Effect of verification bias on the sensitivity of fecal occult blood testing: a meta-analysis

Evaluation of a colorectal cancer screening program composed of successive waves of different tests: The experience of the French Calvados County

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.

Estimating Cancer Screening Sensitivity and Specificity Using Healthcare Utilization Data: Defining the Accuracy Assessment Interval

The effectiveness and efficiency of cancer screening in real-world settings depend on many factors, including test sensitivity and specificity. Outside of select experimental studies, not everyone receives a gold standard test that can serve as a comparator in estimating screening test accuracy. Thus, many studies of screening test accuracy use the passage of time to infer whether or not cancer was present at the time of the screening test, particularly for patients with a negative screening test. We define the accuracy assessment interval as the period of time after a screening test that is used to estimate the test's accuracy. We describe how the length of this interval may bias sensitivity and specificity estimates. We call for future research to quantify bias and uncertainty in accuracy estimates and to provide guidance on setting accuracy assessment interval lengths for different cancers and screening modalities.

Estimating the Impact of Verification Bias on Celiac Disease Testing

GOAL

The goal of this study was to estimate the impact of verification bias on the diagnostic accuracy of immunoglobulin A tissue transglutaminase (IgA tTG) in detecting celiac disease as reported by an authoritative meta-analysis, the 2016 Comparative Effectiveness Review (CER).

BACKGROUND

Verification bias is introduced to diagnostic accuracy studies when screening test results impact the decision to verify disease status.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We adjusted the sensitivity and specificity of IgA tTG reported by the 2016 CER with the proportion of IgA tTG positive and negative individuals who are referred for confirmatory small bowel biopsy. We performed a systematic review from January 1, 2007, to July 19, 2017, to determine these referral rates.

RESULTS

The systematic review identified 793 articles of which 9 met inclusion criteria (n=36,477). Overall, 3.6% [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.1%-10.9%] of IgA tTG negative and 79.2.2% (95% CI: 65.0%-88.7%) of IgA tTG positive individuals were referred for biopsy. Adjusting for these referral rates the 2016 CER reported sensitivity of IgA tTG dropped from 92.6% (95% CI: 90.2%-94.5%) to 57.1% (95% CI: 35.4%-76.4%) and the specificity increased from 97.6% (95% CI: 96.3%-98.5%) to 99.6% (95% CI: 98.4%-99.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

The CER may have largely overestimated the sensitivity of IgA tTG due to a failure to account for verification bias. These findings suggest caution in the interpretation of a negative IgA tTG to rule out celiac disease in clinical practice. More broadly, they highlight the impact of verification bias on diagnostic accuracy estimates and suggest that studies at risk for this bias be excluded from systematic reviews.

Effect of Sex, Age, and Positivity Threshold on Fecal Immunochemical Test Accuracy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Quantitative fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for hemoglobin are commonly used for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. We aimed to quantify the change in CRC and advanced adenoma detection and number of positive test results at different positivity thresholds and by sex and age.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE, selecting articles of FIT for CRC detection in asymptomatic adults undergoing screening. We calculated sensitivity and specificity, as well as detected number of cancers, advanced adenomas, and positive test results at positivity thresholds ≤10 μg hemoglobin/g feces, 10 to ≤20 μg/g, 20 to ≤30 μg/g, and >30 μg/g. We also analyzed results from stratified by patient sex, age, and reference standard.

RESULTS

Our meta-analysis comprised 46 studies with 2.4 million participants and 6478 detected cancers. Sensitivity for detection of CRC increased from 69% (95% confidence interval [CI], 63%-75%) at thresholds >10 μg/g and ≤20 μg/g to 80% (95% CI, 76%-83%) at thresholds ≤10 μg/g. At these threshold values, sensitivity for detection of advanced adenomas increased from 21% (95% CI, 18%-25%) to 31% (95% CI, 27%-35%), whereas specificity decreased from 94% (95% CI, 93%-96%) to 91% (95% CI, 89%-93%). In 3 studies stratified by sex, sensitivity of CRC detection was 77% in men (95% CI, 75%-79%) and 81% in women (95% CI, 60%-100%) (P = .68). In 3 studies stratified by age groups, sensitivity of CRC detection was 85% for ages 50-59 years (95% CI, 71%-99%) and 73% for ages 60-69 years (95% CI, 71%-75%) (P = .10). All studies with colonoscopy follow-up had similar sensitivity levels for detection of CRC to studies that analyzed 2-year registry follow-up data (74%; 95% CI, 68%-78% vs 75%; 95% CI, 73%-77%).

