Fecal immunochemical test accuracy in average-risk colorectal cancer screening

Interval Advanced Adenomas and Neoplasia in Patients with Negative Colonoscopy Following Positive Stool-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Test

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Fecal occult blood test (FOBT) and fecal immunohistochemical test (FIT) are used for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. However, when no adenomas are found following a positive FOBT/FIT, the future risk of advanced adenomas or colorectal cancer (CRC) is unclear. We determined the incidence and determinants of advanced adenomas or CRC after a negative index colonoscopy following a positive FOBT/FIT.

METHODS

We identified patients in the Harris Health System (Houston, Texas) who underwent a colonoscopy following a positive FOBT/FIT from 01/2010 to 01/2013. We compared the incidence rates of advanced adenomas (≥ 1 cm, villous histopathology, or high-grade dysplasia) or CRC through 12/2023 for patients without polyps on index colonoscopy (negative colonoscopy) to patients with polyps (positive colonoscopy). We examined risk factors for incident adenomas using Cox regression models.

RESULTS

Of 2096 patients, 1293 (61.7%) had negative index colonoscopy and 803 (38.3%) had positive index colonoscopy. Overall, 411 patients (19.6%) underwent subsequent colonoscopy with incident adenomas in 241 patients and no incident CRC over mean 12.5 years. The incidence rate of advanced adenomas was 2.08 per 100 person-years after positive index colonoscopy compared to 0.65 per 100 person-years after negative index colonoscopy (age-adjusted incidence rate ratio 3.08, 95% CI 1.27-7.48). Non-Hispanic white race was the strongest risk factor for incident adenomas among patients with negative index colonoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

We found a low likelihood of advanced adenomas and no interval CRC following negative index colonoscopy after positive FOBT/FIT. Non-Hispanic white race was a risk factor for incident adenomas, and these patients may warrant closer surveillance.

Diagnostic Performance of Faecal Immunochemical Testing (FIT) in Patients with Lynch Syndrome Scheduled for Colonoscopic Surveillance

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Lynch syndrome (LS) carries a substantial lifetime risk of colorectal cancer which is currently mitigated by biennial colonoscopy surveillance. Paramount to the surveillance programme is the removal of adenomas before malignant transformation but there is an associated service burden and morbidity of repeated endoscopy. We investigated if faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) for faecal haemoglobin has the diagnostic performance to replace colonoscopy.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, patients due to undergo planned surveillance for LS between November 2020 and April 2022 were sent two FIT kits prior to colonoscopy. Test diagnostic performance of colorectal cancer (CRC), advanced and non-advanced adenoma detection was calculated for single and double FIT strategies. A faecal-Hb of 10 µg Hb/g was considered positive.

RESULTS

In total, 78 patients, with 45 (57.7%) female, median age 52 years (IQR 41-63), completed at least one FIT and colonoscopy. The median time from FIT to colonoscopy was 47 days. A single FIT was positive in 7/30 cases of adenoma (2/3 advanced, 5/27 non-advanced). A total of 64 (82.1% of FIT1T returners) completed a second FIT. Using the greatest of the two FITs (FIT2TMAX) 8/26 (2/3 advanced, 4/23 non-advanced), patients with adenomas were identified. There were no cases of CRC. The sensitivity for adenoma detection was 23.3% and 23.1%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with LS awaiting colonoscopy, FIT has a low sensitivity for detecting adenomas and advanced adenomas. This is not improved by the addition of a second FIT test.

Comparative Performance of Common Fecal Immunochemical Tests : A Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Despite widespread use of fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, data to guide test selection are limited.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the performance characteristics of 5 commonly used FITs, using colonoscopy as the reference standard.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03264898).

SETTING

Three U.S. academic medical centers and affiliated endoscopy units.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged 50 to 85 years undergoing screening or surveillance colonoscopy.

INTERVENTION

Participants completed 5 different FITs before their colonoscopy, including 4 qualitative tests (Hemoccult ICT, Hemosure iFOB, OC-Light S FIT, QuickVue iFOB) and 1 quantitative test (OC-Auto FIT, which was run at the manufacturer's threshold for positivity of >100 ng/mL).

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was test performance (sensitivity and specificity) for each of the 5 FITs for advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACN), defined as advanced polyps or CRC. Positivity rates, positive and negative predictive values, and rates of unevaluable tests were compared. Multivariable models were used to identify factors affecting sensitivity.

RESULTS

A total of 3761 participants were enrolled, with a mean age of 62.1 years (SD, 7.8); 63.2% of participants were female, 5.7% were Black, 86.4% were White, and 28.7% were Hispanic. There were 320 participants with ACN (8.5%), including 9 with CRC (0.2%). The test positivity rate varied 4-fold (3.9% to 16.4%) across FITs. Rates of unevaluable FITs ranged from 0.2% to 2.5%. The sensitivity for ACN varied from 10.1% to 36.7%, and specificity varied from 85.5% to 96.6%. Differences in sensitivity between FITs were all statistically significantly different except between Hemosure iFOB and QuickVue iFOB, and specificity differences were all statistically significantly different from one another. In addition to FIT brand, distal location of ACN was also associated with higher FIT sensitivity.

LIMITATION

The study did not assess the programmatic sensitivity of annual FIT.

CONCLUSION

Although considered a single class, FITs have varying test performance for detecting ACN and should not be considered interchangeable.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Institutes of Health.

Repeat Faecal Immunochemical Testing for Colorectal Cancer Detection in Symptomatic and Screening Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) is widely used in bowel screening programmes and assessing symptomatic patients for suspected colorectal cancer (CRC). The evidence for single test performance of FIT in both settings is considerable; however, the use of a repeat test to increase sensitivity remains uncertain. We aimed to review what increase in test positivity would be generated by additional FITs, whether a repeated FIT detects previously missed CRC and advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACRN), and to estimate the sensitivity of double-FIT strategies to diagnose CRC and ACRN.

METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) was performed using key search terms. Studies reporting the use of more than one FIT in the same screening round or planned assessment of a single symptomatic patient episode were included. Studies were categorised by the reported study population into asymptomatic, mixed (cohorts of combined asymptomatic, symptomatic, or high-risk surveillance), or symptomatic cohorts.

RESULTS

A total of 68 studies were included for analysis (39 asymptomatic, 21 mixed, 7 symptomatic, and 1 study with discrete asymptomatic and symptomatic data). At a threshold of 10 µg Hb/g, the two-test positivity ranged between 8.1 and 34.5%, with an increase from the second test of 3-9.2 percentage points. Four out of five studies comparing one versus two tests for diagnosing CRC at 10 µg Hb/g identified additional cases with the second test, with a minimum of 50% reduction in missed CRC. At a threshold of 20 µg Hb/g, the second test increased the positivity by 1.3-6.7 percentage points, with a two-test positivity of between 5.1 and 25.0%. Using a threshold of 20 µg Hb/g, five out of seven studies had a 25% reduction in missed CRC. A meta-analysis estimated the double-FIT sensitivity at 10 µg Hb/g for CRC in mixed-risk and symptomatic cohorts to be 94% and 98%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Repeated use of FIT helps to diagnose more cases of CRC with a moderate increase in positivity. A double-FIT strategy at 10 µg Hb/g in mixed and symptomatic cohorts has a very high sensitivity for CRC.

Clinical performance of fecal calprotectin, lactoferrin, and hemoglobin for evaluating the disease activity of IBD and detecting colorectal tumors

Background and Aim

Recently, noninvasive fecal markers have been used as indicators of intestinal inflammation in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We conducted a clinical validation study to measure fecal calprotectin (Cp), lactoferrin (Lf), and hemoglobin (Hb) levels using an all-in-one kit in patients with IBD and colorectal tumors and aimed to clarify the utility of these fecal markers.

Methods

In this study, 104 patients were analyzed, including 25 patients with ulcerative colitis (UC), 20 with Crohn's disease (CD), 48 with colorectal tumors, and 13 healthy controls (HC). Of the 48 patients with colorectal tumors, 14 had invasive cancer. We validated the utility of fecal Cp, Lf, and Hb levels by simultaneously measuring fecal markers in patients with IBD and colorectal tumors.

Results

Fecal Cp and Lf had almost equivalent abilities in detecting clinical remission in patients with UC; however, fecal Cp was slightly superior to Lf. Regarding colorectal tumors, fecal Cp and Lf levels tended to be higher in patients with adenomas and colorectal cancer than in HCs. Although fecal Hb alone had the best sensitivity and specificity for detecting colorectal cancer, it had relatively low sensitivity for detecting advanced neoplasms and colorectal cancer.

Conclusion

Fecal Cp and Lf can be used as almost equivalent biomarkers to assess the clinical activity in patients with UC. Fecal Hb is the most useful marker for screening colorectal cancer; however, adding fecal Cp and Lf may compensate for the low sensitivity of detecting for advanced colorectal tumors based on Hb alone.

