1
|
Zarandi-Nowroozi M, Taghiakbari M, Barkun A, Pohl H, Nauche B, Chagnon M, von Renteln D. Effect of fecal immunochemical test cut-off levels on adenoma detection rate: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Scand J Gastroenterol 2024; 59:882-892. [PMID: 38775234 DOI: 10.1080/00365521.2024.2356649] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/04/2023] [Revised: 04/16/2024] [Accepted: 04/23/2024] [Indexed: 07/30/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is higher after a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) compared to direct screening colonoscopy. OBJECTIVE This meta-analysis evaluated how ADR, the rates of advanced adenoma detection (AADR), colorectal cancer detection (CDR), and sessile serrated lesion detection (SSLDR) are affected by different FIT positivity thresholds. METHODS We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and EBM Reviews databases for studies reporting ADR, AADR, CDR, and SSLDR according to different FIT cut-off values in asymptomatic average-risk individuals aged 50-74 years old. Data were stratified according to sex, age, time to colonoscopy, publication year, continent, and FIT kit type. Study quality, heterogeneity, and publication bias were assessed. RESULTS Overall, 4280 articles were retrieved and fifty-eight studies were included (277,661 FIT-positive colonoscopies; mean cecal intubation 96.3%; mean age 60.8 years; male 52.1%). Mean ADR was 56.1% (95% CI 53.4 - 58.7%), while mean AADR, CDR, and SSLDR were 27.2% (95% CI 24.4 - 30.1%), 5.3% (95% CI 4.7 - 6.0%), and 3.0% (95% CI 1.7 - 4.6%), respectively. For each 20 μg Hb/g increase in FIT cut-off level, ADR increased by 1.54% (95% CI 0.52 - 2.56%, p < 0.01), AADR by 3.90% (95% CI 2.76 - 5.05%, p < 0.01) and CDR by 1.46% (95% CI 0.66 - 2.24%, p < 0.01). Many detection rates were greater amongst males and Europeans. CONCLUSIONS ADRs in FIT-positive colonoscopies are influenced by the adopted FIT positivity threshold, and identified targets, importantly, proved to be higher than most current societal recommendations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Melissa Zarandi-Nowroozi
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of Montreal Hospital Center (CHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Mahsa Taghiakbari
- Department of Gastroenterology, University of Montreal Hospital Research Center (CRCHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Alan Barkun
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, McGill University Health Centre, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Heiko Pohl
- Dartmouth Geisel School of Medicine, Hanover, NH, USA
- Section of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, VA White River Junction, White River Junction, VT, USA
| | - Bénédicte Nauche
- Department of Library, University of Montreal Hospital Center (CHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Miguel Chagnon
- Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Daniel von Renteln
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of Montreal Hospital Center (CHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Koïvogui A, Vincelet C, Abihsera G, Ait-Hadad H, Delattre H, Le Trung T, Bernoux A, Carroll R, Nicolet J. Supply and quality of colonoscopy according to the characteristics of gastroenterologists in the French population-based colorectal-cancer screening program. World J Gastroenterol 2023; 29:1492-1508. [PMID: 36998423 PMCID: PMC10044857 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v29.i9.1492] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/17/2022] [Revised: 02/07/2023] [Accepted: 02/27/2023] [Indexed: 03/07/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Since its complete roll-out in 2009, the French colorectal cancer screening program (CRCSP) experienced 3 major constraints [use of a less efficient Guaiac-test (gFOBT), stopping the supply of Fecal-Immunochemical-Test kits (FIT), and suspension of the program due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)] affecting its effectiveness.
AIM To describe the impact of the constraints in terms of changes in the quality of screening-colonoscopy (Quali-Colo).