CONCLUSIONS

In a meta-analysis of studies that analyzed detection of CRC and advanced adenomas at different FIT positivity thresholds, we found the sensitivity and specificity of detection to vary with positive cutoff value. It might be possible to decrease positive threshold values for centers with sufficient follow-up colonoscopy resources. More research is needed to precisely establish FIT thresholds for each sex and age subgroup.

PROTOCOL

PROSPERO CRD42017068760.

Assessment of a Noninvasive Exhaled Breath Test for the Diagnosis of Oesophagogastric Cancer

Question

What is the diagnostic accuracy of a breath test for esophagogastric cancer?

Findings

In a multicenter diagnostic study of 335 patients, including 172 patients with esophagogastric cancer, the breath test demonstrated good diagnostic accuracy.

Meaning

This study suggests the potential of breath analysis as a noninvasive tool in the diagnosis of esophagogastric cancer.

Importance

Early esophagogastric cancer (OGC) stage presents with nonspecific symptoms.

Objective

The aim of this study was to determine the accuracy of a breath test for the diagnosis of OGC in a multicenter validation study.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Patient recruitment for this diagnostic validation study was conducted at 3 London hospital sites, with breath samples returned to a central laboratory for selected ion flow tube mass spectrometry (SIFT-MS) analysis. Based on a 1:1 cancer:control ratio, and maintaining a sensitivity and specificity of 80%, the sample size required was 325 patients. All patients with cancer were on a curative treatment pathway, and patients were recruited consecutively. Among the 335 patients included; 172 were in the control group and 163 had OGC.

Interventions

Breath samples were collected using secure 500-mL steel breath bags and analyzed by SIFT-MS. Quality assurance measures included sampling room air, training all researchers in breath sampling, regular instrument calibration, and unambiguous volatile organic compounds (VOCs) identification by gas chromatography mass spectrometry.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The risk of cancer was identified based on a previously generated 5-VOCs model and compared with histopathology-proven diagnosis.

Results

Patients in the OGC group were older (median [IQR] age 68 [60-75] vs 55 [41-69] years) and had a greater proportion of men (134 [82.2%]) vs women (81 [47.4%]) compared with the control group. Of the 163 patients with OGC, 123 (69%) had tumor stage T3/4, and 106 (65%) had nodal metastasis on clinical staging. The predictive probabilities generated by this 5-VOCs diagnostic model were used to generate a receiver operator characteristic curve, with good diagnostic accuracy, area under the curve of 0.85. This translated to a sensitivity of 80% and specificity of 81% for the diagnosis of OGC.

Conclusions and Relevance

This study shows the potential of breath analysis in noninvasive diagnosis of OGC in the clinical setting. The next step is to establish the diagnostic accuracy of the test among the intended population in primary care where the test will be applied.

One-Time Fecal Immunochemical Screening for Advanced Colorectal Neoplasia in Patients with CKD (DETECT Study)

BACKGROUND

In patients with CKD, the risk of developing colorectal cancer is high and outcomes are poor. Screening using fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) is effective in reducing mortality from colorectal cancer, but performance characteristics of FIT in CKD are unknown.

METHODS

To determine the detection rates and performance characteristics of FIT for advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACN) in patients with CKD, we used FIT to prospectively screen patients aged 35-74 years with CKD (stages 3-5 CKD, dialysis, and renal transplant) from 11 sites in Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and Spain. All participants received clinical follow-up at 2 years. We used a two-step reference standard approach to estimate disease status.

RESULTS

Overall, 369 out of 1706 patients who completed FIT (21.6%) tested positive; 323 (87.5%) underwent colonoscopies. A total of 1553 (91.0%) completed follow-up; 82 (4.8%) had died and 71 (4.2%) were lost. The detection rate of ACN using FIT was 6.0% (5.6%, 7.4%, and 5.6% for stages 3-5 CKD, dialysis, and transplant). Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of FIT for ACN were 0.90, 0.83, 0.30, and 0.99, respectively. Of participants who underwent colonoscopy, five (1.5%) experienced major colonoscopy-related complications, including bowel perforation and major bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

FIT appears to be an accurate screening test for patients with CKD, such that a negative test may rule out the diagnosis of colorectal cancer within 2 years. However, the risk of major complications from work-up colonoscopy are at least ten-fold higher than in the general population.

Contribution of the OC Sensor® immunoassay in comparison to the Hemoccult II® guaiac-test in organized colorectal cancer screening

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major cause of cancer-related death of worldwide with high incidence and mortality rate, accessible to a screening program in France, first with guaiac- based fecal occult blood test (g-FOBT) then with fecal immunochemical tests (FIT), since 2015, because of better accuracy. The aim of our study was to compare the characteristics of screen-detected lesions in two successive CRC screening campaigns, using two different tests (Hemoccult II^® and OC Sensor^®) in the department of Maine-et-Loire, and to precise the performance of these tests [participation rate, detection rates (DR), positive predictive value (PPV)]. Participants, invited by CAP SANTE 49, with polyps or cancer at the colonoscopy after a positive screening test between 01/01/2013 and 31/12/2016 were included. A guaiac-based fecal occult blood test (g-FOBT) was used from January 2013 to December 2014 and a FIT was used from June 2015 to December 2016). 2575 participants, 642 in g-FOBT group and 1933 in FIT group had lesions. Participation rate was not different between tests (p = 0.104), whereas DR and PPV were statistically higher in FIT for all lesions (2.61, 95% CI [2.50-2.70] vs 0.93, 95% CI [0.90-1.00], p < 0.0001 and 64.84, 95% CI [63.10-66.60], 50.00, 95% CI [47.30-52.70], p < 0.0001 respectively). FIT detects more precancerous lesions (adenomas, p < 0.001, and advanced adenomas, p < 0.001) than g-FOBT but g-FOBT detects more serrated polyps (p = 0.025). AAs were more in right colon in FIT than g-FOBT (p = 0.035). No different participation rate was detected between FIT and g-FOBT but DR and PPV of all lesions was higher with FIT.

Influence of Varying Quantitative Fecal Immunochemical Test Positivity Thresholds on Colorectal Cancer Detection: A Community-Based Cohort Study

Background

The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is commonly used for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Despite demographic variations in stool hemoglobin concentrations, few data exist regarding optimal positivity thresholds by age and sex.

Objective

To identify programmatic (multitest) FIT performance characteristics and optimal FIT quantitative hemoglobin positivity thresholds in a large, population-based, screening program.

Design

Retrospective cohort study.

Setting

Kaiser Permanente Northern and Southern California.

Participants

Adults aged 50 to 75 years who were eligible for screening and had baseline quantitative FIT results (2013 to 2014) and 2 years of follow-up. Nearly two thirds (411 241) had FIT screening in the previous 2 years.

Measurements

FIT programmatic sensitivity for CRC and number of positive test results per cancer case detected, overall and by age and sex.

Results

Of 640 859 persons who completed a baseline FIT and were followed for 2 years, 481 817 (75%) had at least 1 additional FIT and 1245 (0.19%) received a CRC diagnosis. Cancer detection (programmatic sensitivity) increased at lower positivity thresholds, from 822 in 1245 (66.0%) at 30 µg/g to 925 (74.3%) at 20 µg/g and 987 (79.3%) at 10 µg/g; the number of positive test results per cancer case detected increased from 43 at 30 µg/g to 52 at 20 µg/g and 85 at 10 µg/g. Reducing the positivity threshold from 20 to 15 µg/g would detect 3% more cancer cases and require 23% more colonoscopies. At the conventional FIT threshold of 20 µg/g, programmatic sensitivity decreased with increasing age (79.0%, 73.4%, and 68.9% for ages 50 to 59, 60 to 69, and 70 to 75 years, respectively; P = 0.009) and was higher in men than women (77.0% vs. 70.6%; P = 0.011).

Limitation

Information on advanced adenoma was lacking.

Conclusion

Increased cancer detection at lower positivity thresholds is counterbalanced by substantial increases in positive tests. Tailored thresholds may provide screening benefits that are more equal among different demographic groups, depending on local resources.

Primary Funding Source

National Cancer Institute.

Verification bias

This article is part of the Catalogue of Bias series. We present a description of verification bias, and outline its potential impact on research studies and the preventive steps to minimise its risk. We also present teaching slides in the online supplementary file. Verification bias (sometimes referred to as 'work-up bias') concerns the test(s) used to confirm a diagnosis within a diagnostic accuracy study. Verification bias occurs when only a proportion of the study participants receive confirmation of the diagnosis by the reference standard test, or if some participants receive a different reference standard test.

Fecal immunochemical tests in combination with blood tests for colorectal cancer and advanced adenoma detection-systematic review

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a common but largely preventable cancer. Although fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) detect the majority of CRCs, they miss some of the cancers and most advanced adenomas (AAs). The potential of blood tests in complementing FITs for the detection of CRC or AA has not yet been systematically investigated.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review of performance of FIT combined with an additional blood test for CRC and AA detection versus FIT alone. PubMed and Web of Science were searched until June 9, 2017.