Adenoma location, size, and morphology are risk factors for FOBT false-negative results in inpatients with advanced colorectal adenoma

Recently, advanced adenoma (AA) has been recognized as a target for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. However, the fecal occult blood test (FOBT), the primary non-invasive screening method, shows limited sensitivity in detecting AA. This study investigates the relationship between adenoma characteristics and FOBT false-negative results. In a retrospective cohort study conducted from 2015 to 2022, we examined 342 inpatients with AA who underwent colonoscopy and received qualitative FOBT. FOBT sensitivity was analyzed about various adenoma characteristics, and logistic regression models were employed to investigate the relationship between adenoma features and FOBT false-negative outcomes. FOBT sensitivity in AA inpatients was 52.63%. Significant differences in sensitivity were observed based on adenoma location (left vs. right), morphology (with or without pedunculation), and size (≤ 10 mm vs. > 10 mm). After adjusting for several potential confounders, FOBT showed a reduced false-negative rate in AA with large-sized (OR, 0.49; 95% CI 0.31-0.77), left-sided location (OR, 0.53; 95% CI 0.31-0.89), and pedunculated morphology (OR, 0.73; 95% CI 0.43-1.24). AA with large size, left-sided location, and pedunculated morphology independently contribute to a decreased rate of FOBT false-negative results. However, these adenoma characteristics are not actively modifiable. Therefore, novel non-invasive methods are needed to improve AA detection accuracy.

Replicate and repeat faecal immunochemical tests in symptomatic patients: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Faecal Immunochemical tests (FITs) in the assessment of patients presenting with symptoms have generally used a single sample. Little evidence pertains to the use of replicate, where a number of tests are done prior to decision-making or repeat FIT, where additional FIT are performed following clinical decision-making. Overwhelmingly, research has focussed on FIT to help identify colorectal cancer (CRC). The aim of this review is to assess the available literature concerning replicate and repeat FIT in symptomatic patients to help generate consensus and guide future research.

METHODS

The terms 'faecal immunochemical test' or 'FIT' were combined with 'multiple' or 'repeat'. EMBASE, Medline and PubMed database and other searches were conducted. All papers published in English were included with no exclusion date limits until November 2021.

RESULTS

Of the 161 initial papers screened, seven were included for review. Qualitative and quantitative FIT outcomes were assessed in the studies. The primary aims of most related to whether replicate FIT increased diagnostic yield of CRC, with colonoscopy used as the reference standard. One publication assessed the impact of a new COVID-adapted pathway on CRC detection. No consensus on replicate FIT was apparent. Some concluded that FITs may help minimise missed CRC diagnoses: others showed no increase in diagnostic yield of CRC.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence on replicate and repeat FIT is both minimal and conflicting. FIT is a superb clinical tool, but significant gaps surrounding application remain. Further studies relating to replicate and repeat FIT are required.

Potential Modifiers and Different Cut-offs in Diagnostic Accuracy of Fecal Immunochemical Test in Detecting Advanced Colon Neoplasia: A Diagnostic Test Accuracy Meta-analysis

Background: Fecal immunoglobulin test (FIT) has been advocated as the first line of screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) in several jurisdictions. Most studies have focused on CRC as the outcome of interest. Our goal was to quantify the diagnostic accuracy of different thresholds of FIT as compared with colonoscopy for detection of advanced colonic neoplasia and potential modifiers using proper Cochrane methodology. Methods: A comprehensive electronic search was performed for studies on FIT using colonoscopy as the reference standard to detect advanced neoplasia. Cochrane methodology was used to perform a diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) meta-analysis. Diagnostic accuracy of different cut-offs of FIT, including 25, 50, 75, 100, 150, and 200 ng/mL, were calculated separately. Meta-regression analysis was also performed to detect potential a priori modifiers, including age, location of the tumor, and time from FIT to colonoscopy. Results: Twenty-four studies were included with no evidence of publication bias. The sensitivity of FIT did not decrease with lowering the cut-off, although specificity increased in higher cut-offs. Commonly used cut-offs of 50 ng/mL, 75 ng/mL, and 100 ng/mL for FIT provided sensitivity of 39%, 36%, 27% and specificity of 92%, 94%, 96%, respectively. Diagnostic accuracy of FIT did not significantly differ in proximal versus distal lesions or in individuals below or over the age of 50 years. The results remained robust in a meta-regression of the location of the study, time from FIT to colonoscopy, and methodological quality. Conclusion: The sensitivity of FIT might have been overestimated in previous studies focusing on CRC, and it seems to be independent of age, location of neoplasia, or cut-offs, contrary to some previous studies. Lowering the cut-off will reduce the diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) by increasing specificity but without any effect on sensitivity.

Guaiac-based faecal occult blood tests versus faecal immunochemical tests for colorectal cancer screening in average-risk individuals

BACKGROUND

Worldwide, many countries have adopted colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes, often based on faecal occult blood tests (FOBTs). CRC screening aims to detect advanced neoplasia (AN), which is defined as CRC or advanced adenomas. FOBTs fall into two categories based on detection technique and the detected blood component: qualitative guaiac-based FOBTs (gFOBTs) and faecal immunochemical tests (FITs), which can be qualitative and quantitative. Screening with gFOBTs reduces CRC-related mortality.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the diagnostic test accuracy of gFOBT and FIT screening for detecting advanced colorectal neoplasia in average-risk individuals.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, BIOSIS Citation Index, Science Citation Index Expanded, and Google Scholar. We searched the reference lists and PubMed-related articles of included studies to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included prospective and retrospective studies that provided the number of true positives, false positives, false negatives, and true negatives for gFOBTs, FITs, or both, with colonoscopy as reference standard. We excluded case-control studies. We included studies in which all participants underwent both index test and reference standard ("reference standard: all"), and studies in which only participants with a positive index test underwent the reference standard while participants with a negative test were followed for at least one year for development of interval carcinomas ("reference standard: positive"). The target population consisted of asymptomatic, average-risk individuals undergoing CRC screening. The target conditions were CRC and advanced neoplasia (advanced adenomas and CRC combined).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened and selected studies for inclusion. In case of disagreement, a third review author made the final decision. We used the Rutter and Gatsonis hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic model to explore differences between tests and identify potential sources of heterogeneity, and the bivariate hierarchical model to estimate sensitivity and specificity at common thresholds: 10 µg haemoglobin (Hb)/g faeces and 20 µg Hb/g faeces. We performed indirect comparisons of the accuracy of the two tests and direct comparisons when both index tests were evaluated in the same population.

MAIN RESULTS

We ran the initial search on 25 June 2019, which yielded 63 studies for inclusion. We ran a top-up search on 14 September 2021, which yielded one potentially eligible study, currently awaiting classification. We included a total of 33 "reference standard: all" published articles involving 104,640 participants. Six studies evaluated only gFOBTs, 23 studies evaluated only FITs, and four studies included both gFOBTs and FITs. The cut-off for positivity of FITs varied between 2.4 μg and 50 µg Hb/g faeces. For each Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS)-2 domain, we assessed risk of bias as high in less than 20% of studies. The summary curve showed that FITs had a higher discriminative ability than gFOBTs for AN (P < 0.001) and CRC (P = 0.004). For the detection of AN, the summary sensitivity of gFOBTs was 15% (95% confidence interval (CI) 12% to 20%), which was significantly lower than FITs at both 10 μg and 20 μg Hb/g cut-offs with summary sensitivities of 33% (95% CI 27% to 40%; P < 0.001) and 26% (95% CI 21% to 31%, P = 0.002), respectively. Results were simulated in a hypothetical cohort of 10,000 screening participants with 1% CRC prevalence and 10% AN prevalence. Out of 1000 participants with AN, gFOBTs missed 850, while FITs missed 670 (10 μg Hb/g cut-off) and 740 (20 μg Hb/g cut-off). No significant differences in summary specificity for AN detection were found between gFOBTs (94%; 95% CI 92% to 96%), and FITs at 10 μg Hb/g cut-off (93%; 95% CI 90% to 95%) and at 20 μg Hb/g cut-off (97%; 95% CI 95% to 98%). So, among 9000 participants without AN, 540 were offered (unnecessary) colonoscopy with gFOBTs compared to 630 (10 μg Hb/g) and 270 (20 μg Hb/g) with FITs. Similarly, for the detection of CRC, the summary sensitivity of gFOBTs, 39% (95% CI 25% to 55%), was significantly lower than FITs at 10 μg and 20 μg Hb/g cut-offs: 76% (95% CI 57% to 88%: P = 0.001) and 65% (95% CI 46% to 80%; P = 0.035), respectively. So, out of 100 participants with CRC, gFOBTs missed 61, and FITs missed 24 (10 μg Hb/g) and 35 (20 μg Hb/g). No significant differences in summary specificity for CRC were found between gFOBTs (94%; 95% CI 91% to 96%), and FITs at the 10 μg Hb/g cut-off (94%; 95% CI 87% to 97%) and 20 μg Hb/g cut-off (96%; 95% CI 91% to 98%). So, out of 9900 participants without CRC, 594 were offered (unnecessary) colonoscopy with gFOBTs versus 594 (10 μg Hb/g) and 396 (20 μg Hb/g) with FITs. In five studies that compared FITs and gFOBTs in the same population, FITs showed a higher discriminative ability for AN than gFOBTs (P = 0.003). We included a total of 30 "reference standard: positive" studies involving 3,664,934 participants. Of these, eight were gFOBT-only studies, 18 were FIT-only studies, and four studies combined both gFOBTs and FITs. The cut-off for positivity of FITs varied between 5 µg to 250 µg Hb/g faeces. For each QUADAS-2 domain, we assessed risk of bias as high in less than 20% of studies. The summary curve showed that FITs had a higher discriminative ability for detecting CRC than gFOBTs (P < 0.001). The summary sensitivity for CRC of gFOBTs, 59% (95% CI 55% to 64%), was significantly lower than FITs at the 10 μg Hb/g cut-off, 89% (95% CI 80% to 95%; P < 0.001) and the 20 μg Hb/g cut-off, 89% (95% CI 85% to 92%; P < 0.001). So, in the hypothetical cohort with 100 participants with CRC, gFOBTs missed 41, while FITs missed 11 (10 μg Hb/g) and 11 (20 μg Hb/g). The summary specificity of gFOBTs was 98% (95% CI 98% to 99%), which was higher than FITs at both 10 μg and 20 μg Hb/g cut-offs: 94% (95% CI 92% to 95%; P < 0.001) and 95% (95% CI 94% to 96%; P < 0.001), respectively. So, out of 9900 participants without CRC, 198 were offered (unnecessary) colonoscopy with gFOBTs compared to 594 (10 μg Hb/g) and 495 (20 μg Hb/g) with FITs. At a specificity of 90% and 95%, FITs had a higher sensitivity than gFOBTs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

FITs are superior to gFOBTs in detecting AN and CRC in average-risk individuals. Specificity of both tests was similar in "reference standard: all" studies, whereas specificity was significantly higher for gFOBTs than FITs in "reference standard: positive" studies. However, at pre-specified specificities, the sensitivity of FITs was significantly higher than gFOBTs.

