Literature DB >> 27793749

Fresh vs Frozen Samples and Ambient Temperature Have Little Effect on Detection of Colorectal Cancer or Adenomas by a Fecal Immunochemical Test in a Colorectal Cancer Screening Cohort in Germany.

Hongda Chen1, Simone Werner2, Hermann Brenner3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) are used in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. We compared detection of CRCs and colorectal neoplasms by FITs using fresh samples (collected into buffer-filled tubes) vs frozen samples, and we assessed the effects of seasonal variations in ambient temperature on test performance.
METHODS: We performed a prospective study of 3466 individuals (50% male; mean age, 62 years) undergoing screening colonoscopies at 20 gastroenterology practices in southern Germany from November 2008 through September 2014. Frozen stool samples (collected and frozen by patients through February 2012, n = 1644) and fresh stool samples (collected by patients into buffer-filled tubes after February 2012, n = 1822) were obtained; hemoglobin (Hgb) concentrations were measured by using a commercial, quantitative FIT (cutoff value for positive result, 17 μg Hgb/g feces). Colonoscopy results were used as the gold standard, with results categorized as CRC, advanced adenoma, non-advanced adenoma, or no colorectal neoplasm. Differences in detection of colorectal neoplasms with fresh vs frozen samples were compared by using Wilcoxon rank sum test (continuous variables) and Fisher exact test (categorical variables). We also compared test performance when samples were collected during different seasons (based on outdoor temperature less than 8°, 8°-15°, or more than 15°).
RESULTS: Of the samples analyzed by FIT, 12.8% of frozen stool samples (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.3%-14.5%) and 8.7% of fresh stool samples (95% CI, 7.5%-10.1%) had positive results (P value for difference < .001). When adjusting the Hgb cutoff value to produce the same percentage of positive results for fresh and frozen samples (10% and 5%), FIT with frozen vs fresh samples detected colorectal neoplasms with similar levels of sensitivity and specificity. For example, at cutoff values that produced 5% positive results for each sample type, FIT detected advanced neoplasms with 27.8% sensitivity when frozen samples were used (95% CI, 21.4%-35.1%) and 25.6% sensitivity when fresh samples were used (95% CI, 19.8%-32.1%). Specificity values were 97.7% when frozen samples were used (95% CI, 96.8%-98.4%) and 97.6% when fresh samples were used (95% CI, 96.7%-98.3%). We did not observe any differences in detection of neoplasms during different seasons that were based on outdoor temperature.
CONCLUSIONS: In a prospective study of 3466 individuals who underwent screening colonoscopies and received FITs, we found that use of fresh vs frozen samples slightly affected positivity rates and the proportions of CRCs or adenomas detected at the recommended Hgb cutoff value. However, after we adjusted Hgb cutoff values to produce equal proportions of positive results for fresh vs frozen samples, the performance of the FIT was similar with each sample type. Season of sample collection (based on outdoor temperature) did not affect detection of CRC using either sample type in this study from Middle Europe.
Copyright © 2017 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Colon Cancer; Environmental Factors; Sampling; Variation

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27793749     DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2016.10.018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol        ISSN: 1542-3565            Impact factor:   11.382


  12 in total

1.  An Exploratory Analysis of Fecal Immunochemical Test Performance for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Nigeria.

Authors:  Gregory C Knapp; Avinash Sharma; Bolatito Olopade; Olusegun I Alatise; Olalekan Olasehinde; Olujide O Arije; Philip E Castle; T Peter Kingham
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  Effect of Sex, Age, and Positivity Threshold on Fecal Immunochemical Test Accuracy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kevin Selby; Emma H Levine; Cecilia Doan; Anton Gies; Hermann Brenner; Charles Quesenberry; Jeffrey K Lee; Douglas A Corley
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2019-08-22       Impact factor: 22.682

3.  Selecting a Cut-off for Colorectal Cancer Screening With a Fecal Immunochemical Test.

Authors:  Hermann Brenner; Simone Werner
Journal:  Clin Transl Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-08-03       Impact factor: 4.488

4.  Fecal occult blood versus DNA testing: indirect comparison in a colorectal cancer screening population.

Authors:  Hermann Brenner; Hongda Chen
Journal:  Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2017-07-13       Impact factor: 4.790

5.  Variation of diagnostic performance of fecal immunochemical testing for hemoglobin by sex and age: results from a large screening cohort.

Authors:  Hermann Brenner; Jing Qian; Simone Werner
Journal:  Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2018-04-05       Impact factor: 4.790

6.  Accuracy of a fecal immunochemical test according to outside temperature and travel time.

Authors:  Tobias Niedermaier; Korbinian Weigl; Anton Gies; Michael Hoffmeister; Hermann Brenner
Journal:  Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2018-09-17       Impact factor: 4.790

7.  Direct comparison of ten quantitative fecal immunochemical tests for hemoglobin stability in colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Anton Gies; Katarina Cuk; Petra Schrotz-King; Hermann Brenner
Journal:  Clin Transl Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-07-06       Impact factor: 4.488

8.  Fecal Immunochemical Tests Detect Screening Participants with Multiple Advanced Adenomas Better than T1 Colorectal Cancers.

Authors:  Anton Gies; Tobias Niedermaier; Laura Fiona Gruner; Thomas Heisser; Petra Schrotz-King; Hermann Brenner
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-02-05       Impact factor: 6.639

9.  Fecal immunochemical test for hemoglobin in combination with fecal transferrin in colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Anton Gies; Katarina Cuk; Petra Schrotz-King; Hermann Brenner
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2018-06-12       Impact factor: 4.623

10.  Impact of Inadequate Bowel Cleansing on Colonoscopic Findings in Routine Screening Practice.

Authors:  Tobias Niedermaier; Efrat L Amitay; Anton Gies; Korbinian Weigl; Michael Hoffmeister; Hermann Brenner
Journal:  Clin Transl Gastroenterol       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 4.396

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.