METHODS This retrospective cohort study included screening-colonoscopies performed by gastroenterologists between Jan-2010 and Dec-2020 in people aged 50-74 living in Ile-de-France (France). The changes in Quali-colo (Proportion of colonoscopies performed beyond 7 mo (Colo_7 mo), Frequency of serious adverse events (SAE) and Colonoscopy detection rate) were described in a cohort of Gastroenterologists who performed at least one colonoscopy over each of the four periods defined according to the chronology of the constraints [gFOBT: Normal progress of the CRCSP using gFOBT (2010-2014); FIT: Normal progress of the CRCSP using FIT (2015-2018); STOP-FIT: Year (2019) during which the CRCSP experienced the cessation of the supply of test kits; COVID: Program suspension due to the COVID-19 health crisis (2020)]. The link between each dependent variable (Colo_7 mo; SAE occurrence, neoplasm detection rate) and the predictive factors was analyzed in a two-level multivariate hierarchical model.
RESULTS The 533 gastroenterologists (cohort) achieved 21509 screening colonoscopies over gFOBT period, 38352 over FIT, 7342 over STOP-FIT and 7995 over COVID period. The frequency of SAE did not change between periods (gFOBT: 0.3%; FIT: 0.3%; STOP-FIT: 0.3%; and COVID: 0.2%; P = 0.10). The risk of Colo_7 mo doubled between FIT [adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.2 (1.1; 1.2)] and STOP-FIT [aOR: 2.4 (2.1; 2.6)]; then, decreased by 40% between STOP-FIT and COVID [aOR: 2.0 (1.8; 2.2)]. Regardless of the period, this Colo_7 mo’s risk was twice as high for screening colonoscopy performed in a public hospital [aOR: 2.1 (1.3; 3.6)] compared to screening-colonoscopy performed in a private clinic. The neoplasm detection, which increased by 60% between gFOBT and FIT [aOR: 1.6 (1.5; 1.7)], decreased by 40% between FIT and COVID [aOR: 1.1 (1.0; 1.3)].
CONCLUSION The constraints likely affected the time-to-colonoscopy as well as the colonoscopy detection rate without impacting the SAE’s occurrence, highlighting the need for a respectable reference time-to-colonoscopy in CRCSP.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Akoï Koïvogui
- Site de Seine-Saint-Denis, Centre Régional de Coordination des Dépistages des Cancers en Ile-de-France (CRCDC-IDF), Bondy 93146, France
| | - Catherine Vincelet
- Site des Yvelines, Centre Régional de Coordination des Dépistages des Cancers en Ile-de-France (CRCDC-IDF), Le Chesnay Cedex 78153, France
| | - Gaëlle Abihsera
- Site du Val-de-Marne, Centre Régional de Coordination des Dépistages des Cancers en Ile-de-France (CRCDC-IDF), Joinville-le-Pont 94340, France
| | - Hamou Ait-Hadad
- Site de Seine-et-Marne, Centre Régional de Coordination des Dépistages des Cancers en Ile-de-France (CRCDC-IDF), Lieusaint 77763, France
| | - Hélène Delattre
- Site des Hauts-de-Seine, Centre Régional de Coordination des Dépistages des Cancers en Ile-de-France (CRCDC-IDF), Nanterre 92000, France
| | - Tu Le Trung
- site du Val-d’Oise, Centre Régional de Coordination des Dépistages des Cancers en Ile-de-France (CRCDC-IDF), Cergy Saint-Christophe 95800, France
| | - Agnès Bernoux
- Site de l’Essonne, Centre Régional de Coordination des Dépistages des Cancers en Ile-de-France (CRCDC-IDF), Fontenay-Les-Briis 91640, France
| | - Rachel Carroll
- Site du Val-de-Marne, Centre Régional de Coordination des Dépistages des Cancers en Ile-de-France (CRCDC-IDF), Joinville-le-Pont 94340, France
| | - Jérôme Nicolet
- Siège Paris, Centre Régional de Coordination des Dépistages des Cancers en Ile-de-France (CRCDC-IDF), Paris 75015, France
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Evaluation of a colorectal cancer screening program composed of successive waves of different tests: The experience of the French Calvados County. Cancer Epidemiol 2022; 80:102240. [PMID: 36058037 DOI: 10.1016/j.canep.2022.102240] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2022] [Revised: 08/08/2022] [Accepted: 08/10/2022] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUNDS The value of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program in a population with a limited participation rate is debated. This study assesses the real-life performances of different screening tests in a population benefiting from an organized program and included in a cancer registry. METHODS Patients who participated in at least one screening campaign between 2004 and 2016 were included. Four screening procedures were used: Hemoccult II, Magstream, Hemoccult and Magstream combined, and OC Sensor. Data were crossed with the Digestive Cancer Registry of Calvados to detect CRCs diagnosed during this period. The main outcomes were CRC detection and the incidence rate of interval cancers. RESULTS Screening consisted of 325,083 tests in 134,498 patients. Of the 2580 CRCs detected in patients aged 50-74, 534 (20.7 %) were screen-detected. OC Sensor had the highest sensitivity for CRC detection (83.7 %, 95 % CI [76.8-89.1 %]) and the lowest interval cancer rate (2.0 per 10,000 person-years, 95 % CI [1.4-2.7]) compared with other screening tests, excluding combinations. The overall participation rate was 28.9 %. CONCLUSION Real-life differences in performance between different screening tests exist, and OC Sensor appears to be the best. The low participation rate suggests that the rate of screen-detected CRC could be higher.