Quality Improvement of Sample Collection Increases the Diagnostic Accuracy of Quantitative Fecal Immunochemical Test in Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Pilot Study

Objective: The diagnostic efficiency of the quantitative fecal immunochemical test (qFIT) has large variations in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. We aimed to explore whether the practical sample collection operant training could improve the diagnostic accuracy of the qFIT in CRC screening.

Methods: Moderate-/high-risk individuals aged 50–75 years old were invited to participate in a prospective observational study between July 2020 and March 2021. Participants took a qFIT sample without fecal sample collection operant training in advance and then completed another qFIT sample after the operant training. The primary outcome was the sensitivity and specificity of the qFITs for CRC and advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACRN). The secondary outcome was the difference in the area under the curves (AUCs) and the concentrations of the fecal hemoglobin (Hb) between the qFIT without and after the operant training.

Results: Out of 913 patients, 81 (8.9%) patients had ACRN, including 25 (2.7%) patients with CRC. For CRC, the sensitivities of the qFIT without and after the operant training at 10 μg/g were 80.4 and 100.0%, respectively, and the specificities were 90.1 and 88.4%, respectively. For ACRN, the sensitivities were 49.4 and 69.1% and the specificities were 91.7 and 91.3%, respectively. The AUC of the qFIT after the operant training was significantly higher than that without the operant training for CRC (p = 0.027) and ACRN (p = 0.001). After the operant training, the concentration of the fecal Hb was significantly higher than that without the operant training (p = 0.009) for ACRN, but there was no significant difference for CRC (p = 0.367).

Conclusion: Practical sample collection operant training improves the diagnostic accuracy of the qFIT, which increases the detection of the low concentrations of fecal Hb. Improving the quality of the sample collection could contribute to the diagnostic efficiency of the qFIT in CRC screening.

Exploration of the Proteomic Landscape of Small Extracellular Vesicles in Serum as Biomarkers for Early Detection of Colorectal Neoplasia

Background

Patient participation in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening via a stool test and colonoscopy is suboptimal, but participation can be improved by the development of a blood test. However, the suboptimal detection abilities of blood tests for advanced neoplasia, including advanced adenoma (AA) and CRC, limit their application. We aimed to investigate the proteomic landscape of small extracellular vesicles (sEVs) from the serum of patients with colorectal neoplasia and identify specific sEV proteins that could serve as biomarkers for early diagnosis.

Materials and Methods

We enrolled 100 patients including 13 healthy subjects, 12 non-AAs, 13 AAs, and 16 stage-I, 15 stage-II, 16 stage-III, and 15 stage-IV CRCs. These patients were classified as normal control, early neoplasia, and advanced neoplasia. The sEV proteome was explored by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Generalized association plots were used to integrate the clustering methods, visualize the data matrix, and analyze the relationship. The specific sEV biomarkers were identified by a decision tree via Orange3 software. Functional enrichment analysis was conducted by using the Ingenuity Pathway Analysis platform.

Results

The sEV protein matrix was identified from the serum of 100 patients and contained 3353 proteins, of which 1921 proteins from 98 patients were finally analyzed. Compared with the normal control, subjects with early and advanced neoplasia exhibited a distinct proteomic distribution in the data matrix plot. Six sEV proteins were identified, namely, GCLM, KEL, APOF, CFB, PDE5A, and ATIC, which properly distinguished normal control, early neoplasia, and advanced neoplasia patients from each other. Functional enrichment analysis revealed that APOF⁺ and CFB⁺ sEV associated with clathrin-mediated endocytosis signaling and the complement system, which have critical implications for CRC carcinogenesis.

Conclusion

Patients with colorectal neoplasia had a distinct sEV proteome expression pattern in serum compared with those patients who were healthy and did not have neoplasms. Moreover, the six identified specific sEV proteins had the potential to discriminate colorectal neoplasia between early-stage and advanced neoplasia. Collectively, our study provided a six-sEV protein biomarker panel for CRC diagnosis at early or advanced stages. Furthermore, the implication of the sEV proteome in CRC carcinogenesis via specific signaling pathways was explored.

Prediction of the severity of colorectal lesion by fecal hemoglobin concentration observed during previous test in the French screening program

BACKGROUND

The rate of positive tests using fecal immunochemical test (FIT) does not decrease with subsequent campaigns, but the positive predictive value of advanced neoplasia significantly decreases in subsequent campaign after a first negative test. A relationship between the fecal hemoglobin concentration (Fhb) and the opportunity to detect a colorectal cancer in subsequent campaign has been shown.

AIM

To predict the severity of colorectal lesions based on Fhb measured during previous colorectal cancer screening campaign.

METHODS

This etiological study included 293750 patients aged 50-74, living in Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes (France). These patients completed at least two FIT [test_(-1) and test₍₀₎] between June 2015 and December 2019. Delay between test_(-1) and test₍₀₎ was > 1 year and test_(-1) result was negative (< 150 ngHb/mL). The severity of colorectal lesions diagnosed at test₍₀₎ was described according to Fhb measured at test_(-1) [Fhb_(-1)]. The relationship between the severity classified in seven ordinal categories and the predictive factors was analyzed in an ordered multivariate polytomous regression model.

RESULTS

The test₍₀₎ positive rate was 4.0%, and the colonoscopy completion rate was 97.1% in 11594 patients who showed a positive test₍₀₎. The colonoscopy detection rate was 77.7% in those 11254 patients who underwent a colonoscopy. A total of 8748 colorectal lesions were detected (including 2182 low-risk-polyps, 2400 high-risk-polyp, and 502 colorectal cancer). The colonoscopy detection rate varied significantly with Fhb_(-1) [0 ngHb/mL: 75.6%, (0-50 ngHb/mL): 77.3%, (50-100 ngHb/mL): 88.7%, (100-150 ngHb/mL): 90.3%; P = 0.001]. People with a Fhb_(-1) within (100-150 ngHb/mL) (P = 0.001) were 2.6 (2.2; 3.0) times more likely to have a high severity level compared to those having a Fhb_(-1) value of zero. This risk was reduced by 20% in patients aged 55-59 compared to those aged < 55 [adjusted odds ratio: 0.8 (0.6; 1.0)].

CONCLUSION

The study showed that higher Fhb_(-1) is correlated to an increased risk of severity of colorectal lesions. This risk of severity increased among first-time participants (age < 55) and the elderly (≥ 70). To avoid the loss of chance in these age groups, the FIT positivity threshold should be reduced to 100 ngHb/mL. The other alternative would be to reduce the time between the two tests in these age groups from the current 2 years to 1 year.

Optimal cut-off value for detecting colorectal cancer with fecal immunochemical tests according to age and sex

In the fecal immunological test, a suitable cut-off value may be selected to classify results as either positive or negative. Our aim is to estimate the optimal cut-off value for detecting colorectal cancer in different age and sex groups. This is a multicentric retrospective cohort study of participants in CRC screening programs with FIT between 2006 and 2012. A total of 545,505 participations were analyzed. Cancers diagnosed outside of the program were identified after a negative test result (IC_test) up until 2014. The Wilcoxon test was used to compare fecal hemoglobin levels. ROC curves were used to identify the optimal cut-off value for each age and sex group. Screening program results were estimated for different cut-off values. The results show that the Hb concentration was higher in colorectal cancer (average = 179.6μg/g) vs. false positives (average = 55.2μg/g), in IC_test (average = 3.1μg/g) vs. true negatives (average = 0μg/g), and in men (average = 166.2μg/g) vs. women (average = 140.2μg/g) with colorectal cancer. The optimal cut-off values for women were 18.3μg/g (50-59y) and 14.6μg/g (60-69y), and 16.8μg/g (50-59y) and 19.9μg/g (60-69y) for men. Using different cut-off values for each age and sex group lead to a decrease in the IC_test rate compared to the 20μg/g cut-off value (from 0.40‰ to 0.37‰) and an increase in the false positive rate (from 6.45% to 6.99%). Moreover, test sensitivity improved (90.7%), especially in men and women aged 50-59y (89.4%; 90%) and women aged 60-69y (90.2%). In conclusion, the optimal cut-off value varies for different sex and age groups and the use of an optimal cut-off value for each group improves sensitivity and leads to a small decrease in IC_tests, but also to a larger increase in false positives.

