Effect of a Single Aspirin Dose Prior to Fecal Immunochemical Testing on Test Sensitivity for Detecting Advanced Colorectal Neoplasms: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Utility of Stool-Based Tests for Colorectal Cancer Detection: A Comprehensive Review

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a significant global health issue where early detection is crucial for improving treatment outcomes and survival rates. This comprehensive review assesses the utility of stool-based tests in CRC screening, including traditional fecal occult blood tests (FOBT), both chemical (gFOBT) and immunochemical techniques (FIT), as well as multitarget stool DNA (mt-sDNA) as a novel and promising biomarker. The advancements, limitations and the impact of false positives and negatives of these methods are examined. The review analyzed various studies on current screening methods, focusing on laboratory tests and biomarkers. Findings indicate that while FIT and mt-sDNA tests offer enhanced sensitivity and specificity over traditional guaiac-based FOBT, they also come with higher costs and potential for increased false positives. FIT shows better patient adherence due to its ease to use, but incorrect usage and interpretation of FOBT can lead to significant diagnostic errors. In conclusion, despite the improvements in FOBT methods like FIT in CRC detection, careful consideration of each method's benefits and drawbacks is essential. Effective CRC screening programs should combine various methods tailored to specific population needs, aiming for early detection and reduced mortality rates.

The effect of antiplatelet therapy and oral anticoagulants on the accuracy of faecal immunochemical testing

INTRODUCTION

Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) has been adopted to identify patients requiring further investigations on the colorectal cancer (CRC) referral pathway. We aimed to investigate the effect of antiplatelet and anticoagulant drugs on the accuracy of FIT results.

METHODS

This observational study categorised patients with suspected CRC symptoms, who completed both FIT and colonic investigations, into two groups (control and exposed) based on their use of antiplatelet and anticoagulant drugs. Two-by-two tables and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis were used to determine accuracy.

RESULTS

A total of 928 patients were divided into a control (n=683) and an exposed group (n=245). A nonsignificant higher proportion of patients tested positive in the exposed group (24.1% vs 18.4%, p=0.063). For detection of CRC, improved sensitivity of 87% vs 81.2%, specificity of 84.8% vs 79.9% and negative predictive value of 99.2% vs 98.3% was calculated in the control vs exposed groups, respectively. The positive predictive value was comparable between the two groups (21.4% vs 22% in the control and exposed groups, respectively). In ROC analysis, there was no difference between the groups (AUC 90% vs 87%, p=0.56). The use of antiplatelet and anticoagulant drugs did not increase the risk of positive FIT results on multivariate logistic regression analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

FIT accuracy for CRC detection remained unaffected despite more patients testing positive in the exposed group. FIT should be considered a supplementary tool for triage. Antiplatelet and anticoagulant drugs do not need to be discontinued before collection of FIT.

Effect of aspirin, warfarin, and proton-pump inhibitors on performance of fecal immunochemical test in colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis

This study aims to investigate the impact of antithrombotic agents and proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) on fecal immunochemical test (FIT). PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Central, and Google Scholar were searched from inception until September 3, 2023. Studies comparing the diagnostic performance of FIT between medicine users and non-users in average-risk colorectal cancer screening populations were included. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive values (PPVs) for advanced neoplasia (AN) of FIT were compared by reporting pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a random-effects model. Twenty-two studies enrolling 5,572,367 individuals were included. For aspirin, pooled sensitivity and specificity for AN were 57.2% and 88.4% in users versus 60.2% and 93.2% in non-users; while pooled ORs were 1.49 (95% CI 0.89-2.48, P = 0.13) and 0.72 (95% CI 0.62-0.83, P < 0.001), respectively. In subgroup analysis, there was no difference in sensitivity and specificity between the two groups at the cutoff of 20 μg Hb/g (P = 0.57 and 0.29, respectively) but a significantly lower specificity in users compared with non-users at lower cutoffs (P < 0.001). Moreover, a significantly lower PPVAN in users compared with non-users was observed after matching age and sex confounders (P = 0.001). Warfarin had no significant influence on PPVAN of FIT (P = 0.43). PPIs were associated with a significantly lower PPVAN in users (P < 0.001). Aspirin use was associated with lower specificity and PPV of FIT. Aspirin discontinuation before FIT to reduce false-positive results should be interpreted with caution given concerns about cardiovascular events. Increasing cutoff values of FIT in aspirin users may be another possible approach. Additionally, warfarin withdrawal before FIT is unnecessary but PPIs withdrawal before FIT is recommended to reduce false-positive results.

Impact of antithrombotic drugs on the accuracy of fecal occult blood testing for advanced colorectal neoplasia screening: a meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

The current meta-analysis was conducted to determine whether antithrombotic drug use would affect the diagnostic accuracy of fecal occult blood testing for advanced colorectal neoplasia.

METHODS

Articles published between 2000 and 2019 were systematically retrieved and screened according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria by two reviewers independently. Pooled analyses were conducted with a fixed-effect model if no apparent heterogeneity (I² ≥ 50%) was found between studies; otherwise, the random effects model would be used. Sensitivity analysis and subgroup analysis were also conducted using Review Manager 5.3.

RESULTS

Pooled analysis revealed that aspirin and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were associated with a decrease in the positive predictive value of fecal occult blood testing for advanced colorectal neoplasia screening, with a RR of 0.89 (95% CI: 0.84-0.94) and 0.88 (95% CI: 0.84-0.93, p<0.001) respectively. Subgroup analysis based on data limited to high-quality studies, fecal immunochemical testing, or in Caucasians also showed that the use of aspirin/NSAID drugs decreased the accuracy for advanced colorectal neoplasia screening.

CONCLUSION

Aspirin/NSAIDs and direct oral anticoagulants rather than warfarin may decrease the diagnostic accuracy of fecal occult blood testing for advanced colorectal neoplasia screening.

Colorectal cancer chemoprevention: is aspirin still in the game?

Screening strategies have demonstrated their potential for decreasing the incidence and mortality of cancers, particularly that of colorectal cancer (CRC). Another strategy that has been developed to reduce CRC occurrence is the use of chemoprevention agents. Among them, aspirin is the most promising. Aspirin acts in colorectal tumourigenesis through several mechanisms, either directly in tumor cells or in their microenvironment, such as through its anti-inflammatory activity or its effect on the modulation of platelet function. Many retrospective studies, as well as follow-up of large cohorts from trials with primary cardiovascular end points, have shown that long-term treatment with daily low-dose aspirin decreases the incidence of adenomas and colorectal cancers. Therefore, aspirin is currently recommended by the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) for primary prevention of CRC in all patients aged 50 to 59 with a 10-y risk of cardiovascular events greater than 10%. Furthermore, several studies have also reported that long-term aspirin treatment taking after CRC resection decreases recurrence risk and increases overall survival, especially in patients with PIK3CA-mutated tumors. This review summarizes current knowledge on the pathophysiological mechanisms of aspirin chemoprevention, discusses the primary clinical results on CRC prevention and highlights the potential biomarkers identified to predict aspirin efficacy.

Impact of antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants on the performance of fecal immunochemical tests: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Antithrombotic agents may increase the bleeding tendency and affect the performance of fecal immunochemical test (FIT). We aimed to evaluate the impact of antithrombotic agents on the performance of FIT through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

All relevant studies published between January 1980 and September 2020 that examined the diagnostic performance of FIT were searched through MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases. We performed a meta-analysis for the positive predictive value (PPV) of FIT for detecting advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACRN) or colorectal cancer (CRC) according to the administration of antithrombotic agents including aspirin, antiplatelet agents, and oral anticoagulants (OACs).

