Publications by authors named "Willemijn de Klaver"
Article Synopsis
- Colonoscopy surveillance for colorectal cancer (CRC) can be burdensome for patients, and stool tests might help reduce the need for colonoscopies by identifying individuals at higher risk.
- This study involved 3453 participants aged 50-75 who completed multiple stool tests and colonoscopies to assess the accuracy of these methods for detecting advanced neoplasia.
- Results indicated that stool-based strategies could effectively reduce colonoscopy frequency by 15%-41% while being safer and more cost-effective, particularly with fecal immunochemical tests (FITs), although multitarget stool DNA testing was found to be more expensive.
Article Synopsis
- More than half of participants with a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) result did not have advanced neoplasia detected at colonoscopy, but positive FIT results could indicate cancers located closer to the upper gastrointestinal regions.
- A study analyzed data from Dutch colorectal cancer screening participants to determine the risk of being diagnosed with cancers proximal to the colon within three years, comparing those with positive and negative FIT results.
- Findings showed that participants with positive FIT results (both with and without advanced neoplasia) had a greater risk of proximal cancers, with cumulative incidences of 0.7% and 0.6%, respectively, compared to 0.4% in those with negative FIT results.
Environmental factors like the pathogenicity island polyketide synthase positive (pks+) Escherichia coli (E. coli) could have potential for risk stratification in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. The association between pks+ E.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBackground: The faecal immunochemical test (FIT) is widely employed for colorectal cancer screening. However, its sensitivity for advanced precursor lesions remains suboptimal. The multitarget FIT (mtFIT), measuring haemoglobin, calprotectin, and serpin family F member 2, has demonstrated enhanced sensitivity for advanced neoplasia, especially advanced adenomas, at equal specificity to FIT.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFWhether colonoscopy surveillance is useful depends on the impact of colonoscopy surveillance on colorectal cancer incidence and colorectal cancer related mortality. After the introduction of colorectal cancer screening programs, with improved colonoscopy quality, and the publication of new scientific literature, the European guideline for colonoscopy surveillance was revised in 2020. The new guideline is easy to follow and differentiates between individuals with a high- and low-risk profile.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFArticle Synopsis
- Fecal Immunochemical Testing (FIT) is crucial for colorectal cancer screening, and combining FIT with other risk factors can enhance the selection of individuals for colonoscopy.
- A systematic literature review found 20 different risk models based on FIT, but most demonstrated a high risk of bias and many lacked external validation.
- Despite their promise to improve colorectal cancer screening effectiveness, the majority of these risk models require more thorough evaluation before being widely implemented.
Article Synopsis
- Scientists are finding new ways to test for colorectal cancer that are easier and less invasive than traditional methods.
- A group of experts updated the rules for how to evaluate these new tests to make sure they're effective.
- The new tests should be compared to the existing reliable tests and go through several phases of research to ensure they're safe and useful in real-world situations.
Background: The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is used in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, yet it leaves room for improvement.
Objective: To develop a multitarget FIT (mtFIT) with better diagnostic performance than FIT.
Design: Diagnostic test accuracy study.
Background And Aims: Serrated polyposis syndrome (SPS) is associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). International guidelines recommend surveillance intervals of 1-2 years. However, yearly surveillance likely leads to overtreatment for many.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFThe therapeutic landscape of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) has drastically changed over the past decade with the advent of several new anti-tumor agents. Oncologists increasingly face dilemmas concerning the best treatment sequence for individual patients since most of the novel compounds have been investigated and subsequently positioned either pre- or post-docetaxel. A currently unmet need exists for biomarkers able to guide treatment decisions and to capture treatment resistance at an early stage thereby allowing for an early change to an alternative strategy.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF