BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer is the second commonest cause of cancer mortality. Some countries are implementing colorectal cancer screening to detect lesions at an early stage using non-invasive tools like the faecal immunochemical test. Despite affordability, this test shows a low sensitivity for precancerous lesions and a low positive predictive value for colorectal cancer, resulting in a high false-positive rate. AIM: To develop a new, non-invasive colorectal cancer screening tool based on bacterial faecal biomarkers, which in combination with the faecal immunochemical test, could allow a reduction in the false-positive rate. This tool is called risk assessment of intestinal disease for colorectal cancer (RAID-CRC). METHODS: We performed both the faecal immunochemical test and the bacterial markers analysis (RAID-CRC test) in stool samples from individuals with normal colonoscopy (167), non-advanced adenomas (88), advanced adenomas (30) and colorectal cancer (48). All the participants showed colorectal cancer-associated symptoms. RESULTS: Performance of the faecal immunochemical test for advanced neoplasia (ie advanced adenoma and colorectal cancer) was determined by using the cut-off value established in Catalonia (20 µg haemoglobin/g of faeces) for a population-based screening approach. Sensitivity and specificity values of 83% and 80%, respectively, and positive and negative predictive values of 56% and 94%, respectively, were obtained. When both the immunological and the biological analysis were combined, the corresponding values were 80% and 90% for sensitivity and specificity, respectively, and 70% and 94% for positive and negative predictive values, respectively, resulting in a 50% reduction of the false-positive rate. CONCLUSIONS: RAID-CRC test allows a substantial reduction in the faecal immunochemical test false-positive results (50%) in a symptomatic population. Further validation is indicated in a colorectal cancer-screening scenario.
BACKGROUND:Colorectal cancer is the second commonest cause of cancer mortality. Some countries are implementing colorectal cancer screening to detect lesions at an early stage using non-invasive tools like the faecal immunochemical test. Despite affordability, this test shows a low sensitivity for precancerous lesions and a low positive predictive value for colorectal cancer, resulting in a high false-positive rate. AIM: To develop a new, non-invasive colorectal cancer screening tool based on bacterial faecal biomarkers, which in combination with the faecal immunochemical test, could allow a reduction in the false-positive rate. This tool is called risk assessment of intestinal disease for colorectal cancer (RAID-CRC). METHODS: We performed both the faecal immunochemical test and the bacterial markers analysis (RAID-CRC test) in stool samples from individuals with normal colonoscopy (167), non-advanced adenomas (88), advanced adenomas (30) and colorectal cancer (48). All the participants showed colorectal cancer-associated symptoms. RESULTS: Performance of the faecal immunochemical test for advanced neoplasia (ie advanced adenoma and colorectal cancer) was determined by using the cut-off value established in Catalonia (20 µg haemoglobin/g of faeces) for a population-based screening approach. Sensitivity and specificity values of 83% and 80%, respectively, and positive and negative predictive values of 56% and 94%, respectively, were obtained. When both the immunological and the biological analysis were combined, the corresponding values were 80% and 90% for sensitivity and specificity, respectively, and 70% and 94% for positive and negative predictive values, respectively, resulting in a 50% reduction of the false-positive rate. CONCLUSIONS: RAID-CRC test allows a substantial reduction in the faecal immunochemical test false-positive results (50%) in a symptomatic population. Further validation is indicated in a colorectal cancer-screening scenario.
Authors: Marta Malagón; Sara Ramió-Pujol; Marta Serrano; Joan Amoedo; Lia Oliver; Anna Bahí; Josep Oriol Miquel-Cusachs; Manel Ramirez; Xavier Queralt-Moles; Pau Gilabert; Joan Saló; Jordi Guardiola; Virginia Piñol; Mariona Serra-Pagès; Antoni Castells; Xavier Aldeguer; L Jesús Garcia-Gil Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-12-01 Impact factor: 3.240