Results

Some markers substantially increased sensitivity for CRC when combined with FIT, albeit typically at a major loss of specificity. For AA, no relevant increase in sensitivity could be achieved.

Conclusion

Combining FIT and blood tests might be a promising approach to enhance sensitivity of CRC screening, but comprehensive evaluation of promising marker combinations in screening populations is needed.

Diagnostic Value of Methylated Septin9 for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Meta-Analysis

Background

Septin9 is a member of GTP-binding protein family, and is used as a predictive diagnostic index. However, it has not been widely adopted due to inconsistent results reported in the literature. The present study was performed to determine the diagnostic accuracy of methylated Septin9 (mSEPT9) for colorectal cancer (CRC) and to evaluate its utility in CRC screening.

Material/Methods

After reviewing relevant studies, accuracy measures (pooled sensitivity and specificity, positive/negative likelihood ratio [PLR/NLR], and diagnostic odds ratio [DOR]) were calculated for mSEPT9 in the diagnosis of CRC. Overall test performance was summarized using summary receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Potential between-study heterogeneity was explored by use of a meta-regression model. We divided included studies into Epi proColon test and non-Epi proColon test subgroups. We compared the effects of mSEPT9 and fecal occult blood test (FOBT) for CRC screening.

Results

A total of 9870 subjects in 14 studies were recruited. Pooled sensitivity and specificity, PLR, NLR, DOR, and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) of mSEPT9 for CRC diagnosis were 0.66 (95% CI: 0.64–0.69), 0.91 (95% CI: 0.90–0.91), 5.59 (95% CI: 4.03–7.74), 0.37 (95% CI: 0.29–0.48), and 16.79 (95% CI: 10.54–26.76), respectively. The area under the summary ROC curve (AUC) was 0.8563. The AUCs in the Epi proColon test and non-Epi proColon test for CRC diagnosis were 0.8709 and 0.7968, respectively. In head-to-head comparison, AUC of mSEPT9 and FOBT for CRC diagnosis were 0.7857 and 0.6571, respectively.

Conclusions

The present study demonstrates that mSEPT9 can be a good diagnostic biomarker complementary to FOBT as a screening tool for CRC.

Systematic review with meta-analysis: faecal occult blood tests show lower colorectal cancer detection rates in the proximal colon in colonoscopy-verified diagnostic studies

BACKGROUND

The performance of faecal occult blood tests (FOBTs) to screen proximally located colorectal cancer (CRC) has produced inconsistent results.

AIM

To assess in a meta-analysis, the diagnostic accuracy of FOBTs for relative detection of CRC according to anatomical location of CRC.

METHODS

Diagnostic studies including both symptomatic and asymptomatic cohorts assessing performance of FOBTs for CRC were searched from MEDINE and EMBASE. Primary outcome was accuracy of FOBTs according to the anatomical location of CRC. Bivariate random-effects model was used. Subgroup analyses were performed to evaluate test performance of guaiac-based FOBT (gFOBT) and immunochemical-based FOBT (iFOBT).

RESULTS

Thirteen studies, with 17 cohorts, reporting performance of FOBT were included; a total of 26 342 patients (mean age 58.9 years; 58.1% male) underwent both colonoscopy and FOBT. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio and negative likelihood ratio of FOBTs for CRC detection in the proximal colon were 71.2% (95% CI 61.3-79.4%), 93.6% (95% CI 90.7-95.7%), 11.1 (95% CI 7.8-15.8) and 0.3 (95% CI 0.2-0.4) respectively. Corresponding findings for CRC detection in distal colon were 80.1% (95% CI 70.9-87.0%), 93.6% (95% CI 90.7-95.7%), 12.6 (95% CI 8.8-18.1) and 0.2 (95% CI 0.1-0.3). The area-under-curve for FOBT detection for proximal and distal CRC were 90% vs. 94% (P = 0.0143). Both gFOBT and iFOBT showed significantly lower sensitivity but comparable specificity for the detection of proximally located CRC compared with distal CRC.

CONCLUSION

Faecal occult blood tests, both guaiac- and immunochemical-based, show better diagnostic performance for the relative detection of colorectal cancer in the distal colon than in the proximal bowel.