Screening for Colorectal Cancer: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in the US.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the effectiveness, test accuracy, and harms of screening for CRC to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for relevant studies published from January 1, 2015, to December 4, 2019; surveillance through March 26, 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

English-language studies conducted in asymptomatic populations at general risk of CRC.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers independently appraised the articles and extracted relevant study data from fair- or good-quality studies. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, test accuracy in detecting cancers or adenomas, and serious adverse events.

RESULTS

The review included 33 studies (n = 10 776 276) on the effectiveness of screening, 59 (n = 3 491 045) on the test performance of screening tests, and 131 (n = 26 987 366) on the harms of screening. In randomized clinical trials (4 trials, n = 458 002), intention to screen with 1- or 2-time flexible sigmoidoscopy vs no screening was associated with a decrease in CRC-specific mortality (incidence rate ratio, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.68-0.80]). Annual or biennial guaiac fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) vs no screening (5 trials, n = 419 966) was associated with a reduction of CRC-specific mortality after 2 to 9 rounds of screening (relative risk at 19.5 years, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.84-0.98]; relative risk at 30 years, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.65-0.93]). In observational studies, receipt of screening colonoscopy (2 studies, n = 436 927) or fecal immunochemical test (FIT) (1 study, n = 5.4 million) vs no screening was associated with lower risk of CRC incidence or mortality. Nine studies (n = 6497) evaluated the test accuracy of screening computed tomography (CT) colonography, 4 of which also reported the test accuracy of colonoscopy; pooled sensitivity to detect adenomas 6 mm or larger was similar between CT colonography with bowel prep (0.86) and colonoscopy (0.89). In pooled values, commonly evaluated FITs (14 studies, n = 45 403) (sensitivity, 0.74; specificity, 0.94) and stool DNA with FIT (4 studies, n = 12 424) (sensitivity, 0.93; specificity, 0.85) performed better than high-sensitivity gFOBT (2 studies, n = 3503) (sensitivity, 0.50-0.75; specificity, 0.96-0.98) to detect cancers. Serious harms of screening colonoscopy included perforations (3.1/10 000 procedures) and major bleeding (14.6/10 000 procedures). CT colonography may have harms resulting from low-dose ionizing radiation. It is unclear if detection of extracolonic findings on CT colonography is a net benefit or harm.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

There are several options to screen for colorectal cancer, each with a different level of evidence demonstrating its ability to reduce cancer mortality, its ability to detect cancer or precursor lesions, and its risk of harms.

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

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.

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.

Detecting Prognosis Risk Biomarkers for Colon Cancer Through Multi-Omics-Based Prognostic Analysis and Target Regulation Simulation Modeling

Background

Colon cancer is one of the most common health threats for humans since its high morbidity and mortality. Detecting potential prognosis risk biomarkers (PRBs) is essential for the improvement of therapeutic strategies and drug development. Currently, although an integrated prognostic analysis of multi-omics for colon cancer is insufficient, it has been reported to be valuable for improving PRBs’ detection in other cancer types.

Aim

This study aims to detect potential PRBs for colon adenocarcinoma (COAD) samples through the cancer genome atlas (TCGA) by integrating muti-omics.

Materials and Methods

The multi-omics-based prognostic analysis (MPA) model was first constructed to systemically analyze the prognosis of colon cancer based on four-omics data of gene expression, exon expression, DNA methylation and somatic mutations on COAD samples. Then, the essential features related to prognosis were functionally annotated through protein–protein interaction (PPI) network and cancer-related pathways. Moreover, the significance of those essential prognostic features were further confirmed by the target regulation simulation (TRS) model. Finally, an independent testing dataset, as well as the single cell-based expression dataset were utilized to validate the generality and repeatability of PRBs detected in this study.

Results

By integrating the result of MPA modeling, as well the PPI network, integrated pathway and TRS modeling, essential features with gene symbols such as EPB41, PSMA1, FGFR3, MRAS, LEP, C7orf46, LOC285000, LBP, ZNF35, SLC30A3, LECT2, RNF7, and DYNC1I1 were identified as PRBs which provide high potential as drug targets for COAD treatment. Validation on the independent testing dataset demonstrated that these PRBs could be applied to distinguish the prognosis of COAD patients. Moreover, the prognosis of patients with different clinical conditions could also be distinguished by the above PRBs.

Conclusions

The MPA and TRS models constructed in this paper, as well as the PPI network and integrated pathway analysis, could not only help detect PRBs as potential therapeutic targets for COAD patients but also make it a paradigm for the prognostic analysis of other cancers.

Proximal retroflexion versus second forward view of the right colon during screening colonoscopy: A multicentre randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Colonoscopy is the gold standard investigation for the detection of colorectal cancer, but the right colon is more difficult to examine than the left colon. A second examination of the proximal colon has the potential to reduce rates of missed pathology.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether proximal retroflexion improves the adenoma detection rate or other outcomes in the right colon compared with the forward view.

METHODS

We performed a multicentre randomized controlled trial of patients from the colorectal cancer screening programme with a positive faecal immunochemical test. Patients were randomized to a second right colon examination using proximal retroflexion or forward view.

RESULTS

A total of 692 patients were included. A second examination of the right colon, with an average additional procedure time of 1.62 min, increased the adenoma detection rate by 11%, regardless of the method used (9% proximal retroflexion vs. 12% second forward view, p = 0.21). The adenoma miss rate was 19% (17% proximal retroflexion vs. 20% forward view, p = 0.28) The success rate of retroflexion was 83%, without secondary complications. In the 15.6% of patients in whom lesions were detected during the second pass, endoscopic follow-up was modified by reducing the time of the next colonoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

A second examination of the right colon, either from retroflexion or second forward view, can increase adenoma detection rate and shorten surveillance intervals in patients undergoing screening colonoscopy. This should be emphasized during colonoscopy training and integrated into diagnostic colonoscopy practice.

Stage-Specific Sensitivity of Fecal Immunochemical Tests for Detecting Colorectal Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) detect the majority of colorectal cancers (CRCs), but evidence for variation in sensitivity according to the CRC stage is sparse and has not yet been systematically synthesized. Thus, our objective was to systematically review and summarize evidence on the stage-specific sensitivity of FITs.

METHODS

We screened PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from inception to June 14, 2019, for English-language articles reporting on the stage-specific sensitivity of FIT for CRC detection using colonoscopy as a reference standard. Studies reporting stage-specific sensitivities and the specificity of FIT for CRC detection were included. Summary estimates of sensitivity according to the CRC stage and study setting (screening cohorts, symptomatic/diagnostic cohorts, and case-control studies) were derived from bivariate meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Forty-four studies (92,447 participants including 3,034 CRC cases) were included. Pooled stage-specific sensitivities were overall very similar but suffered from high levels of imprecision because of small case numbers when calculated separately for screening cohorts, symptomatic/diagnostic cohorts, and case-control studies. Pooled sensitivities (95% confidence intervals) for all studies combined were 73% (65%-79%) for stage-I-CRCs and 80% (74%-84%), 82% (77%-87%), and 79% (70%-86%) for the detection of CRC stages II, III, and IV, respectively. Even substantially larger variation was seen in sensitivity by T-stage, with summary estimates ranging from 40% (21%-64%) for T1 to 83% (68%-91%) for T3-CRC.

DISCUSSION

Although FITs detect 4 of 5 CRCs at stages II-IV, the substantially lower sensitivity for stage-I-CRC and, in particular, T1 CRC indicates both need and potential for further improvement in performance for the early detection of CRC.

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.

Multiple rounds of one sample versus two sample faecal immunochemical test-based colorectal cancer screening: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

Faecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based colorectal cancer screening requires successive rounds for maximum preventive effect. Advanced neoplasia can bleed intermittently and thus might be missed by single faecal sampling. Few studies have been done on two sample FIT (2-FIT) screening over multiple rounds. Therefore, we compared multiple rounds of one sample FIT (1-FIT) with 2-FIT screening with respect to participation, positive predictive value (PPV), diagnostic yield, and interval colorectal cancer.

METHODS

In this population-based study, a random selection of asymptomatic individuals aged 50-74 years in the Rotterdam-Rijnmond region, Netherlands, were invited by post for four rounds (every 2 years) of 1-FIT or 2-FIT screening. Key exclusion criteria were a history or colorectal cancer or inflammatory bowel disease, colon imaging in the previous 2 years, and life expectancy of less than 5 years. Per round, invitees received one or two FITs to sample either one or two consecutive bowel movements. OC-Sensor Micro (Eiken Chemical Co., Ltd, Japan) FITs were used by all participants, except the fourth round of screening for the 1-FIT cohort, for which participants used either an OC-Sensor or a FOB-Gold (Sentinel Diagnostics, Milan, Italy). A faecal haemoglobin cutoff concentration of 10 μg/g of faeces in at least one test was used for referral for colonoscopy.

