Wei SC, Tsao PN, Wang YT, Lin BR, Wu DC, Tsai WS, Chen JS, Wong JM. Using serum placenta growth factor could improve the sensitivity of colorectal cancer screening in fecal occult blood negative population: A multicenter with independent cohort validation study.
Cancer Med 2019;
8:3583-3591. [PMID:
31063258 PMCID:
PMC6601572 DOI:
10.1002/cam4.2216]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/28/2018] [Revised: 04/08/2019] [Accepted: 04/14/2019] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Background
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common cancers worldwide. Screening for CRC using the fecal occult blood test (FOBT) is feasible and useful for decreasing disease‐related mortality; however, its sensitivity and compliance are unsatisfactory.
Methods
This study examined the efficacy of using serum placenta growth factor (PlGF) for a novel CRC screening strategy. To investigate a potential novel screening tool for CRC, we compared the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the FOBT, serum PlGF, and their combination through an examination of two independent cohorts and validation using the second cohort. All the patients and control group received the colonoscopy and FOBT, the colonoscopy was used as the gold standard for the result.
Results
Serum PlGF levels were significantly increased in CRC patients (16.8 ± 11.4 pg/mL) compared with controls (12.0 ± 11.2 pg/mL). The predictive model that used the serum PlGF level alone was as effective as the FOBT (AUC: 0.60 vs 0.68, P = 0.891), and it had significantly higher sensitivity than the FOBT (0.81 vs 0.39). In addition, we found serum PlGF level has a good value for predicting CRC patients in those FOBT negative populations. Finally, combining serum PlGF level and the FOBT improved the predictive power and demonstrated satisfactory sensitivity (0.71) and specificity (0.71). This result was confirmed and validated in the second independent cohort. Furthermore, no matter the stages (early/advanced) and the location (distal/proximal) of CRC, the efficacy of serum PlGF and the combined model remained quite stable.
Conclusion
Serum PlGF level is a potential alternative screening tool for CRC, especially for those who are reluctant to stool‐based screening methods and who were tested as negative FOBT. In addition, combining serum PlGF level and the FOBT could increase the power of CRC screening.
Collapse