Diagnostic performance of guaiac-based fecal occult blood test in routine screening: state-wide analysis from Bavaria, Germany

OBJECTIVES

Randomized trials have shown that annual or biannual screening by guaiac-based fecal occult blood tests (gFOBTs) reduces colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality. Few clinical studies have evaluated diagnostic performance of gFOBT through validation by colonoscopy in all participants. We aimed for a comprehensive evaluation of diagnostic performance of gFOBT by age and sex under routine screening conditions.

METHODS

Our analysis is based on 20,884 colonoscopies following up a positive gFOBT and 182,956 primary screening colonoscopies documented in a state-wide quality assurance program in Bavaria, Germany, in 2007-2009. Positive likelihood ratios (LR+), which represent an integrative measure of diagnostic performance, were derived, by age groups (55-59, 60-64, 65-69, 70-74 years) and sex, from a joint and comparative analysis of prevalences of colorectal neoplasms in both groups.

RESULTS

Overall LR+ (95% confidence intervals) were 1.11 (1.06-1.15), 1.80 (1.72-1.88), and 5.04 (4.64-5.47) for non-advanced adenoma, advanced adenoma, and cancer, respectively. Assuming a specificity of gFOBT of 95.2%, as recently observed in a German study among 2,235 participants of screening colonoscopy, these LR+ would translate to sensitivities of 5.3%, 8.6%, and 24.2% for the three outcomes, respectively. Diagnostic performance was similarly poor among women and men and across age groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The performance of gFOBT under routine screening conditions is even worse than previously estimated from clinical studies. In routine screening application, gFOBTs are expected to miss more than 9 out of 10 advanced adenomas and 3 out of 4 cancers. These results underline the need and the potential for better noninvasive CRC screening tests.

The cost-effectiveness of immunochemical tests for colorectal cancer screening

BACKGROUND

The optimal immunochemical test to use for generalised mass screening is still under debate in France.

AIM

To compare the cost and effectiveness in biennial screening for colorectal cancer of fifteen strategies consisting of the three-stool sample un-rehydrated guaiac faecal occult blood test and three immunochemical tests: Magstream, FOB-Gold and OC-Sensor, at different positivity cut-off levels and stool-sample collection.

METHODS

A Markov model was used to compare these strategies in a general population of 100,000 individuals aged 50-74 over a 20-year period.

RESULTS

Immunochemical tests were efficient strategies compared with guaiac faecal occult blood test. When all 15 strategies were compared with each other, only five of them remained efficient: the one- and two-stool sample Magstream, the one- and two-stool sample FOB-Gold with the 176 ng/mL cut-off, and the two-stool sample OC-Sensor with the 150 ng/mL cut-off. Sensitivity analyses showed that, at an identical price, the one-stool sample OC-Sensor was the most efficient strategy, and outperformed FOB-Gold.

CONCLUSION

One-stool immunochemical testing can be considered a promising alternative to the guaiac faecal occult blood test for colorectal cancer mass screening in the general population. Competition between manufacturers should now be introduced to reduce purchase price differences.

Diagnostic inconsistency of faecal immunochemical tests for haemoglobin in population screening of colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

There is currently very little data available on the consistency of quantitative and qualitative faecal immunochemical test (FIT) for colorectal cancer screening.

METHODS

A representative random population (n=1889, 40-74 year olds) in Jiashan, China was invited for FIT screening in 2012. Faecal samples were collected by a single specimen collection device and simultaneously tested by a quantitative FIT (OC-SENSOR, OC) and two qualitative FITs (FIT A and FIT B with intrinsic positive haemoglobin cut-off concentrations of 20 μg Hb/g faeces and 40 μg Hb/g faeces, respectively). The observational criteria for a positive result of the qualitative FIT were set according to the density of the colour appearing in the test strip. The results produced by the quantitative and qualitative FIT for each sample were compared. κ coefficient was used to measure consistency.

RESULTS

A total of 1368 (72.4%) individuals returned faecal samples. Both FIT A and FIT B precisely identified all faecal samples with haemoglobin concentration above 100 μg Hb/g faeces, but the overall consistency was poor for OC & FIT A (κ=0.32, 95% CI 0.20-0.44) and was moderate for OC & FIT B (κ=0.74, 95% CI 0.64-0.85). A more favourable consistency (κ=0.64, 95% CI 0.57-0.72) was achieved when a different positive criterion was employed for FIT A.

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnostic inconsistency between quantitative and qualitative FITs mainly exists in the faecal samples with low haemoglobin concentrations. Refining the criterion for a positive result may be a feasible way to improve the accuracy of qualitative FIT.