RESULTS

Thirteen studies with 27,518 patients were included. Of these, 11 studies with data required for the calculation of pooled PPV were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled PPV of FIT for detecting ACRN was significantly lower in antithrombotic agent users than in non-users (odds ratio [OR] [95% confidence interval [CI]]: aspirin, 0.82 [0.68-0.99]; antiplatelet agents, 0.82 [0.69-0.96]; OACs, 0.66 [0.52-0.84]). For detecting CRC, antithrombotic agent use tended to be associated with a reduced PPV (aspirin, 0.76 [0.51-1.14]; antiplatelet agents, 0.73 [0.52-1.02]; OACs, 0.60 [0.25-1.44]). In the subgroup analysis, a FIT cutoff value of 15 μg Hb/g feces tended to be associated with lower PPVs compared to a value of 20 μg Hb/g feces in antithrombotic agent users.

CONCLUSIONS

Aspirin, antiplatelet agents, and OACs significantly lowered the PPV of FIT for detecting ACRN. These drugs may increase the false-positive of FIT.

Consistent Major Differences in Sex- and Age-Specific Diagnostic Performance among Nine Faecal Immunochemical Tests Used for Colorectal Cancer Screening

Evidence on diagnostic performance of faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) by sex and age is scarce. We aimed to evaluate FIT performance for detection of advanced colorectal neoplasia (AN) by sex and age across nine different FIT brands in a colonoscopy-controlled setting. The faecal samples were obtained from 2042 participants of colonoscopy screening. All eligible cases with AN (n = 216) and 300 randomly selected participants without AN were included. Diagnostic performance for detection of AN was assessed by sex and age (50-64 vs. 65-79 years for each of the nine FITs individually and for all FITs combined. Sensitivity was consistently lower, and specificity was consistently higher for females as compared with males (pooled values at original FIT cutoffs, 25.7% vs. 34.6%, p = 0.12 and 96.2% vs. 90.8%, p < 0.01, respectively). Positive predictive values (PPVs) were similar between both sexes, but negative predictive values (NPVs) were consistently higher for females (pooled values, 91.8% vs. 86.6%, p < 0.01). Sex-specific cutoffs attenuated differences in sensitivities but increased differences in predictive values. According to age, sensitivities and specificities were similar, whereas PPVs were consistently lower and NPVs were consistently higher for the younger participants. A negative FIT is less reliable in ruling out AN among men than among women and among older than among younger participants. Comparisons of measures of diagnostic performance among studies with different sex or age distributions should be interpreted with caution.

Risk of lower gastrointestinal bleeding and colorectal neoplasms following initiation of low-dose aspirin: a Danish population-based cohort study

OBJECTIVE

Aspirin may increase the risk of lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) from precursors of colorectal cancer (CRC). We investigated whether use of low-dose aspirin, through initiation of LGIB, may lead patients to undergo colonoscopy and polypectomy before manifest CRC.

DESIGN

We conducted a historical cohort study (2005-2013) of all Danish residents who initiated low-dose aspirin treatment (n=412 202) in a setting without screening for CRC. Each new aspirin user was matched with three non-users (n=1 236 560) by age, sex and region of residence on the date of their matched new user's first-time aspirin prescription (index date). We computed absolute risks (ARs), risk differences and relative risks (RRs) of LGIB, lower gastrointestinal endoscopy, colorectal polyps and CRC, comparing aspirin users with non-users.

RESULTS

The ARs were higher for new users than non-users for LGIB, lower gastrointestinal endoscopy, colorectal polyps and CRC within 3 months after index. Comparing new users with non-users, the RRs were 2.79 (95% CI 2.40 to 3.24) for LGIB, 1.73 (95% CI 1.63 to 1.84) for lower gastrointestinal endoscopy, 1.56 (95% CI 1.42 to 1.72) for colorectal polyps and 1.73 (95% CI 1.51 to 1.98) for CRC. The RRs remained elevated for more than 12 months after the index date, with the exception of CRC where the RRs were slightly decreased during the 3-5 years (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.98) and more than 5 years (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.00) following the index date.

CONCLUSION

These findings indicate that aspirin may contribute to reduce CRC risk by causing premalignant polyps to bleed, thereby expediting colonoscopy and polypectomy before CRC development.