Collapse
|
4
|
Zhang M, Zhao L, Zhang Y, Jing H, Wei L, Li Z, Zhang H, Zhang Y, Zhu S, Zhang S, Zhang X. Colorectal Cancer Screening With High Risk-Factor Questionnaire and Fecal Immunochemical Tests Among 5, 947, 986 Asymptomatic Population: A Population-Based Study. Front Oncol 2022; 12:893183. [PMID: 35712520 PMCID: PMC9195590 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.893183] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/10/2022] [Accepted: 04/27/2022] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The recent uptrend in colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence in China is causing an increasingly overwhelming social burden. And its occurrence can be effectively reduced by sensitizing CRC screening for early diagnosis and treatment. However, a large number of people in China do not undergo screening due to multiple factors. To address this issue, since 2012, a CRC screening program has been initiated in Tianjin. Methods Residents aged 40-74 years were eligible for CRC screening. The first was to complete the high-risk factor questionnaire (HRFQ) and undergo fecal immunochemical test (FIT). Then those with a positive result in any of the two screening methods were recommended for a free colonoscopy. Results The detection rate of intestinal diseases increased with age, had a male predominance, and was higher in residents from central urban areas and those with primary school above education level. The sensitivity of predicting CRC after colonoscopy in the high-risk group was 76.02%; the specificity was 25.33%.A significant decrease in the detection rate of intestinal disease, CRC and advanced adenoma was observed from positive FIT, the high-risk group and positive HRFQ, 47.13%, 44.79%, 42.30%; 3.15%, 2.44%, 1.76%; 7.72%, 6.42%, 5.08%, in that order, while no inter-group difference was found for the detection of polyps. In addition, the different combinations of HRFQ and FIT can enroll more high-risk population than FIT or (and) HRFQ only, and thus detect more intestinal diseases (include CRC/AA/Polyp). Conclusion The superimposition of different screening method for HRFQ and FIT is an effective strategy for the detection of CRC, AA, and Polyp, compared to HRFQ or FIT alone. However, further improvements in screening and interventions are needed to promote colonoscopy compliance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mingqing Zhang
- Nankai University School of Medicine, Nankai University, Tianjin, China.,Department of Colorectal Surgery, Tianjin Union Medical Center, Tianjin, China.,Colorectal Cancer Screening Office, Tianjin Institute of Coloproctology, Tianjin, China.,The Institute of Translational Medicine, Tianjin Union Medical Center of Nankai University, Tianjin, China
| | - Lizhong Zhao
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Tianjin Union Medical Center, Tianjin, China.,Colorectal Cancer Screening Office, Tianjin Institute of Coloproctology, Tianjin, China
| | - Yongdan Zhang
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Tianjin Union Medical Center, Tianjin, China.,Colorectal Cancer Screening Office, Tianjin Institute of Coloproctology, Tianjin, China
| | - Haoren Jing
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Tianjin Union Medical Center, Tianjin, China.,Colorectal Cancer Screening Office, Tianjin Institute of Coloproctology, Tianjin, China
| | - Lianbo Wei
- Center for Applied Mathematics, Tianjin University, Tianjin, China
| | - Zhixuan Li
- Center for Applied Mathematics, Tianjin University, Tianjin, China
| | - Haixiang Zhang
- Center for Applied Mathematics, Tianjin University, Tianjin, China
| | - Yong Zhang
- Center for Applied Mathematics, Tianjin University, Tianjin, China
| | - Siwei Zhu
- Nankai University School of Medicine, Nankai University, Tianjin, China.,Department of Colorectal Surgery, Tianjin Union Medical Center, Tianjin, China.,Colorectal Cancer Screening Office, Tianjin Institute of Coloproctology, Tianjin, China.,The Institute of Translational Medicine, Tianjin Union Medical Center of Nankai University, Tianjin, China
