial adenomatous polyposis coli gene. Cell 66 (3): 589-600, 1991.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
50. Leppert M, Burt R, Hughes JP, et al.: Genetic analysis of an inherited predisposition to colon cancer in a family with a variable number of adenomatous polyps. N Engl J Med 322 (13): 904-8, 1990.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
51. Spirio L, Olschwang S, Groden J, et al.: Alleles of the APC gene: an attenuated form of familial polyposis. Cell 75 (5): 951-7, 1993.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
52. Brensinger JD, Laken SJ, Luce MC, et al.: Variable phenotype of familial adenomatous polyposis in pedigrees with 3' mutation in the APC gene. Gut 43 (4): 548-52, 1998.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
53. Soravia C, Berk T, Madlensky L, et al.: Genotype-phenotype correlations in attenuated adenomatous polyposis coli. Am J Hum Genet 62 (6): 1290-301, 1998.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
54. Pedemonte S, Sciallero S, Gismondi V, et al.: Novel germline APC variants in patients with multiple adenomas. Genes Chromosomes Cancer 22 (4): 257-67, 1998.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
55. Sieber OM, Lamlum H, Crabtree MD, et al.: Whole-gene APC deletions cause classical familial adenomatous polyposis, but not attenuated polyposis or "multiple" colorectal adenomas. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 99 (5): 2954-8, 2002.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
56. Leach FS, Nicolaides NC, Papadopoulos N, et al.: Mutations of a mutS homolog in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Cell 75 (6): 1215-25, 1993.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
57. Papadopoulos N, Nicolaides NC, Wei YF, et al.: Mutation of a mutL homolog in hereditary colon cancer. Science 263 (5153): 1625-9, 1994.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
58. Nicolaides NC, Papadopoulos N, Liu B, et al.: Mutations of two PMS homologues in hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer. Nature 371 (6492): 75-80, 1994.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
59. Miyaki M, Konishi M, Tanaka K, et al.: Germline mutation of MSH6 as the cause of hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Nat Genet 17 (3): 271-2, 1997.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
60. Glanz K, Grove J, Le Marchand L, et al.: Underreporting of family history of colon cancer: correlates and implications. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 8 (7): 635-9, 1999.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
61. Kerber RA, Slattery ML: Comparison of self-reported and database-linked family history of cancer data in a case-control study. Am J Epidemiol 146 (3): 244-8, 1997.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
62. Rose DP, Boyar AP, Wynder EL: International comparisons of mortality rates for cancer of the breast, ovary, prostate, and colon, and per capita food consumption. Cancer 58 (11): 2363-71, 1986.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
63. Newcomb PA, Storer BE, Marcus PM: Cancer of the large bowel in women in relation to alcohol consumption: a case-control study in Wisconsin (United States). Cancer Causes Control 4 (5): 405-11, 1993.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
64. Meyer F, White E: Alcohol and nutrients in relation to colon cancer in middle-aged adults. Am J Epidemiol 138 (4): 225-36, 1993.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
65. Potter JD: Reconciling the epidemiology, physiology, and molecular biology of colon cancer. JAMA 268 (12): 1573-7, 1992 Sep 23-30.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
66. Potter JD, McMichael AJ: Diet and cancer of the colon and rectum: a case-control study. J Natl Cancer Inst 76 (4): 557-69, 1986.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
67. Zheng W, Anderson KE, Kushi LH, et al.: A prospective cohort study of intake of calcium, vitamin D, and other micronutrients in relation to incidence of rectal cancer among postmenopausal women. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 7 (3): 221-5, 1998.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
68. Baron JA, Beach M, Mandel JS, et al.: Calcium supplements for the prevention of colorectal adenomas. Calcium Polyp Prevention Study Group. N Engl J Med 340 (2): 101-7, 1999.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
69. Giovannucci E, Stampfer MJ, Colditz GA, et al.: Multivitamin use, folate, and colon cancer in women in the Nurses' Health Study. Ann Intern Med 129 (7): 517-24, 1998.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
70. Howe GR, Benito E, Castelleto R, et al.: Dietary intake of fiber and decreased risk of cancers of the colon and rectum: evidence from the combined analysis of 13 case-control studies. J Natl Cancer Inst 84 (24): 1887-96, 1992.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