Use of Antiplatelet Agents Decreases the Positive Predictive Value of Fecal Immunochemical Tests for Colorectal Cancer but Does Not Affect Their Sensitivity

Previous studies have evaluated the effects of antithrombotic agents on the performance of fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for the detection of colorectal cancer (CRC), but the results were inconsistent and based on small sample sizes. We studied this topic using a large-scale population-based database. Using the Korean National Cancer Screening Program Database, we compared the performance of FITs for CRC detection between users and non-users of antiplatelet agents and warfarin. Non-users were matched according to age and sex. Among 5,426,469 eligible participants, 768,733 used antiplatelet agents (mono/dual/triple therapy, n = 701,683/63,211/3839), and 19,569 used warfarin, while 4,638,167 were non-users. Among antiplatelet agents, aspirin, clopidogrel, and cilostazol ranked first, second, and third, respectively, in terms of prescription rates. Users of antiplatelet agents (3.62% vs. 4.45%; relative risk (RR): 0.83; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.78–0.88), aspirin (3.66% vs. 4.13%; RR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.83–0.97), and clopidogrel (3.48% vs. 4.88%; RR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.61–0.86) had lower positive predictive values (PPVs) for CRC detection than non-users. However, there were no significant differences in PPV between cilostazol vs. non-users and warfarin users vs. non-users. For PPV, the RR (users vs. non-users) for antiplatelet monotherapy was 0.86, while the RRs for dual and triple antiplatelet therapies (excluding cilostazol) were 0.67 and 0.22, respectively. For all antithrombotic agents, the sensitivity for CRC detection was not different between users and non-users. Use of antiplatelet agents, except cilostazol, may increase the false positives without improving the sensitivity of FITs for CRC detection.

Development and user-testing of a brief decision aid for aspirin as a preventive approach alongside colorectal cancer screening

BACKGROUND

Several epidemiological and cohort studies suggest that regular low-dose aspirin use independently reduces the long-term incidence and risk of colorectal cancer deaths by approximately 20%. However, there are also risks to aspirin use, mainly gastrointestinal bleeding and haemorrhagic stroke. Making informed decisions depends on the ability to understand and weigh up benefits and risks of available options. A decision aid to support people to consider aspirin therapy alongside participation in the NHS bowel cancer screening programme may have an additional impact on colorectal cancer prevention. This study aims to develop and user-test a brief decision aid about aspirin to enable informed decision-making for colorectal screening-eligible members of the public.

METHODS

We undertook a qualitative study to develop an aspirin decision aid leaflet to support bowel screening responders in deciding whether to take aspirin to reduce their risk of colorectal cancer. The iterative development process involved two focus groups with public members aged 60-74 years (n = 14) and interviews with clinicians (n = 10). Interviews (n = 11) were used to evaluate its utility for decision-making. Analysis was conducted using a framework approach.

RESULTS

Overall, participants found the decision aid acceptable and useful to facilitate decision-making. They expressed a need for individualised risk information, more detail about the potential risks of aspirin, and preferred risk information presented in pictograms when offered different options. Implementation pathways were discussed, including the possibility of involving different clinicians in the process such as GPs and/or community pharmacists. A range of potentially effective timepoints for sending out the decision aid were identified.

CONCLUSION

An acceptable and usable decision aid was developed to support decisions about aspirin use to prevent colorectal cancer.

Effects of antithrombotic drugs on the results of fecal immunochemical test in colorectal neoplasms screening

Fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is widely used as a colorectal cancer screening tool. Antithrombotic drugs may affect the screening performance of FIT for colorectal tumors. The aim of this study was to clarify the effect of antithrombotic agents on FIT accuracy in screening for colorectal neoplasms. This retrospective study enrolled a total of 758 patients who underwent both FIT and total colonoscopy. The effect of antithrombotic drugs on FIT accuracy in detecting colorectal neoplasms (CN), including colorectal cancer (CRC), advanced adenoma (AA), and non-advanced adenoma (NAA), was examined. Of the 758 patients, 144 (19%) received antithrombotic drugs (administration group). In administration group, 61/144 (42%) cases had CN [CRC:14, AA:15, NAA:32] and 217/614 (35%) cases had CN (CRC:43, AA:56, NAA:118) in non-administration group. The prevalence of CN was not significantly different between the two groups (p = 0.1157). There was no significant difference in sensitivity or specificity of the detection of all types of CN with or without taking antithrombotic drugs. Neither the positive predictive value nor negative predictive value of FIT was affected by antithrombotic drug administration. Taking antithrombotic drugs may not have a large impact on sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, or negative predictive value of FIT in screening for CN.