FINDINGS

Between 2006 and 2015, of 10 008 invited individuals for the 1-FIT cohort, 9787 were eligible for inclusion, of whom 7310 participated at least once in four successive rounds. Of 3197 invited individuals for the 2-FIT cohort, 3131 were eligible for inclusion, and 2269 participated at least once in four successive rounds. In the 1-FIT screening cohort, 74·7% (7310 of 9787) of invitees participated at least once versus 72·5% (2269 of 3131) of invitees in the 2-FIT cohort (p=0·013). Among participants who participated at least once, the cumulative positivity rate over four rounds was 19·2% (1407 of 7310) for the 1-FIT cohort versus 28·5% (647 of 2269) for the 2-FIT cohort (p<0·0001). The cumulative PPV for advanced neoplasia was 33·0% (432 of 1308 colonoscopies) for the 1-FIT cohort versus 24·2% (147 of 607 colonoscopies) for the 2-FIT cohort (p<0·0001). The cumulative diagnostic yield of advanced neoplasia among invited individuals was 4·4% (432 of 9787) for 1-FIT versus 4·7% (147 of 3131) for 2-FIT screening (p=0·46)). FIT interval colorectal cancers were detected in eight (0·1%) of 7310 participants in the 1-FIT cohort and two (0·1%) of 2269 with 2-FIT screening (p=1·00).

INTERPRETATION

Four rounds of 2-FIT screening with a low faecal haemoglobin cutoff level did not result in a significant increase in diagnostic yield or a decrease in interval colorectal cancers compared with 1-FIT, despite higher colonoscopy demand. Therefore, 1-FIT colorectal cancer screening programmes should be preferred.

FUNDING

None.

Quantile-based fecal hemoglobin concentration for assessing colorectal neoplasms with 1,263,717 Taiwanese screenees

Background

Although fecal hemoglobin concentration (f-Hb) was highly associated with the risk of colorectal neoplasms, current studies on this subject are hampered by skewedness of the data and the ordinal property of f-Hb has not been well studied yet. Our aim was to develop a quantile-based method to estimate adjusted percentiles (median) of fecal hemoglobin concentration and their derived prediction for the risk of multistage outcomes of colorectal disease.

Methods

We used a 6-year follow-up cohort of Taiwanese nationwide colorectal screening program with fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) to obtain fecal hemoglobin concentration and applied accelerated failure time multi-variable analyses to make the comparison of adjusted median and other percentitles of fecal hemoglobin across four categories of colorectal carcinogenesis. We then predicted the risk of colorectal neoplasms on the basis of the corresponding percentile values by using accelerated failure time model with Bayesian inversion method.

Results

The adjusted median fecal hemoglobin concentration of nonadvanced adenoma, advanced adenoma, and colorectal cancer were 57, 82, and 163 μg/g feces as opposed to 0 μg/g feces for the normal group. At 90 μg/g of f-Hb, the highly suspected cut-off for colorectal disease, the risks were 17% for non-advanced adenoma, 6% for advanced adenoma, and 9% for CRC. Life-time risks of each colorectal neoplasm were derived by percentiles of fecal hemoglobin concentration.

Conclusion

Covariate-adjusted risk stratification for multistage outcomes of colorectal neoplasia were provided by using the quantiles of fecal hemoglobin concentration, yielding the estimated life-time risks of 25th to 75th quantitles, ranging from 0.5 to 44% for colorectal cancer, 0.2 to 46% for non-advanced adenoma, and 0.1 to 20% for advanced adenoma.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12911-019-0812-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Fecal Immunochemical Tests for Colorectal Cancer Screening: Is Fecal Sampling from Multiple Sites Necessary?

Fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for hemoglobin (Hb) are increasingly used for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Most FIT manufacturers instruct that fecal samples from multiple parts of one bowel movement should be obtained. Our aim was to compare the FIT diagnostic performance based on fecal samples from just one versus two different sites of one bowel movement. A total of 1141 participants of screening colonoscopy provided two fecal samples from two different sites of a single bowel movement for FIT analyses. There was no statistically significant difference in the diagnostic performance of the FIT when either one or both fecal samples were used for analysis, with area under the curve (AUC) for detecting CRC ranging from 0.94 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84–0.99) for one FIT to 0.95 (95%CI 0.86–0.99) for a geometric mean of two FITs. The manufacturers’ recommendation of sampling multiple sites of the stool aims to reduce intra-individual Hb variability and improve diagnostic performance. If no such improvement can be achieved, the recommendation for multiple-site sampling might have potential adverse effects on population adherence to FIT-based CRC screening. Our results point to a potential of increasing adherence to FIT screening by simplifying instructions for fecal sampling at no loss of the diagnostic performance.

Performance Characteristics of Fecal Immunochemical Tests for Colorectal Cancer and Advanced Adenomatous Polyps: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Studies report inconsistent performance of fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for colorectal cancer (CRC) and advanced adenomas.

PURPOSE

To summarize performance characteristics of FITs for CRC and advanced adenomas in average-risk persons undergoing screening colonoscopy (reference standard) and to identify factors affecting these characteristics.

DATA SOURCES

Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from inception through October 2018; reference lists of studies and reviews.

STUDY SELECTION

Two reviewers independently screened records to identify published English-language prospective or retrospective observational studies that evaluated FIT sensitivity and specificity for colonoscopic findings in asymptomatic, average-risk adults.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two authors independently extracted data and evaluated study quality.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Thirty-one studies (120 255 participants; 18 FITs) were included; all were judged to have low to moderate risk of bias. Performance characteristics depended on the threshold for a positive result. A threshold of 10 µg/g resulted in sensitivity of 0.91 (95% CI, 0.84 to 0.95) and a negative likelihood ratio of 0.10 (CI, 0.06 to 0.19) for CRC, whereas a threshold of greater than 20 µg/g resulted in specificity of 0.95 (CI, 0.94 to 0.96) and a positive likelihood ratio of 15.49 (CI, 9.82 to 22.39). For advanced adenomas, sensitivity was 0.40 (CI, 0.33 to 0.47) and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.67 (CI, 0.57 to 0.78) at 10 µg/g, and specificity was 0.95 (CI, 0.94 to 0.96) and the positive likelihood ratio was 5.86 (CI, 3.77 to 8.97) at greater than 20 µg/g. Studies had low to high heterogeneity, depending on the threshold. Although several FITs had adequate performance, sensitivity and specificity for CRC for 1 qualitative FIT were 0.90 and 0.91, respectively, at its single threshold of 10 µg/g; positive and negative likelihood ratios were 10.13 and 0.11, respectively. Comparison of 3 FITs at 3 thresholds was inconclusive: CIs overlapped, and the comparisons were across rather than within studies.

LIMITATIONS

Only English-language studies were included. Incomplete reporting limited quality assessment of some evidence. Performance characteristics are for 1-time rather than serial testing.

CONCLUSION

Single-application FITs have moderate to high sensitivity and specificity for CRC, depending on the positivity threshold. Sensitivity of 1-time testing for advanced adenomas is low, regardless of the threshold.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine.

Impact of a higher fecal immunochemistry test cut-off on pathology detected in subsequent rounds of a colorectal screening program

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is superior to the traditional binary fecal occult blood test. Its quantitative nature allows the investigator to choose a positivity threshold to match cost and endoscope capacity. The optimal threshold is still debated. BowelScreen, the Irish national colorectal cancer screening program, has a cut-off of 45 μg Hb/g feces, and in this study we investigated the impact of this threshold on pathology detected in round 2 in individuals who had a negative result for round 1 FIT (FIT¹).

METHODS

All individuals with a negative FIT¹ result who completed a round 2 FIT (FIT²) 2 years later were included. Pathology outcomes for individuals who had positive FIT² results were correlated with FIT¹ levels.

RESULTS

A total of 37,877 individuals had negative FIT¹ results and completed FIT². One thousand two hundred thirty (3.2%) had positive FIT² results (702 men [57%], median age 69, age range 60-70 years). Quantitative analysis showed that at an FIT¹ level <5 μg Hb/g feces, 2.3% had positive FIT² results. At a higher cut-off of 40.1 to 45 μg Hb/g feces, 15.6% of individuals had positive FIT² results. One thousand two (81.5%) underwent colonoscopy, with clinical outcomes in all cases. Three hundred fifty-one (35%) had normal colonoscopy results. The proportion of individuals with normal colonoscopy results decreased as FIT¹ levels rose. Conversely, advanced pathology (CRC + high-risk adenomas) rates rose from 7% to 50% when FIT¹ was <5 compared with 40.1 to 45 μg Hb/g feces, respectively. There were 51 screen-detected cancers in round 2 among individuals with negative FIT¹ results (22 stage I, 12 stage II, 14 stage III, 3 stage IV). All 3 stage IV individuals had FIT¹ results <20 μg Hb/g feces.

CONCLUSIONS

Varying rates of pathology are observed in round 2 of a screening program based on the quantitative level of a negative round 1 FIT result when the positivity threshold is relatively high. A CRC rate of 5.1% within this group appears acceptable. Although patients with incurable cancer were observed, the positivity threshold to capture these cases within round 1 would have been so sensitive that it would create an unsustainable endoscopy referral burden.

Combination of Different Fecal Immunochemical Tests in Colorectal Cancer Screening: Any Gain in Diagnostic Performance?

