Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

CAD EYE computer-aided assistance did not significantly improve adenoma detection rates in Lynch syndrome patientsAI assistance does not improve adenoma detection in Lynch syndrome

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Note that CAD EYE computer-aided assistance did not significantly improve adenoma detection rates in Lynch syndrome patients.

This multicenter randomized controlled superiority trial evaluated the impact of computer-aided detection (CAD) on colonoscopy outcomes in a specific high-risk population. The study enrolled 757 adults aged 18 years or older with genetically confirmed Lynch syndrome who were scheduled for surveillance colonoscopy. The study was conducted across nine specialized hereditary cancer surveillance centers located in Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, and Spain.

The study compared two distinct protocols: high-definition white-light (HD-WL) colonoscopy alone versus HD-WL colonoscopy with computer-aided assistance from the CAD EYE system (Fujifilm, Tokyo, Japan). The primary objective was to determine if the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) could enhance the detection of adenomas in patients with Lynch syndrome, a condition characterized by a high risk of colorectal cancer.

Regarding the primary outcome, the adenoma detection rate was 30.9% (114 of 369) in the HD-WL group compared to 33.8% (123 of 364) in the CADe group. The resulting odds ratio was 1.14, but this did not reach statistical significance (95% CI 0.83-1.57, p=0.41). These results indicate that the addition of the CAD EYE system did not provide a statistically significant increase in the detection of adenomas compared to standard high-definition white-light colonoscopy in this cohort.

Secondary outcomes focused on the diagnostic performance of the CADx system for the optical differentiation of colorectal lesions. The CADx system demonstrated a sensitivity of 85.9% (95% CI 82.0-89.1) for distinguishing neoplastic from non-neoplastic lesions. The specificity for this differentiation was reported at 91.4% (95% CI 89.4-93.0). While these figures indicate high performance, the study noted that the CADx system did not clearly improve lesion differentiation beyond what is achievable through expert optical diagnosis in specialized Lynch syndrome surveillance settings.

Safety and tolerability data were reported for both groups. In the AI-assisted group, 3 adverse events were recorded: 2 mild post-polypectomy bleedings and 1 serious pulmonary embolism or deep venous thrombosis. The serious event was noted as unrelated to the procedure. In the HD-WL group, 0 adverse events were reported. No data regarding discontinuations or specific tolerability metrics were provided.

Methodologically, the study noted that the CADe-assisted colonoscopy did not show the absolute improvement in adenoma detection rate that was assumed in the prespecified sample-size calculation. This suggests that the study may have been powered to detect a specific magnitude of improvement that was not observed. Furthermore, the lack of significant improvement in lesion differentiation suggests that expert endoscopists may already perform at a high level in these specialized settings.

Clinical implications for practice are limited by these findings. Because the CADe-assisted colonoscopy did not show a statistically significant improvement in adenoma detection rates, and the CADx system did not improve differentiation beyond expert diagnosis, the integration of this specific AI tool may not be necessary to improve outcomes in Lynch syndrome surveillance. Questions remain regarding whether different AI systems or different patient populations might yield different results, but for this specific intervention and population, no significant benefit was observed.

How this fits prior evidence

How this fits prior evidence This study addresses the clinical management of Lynch syndrome, a condition previously linked to lower mortality in surveillance programs. While the study confirms the high-risk nature of the population, it specifically addresses the role of technology in improving detection rates. It does not directly relate to the prevalence of germline MMR mutations in urothelial carcinoma or the identification of MSH2 variants in specific families.

People with Lynch syndrome have a genetic condition that increases their risk of developing certain cancers, including colon cancer. Because of this risk, these individuals require regular and very thorough surveillance colonoscopies. Doctors must be able to find and remove small growths, known as adenomas, which can eventually turn into cancer. This research aimed to see if adding a computer-aided detection (CAD) system could help doctors find more of these growths during the procedure.

To test this, researchers conducted a randomized controlled trial involving 757 adults with confirmed Lynch syndrome. The study took place across nine specialized centers in several European countries. The participants were split into two groups. One group received a standard high-definition colonoscopy, while the other group received a colonoscopy assisted by a computer-aided system designed to help identify and differentiate lesions. The primary goal was to see if the computer-aided system increased the adenoma detection rate. The results showed that the detection rate was 30.9 percent for the standard procedure and 33.8 percent for the procedure with computer assistance. This difference was not statistically significant, meaning the computer did not provide a measurable improvement in finding polyps compared to the standard method. Additionally, the system did not show a clear improvement in distinguishing between different types of tissue when compared to the expert judgment of the doctors.