Sensitivity of Fecal Immunochemical Test for Colorectal Cancer Detection Differs According to Stage and Location

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) are widely used for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. FITs detect most CRCs. Although detection of CRC at early stages is most relevant for reducing CRC mortality, there is limited evidence for the stage-specific sensitivity of the FIT in CRC detection. We estimated stage- and location-specific sensitivities of a quantitative FIT in a large cohort of patients with CRC.

METHODS

Fecal samples were collected before treatment from 435 patients with newly diagnosed CRC. Sensitivities of a quantitative FIT (FOB Gold, Sentinel Diagnostics; Milano, Italy) for tumors of different T stages and overall TNM stages (according to Union for International Cancer Control) were calculated at the cutoff recommended by the manufacturer (17 μg/g feces) and at alternative cutoffs, ranging from 10 to 40 μg/g feces, overall and stratified by tumor location.

RESULTS

At the cutoff recommended by the manufacturer, the FIT detected T1 tumors with 52% sensitivity (95% CI, 37%-67%), T2 tumors with 79% sensitivity (95% CI, 68%-88%), T3 tumors with 93% sensitivity (95% CI, 89%-95%), and T4 tumors with 84% sensitivity (95% CI, 72%-92%) (P_trend < .0001). The FIT detected stage I cancers with 68% sensitivity (95% CI, 57%-78%), stage II cancers with 92% sensitivity (95% CI, 87%-96%), stage III cancers with 82% sensitivity (95% CI, 73%-89%), and stage IV cancers with 89% sensitivity (95% CI, 80%-95%) (P_trend 0.01). The FIT detected T1 colorectal tumors with sensitivity values that were 22%-52% lower than for tumors of other T stages and stage I CRC with sensitivity values that were 11%-33% lower than for later-stage CRCs, at any of the evaluated cutoff values. The FIT detected T1 and stage I CRCs in the distal colon with sensitivity values of 32% and 52%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the FIT identifies patients with CRC with overall high sensitivity, it can miss approximately one-third of stage I CRCs. Studies are needed to increase noninvasive detection of early-stage CRC.

Fecal Immunochemical Test: The World's Colorectal Cancer Screening Test

The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is a tool used for colorectal cancer screening and its use is growing rapidly. FIT, applied as a qualitative or quantitative test, has far better sensitivity for hemoglobin than older, guaiac fecal occult blood tests. This translates into several advantages of FIT, including ability to screen using only 1 stool sample per cycle. This article reviews current understanding of FIT performance as a 1-time test and when applied programmatically. It outlines how to apply the test at the patient level and track performance at the program level. Future prospects for FIT application are highlighted.

Multiplex quantitation of 270 plasma protein markers to identify a signature for early detection of colorectal cancer

Blood-based protein biomarker signatures might be an alternative or supplement to existing methods for early detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) for population-based screening. The objective of this study was to derive a protein biomarker signature for early detection of CRC and its precursor advanced adenoma (AA). In a two-stage design, 270 protein markers were measured by liquid chromatography/multiple reaction monitoring/mass spectrometry in plasma samples of discovery and validation sets. In the discovery set consisting of 100 newly diagnosed CRC cases and 100 age- and sex-matched controls free of neoplasm at screening colonoscopy, the algorithms predicting the presence of early- or late-stage CRC were derived by Lasso regression and .632 + bootstrap. The prediction algorithms were then externally validated in an independent validation set consisting of participants of screening colonoscopy including 56 participants with CRC, 99 with AA and 99 controls without any colorectal neoplasms. Three different signatures for all-, early- and late-stage CRC consisting of five-, three- and eight-protein markers were obtained in the discovery set with areas under the curves (AUCs) after .632 + bootstrap adjustment of 0.85, 0.83 and 0.96, respectively. External validation in the representative screening population yielded AUCs of 0.79 (95% CI, 0.70-0.86), 0.79 (95% CI, 0.66-0.89) and 0.80 (95% CI, 0.70-0.89) for all-, early- and late-stage CRCs, respectively. The three-marker early-stage algorithm yielded an AUC of 0.65 (95% CI, 0.56-0.73) for detection of AA in the validation set. Although not yet competitive with available stool-based tests for CRC early detection, the identified proteins may contribute to the development of powerful blood-based tests for early detection of CRC and its precursors AAs.