| | - Shiwu Zhang
- The Institute of Translational Medicine, Tianjin Union Medical Center of Nankai University, Tianjin, China.,Department of Pathology, Tianjin Union Medical Center, Tianjin, China
| | - Xipeng Zhang
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Tianjin Union Medical Center, Tianjin, China.,Colorectal Cancer Screening Office, Tianjin Institute of Coloproctology, Tianjin, China.,The Institute of Translational Medicine, Tianjin Union Medical Center of Nankai University, Tianjin, China
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Significant decrease in interval colorectal cancer incidence after implementing immunochemical testing in a multiple-round guaiac-based screening programme. Br J Cancer 2021; 125:1494-1502. [PMID: 34511603 DOI: 10.1038/s41416-021-01546-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/21/2021] [Revised: 08/04/2021] [Accepted: 09/03/2021] [Indexed: 01/02/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS We aimed to evaluate the effects of switching to faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) on the cumulative 2-year incidence rate of interval cancers, interval cancer rate and test sensitivity within a mature population-based colorectal cancer screening programme consisting of six rounds of biennial guaiac faecal occult blood testing (gFOBT). METHODS The FIT results were compared with those of gFOBT used in each of the previous two rounds. For the three rounds analysed, 279,041 tests were performed by 156,186 individuals. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine interval cancer risk factors (Poisson regression) and to compare the sensitivity of FIT to gFOBT. RESULTS There were 612 cases of screen-detected cancers and 209 cases of interval cancers. The sex- and age-adjusted cumulative 2-year incidence rates of interval cancers were 55.7 (95% CI, 45.3-68.5), 42.4 (95% CI, 32.6-55.2) and 15.8 (95% CI, 10.9-22.8) per 100,000 person-years after the last two rounds of gFOBT and FIT, respectively. The FIT/gFOBT incidence rate ratio was 0.38 [95% CI, 0.27-0.54] (P < 0.001). Sex- and age-adjusted sensitivity was significantly higher with FIT than with gFOBT (OR = 6.70 [95% CI, 4.48-10.01], P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS This population-based study revealed a dramatic decrease in the cumulative incidence rates of interval cancers after switching from gFOBT to FIT. These data provide an additional incentive for countries still using gFOBT to switch to FIT.
Collapse
|
6
|
PPV and Detection Rate of mt-sDNA Testing, FIT, and CT Colonography for Advanced Neoplasia: A Hierarchic Bayesian Meta-Analysis of the Noninvasive Colorectal Screening Tests. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2021; 217:817-830. [PMID: 33703913 DOI: 10.2214/ajr.20.25416] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND. Noninvasive tests for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and prevention limit the need for invasive colonoscopy to follow up positive test results. However, the relative performance characteristics of available noninvasive tests have not yet been adequately compared. OBJECTIVE. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic performance of the available noninvasive CRC screening tests, including multitarget stool DNA (mt-sDNA) testing, fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), and CT colonography (CTC), with an emphasis on comparison of PPV and detection rate (DR) for advanced neoplasia (AN; encompassing cases of advanced adenomas and CRC). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION. After systematic searches of MEDLINE and Google Scholar databases, 10 mt-sDNA, 27 CTC, and 88 FIT published screening studies involving 25,132, 33,493, and 2,355,958 asymptomatic adults, respectively, were included. Meta-analysis with hierarchic Bayesian modeling was conducted in accordance with Cochrane Collaboration and PRISMA guidelines to determine test positivity rates (TPRs) leading to optical colonoscopy, as well as PPVs and DRs for both AN and CRC. Different positivity thresholds were considered for FIT and CTC. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS. Point estimates (with 95% credible intervals) from pooled Bayesian meta-analysis combining all thresholds for FIT and stratifying CTC results by a polyp size threshold of 6 mm or larger (CTC6) and 10 mm or larger (CTC10) were calculated. TPR was 13.5% (10.9-16.6%) for mt-sDNA testing, 6.4% (5.8-7.2%) for FIT, 13.4% (11.4-15.6%) for CTC6, and 6.6% (5.2-7.7%) for CTC10. AN PPV was 26.9% (95% credible interval, 21.8-33.2%) for mt-sDNA testing, 31.8% (29.3-34.5%) for FIT, 34.4% (27.2-41.0%) for CTC6, and 61.0% (54.0-70.0%) for CTC10. CRC PPV was 2.4% (1.5-3.9%) for mt-sDNA testing, 4.9% (4.3-5.3%) for FIT, 3.5% (2.5-4.8%) for CTC6, and 6.0% (4.3-8.0%) for CTC10. The DR for AN was 3.4% (95% credible interval, 2.5-4.8%) for mt-SDNA, 2.0% (1.8-2.3%) for FIT, 4.8% (4.0-6.5%) for CTC6, and 4.0% (3.0-4.6%) for CTC10. When FIT is restricted to a lower threshold (< 10 μg Hb/g feces), its performance profile is similar to that of mt-sDNA testing, although available data are limited. AN PPV odds ratios (relative to CTC10 as the reference) were 0.24 (95% credible interval, 0.17-0.33) for mt-sDNA testing, 0.30 (0.24-0.45) for FIT, and 0.33 (0.25-0.47) for CTC6. CONCLUSION. Among noninvasive CRC screening tests, CTC with a polyp size threshold of 10 mm or larger most effectively targets AN, preserving detection while also decreasing unnecessary colonoscopies compared with mt-sDNA testing and FIT. CLINICAL IMPACT. CTC performed with a polyp size threshold for colonoscopy referral set at 10 mm or larger represents the most effective and efficient noninvasive screening test for CRC prevention and detection.
Collapse
|
7
|
Detection of Colorectal Cancer and Advanced Adenoma by Liquid Biopsy (Decalib Study): The ddPCR Challenge. Cancers (Basel) 2020; 12:cancers12061482. [PMID: 32517177 PMCID: PMC7352444 DOI: 10.3390/cancers12061482] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/10/2020] [Revised: 05/29/2020] [Accepted: 06/01/2020] [Indexed: 12/27/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: In most countries, participation in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs with the immunological fecal occult blood test (iFOBT) is low. Mutations of RAS and BRAF occur early in colorectal carcinogenesis and “liquid biopsy” allows detection of mutated circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA). This prospective study aims to evaluate the performance of RAS and BRAF-mutated ctDNA in detecting CRC and advanced adenomas (AA). Methods: One hundred and thirty patients who underwent colonoscopy for suspicion of colorectal lesion were included and divided into four groups: 20 CRC, 39 AA, 31 non-advanced adenoma and/or hyperplastic polyp(s) (NAA) and 40 with no lesion. Mutated ctDNA was analyzed by droplet digital PCR. Results: ctDNA was detected in 45.0% of CRC, in 2.6% of AA and none of the NAA and “no-lesion” groups. All patients with stage II to IV mutated CRC had detectable ctDNA (n = 8/8). Among the mutated AA, only one patient had detectable ctDNA (4.3%), maybe due to limited technical sensitivity or to a low rate of ctDNA or even the absence ctDNA in plasma. Specificity and sensitivity of KRAS- and BRAF-mutated ctDNA for the detection of all CRC and AA were 100% and 16.9%, respectively. Conclusions: ctDNA had high sensitivity in detection of advanced mutated CRC but was unable to sensitively detect AA. ctDNA analysis was easy to perform and readily accepted by the population but requires combination with other circulating biomarkers before replacing iFOBT.