Regarding safety, the study reported a few minor issues in the group using the computer-aided system, including two mild bleedings after polyp removal. There was also one serious event, a blood clot, but researchers noted this was not related to the procedure itself. No issues were reported in the group that received the standard colonoscopy.

It is important to note that while this study is large and well-conducted, it does not mean that computer-aided tools are not useful in other settings. However, for this specific group of patients being monitored by experts, the technology did not provide a measurable advantage over standard high-quality equipment. Because the study did not show a significant improvement in detection rates, it suggests that the current standard of care is already very effective for these patients.

For patients with Lynch syndrome, this means that while technology is advancing, the current standard of high-definition colonoscopy remains a reliable and effective method for surveillance. Patients should continue to follow the specific screening protocols recommended by their specialists, as the addition of this specific computer-aided tool did not change the expected outcomes for their routine screenings.

What this means for you:
Computer-aided tools did not improve the detection of polyps in Lynch syndrome patients compared to standard methods.

Study Details

Study typeRct
Sample sizen = 757
EvidenceLevel 2
Follow-up216.0 mo
PublishedOct 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence (AI)-based computer-aided detection (CADe) systems improve adenoma detection in average-risk colorectal cancer screening. Meanwhile, evidence in Lynch syndrome surveillance is sparse and inconsistent. We assessed the effect of CADe on adenoma detection during Lynch syndrome surveillance. Computer-aided optical diagnosis (CADx) performance for optical differentiation of colorectal lesions was evaluated as a secondary aim. METHODS: CADLY2 was an international, multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled superiority trial at nine specialised hereditary cancer surveillance centres in Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, and Spain. Adults aged 18 years or older with genetically confirmed Lynch syndrome scheduled for surveillance colonoscopy were randomly assigned (1:1) to high-definition white-light (HD-WL) colonoscopy alone or to HD-WL colonoscopy with computer-aided assistance from CAD EYE (Fujifilm, Tokyo, Japan). CAD EYE was used for CADe during withdrawal and for CADx after lesion detection. Randomisation was done centrally through a secure web-based system using Pocock's minimisation algorithm with a stochastic component and was stratified by centre, sex, previous colorectal cancer, underlying pathogenic variant, and interval since previous colonoscopy. Allocation concealment was ensured through the centralised web-based system. Patients were masked to group allocation until the start of withdrawal in procedures with mild sedation, or until completion of the procedure in procedures with propofol-based sedation. Endoscopists were not masked. The primary outcome was adenoma detection rate, defined as the proportion of patients with at least one histopathologically confirmed adenoma, analysed in the full analysis set (defined as all randomly allocated patients with available data for the primary outcome). The diagnostic performance of the CADx system was evaluated as a secondary outcome. The safety analysis set comprised all randomly allocated patients who underwent a study colonoscopy. This study is registered with the German Clinical Trials Register, DRKS00030695, and is completed. FINDINGS: Between May 9, 2023, and Oct 30, 2025, 757 patients were randomly allocated to HD-WL colonoscopy (377 patients) or to AI-assisted colonoscopy (380 patients); 733 patients were included in the full analysis set (369 HD-WL and 364 AI-assisted). The median age was 49 years (IQR 38-59) in the HD-WL group and 50 years (38-59) in the AI-assisted group; 213 (58%) were female and 156 (42%) male in the HD-WL group, and 207 (57%) were female and 157 (43%) male in the AI-assisted group. The adenoma detection rate was 30·9% (114 of 369 patients) with HD-WL versus 33·8% (123 of 364 patients) with CADe assistance (odds ratio 1·14 [95% CI 0·83-1·57], p=0·41). For CADx differentiation of neoplastic versus non-neoplastic lesions in the paired lesion-level analysis, with histopathology as the reference standard and sessile serrated lesions and traditional serrated adenomas classified as non-neoplastic, CADx sensitivity was 85·9% (95% CI 82·0-89·1) and specificity was 91·4% (89·4-93·0). Three adverse events occurred in the AI-assisted group: two mild post-polypectomy bleedings and one serious pulmonary embolism or deep venous thrombosis unrelated to the procedure. No adverse events occurred in the HD-WL group. INTERPRETATION: CADe-assisted colonoscopy did not show the absolute improvement in adenoma detection rate that was assumed in the prespecified sample-size calculation. CADx did not clearly improve lesion differentiation beyond expert optical diagnosis in expert Lynch syndrome surveillance settings. FUNDING: Third-party research funding of the National Center for Hereditary Tumor Syndromes, University Hospital Bonn.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.