Skip to main content

Table 2 Comparing FAP versus AFAP upper gastrointestinal phenotypes

From: Variables affecting penetrance of gastric and duodenal phenotype in familial adenomatous polyposis patients

Characteristics

Total (n = 150)

FAP (n = 79)

AFAP (n = 71)

p-value1

Number duodenal polyps:

 Median (25th–75th percentile)

7 (1–18)

17 (8–33)

4 (0–7)

< 0.0001*

Sum diameter duodenal polyps:

 Median (25th–75th percentile)

15.5 (5–43)

32 (15–75)

7 (0–15)

< 0.0001*

 Number with zero duodenal polyps

27 (18.0%)

6 (7.6%)

21 (29.6%)

0.0005

Spigelman classification: 0

27 (18.0%)

6 (7.6%)

21 (29.6%)

< 0.0001*

 I

19 (12.7%)

3 (3.8%)

16 (22.5%)

30 (42.3%)

 II

81 (54%)

51 (64.6%)

 III

22 (14.7%)

18 (22.8%)

4 (5.6%)

 IV

1 (0.7%)

1 (1.3%)

0 (0%)

Number of ampullas with adenoma involvement:

 Yes

20 (13.3%)

15 (19%)

5 (7%)

0.0659

 No

97 (64.7%)

50 (63.3%)

47 (66.2%)

 Missing

33 (22%)

14 (17.7%)

19 (26.8%)

Sum diameter duodenal polyps ≥10 mm

65% (n = 97)

82% (n = 67)

44% (n = 30)

< 0.0001*

Number gastric polyps:

    

Median (25th–75th percentile)

72.5 (15–200)

50 (15–150)

100 (1–200)

0.6703

Patients with > 10 gastric polyps

78.0% (117)

81.0% (64)

74.7% (53)

0.3474

  1. 1Continuous variables compared with Wilcoxon rank sum test (number and sum diameter of polyps). Median and 25th–75th percentile describe the distribution of the variable within the Total, FAP and AFAP groups. Categorical values compared with chi-square test (sum diameter duodenal polyps > 10, patients > 10 gastric polyps).
  2. *When smokers or recent NSAID usage was excluded, there was no change in significant associations with FAP vs AFAP