Literature DB >> 27974550

A comparative effectiveness trial of two faecal immunochemical tests for haemoglobin (FIT). Assessment of test performance and adherence in a single round of a population-based screening programme for colorectal cancer.

Basilio Passamonti1, Morena Malaspina1, Callum G Fraser2, Beatrice Tintori1, Angela Carlani1, Valentina D'Angelo1, Paola Galeazzi1, Eugenio Di Dato1, Loretta Mariotti1, Simonetta Bulletti1, Maria Rosaria D'Amico1, Daniela Gustinucci1, Nadia Martinelli1, Nicoletta Spita1, Elena Cesarini1, Tiziana Rubeca3, Mariadonata Giaimo4, Nereo Segnan5, Carlo Senore5.   

Abstract

AIM: To compare acceptability and diagnostic accuracy of a recently available faecal immunochemical test (FIT) system (HM-JACKarc) with the FIT routinely used in an established screening programme (OC-Sensor).
DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial (ISRCTN20086618) within a population-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programme. Subjects eligible for invitation in the Umbria Region (Italy) programme were randomised (ratio 1:1) to be screened using one of the FIT systems.
RESULTS: Screening uptake among the 48 888 invitees was the same for both systems among subjects invited in the first round and higher with OC-Sensor than with HM-JACKarc (relative risk (RR): 1.03; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.04) among those invited in subsequent rounds. Positivity rate (PR) was similar with OC-Sensor (6.5%) as with HM-JACKarc (6.2%) among subjects performing their first FIT screening and higher with OC-Sensor (5.6%, RR: 1.25, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.40) than with HM-JACKarc (4.4%) among those screened in previous rounds. Positive predictive value (PPV) (OC-Sensor: 25.9%, HM-JACKarc: 25.6%) and detection rate (DR) (OC-Sensor: 1.40%; HM-JACKarc: 1.42%) for advanced neoplasia (AN: CRC + advanced adenoma) were similar among subjects performing their first FIT screening. The differences in the AN PPV (OC-Sensor: 20.3%, HM-JACKarc: 22.6%) and DR (OC-Sensor: 0.96%, HM-JACKarc: 0.83%) among those screened in previous rounds were not statistically significant. The number needed to scope to detect one AN was 3.9 (95% CI 5.8 to 2.9) and 3.9 (95% CI 5.5 to 2.9) at first and 4.9 (95% CI 5.8 to 4.2) and 4.4 (95% CI 5.3 to 3.7) at subsequent screening, with OC-Sensor and HM-JACKarc, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that acceptability and diagnostic performance of HM-JACKarc and of OC-Sensor systems are similar in a screening setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN20086618; Results. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CANCER PREVENTION; COLORECTAL CANCER SCREENING; SCREENING

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27974550     DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2016-312716

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gut        ISSN: 0017-5749            Impact factor:   23.059


  5 in total

1.  One-sample quantitative and two-sample qualitative faecal immunochemical tests for colorectal cancer screening: a cross-sectional study in China.

Authors:  Le Wang; Hongda Chen; Yunfeng Zhu; Ming Lu; Youqing Wang; Xinmin Chen; Weihua Ma; Lingbin Du; Wanqing Chen
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-05-19       Impact factor: 3.006

2.  Comparative yield and efficiency of strategies based on risk assessment and fecal immunochemical test in colorectal cancer screening: A cross-sectional population-based analysis.

Authors:  Hongda Chen; Le Wang; Ming Lu; Chen Zhu; Yunfeng Zhu; Weihua Ma; Xinmin Chen; Lingbin Du; Wanqing Chen
Journal:  Chin J Cancer Res       Date:  2021-08-31       Impact factor: 5.087

3.  Is It Necessary to Repeat Fecal Occult Blood Tests with Borderline Results for Colorectal Cancer Screening?

Authors:  Eunyoung Lee; Yangsoon Lee
Journal:  Ann Lab Med       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 3.464

4.  Inflammatory genes are novel prognostic biomarkers for colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Hao Jiang; Li Dong; Fangyan Gong; Yuping Gu; Henghun Zhang; Dong Fan; Zhiguo Sun
Journal:  Int J Mol Med       Date:  2018-04-18       Impact factor: 4.101

5.  Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) in symptomatic patients: what are we missing?

Authors:  Alexia Farrugia; Monika Widlak; Charles Evans; Stephen Charles Smith; Ramesh Arasaradnam
Journal:  Frontline Gastroenterol       Date:  2019-05-11
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.