Overestimated Sensitivity of Fecal Immunochemical Tests in Screening Cohorts With Registry-Based Follow-up

OBJECTIVES

Several recent studies have reported very high estimates of sensitivity and specificity of fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) at seemingly high levels of precision using registry-based follow-up of participants in very large FIT-based screening programs. We aimed to assess the validity of estimates of diagnostic performance parameters derived by this indirect approach.

METHODS

We modeled expected values of sensitivity and specificity of colorectal cancer detection in studies using the indirect approach and their deviation from true values under a broad range of plausible assumptions, and we compared these expected values with recently reported estimates of FIT sensitivity and specificity from such studies.

RESULTS

Using a sensitivity of 75% and specificity of 93.6% (from studies using a direct approach, i.e., colonoscopy follow-up of all participants), the indirect approach would be expected to yield sensitivities between 84.5% and 91.1% and specificities between 93.4% and 93.6% under a range of realistic assumptions regarding colonoscopic follow-up rates of positive FITs and clinical manifestation rates of preclinical colorectal cancer.

DISCUSSION

Very high sensitivities of FITs recently reported with seemingly very high levels of precision by several large-scale registry-based studies, which are in line with expected results based on our model calculations, are likely to be strongly overestimated and need to be interpreted with due caution.

Evaluation and Validation of Plasma Proteins Using Two Different Protein Detection Methods for Early Detection of Colorectal Cancer

Objective: Plasma protein biomarkers could be an efficient alternative for population-based screening for early detection of colorectal cancer (CRC). The objective of this study was to evaluate and validate plasma proteins individually and as a signature for early detection of CRC. Methods: In a three-stage design, proteins were measured firstly by liquid chromatography/multiple reaction monitoring-mass spectrometry (LC/MRM-MS) and later by proximity extension assay (PEA) in a discovery set consisting of 96 newly diagnosed CRC cases and 94 controls free of neoplasms at screening colonoscopy. Two algorithms (one for each measurement method) were derived by Lasso regression and .632+ bootstrap based on 11 proteins that were included in both the LC/MRM-MS and PEA measurements. Additionally, another algorithm was constructed from the same eleven biomarkers plus amphireglin, the most promising protein marker in the PEA measurements that had not been available from the LC/MRM-MS measurements. Lastly the three prediction signatures were validated with PEA in independent samples of participants of screening colonoscopy (CRC (n = 56), advanced adenoma (n = 101), and participants free of neoplasm (n = 102)). Results: The same four proteins were included in all three prediction signatures; mannan binding lectin serine protease 1, osteopontin, serum paraoxonase lactonase 3 and transferrin receptor protein 1, and the third prediction signature additionally included amphiregulin. In the independent validation set from a true screening setting, the five-marker blood-based signature including AREG presented areas under the curves of 0.82 (95% CI, 0.74–0.89), 0.86 (95% CI, 0.77–0.92) and 0.76 (95% CI, 0.64–0.86) for all, early and late stages CRC, respectively. Conclusion: Two different measurement methods consistently identified four protein markers and an algorithm additionally including amphiregulin, a marker measured by PEA only, showed promising performance for detecting early stage CRC in an independent validation in a true screening setting. These proteins may be potential candidates for blood-based tests for early detection of CRC.