Collapse
|
8
|
Ikram MA, Brusselle G, Ghanbari M, Goedegebure A, Ikram MK, Kavousi M, Kieboom BCT, Klaver CCW, de Knegt RJ, Luik AI, Nijsten TEC, Peeters RP, van Rooij FJA, Stricker BH, Uitterlinden AG, Vernooij MW, Voortman T. Objectives, design and main findings until 2020 from the Rotterdam Study. Eur J Epidemiol 2020; 35:483-517. [PMID: 32367290 PMCID: PMC7250962 DOI: 10.1007/s10654-020-00640-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 298] [Impact Index Per Article: 74.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/23/2020] [Accepted: 04/23/2020] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
The Rotterdam Study is an ongoing prospective cohort study that started in 1990 in the city of Rotterdam, The Netherlands. The study aims to unravel etiology, preclinical course, natural history and potential targets for intervention for chronic diseases in mid-life and late-life. The study focuses on cardiovascular, endocrine, hepatic, neurological, ophthalmic, psychiatric, dermatological, otolaryngological, locomotor, and respiratory diseases. As of 2008, 14,926 subjects aged 45 years or over comprise the Rotterdam Study cohort. Since 2016, the cohort is being expanded by persons aged 40 years and over. The findings of the Rotterdam Study have been presented in over 1700 research articles and reports. This article provides an update on the rationale and design of the study. It also presents a summary of the major findings from the preceding 3 years and outlines developments for the coming period.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Arfan Ikram
- Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Guy Brusselle
- Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.,Department of Respiratory Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Mohsen Ghanbari
- Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - André Goedegebure
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M Kamran Ikram
- Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.,Department of Neurology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Maryam Kavousi
- Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Brenda C T Kieboom
- Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Caroline C W Klaver
- Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.,Department of Ophthalmology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Robert J de Knegt
- Department of Gastroenterology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Annemarie I Luik
- Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Tamar E C Nijsten
- Department of Dermatology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Robin P Peeters
- Department of Internal Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Frank J A van Rooij
- Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bruno H Stricker
- Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - André G Uitterlinden
- Department of Internal Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Meike W Vernooij
- Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.,Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Trudy Voortman
- Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Guo F, De Brabander I, Francart J, Candeur M, Polus M, Van Eycken L, Brenner H. Benefits of switching from guaiac-based faecal occult blood to faecal immunochemical testing: experience from the Wallonia-Brussels colorectal cancer screening programme. Br J Cancer 2020; 122:1109-1117. [PMID: 32066910 PMCID: PMC7109124 DOI: 10.1038/s41416-020-0754-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/26/2019] [Revised: 01/20/2020] [Accepted: 01/30/2020] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) have replaced guaiac-based faecal occult blood test (gFOBTs) in several colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes. We aimed to evaluate the benefits of this transition based on the Wallonia–Brussels-organised CRC screening programme. Methods A total of 1,569,868 individuals aged 50–74 years, who were invited to screening during 2009–2017, were studied by linking their screening records with insurance, pathology and cancer data in the Belgian Cancer Registry. We compared neoplasm detection rates and positive predictive values (PPVs) of gFOBT and FIT at 15 µg haemoglobin per gram cut-off in screen-naive individuals. We furthermore examined the incidence rates of interval cancer in gFOBT- and FIT-based screening programme. Results Advanced neoplasms were detected less frequently by gFOBT (0.8%) than by FIT (1.3%), with a difference of 0.5% (P < 0.01). PPVs were lower for gFOBT (15.1%) than for FIT (21.7%) for advanced neoplasms (difference 6.6%, P < 0.01). Compared to participants with negative gFOBT, those with negative FIT were 77% less likely to develop interval cancer (incidence rate ratio 0.23, 95% confidence interval 0.16–0.33). Conclusion Our study demonstrated that in an organised CRC screening programme, replacing gFOBT with FIT improved neoplasm detection rate and substantially reduced interval cancer incidence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Feng Guo
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.,Medical Faculty Heidelberg, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | | | | | - Michel Candeur
- Community Reference Center for Cancer Screening (Wallonia), Mont-Saint-Guibert, Belgium
| | - Marc Polus
- Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospital of Liège, Liège, Belgium
| | | | - Hermann Brenner
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany. .,Division of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) and National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany. .,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|