A variety of fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) are used for colorectal cancer screening. FIT performance could be improved further. It is unclear, whether the combination of different FITs with different analytical characteristics (such as, different antibodies for the detection of fecal hemoglobin) can yield a better diagnostic performance. Fecal samples were obtained from 2042 participants of screening colonoscopy. All participants with advanced neoplasm (AN, colorectal cancer (n = 16) or advanced adenoma (n = 200)) and 300 randomly selected participants without AN were included. Nine quantitative FITs were evaluated simultaneously. Sensitivity and specificity was calculated for single tests (n = 9) and for their pairwise test combinations (n = 36) (requiring either both FITs (P++) or at least one FIT (P+) to be positive for defining a positive test result). Mean age of the participants (n = 516) was 63 (range: 50–79) years and 56% were men. At cutoffs yielding a specificity of 96.7% for single FITs, the median gain in specificity by P++ combination was +1.0%, whereas the median loss in sensitivity for AN was −4.2%. For P+ combination the median gain in sensitivity for AN was +2.8%, at a prize of median loss of −1.0% of specificity. Combinations of different FITs do not yield any relevant gain in diagnostic performance.

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.

Quality Metrics of a Fecal Immunochemical Test-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Program in Korea

Background/Aims

Knowledge regarding the quality metrics of fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based colorectal cancer screening programs is limited. The aim of this study was to investigate the performance and quality metrics of a FIT-based screening program.

Methods

In our screening program, asymptomatic subjects aged ≥50 years underwent an annual FIT, and subjects with positive FIT results underwent a subsequent colonoscopy. The performance of the FIT and colonoscopy was analyzed in individuals with a positive FIT who completed the program between 2009 and 2015 at a university hospital.

Results

Among the 51,439 screened participants, 75.1% completed the FIT. The positive rate was 1.1%, and the colonoscopy completion rate in these patients was 68.6%. The positive predictive values of cancer and advanced neoplasia were 5.5% and 19.1%, respectively. The adenoma detection rate in the patients who underwent colonoscopy after a positive FIT was 48.2% (60.0% for men and 33.6% for women). The group with the highest tertile quantitative FIT level showed a significantly higher detection rate of advanced neoplasia than the group with the lowest tertile (odds ratio, 2.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.4 to 5.1; p<0.001).

Conclusions

The quality metrics used in the United States and Europe may be directly introduced to other countries, including Korea. However, the optimal quality metrics should be established in each country.

Quantitative fecal immunochemical tests for colorectal cancer screening

Fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for hemoglobin (Hb) are increasingly used for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. We aimed to review, summarize and compare reported diagnostic performance of various FITs. PubMed and Web of Science were searched from inception to July 24, 2017. Data on diagnostic performance of quantitative FITs, conducted in colonoscopy-controlled average-risk screening populations, were extracted. Summary receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted and correlations between thresholds, positivity rates (PRs), sensitivities and specificities were assessed. Seven test brands were investigated across 22 studies. Although reported sensitivities for CRC, advanced adenoma (AA) and any advanced neoplasm (AN) varied widely (ranges: 25-100%, 6-44% and 9-60%, respectively), with specificities for AN ranging from 82% to 99%, the estimates were very close to the respective summary ROC curves whose areas under the curve (95% CI) were 0.905 (0.88-0.94), 0.683 (0.67-0.70) and 0.710 (0.70-0.72) for CRC, AA and AN, respectively. The seemingly large heterogeneity essentially reflected variations in test thresholds (range: 2-82 µg Hb/g feces) and showed moderate correlations with sensitivity (r = -0.49) and specificity (r = 0.60) for AN. By contrast, observed PRs (range: 1-21%) almost perfectly correlated with sensitivity (r = 0.84) and specificity (r = -0.94) for AN. The apparent large heterogeneity in diagnostic performance between various FITs can be almost completely overcome by appropriate threshold adjustments. Instead of simply applying the threshold recommended by the manufacturer, screening programs should adjust the threshold to yield a desired PR which is a very good proxy indicator for the specificity and the subsequent colonoscopy workload.

Timeliness of Colonoscopy After Abnormal Fecal Test Results in a Safety Net Practice

Fecal testing can only reduce colorectal cancer mortality if patients with an abnormal test result receive a follow-up colonoscopy. As part of the Strategies and Opportunities to STOP Colon Cancer in Priority Populations (STOP CRC) project, we examined factors associated with adherence to follow-up colonoscopy among patients with abnormal fecal test results. As part of STOP CRC outreach, Virginia Garcia Memorial Health Center staff distributed 1753 fecal immunochemical tests (FIT), of which 677 (39 %) were completed, and 56 had an abnormal result (8 %). Project staff used logistic regression analyses to examine factors associated with colonoscopy referral and completion. Of the 56 patients with abnormal FIT results; 45 (80 %) had evidence of a referral for colonoscopy, 32 (57 %) had evidence of a completed colonoscopy within 18 months, and 14 (25 %) within 60 days of an abnormal fecal test result. In adjusted analysis, Hispanics had lower odds of completing follow-up colonoscopy within 60 days than non-Hispanic whites (adjusted OR 0.20; 95 % CI 0.04, 0.92). Colonoscopy within 60 days trended lower for women than for men (adjusted OR 0.25; 95 % CI 0.06-1.04). Among the 24 patients lacking medical record evidence of a colonoscopy, 19 (79 %) had a documented reason, including clinician did not pursue, patient refused, and colonoscopy not indicated. No reason was found for 21 %. Improvements are needed to increase rates of follow-up colonoscopy completion, especially among female and Hispanic patients.

A Comparison of Fecal Immunochemical and High-Sensitivity Guaiac Tests for Colorectal Cancer Screening

OBJECTIVES

Annual testing using either a high-sensitivity guaiac fecal occult blood test (HS-gFOBT) or a fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is recommended for screening average-risk people for colorectal cancer. We compared the performance characteristics of the HS-gFOBT Hemoccult II SENSA and two FITs (InSure FIT and OC FIT-CHEK) for detecting advanced colorectal neoplasia.

METHODS

The study included 1,006 asymptomatic patients, aged 50-75 years, who were scheduled to receive a screening colonoscopy at gastroenterology practices in the Minneapolis and Indianapolis metropolitan areas. Each participant was asked to complete all three stool tests before their colonoscopy. Each test's performance characteristics were evaluated using the screening colonoscopic results as the reference standard.

RESULTS

Sensitivity for detecting advanced colorectal neoplasia was highest for InSure FIT (26.3%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 15.9-40.7), followed by OC FIT-CHEK (15.1%, 95% CI 6.7-26.1) and Hemoccult II SENSA (7.4%, 95% CI 1.9-17.0). InSure FIT was statistically significantly more sensitive than both OC FIT-CHEK (absolute difference in sensitivity=11.2%, 95% CI 0.4-24.2) and Hemoccult II SENSA (difference in sensitivity=18.9%, 95% CI 10.2-32.6). Specificities were relatively high for all tests (between 96.8% and 98.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that some FITs are more sensitive than the HS-gFOBT Hemoccult II SENSA, but these results need to be confirmed in larger asymptomatic populations. Comparisons between the FITs examined in this study and other FITs are needed to determine the best tests for population screening.

Selecting a Cut-off for Colorectal Cancer Screening With a Fecal Immunochemical Test

OBJECTIVES

Fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for hemoglobin (Hb) are increasingly used for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. However, cut-offs for defining test positivity are varying widely. We aimed to evaluate the impact of cut-off selection on key indicators of diagnostic performance in a true screening setting.

METHODS

We evaluated diagnostic performance of FOB Gold, a widely used quantitative FIT, for detecting advanced neoplasms (AN) across a wide range of possible cut-offs among 1822 participants of screening colonoscopy aged 50-79 years in Germany.

RESULTS

The positive predictive value (PPV) for detecting AN showed a very steep increase with increasing cut-off up to 35.2% (95% CI 29.9-40.9%) at a cut-off of 9 μg Hb/g feces at which sensitivity and specificity were 48.8% (95% CI 42.1-55.6%) and 88.5% (95% CI 86.8-89.9%), respectively. A further moderate increase of PPV up to 56.9% (95% CI 47.8-65.5%), along with a major decrease in sensitivity was observed when gradually increasing the cut-off to 25 μg Hb/g feces at which sensitivity and specificity were 31.9% (95% CI 25.9-38.5%) and 96.9% (95% CI 95.9-97.6%), respectively. Further increases of the cut-off hardly affected PPV and specificity, but went along with further relevant decline in sensitivity.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study illustrates delineation of a range of meaningful cut-offs (here: 9-25 μg Hb/g feces) according to expected diagnostic yield in a true screening setting. Selecting a cut-off within or beyond this range should consider characteristics of the specific target population, such as AN prevalence or available colonoscopy capacity.

Results of the FIT-based National Colorectal Cancer Screening Program in Slovenia

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common malignancies in the western world.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess the first round of fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based National CRC screening program (NCSP).

METHODS

In the NCSP conducted in Slovenia, a FIT and colonoscopy for those tested positive was used. The NCSP central unit sent 536,709 invitations to Slovenian residents age 50 to 69 years old between 2009 and 2011. The adherence rate was 56.9% (303,343 participants). FIT was positive in 6.2% (15,310) of the participants (men, 7.8%; women, 5.0%; P<0.01). A total of 13,919 unsedated colonoscopies were performed with the cecal intubation rate of 97.8%.

RESULTS

The overall adenoma detection rate was 51.3% [95% confidence interval (CI), 50.5%-52.1%] of which 61.0% (95% CI, 59.9%-62.1%) was in men, and 39.1% (95% CI, 37.8%-40.3%) in women (P<0.01). The mean number of adenoma per positive colonoscopy was 1.94 (95% CI, 1.90-1.97). Adenoma, advanced adenoma, or cancer were found in 7732 (55.5%) colonoscopies. A total of 862 (6.2%) CRC cases were found. Only 161 (18.7%) carcinomas were situated in the right colon. A total of 597 (70.2%) patients with cancer were in the early clinical stages (N, negative; 194 22.8%) of all cancers were cured with only endoscopic resection.