71. Schatzkin A, Lanza E, Corle D, et al.: Lack of effect of a low-fat, high-fiber diet on the recurrence of colorectal adenomas. Polyp Prevention Trial Study Group. N Engl J Med 342 (16): 1149-55, 2000.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
72. Fuchs CS, Giovannucci EL, Colditz GA, et al.: Dietary fiber and the risk of colorectal cancer and adenoma in women. N Engl J Med 340 (3): 169-76, 1999.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
73. Michels KB, Edward Giovannucci, Joshipura KJ, et al.: Prospective study of fruit and vegetable consumption and incidence of colon and rectal cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst 92 (21): 1740-52, 2000.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
74. Terry P, Giovannucci E, Michels KB, et al.: Fruit, vegetables, dietary fiber, and risk of colorectal cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 93 (7): 525-33, 2001.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
75. Alberts DS, Martínez ME, Roe DJ, et al.: Lack of effect of a high-fiber cereal supplement on the recurrence of colorectal adenomas. Phoenix Colon Cancer Prevention Physicians' Network. N Engl J Med 342 (16): 1156-62, 2000.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
76. Thun MJ, Namboodiri MM, Heath CW Jr: Aspirin use and reduced risk of fatal colon cancer. N Engl J Med 325 (23): 1593-6, 1991.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
77. Smalley W, Ray WA, Daugherty J, et al.: Use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and incidence of colorectal cancer: a population-based study. Arch Intern Med 159 (2): 161-6, 1999.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
78. Baron JA, Cole BF, Sandler RS, et al.: A randomized trial of aspirin to prevent colorectal adenomas. N Engl J Med 348 (10): 891-9, 2003.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
79. Stürmer T, Glynn RJ, Lee IM, et al.: Aspirin use and colorectal cancer: post-trial follow-up data from the Physicians' Health Study. Ann Intern Med 128 (9): 713-20, 1998.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
80. Grodstein F, Newcomb PA, Stampfer MJ: Postmenopausal hormone therapy and the risk of colorectal cancer: a review and meta-analysis. Am J Med 106 (5): 574-82, 1999.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
81. Terry MB, Neugut AI, Bostick RM, et al.: Risk factors for advanced colorectal adenomas: a pooled analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 11 (7): 622-9, 2002.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
82. Chao A, Thun MJ, Jacobs EJ, et al.: Cigarette smoking and colorectal cancer mortality in the cancer prevention study II. J Natl Cancer Inst 92 (23): 1888-96, 2000.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
83. Terry P, Ekbom A, Lichtenstein P, et al.: Long-term tobacco smoking and colorectal cancer in a prospective cohort study. Int J Cancer 91 (4): 585-7, 2001.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
84. White E, Jacobs EJ, Daling JR: Physical activity in relation to colon cancer in middle-aged men and women. Am J Epidemiol 144 (1): 42-50, 1996.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
85. Slattery ML, Schumacher MC, Smith KR, et al.: Physical activity, diet, and risk of colon cancer in Utah. Am J Epidemiol 128 (5): 989-99, 1988.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
86. Friedenreich CM: Physical activity and cancer prevention: from observational to intervention research. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 10 (4): 287-301, 2001.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
87. Kune GA, Kune S, Watson LF: Body weight and physical activity as predictors of colorectal cancer risk. Nutr Cancer 13 (1-2): 9-17, 1990.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
88. Lin HJ, Probst-Hensch NM, Louie AD, et al.: Glutathione transferase null genotype, broccoli, and lower prevalence of colorectal adenomas. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 7 (8): 647-52, 1998.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
89. Chen J, Stampfer MJ, Hough HL, et al.: A prospective study of N-acetyltransferase genotype, red meat intake, and risk of colorectal cancer. Cancer Res 58 (15): 3307-11, 1998.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
90. Shaheen NJ, Silverman LM, Keku T, et al.: Association between hemochromatosis (HFE) gene mutation carrier status and the risk of colon cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 95 (2): 154-9, 2003.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
