Colorectal cancer is the third leading cause of cancer deaths in the United States. Most colorectal cancers can be prevented by detecting and removing the precursor adenomatous polyp. Individual risk factors for the development of colorectal cancer will influence the particular choice of screening tool. CT colonography (CTC) is the primary imaging test for colorectal cancer screening in average-risk individuals, whereas the double-contrast barium enema (DCBE) is now considered to be a test that may be appropriate, particularly in settings where CTC is unavailable. Single-contrast barium enema has a lower performance profile and is indicated for screening only when CTC and DCBE are not available. CTC is also the preferred test for colon evaluation following an incomplete colonoscopy. Imaging tests including CTC and DCBE are not indicated for colorectal cancer screening in high-risk patients with polyposis syndromes or inflammatory bowel disease. This paper presents the updated colorectal cancer imaging test ratings and is the result of evidence-based consensus by the ACR Appropriateness Criteria Expert Panel on Gastrointestinal Imaging. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. rights reserved.

BACKGROUND: Hospital attributes have been shown to impact short- and long-term outcomes after cancer surgery. However, the effect of hospital attributes on processes of cancer care in terms of delivery of guideline recommended care has not been evaluated. We examined the impact of hospital attributes (volume and type) on guideline-recommended care in patients treated for gastric cancer. METHODS: We identified patients who were surgically treated for gastric cancer at Commission on Cancer (CoC) hospitals from 2001 to 2006. Patient, tumor, and treatment factors were compared separately by hospital volume and type. Multivariable analyses were used to evaluate the impact of hospital attributes on delivery of guideline recommended gastric cancer care: adequate lymphadenectomy (>/=15 lymph nodes), and adjuvant multimodality therapy (for AJCC Ib-IVM0), controlling for covariates. RESULTS: More than 1,490 CoC hospitals performed 37,124 gastrectomies. High-volume and teaching CoC hospitals were more likely to treat younger patients, non-whites, patients with lower AJCC stage, and to perform adequate lymphadenectomy than low-volume and community CoC hospitals (p ≤ 0.001). Hospital volume and type, however, were not associated with receipt of adjuvant multimodality therapy. These associations persisted in our multivariable analyses to show that CoC hospital attributes were associated with adequate lymphadenectomy, but marginally predictive of receipt of adjuvant multimodality therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The strong association between CoC hospital volume or type and guideline-recommended care diminishes after gastric cancer surgery. Variations in referral, insurance, and documentation patterns are potential explanations for these findings. These results highlight some limitations of using hospital attributes as a sole predictor of optimal cancer care.

BACKGROUND: Race is associated with patterns of presentation and survival outcomes of gastric cancer in the United States. However, the impact of race on the receipt of guideline-recommended care is not well characterized. By using current recommendations, the authors examined the association between race and guideline-recommended treatments and identified factors that are predictive of variations in gastric cancer care. METHODS: By using the National Cancer Database for 1998 through 2005, 106,002 patients with gastric adenocarcinoma were identified. Multivariate analysis techniques were used to examine the association between race, the receipt of guideline-recommended care, and survival after adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: Although African-American and Hispanic patients were more likely to undergo adequate lymphadenectomy (> or =15 lymph nodes) and to receive care at comprehensive cancer centers and high-volume facilities (for all, P < or = .001), they were less likely to receive adjuvant multimodality therapy for American Joint Committee on Cancer stage IB through IV, lymph node-negative (M0) disease. Up to 60% of all patients who underwent gastrectomy failed to receive adequate lymphadenectomy and adjuvant multimodality therapy. The delivery of multimodality therapy varied significantly by stage and lymph node evaluation (P < or = .001). These findings persisted on our multivariate analyses, indicating that African-American and Hispanic patients received adequate lymph node evaluation (P < or = .001), whereas they were associated with receiving no adjuvant multimodality therapy (P < or = .025). CONCLUSIONS: There were significant variations in treatment for gastric cancer among ethnic groups in the United States. It was noteworthy that, although nonwhite race was associated with improved surgical care, gastric cancer care remained suboptimal overall. Cancer programs need to identify procedures to maximize the delivery of adequate gastric cancer care to all patients.

BACKGROUND: Regional-based studies have indicated that ethnicity is associated with presentation and outcome in patients with gastric adenocarcinoma. To validate this observation in a large cohort, the authors of this report used the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) to determine whether self-reported ethnicity influences presentation and survival in this patient population. METHODS: Patient demographics, tumor-relatedfeatures, and treatment-related features were analyzed by ethnicity. Univariate analyses were performed using the chi-square test. Overall median and relative survival rates were examined by using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional-hazards models were used to identify the predictors of survival outcomes. RESULTS: Between 1995 and 2002, 81,095 cases of gastric adenocarcinoma were entered into the NCDB. There were 57,943 white patients (71.5%), 11,094 African-American patients (13.7%), 5665 Hispanic patients (7%), 4736 Asian/Pacific Islander (API) patients (5.8%), and 1657 patients of other ethnicities (2%). Significant differences were observed according to ethnicity among the variables that were compared (all P < .01). In patients with stage I and II disease, the 5-year relative survival rates for APIs (stage I, 77.2%; stage II, 48%) were more favorable than for whites (stage I, 58.7%; stage II, 32.8%), African Americans (stage I, 55.9%; stage II, 37.9%), and Hispanics (stage I, 60.8%; stage II, 39.3%). The overall median survival of APIs was more favorable than that of others (P < .01). Predictors of a better outcome were Asian race, female sex, younger age, earlier stage, lower grade, distal tumors, multimodality treatment, and care at a teaching hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Ethnicity was associated with differences in presentation and outcome of patients with gastric adenocarcinoma. APIs had a more favorable outcome than patients of other ethnicities. Further studies should target underlying biologic and socioeconomic factors to explain these differences.