CONCLUSIONS

In the NCSP, CRC was found in 6.2% of those participants attending colonoscopy, with 81.3% of carcinomas found in the left colon. A localized clinical stage was found in 70.2% participants. In 22.8% of CRC patients, cancer was cured with endoscopic resection only.

Recommendations on Fecal Immunochemical Testing to Screen for Colorectal Neoplasia: A Consensus Statement by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer

The use of the fecal occult blood test (FOBT) for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is supported by randomized trials demonstrating effectiveness in cancer prevention and widely recommended by guidelines for this purpose. The fecal immunochemical test (FIT), as a direct measure of human hemoglobin in stool has a number of advantages relative to conventional FOBT and is increasingly used relative to that test. This review summarizes current evidence for FIT in colorectal neoplasia detection and the comparative effectiveness of FIT relative to other commonly used CRC screening modalities. Based on evidence, guidance statements on FIT application were developed and quality metrics for program implementation proposed.

Recommendations on Fecal Immunochemical Testing to Screen for Colorectal Neoplasia: A Consensus Statement by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer

The use of the fecal occult blood test (FOBT) for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is supported by randomized trials demonstrating effectiveness in cancer prevention and widely recommended by guidelines for this purpose. The fecal immunochemical test (FIT), as a direct measure of human hemoglobin in stool has a number of advantages relative to conventional FOBT and is increasingly used relative to that test. This review summarizes current evidence for FIT in colorectal neoplasia detection and the comparative effectiveness of FIT relative to other commonly used CRC screening modalities. Based on evidence, guidance statements on FIT application were developed and quality metrics for program implementation proposed.

Correlation between adenoma detection rate in colonoscopy- and fecal immunochemical testing-based colorectal cancer screening programs

BACKGROUND

The adenoma detection rate (ADR) is the main quality indicator of colonoscopy. The ADR recommended in fecal immunochemical testing (FIT)-based colorectal cancer screening programs is unknown.

METHODS

Using the COLONPREV (NCT00906997) study dataset, we performed a post-hoc analysis to determine if there was a correlation between the ADR in primary and work-up colonoscopy, and the equivalent figure to the minimal 20% ADR recommended. Colonoscopy was performed in 5722 individuals: 5059 as primary strategy and 663 after a positive FIT result (OC-Sensor™; cut-off level 15 µg/g of feces). We developed a predictive model based on a multivariable lineal regression analysis including confounding variables.

RESULTS

The median ADR was 31% (range, 14%-51%) in the colonoscopy group and 55% (range, 21%-83%) in the FIT group. There was a positive correlation in the ADR between primary and work-up colonoscopy (Pearson's coefficient 0.716; p < 0.001). ADR in the FIT group was independently related to ADR in the colonoscopy group: regression coefficient for colonoscopy ADR, 0.71 (p = 0.009); sex, 0.09 (p = 0.09); age, 0.3 (p = 0.5); and region 0.00 (p = 0.9). The equivalent figure to the 20% ADR was 45% (95% confidence interval, 35%-56%).

CONCLUSIONS

ADR in primary and work-up colonoscopy of a FIT-positive result are positively and significantly correlated.

Evaluation of serum nucleoside diphosphate kinase A for the detection of colorectal cancer

We previously described the over-expression of nucleoside diphosphate kinase A (NDKA) in tumours and serum from colorectal cancer (CRC) patients, suggesting its use as biomarker. In this study we evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of serum NDKA to detect advanced neoplasia (CRC or advanced adenomas). Furthermore, the performance of NDKA was compared with the faecal immunochemical test (FIT). The study population included a case-control cohort and a screening cohort (511 asymptomatic first-degree relatives of CRC patients that underwent a colonoscopy and a FIT). Serum NDKA was elevated in CRC patients in the case-control cohort (p = 0.002). In the screening cohort, NDKA levels were higher for advanced adenomas (p = 0.010) and advanced neoplasia (p = 0.006) compared to no neoplasia. Moreover, elevated NDKA was associated with severe characteristics of adenomas (≥3 lesions, size ≥ 1 cm or villous component). Setting specificity to 85%, NDKA showed a sensitivity of 30.19% and 29.82% for advanced adenomas and advanced neoplasia, respectively. NDKA combined with FIT (100 ng/mL cut-off) detected advanced adenomas and advanced neoplasia with 45.28% and 49.12% sensitivity, with specificity close to 90%. The combination of serum NDKA and FIT can improve the detection of advanced neoplasia, mainly for lesions located on the proximal colon, in asymptomatic individuals with CRC family-risk.

Advances in Fecal Tests for Colorectal Cancer Screening

Colorectal cancer (CRC) forms an important public health problem, especially in developed countries. CRC screening tests can be used to identify asymptomatic individuals with CRC precursors and (early) cancer. Removal of these lesions reduces CRC incidence and prevents CRC-related mortality. There are a range of screening tests available, each with advantages and disadvantages. Stool screening tests can broadly be divided into fecal occult blood tests (FOBTs) and molecular biomarker test, such as DNA/RNA marker tests, protein markers, and fecal microbiome marker tests. Guaiac fecal occult blood tests (gFOBT) have been demonstrated in large randomized screening trials to reduce CRC mortality. Fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) have superior adherence, usability, and accuracy as compared to gFOBT. Advantage of the use of quantitative FITs in CRC screening programs is the cut-off level that can be adjusted. Molecular biomarker DNA tests have shown to detect significantly more cancers than FIT. By combining biomarker DNA tests with FIT, sensitivity for advanced adenomas can be increased significantly. However, it has lower specificity thus demands more colonoscopy resources, is more cumbersome, and costly. The adherence has not been assessed in population screening trials. For these reasons, FIT is therefore at present regarded as the preferred method of non-invasive CRC screening. This chapter will review the current status of fecal test-based CRC screening.

Comparison of One versus Two Fecal Immunochemical Tests in the Detection of Colorectal Neoplasia in a Population-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Program

Objective. To determine the positive predictive value (PPV) of two versus one abnormal FIT in the detection of colorectal neoplasia in a Canadian population. Methods. Three communities enrolled in a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening pilot program from 01/2009 to 04/2013 using 2 FITs. Data collected included demographics, colonoscopy, pathology, and FIT results. Participants completed both FITs and had one positive FIT and colonoscopy. PPV of one versus two abnormal FITs was calculated using a weighted-generalized score statistic. A two-sided 5% significance level was used. Results. 1576 of 17,031 average-risk participants, 50-75 years old, had a positive FIT. Colonoscopy revealed 58 (3.7%) cancers, 419 (31.6%) high-risk polyps, and 374 (23.7%) low-risk polyps as the most significant lesion. PPV of one versus two positive FITs for cancer, high-risk polyps, and any neoplasia were 1% versus 8%, 20% versus 40%, and 48% versus 67%, respectively (p value < 0.0001). When the first FIT was negative, the second positive FIT detected 7 CRCs and 98 high-risk polyps. Conclusions. PPV of two positive FITs is superior to one positive FIT for CRC and high-risk polyps. The added value of the second FIT was 12% of total CRCs and 23% of total high-risk polyps.

The sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and likelihood ratios of fecal occult blood test for the detection of colorectal cancer in hospital settings

Objectives

To study the performance of a single test using two fecal occult blood tests with colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) for the first time in Saudi Arabia to determine possible implications for the anticipated colorectal screening program.

Materials and methods

We compared the performance of guaiac and immunochemical fecal occult blood tests for the detection of CRC among patients of 50–74 years old attending two hospitals in the Eastern Region of Saudi Arabia. Samples of feces were collected from 257 asymptomatic patients and 20 cases of confirmed CRC, and they were tested simultaneously by the guaiac-based occult blood test and monoclonal antibody-based immunoassay kit. Colonoscopy was performed on all participants and the results were statistically analyzed with both positive and negative occult blood tests of both methods.

Results

Of the 277 subjects, 79 tested positive for occult blood with at least one method. Overall, the number of those with an occult blood-positive result by both tests was 39 (14.1%), while for 198 (71.5%), both tests were negative (P<0.0001); 40 (14.4%) samples showed a discrepant result. Colonoscopy data were obtained for all 277 patients. A total of three invasive cancers were detected among the screening group. Of the three, the guaiac test detected two cases, while the immunochemical test detected three of them. Of the 20 control cases, the guaiac test detected 13 CRC cases (P=0.03), while the immunochemical test detected 16 of them (P<0.0001). The sensitivity of guaiac and immunochemical tests for the detection of CRC in the screening group was 50.00% (95% confidence interval [CI] =6.76–93.24) and 75.00% (95% CI =19.41–99.37), respectively. For comparison, the sensitivity of the guaiac fecal occult blood test for detecting CRC among the control group was 65.00% (95% CI =40.78–84.61) while that of FIT was 80.00% (95% CI =56.34–94.27). The specificity of the guaiac and immunoassay tests was 77.87% (95% CI =72.24–82.83) and 90.12% (95% CI =85.76–93.50), respectively. The positive likelihood ratio of guaiac and immunochemical tests for the detection of CRC was 2.26 (95% CI =0.83–6.18) and 7.59 (95% CI =3.86–14.94), whereas the negative likelihood ratio was 0.64 (95% CI =0.24–1.71) and 0.28 (95% CI =0.05–1.52), respectively. The positive predictive values of guaiac and immunochemical tests were 3.45% (95% CI =0.426–11.91) and 10.71% (95% CI =2.27–28.23), respectively. There was no marked difference in the negative predictive values for both methods. The sensitivity of the fecal occult blood test by FIT was significantly higher for stages III and IV colorectal cancer than for stages I and II (P=0.01) and it was insignificant for the guaiac fecal occult blood test (P=0.07).