91. Campbell PT, Edwards L, McLaughlin JR, et al.: Cytochrome P450 17A1 and catechol O-methyltransferase polymorphisms and age at Lynch syndrome colon cancer onset in Newfoundland. Clin Cancer Res 13 (13): 3783-8, 2007.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
92. Järvinen HJ, Aarnio M, Mustonen H, et al.: Controlled 15-year trial on screening for colorectal cancer in families with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Gastroenterology 118 (5): 829-34, 2000.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
93. Mandel JS, Bond JH, Church TR, et al.: Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. Minnesota Colon Cancer Control Study. N Engl J Med 328 (19): 1365-71, 1993.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
94. Hardcastle JD, Armitage NC, Chamberlain J, et al.: Fecal occult blood screening for colorectal cancer in the general population. Results of a controlled trial. Cancer 58 (2): 397-403, 1986.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
95. Winawer SJ, St John J, Bond J, et al.: Screening of average-risk individuals for colorectal cancer. WHO Collaborating Centre for the Prevention of Colorectal Cancer. Bull World Health Organ 68 (4): 505-13, 1990.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
96. Selby JV, Friedman GD, Quesenberry CP Jr, et al.: A case-control study of screening sigmoidoscopy and mortality from colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 326 (10): 653-7, 1992.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
97. Newcomb PA, Norfleet RG, Storer BE, et al.: Screening sigmoidoscopy and colorectal cancer mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst 84 (20): 1572-5, 1992.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
98. Kavanagh AM, Giovannucci EL, Fuchs CS, et al.: Screening endoscopy and risk of colorectal cancer in United States men. Cancer Causes Control 9 (4): 455-62, 1998.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
99. Citarda F, Tomaselli G, Capocaccia R, et al.: Efficacy in standard clinical practice of colonoscopic polypectomy in reducing colorectal cancer incidence. Gut 48 (6): 812-5, 2001.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
100. Vasen HF, den Hartog Jager FC, Menko FH, et al.: Screening for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer: a study of 22 kindreds in The Netherlands. Am J Med 86 (3): 278-81, 1989.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
101. Järvinen HJ, Mecklin JP, Sistonen P: Screening reduces colorectal cancer rate in families with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Gastroenterology 108 (5): 1405-11, 1995.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
102. Bülow S, Bülow C, Nielsen TF, et al.: Centralized registration, prophylactic examination, and treatment results in improved prognosis in familial adenomatous polyposis. Results from the Danish Polyposis Register. Scand J Gastroenterol 30 (10): 989-93, 1995.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
103. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.: Guide to Clinical Preventive Services: Report of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. 2nd ed. Baltimore, Md: Williams & Wilkins, 1996. 
     
     
104. The periodic health examination. Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination. Can Med Assoc J 121 (9): 1193-254, 1979.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
105. Woolf SH: Screening for prostate cancer with prostate-specific antigen. An examination of the evidence. N Engl J Med 333 (21): 1401-5, 1995.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
106. Smith RA, Cokkinides V, Eyre HJ: American Cancer Society guidelines for the early detection of cancer, 2006. CA Cancer J Clin 56 (1): 11-25; quiz 49-50, 2006 Jan-Feb.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
107. Winawer S, Fletcher R, Rex D, et al.: Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance: clinical guidelines and rationale-Update based on new evidence. Gastroenterology 124 (2): 544-60, 2003.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
108. Church J, Simmang C; Standards Task Force., American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons.Collaborative Group of the Americas on Inherited Colorectal Cancer and the Standards Committee of The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons., et al.: Practice parameters for the treatment of patients with dominantly inherited colorectal cancer (familial adenomatous polyposis and hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer). Dis Colon Rectum 46 (8): 1001-12, 2003.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
109. National Comprehensive Cancer Network.: NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Colorectal Cancer Screening. Version 1.2007. Rockledge, Pa: National Comprehensive Cancer Network, 2006 Available online. Last accessed March 8, 2007. 
     
     
110. Tomeo CA, Colditz GA, Willett WC, et al.: Harvard Report on Cancer Prevention. Volume 3: prevention of colon cancer in the United States. Cancer Causes Control 10 (3): 167-80, 1999.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
111. Greenberg ER, Baron JA, Tosteson TD, et al.: A clinical trial of antioxidant vitamins to prevent colorectal adenoma. Polyp Prevention Study Group. N Engl J Med 331 (3): 141-7, 1994.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
112. Hawk E, Lubet R, Limburg P: Chemoprevention in hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes. Cancer 86 (11 Suppl): 2551-63, 1999.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
113. Steinbach G, Lynch PM, Phillips RK, et al.: The effect of celecoxib, a cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor, in familial adenomatous polyposis. N Engl J Med 342 (26): 1946-52, 2000.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
114. Giardiello FM, Yang VW, Hylind LM, et al.: Primary chemoprevention of familial adenomatous polyposis with sulindac. N Engl J Med 346 (14): 1054-9, 2002.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
115. Taketo MM: Cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors in tumorigenesis (Part II). J Natl Cancer Inst 90 (21): 1609-20, 1998.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
116. Wu GD: A nuclear receptor to prevent colon cancer. N Engl J Med 342 (9): 651-3, 2000.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
117. Greenberg ER, Baron JA, Freeman DH Jr, et al.: Reduced risk of large-bowel adenomas among aspirin users. The Polyp Prevention Study Group. J Natl Cancer Inst 85 (11): 912-6, 1993.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
118. Giovannucci E, Rimm EB, Stampfer MJ, et al.: Aspirin use and the risk for colorectal cancer and adenoma in male health professionals. Ann Intern Med 121 (4): 241-6, 1994.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
119. Giovannucci E, Egan KM, Hunter DJ, et al.: Aspirin and the risk of colorectal cancer in women. N Engl J Med 333 (10): 609-14, 1995.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
120. Sandler RS, Halabi S, Baron JA, et al.: A randomized trial of aspirin to prevent colorectal adenomas in patients with previous colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 348 (10): 883-90, 2003.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
121. Hisamuddin IM, Wehbi MA, Schmotzer B, et al.: Genetic polymorphisms of flavin monooxygenase 3 in sulindac-induced regression of colorectal adenomas in familial adenomatous polyposis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 14 (10): 2366-9, 2005.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
122. Phillips RK, Wallace MH, Lynch PM, et al.: A randomised, double blind, placebo controlled study of celecoxib, a selective cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitor, on duodenal polyposis in familial adenomatous polyposis. Gut 50 (6): 857-60, 2002.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
123. Hallak A, Alon-Baron L, Shamir R, et al.: Rofecoxib reduces polyp recurrence in familial polyposis. Dig Dis Sci 48 (10): 1998-2002, 2003.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
124. Arber N, Eagle CJ, Spicak J, et al.: Celecoxib for the prevention of colorectal adenomatous polyps. N Engl J Med 355 (9): 885-95, 2006.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
125. Baron JA, Sandler RS, Bresalier RS, et al.: A randomized trial of rofecoxib for the chemoprevention of colorectal adenomas. Gastroenterology 131 (6): 1674-82, 2006.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
126. Bertagnolli MM, Eagle CJ, Zauber AG, et al.: Celecoxib for the prevention of sporadic colorectal adenomas. N Engl J Med 355 (9): 873-84, 2006.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
127. Solomon SD, McMurray JJ, Pfeffer MA, et al.: Cardiovascular risk associated with celecoxib in a clinical trial for colorectal adenoma prevention. N Engl J Med 352 (11): 1071-80, 2005.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
128. Bresalier RS, Sandler RS, Quan H, et al.: Cardiovascular events associated with rofecoxib in a colorectal adenoma chemoprevention trial. N Engl J Med 352 (11): 1092-102, 2005.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
129. Kearney PM, Baigent C, Godwin J, et al.: Do selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors and traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs increase the risk of atherothrombosis? Meta-analysis of randomised trials. BMJ 332 (7553): 1302-8, 2006.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
130. McGettigan P, Henry D: Cardiovascular risk and inhibition of cyclooxygenase: a systematic review of the observational studies of selective and nonselective inhibitors of cyclooxygenase 2. JAMA 296 (13): 1633-44, 2006.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
131. Newmark HL, Wargovich MJ, Bruce WR: Colon cancer and dietary fat, phosphate, and calcium: a hypothesis. J Natl Cancer Inst 72 (6): 1323-5, 1984.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
132. Grodstein F, Martinez ME, Platz EA, et al.: Postmenopausal hormone use and risk for colorectal cancer and adenoma. Ann Intern Med 128 (9): 705-12, 1998.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
133. Paganini-Hill A: Estrogen replacement therapy and colorectal cancer risk in elderly women. Dis Colon Rectum 42 (10): 1300-5, 1999.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
134. Potter JD: Colorectal cancer: molecules and populations. J Natl Cancer Inst 91 (11): 916-32, 1999.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
135. Cummings JH, Bingham SA: Diet and the prevention of cancer. BMJ 317 (7173): 1636-40, 1998.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
136. La Vecchia C, Gallus S, Talamini R, et al.: Interaction between selected environmental factors and familial propensity for colon cancer. Eur J Cancer Prev 8 (2): 147-50, 1999.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     
137. Fuchs CS, Willett WC, Colditz GA, et al.: The influence of folate and multivitamin use on the familial risk of colon cancer in women. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 11 (3): 227-34, 2002.  [PUBMED Abstract]
     
     

Back to Top

< Previous Section  |  Next Section >