Literature DB >> 19431212

Performance of immunochemical faecal occult blood test in colorectal cancer screening in average-risk population according to positivity threshold and number of samples.

Lydia Guittet1, Véronique Bouvier, Nicole Mariotte, Jean-Pierre Vallee, Romuald Levillain, Jean Tichet, Guy Launoy.   

Abstract

Immunochemical faecal occult blood tests (I-FOBT) detect more effectively advanced neoplasia than guaiac tests (G-FOBT). The study aim was to compare the performance of an I-FOBT whilst varying the positivity threshold and considering four analysis modalities: one sample was performed (MG(1)), two samples were performed and at least one sample was positive (MG(2+)), both samples were positive (MG(2++)) or the mean of the two samples' log-transformed haemoglobin contents exceeded the cutoff (MG(2m)). Screening for colorectal cancer using both G-FOBT and two samples' I-FOBT was performed by an average-risk population sample of 20,322 subjects. Among the 1,615 subjects with at least one positive test, 1,277 had a satisfactory colonoscopy result; 43 invasive cancers and 270 high-risk adenomas were detected. The I-FOBT was reinterpreted under each analysis modality (a random selection of one sample led to MG(1)). For all modalities, increasing the positivity threshold decreased sensitivity and increased specificity. The relative ROC curves (in reference to G-FOBT) demonstrated similar performance for MG(1) and MG(2+), and improved performance for MG(2m). MG(2++) sensitivity was limited within the range of positivity thresholds evaluated. For any specificity, MG(2m) provided the highest sensitivity. For any sensitivity, MG(2m) provided the highest specificity. For any positivity rate, MG(2m) provided both the highest sensitivity and specificity. This study suggests the replacement of MG(2+) by MG(1) or, for even better performance, by MG(2m) provided that two samples are performed with similar participation (which should be explored). The targeted positivity rate could then be achieved by choosing the positivity threshold. 2009 UICC.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19431212     DOI: 10.1002/ijc.24407

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cancer        ISSN: 0020-7136            Impact factor:   7.396


  6 in total

1.  Malignant colorectal polyps.

Authors:  Luis Bujanda; Angel Cosme; Ines Gil; Juan I Arenas-Mirave
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-07-07       Impact factor: 5.742

2.  Fecal immunochemical test accuracy in average-risk colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Vicent Hernandez; Joaquin Cubiella; M Carmen Gonzalez-Mao; Felipe Iglesias; Concepción Rivera; M Begoña Iglesias; Lucía Cid; Ines Castro; Luisa de Castro; Pablo Vega; Jose Antonio Hermo; Ramiro Macenlle; Alfonso Martínez-Turnes; David Martínez-Ares; Pamela Estevez; Estela Cid; M Carmen Vidal; Angeles López-Martínez; Elisabeth Hijona; Marta Herreros-Villanueva; Luis Bujanda; Jose Ignacio Rodriguez-Prada
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-01-28       Impact factor: 5.742

3.  Participant-Related Risk Factors for False-Positive and False-Negative Fecal Immunochemical Tests in Colorectal Cancer Screening: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Clasine M de Klerk; Lisanne M Vendrig; Patrick M Bossuyt; Evelien Dekker
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-08-29       Impact factor: 10.864

4.  Double sampling of a faecal immunochemical test is not superior to single sampling for detection of colorectal neoplasia: a colonoscopy controlled prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Frank A Oort; Sietze T van Turenhout; Veerle M H Coupé; René W M van der Hulst; Eric I C Wesdorp; Jochim S Terhaar sive Droste; Ilhame Ben Larbi; Shannon L Kanis; Edwin van Hengel; Anneke A Bouman; Gerrit A Meijer; Chris J J Mulder
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2011-10-10       Impact factor: 4.430

5.  Comparison of One versus Two Fecal Immunochemical Tests in the Detection of Colorectal Neoplasia in a Population-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Program.

Authors:  Sarvenaz Moosavi; Robert Enns; Laura Gentile; Lovedeep Gondara; Colleen McGahan; Jennifer Telford
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2016-12-01

Review 6.  Evaluation and treatment of iron deficiency anemia: a gastroenterological perspective.

Authors:  Amy Zhu; Marc Kaneshiro; Jonathan D Kaunitz
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2010-01-27       Impact factor: 3.199

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.