Conclusion

In areas where other advance screening methods of CRC are not feasible, the use of FIT can be considered.

Colorectal cancer in a second round after a negative faecal immunochemical test

OBJECTIVE

The faecal immunochemical test is one of the tests recommended by scientific societies for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in average-risk populations. Our aim was to evaluate the characteristics of CRC detected in a second round of screening after negative results in a first round.

METHODS

We studied patients in whom CRC was detected in a screening programme. This programme included asymptomatic individuals between 50 and 69 years old and offered tests every 2 years. A total of 363,792 individuals were invited to participate in the first round of faecal immunochemical test screening and 100,135 individuals in the second round after a first negative result. The screening strategy consisted of faecal testing of a single sample using an automated semiquantitative kit, with a cut-off of 20 μg haemoglobin (Hb)/g faeces.

RESULTS

The rate of positive results was 6.9% (16,467/238,647) in the first round and 4.8% (3359/69,193) in the second round (P < 0.0005). Overall, 860 (0.36%) cases of CRC were detected in the first round and 100 (0.14%) in the second round (P < 0.005). The location of the cancer was proximal in 12.5 and 24% of cases detected in the first and second rounds, respectively (P = 0.008). Hb concentrations were higher in the first round (211 vs. 109 μg Hb/g faeces in the second round; P = 0.002). Multivariate analysis confirmed that, in the second round, CRC diagnosed was more often proximal (hazard ratio vs. first round, 2.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-4.4; P = 0.003) and the concentration of Hb/g faeces was lower (hazard ratio vs. first round, 2.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-3.5; P = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

The CRC detection rate is lower in the second round of screening. Further, in the second round, CRC detected is more often in a proximal location and Hb concentrations are lower.

Diagnostic performance of fecal immunochemical test and sigmoidoscopy for advanced right-sided colorectal neoplasms

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer screening effect on right-sided colorectal neoplasia is limited. We compared fecal immunochemical test and simulated sigmoidoscopy diagnostic accuracy for advanced right-sided neoplasia detection.

METHODS

We analyzed 1,292 individuals with complete screening colonoscopy with a fecal immunochemical test determination before colonoscopy. Sigmoidoscopy and "hybrid strategy" (sigmoidoscopy or fecal hemoglobin concentration ≥ 20 µg hemoglobin/g) diagnostic yield were simulated according to UK Flexible Sigmoidoscopy, Screening for COlon REctum (SCORE), and Norwegian Colorectal Cancer Prevention (NORCCAP) trials criteria to complete colonic examination. We compared sensitivity and specificity of both strategies and of "hybrid strategy" for advanced right-sided neoplasia with McNemar test.

RESULTS

An advanced right-sided neoplasia was detected in 47 (3.6 %) subjects. A fecal hemoglobin concentration ≥ 20 µg hemoglobin/g was determined in 6.6 % of the subjects and 10.1, 12.7, and 23.5 % met UK, SCORE, and NORCCAP criteria, respectively. Fecal immunochemical test was statistically more specific than sigmoidoscopy strategies (93.8 %, UK 90.3 %, SCORE 87.7 %, NORCCAP 77.8 %; p < 0.001). In contrast, fecal immunochemical test sensitivity for advanced right-sided neoplasia (17 %) was not statistically different than UK (21.3 %; p = 0.7) or SCORE (23.4 %; p = 0.5), although it was inferior than NORCCAP strategy (42.5 %; p < 0.001). Adding fecal immunochemical test to sigmoidoscopy increased number of positives (8.5-25.7 %), sensitivity (10-30 %), and significantly reduced advanced right-sided neoplasia specificity (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Fecal immunochemical test and sigmoidoscopy diagnostic yield for advanced right-sided neoplasia are low. Fecal immunochemical test is more specific than sigmoidoscopy but less sensitive than sigmoidoscopy according to NORCCAP criteria.

Diagnostic accuracy of fecal immunochemical test in average- and familial-risk colorectal cancer screening

BACKGROUND

There is little information about the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) in familial-risk colorectal cancer (CRC) screening.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this article is to investigate whether FIT diagnostic accuracy for advanced neoplasia (AN) differs between average and familial-risk (first-degree relative) patients.

METHODS

A total of 1317 consecutive participants (595 familial) who collected one stool sample before performing a colonoscopy as a CRC screening test were included. FIT diagnostic accuracy for AN was evaluated with Chi-square test at a 20 µg hemoglobin/g of feces cut-off value. Finally, we determined which variables were independently related to AN.

RESULTS

An AN was found in 151 (11.5%) patients. The overall accuracy was not statistically different between both cohorts for AN (88.4%, 91.7%; p = 0.051). At the cut-off stablished, differences in FIT sensitivity (31.1%, 40.6%; p = 0.2) or specificity (96.5%, 97.3%; p = 0.1) were not statistically significant. Finally, independent variables such as sex (male) (odds ratio (OR) 2.1, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.4-3.1), age (50-65, >65 years) (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.1-4.3; OR 2.7, 95% CI 1.2-6.1), previous colonoscopy (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.9) and FIT ≥20 µg/g feces (OR 17.7, 95% CI 10.8-29.1) were associated with AN diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

FIT accuracy for AN detection is equivalent in average and familial-risk CRC screening cohorts.

Utility of the Asia-Pacific colorectal screening scoring system and the presence of metabolic syndrome components in screening for sporadic colorectal cancer

AIM: To determine the utility of the Asia-Pacific colorectal screening (APCS) scoring system and metabolic syndrome components in individual screening for sporadic colorectal cancer.

METHODS: The subjects were patients admitted to the Peking University People’s Hospital for colonoscopy between October 2012 and July 2013. Clinical information, including patient willingness to undergo colonoscopy, medical history, endoscopic findings, histology, and other information, was collected, and the patients were grouped according to APCS scores and the presence of metabolic syndrome components. Colorectal tumor detection rates were compared between the groups.

RESULTS: A total of 219 patients were included in the study, 108 were male and 111 were female, resulting in a male-to-female ratio of 1:1.03. The average age of the patients was 56.8 ± 13.7 years. According to APCS scores, 88 (40.2%) patients were included in the average-risk (AR) group, 113 (51.6%) patients were included in the moderate-risk (MR) group, and 18 (8.2%) patients were included in the high-risk (HR) group. Colorectal tumors were detected in 69 (31.5%) subjects, and the detection rates in the AR, MR, and HR groups were 15.9%, 36.3%, and 77.8%, respectively. The difference in the detection rates between the three groups was statistically significant (P < 0.01). The combined detection rate of colorectal tumors in the APCS MR and HR groups was 42.0%. However, patients in the MR and HR groups who presented with metabolic syndrome components, in particular obesity, exhibited a significantly higher colorectal tumor detection rate (59.5%) than did those without these components (19.2%, P < 0.01) and those who underwent colonoscopy because of doctor’s recommendation (36.5%, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION: The APCS scoring system can be used in individual screening for sporadic colorectal cancer. The combined use of APCS scores and the metabolic syndrome components, in particular obesity, will significantly improve the efficacy of individual colorectal cancer screening.

Characteristics of adenomas detected by fecal immunochemical test in colorectal cancer screening

BACKGROUND

Fecal immunochemical test (FIT) diagnostic accuracy for colorectal adenoma detection in colorectal cancer screening is limited.

METHODS

We analyzed 474 asymptomatic subjects with adenomas detected on colonoscopy in two blinded diagnostic tests studies designed to assess FIT diagnostic accuracy. We determined the characteristics of adenomas (number, size, histology, morphology, and location) and the risk of metachronous lesions (according to European guidelines). Finally, we performed a logistic regression to identify those variables independently associated with a positive result.

RESULTS

Advanced adenomas were found in 145 patients (75.6% distal and 24.3% only proximal to splenic flexure). Patients were classified as low (59.5%), intermediate (30.2%), and high risk (10.3%) according to European guidelines. At a 100-ng/mL threshold, FIT was positive in 61 patients (12.8%). Patients with advanced adenomas [odds ratio (OR), 8.8; 95% confidence interval (CI), 4.76-16.25], distal advanced adenomas (OR, 6.7; 95% CI, 1.9-8.8), high risk (OR, 20.1; 95% CI, 8.8-45.8), or intermediate risk lesions (OR, 6; 95% CI, 2.9-12.4) had more probabilities to have a positive test. The characteristics of adenomas independently associated were number of adenomas (OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.04-1.42), distal flat adenomas (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.21-0.96), pedunculated adenomas (OR, 2.28; 95% CI, 1.48-3.5), and maximum size of distal adenomas (mm; OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.16-1.32).

CONCLUSIONS

European guidelines classification and adenoma location correlates with the likelihood of a positive FIT result.

IMPACT

This information allows us to understand the FIT impact in colorectal cancer prevention. Likewise, it should be taken into account in the development of new colorectal adenomas biomarkers.