A systematic review classifies sources of bias and variation in diagnostic test accuracy studies

OBJECTIVE

To classify the sources of bias and variation and to provide an updated summary of the evidence of the effects of each source of bias and variation.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We conducted a systematic review of studies of any design with the main objective of addressing bias or variation in the results of diagnostic accuracy studies. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS, the Cochrane Methodology Register, and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) from 2001 to October 2011. Citation searches based on three key papers were conducted, and studies from our previous review (search to 2001) were eligible. One reviewer extracted data on the study design, objective, sources of bias and/or variation, and results. A second reviewer checked the extraction.

RESULTS

We summarized the number of studies providing evidence of an effect arising from each source of bias and variation on the estimates of sensitivity, specificity, and overall accuracy.

CONCLUSIONS

We found consistent evidence for the effects of case-control design, observer variability, availability of clinical information, reference standard, partial and differential verification bias, demographic features, and disease prevalence and severity. Effects were generally stronger for sensitivity than for specificity. Evidence for other sources of bias and variation was limited.

Screening for colorectal cancer and advanced colorectal neoplasia in kidney transplant recipients: cross sectional prevalence and diagnostic accuracy study of faecal immunochemical testing for haemoglobin and colonoscopy

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether screening kidney transplant recipients aged over 50 years for colorectal cancer with a faecal immunochemical test for haemoglobin might be justified, by determining the prevalence of advanced colorectal neoplasia and evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of faecal haemoglobin testing compared with colonoscopy in a population of kidney transplant recipients at otherwise average risk.

DESIGN

Cross sectional prevalence and diagnostic accuracy study with index test of faecal haemoglobin and reference standard of colonoscopy.

SETTING

Outpatient clinics in metropolitan and regional hospitals in South Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

229 kidney transplant recipients aged 50 years and over, who were at least 6 months (mean 9.0 (SD 8.4) years) post-transplant and otherwise at average risk of colorectal cancer, completed the study between June 2008 and October 2011.

INTERVENTIONS

Faecal immunochemical testing (Enterix Insure) for human haemoglobin, followed by colonoscopy with histological evaluation of retrieved samples.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Prevalence of advanced colorectal neoplasia, defined as an adenoma at least 10 mm in diameter, villous features, high grade dysplasia, or colorectal cancer; sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of faecal haemoglobin testing for advanced neoplasia compared with colonoscopy.

RESULTS

Advanced colorectal neoplasia was found in 29 (13%, 95% confidence interval 9% to 18%) participants, including 2% (n=4) with high grade dysplasia and 2% (n=5) with colorectal cancer. Faecal testing for haemoglobin was positive in 12% (n=28); sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for advanced neoplasia were 31.0% (15.3% to 50.8%), 90.5% (85.6% to 94.2%), 32.1% (15.9% to 52.4%), and 90.1% (85.1% to 93.8%). Colonoscopy was well tolerated, with no significant adverse outcomes. To identify one case of advanced neoplasia, 8 (6 to 12) colonoscopies were needed.

CONCLUSIONS

Kidney transplant recipients aged over 50 years have a high prevalence of advanced colorectal neoplasia. Faecal haemoglobin screening for colorectal neoplasia has similar performance characteristics in transplant recipients to those reported in general population studies, with poor sensitivity but reasonable specificity. Surveillance colonoscopy might be a more appropriate approach in this population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12608000154303.

Fecal DNA testing for Colorectal Cancer Screening: the ColoSure™ test

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer and the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States. Screening has been shown to be effective in reducing colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. Colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, and fecal occult blood tests are all recommended screening tests that have widespread availability. Nevertheless, many people do not receive the evidence-based recommended screening for colorectal cancer. Additional stool-based methods have been developed that offer more options for colorectal cancer screening, including a variety of fecal DNA tests. The only fecal DNA test that is currently available commercially in the United States is ColoSure(TM), which is marketed as a non-invasive test that detects an epigenetic marker (methylated vimentin) associated with colorectal cancer and pre-cancerous adenomas. We examined the published literature on the analytic validity, clinical validity, and clinical utility of ColoSure and we briefly summarized the current colorectal cancer screening guidelines regarding fecal DNA testing. We also addressed the public health implications of the test and contextual issues surrounding the integration of fecal DNA testing into current colorectal cancer screening strategies. The primary goal was to provide a basic overview of ColoSure and identify gaps in knowledge and evidence that affect the recommendation and adoption of the test in colorectal cancer screening strategies.