|
1
|
Ward JM, Horvat N, Gollub MJ. Extracolonic findings at CT colonography in an oncological hospital setting. Clin Imaging 2022; 86:98-102. [DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2022.03.020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/01/2022] [Revised: 03/25/2022] [Accepted: 03/25/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
|
|
2
|
MacLeod C, Monaghan E, Banerjee A, Jenkinson P, Falconer R, Ramsay G, Watson AJM. Colon capsule endoscopy. Surgeon 2020; 18:251-256. [PMID: 32178986 DOI: 10.1016/j.surge.2020.01.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/17/2019] [Accepted: 01/22/2020] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
There are multiple indications for luminal imaging of the colon. From assessment of known disease, to diagnosing new pathology; intra-luminal visualisation is the mainstay of gastrointestinal diagnosis. Colonoscopy and radiological imaging are currently the most frequently deployed diagnostic methods. However, both have an associated risk profile, have significant resource pressures and are not universally tolerated. Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) offers an adjunct to these diagnostic options. In this narrative review the utility of CCE is described. Its current uses, potential benefits and future developments are also discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C MacLeod
- Department of Surgery, Raigmore Hospital, NHS Highland, Old Perth Road, Inverness IV2 3UJ, Scotland, United Kingdom.
| | - E Monaghan
- Department of Surgery, Raigmore Hospital, NHS Highland, Old Perth Road, Inverness IV2 3UJ, Scotland, United Kingdom
| | - A Banerjee
- Department of Surgery, Raigmore Hospital, NHS Highland, Old Perth Road, Inverness IV2 3UJ, Scotland, United Kingdom
| | - P Jenkinson
- Department of Surgery, Raigmore Hospital, NHS Highland, Old Perth Road, Inverness IV2 3UJ, Scotland, United Kingdom
| | - R Falconer
- Department of Surgery, Raigmore Hospital, NHS Highland, Old Perth Road, Inverness IV2 3UJ, Scotland, United Kingdom
| | - G Ramsay
- Department of Surgery, Raigmore Hospital, NHS Highland, Old Perth Road, Inverness IV2 3UJ, Scotland, United Kingdom
| | - A J M Watson
- Department of Surgery, Raigmore Hospital, NHS Highland, Old Perth Road, Inverness IV2 3UJ, Scotland, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
|
3
|
Sali L, Regge D. CT colonography for population screening of colorectal cancer: hints from European trials. Br J Radiol 2016; 89:20160517. [PMID: 27542076 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20160517] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
CT colonography (CTC) is a minimally invasive radiological investigation of the colon. Robust evidence indicates that CTC is safe, well tolerated and highly accurate for the detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) and large polyps, which are the targets of screening. Randomized controlled trials were carried out in Europe to evaluate CTC as the primary test for population screening of CRC in comparison with faecal immunochemical test (FIT), sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy. Main outcomes were participation rate and detection rate. Participation rate for screening CTC was in the range of 25-34%, whereas the detection rate of CTC for CRC and advanced adenoma was in the range of 5.1-6.1%. Participation for CTC screening was lower than that for FIT, similar to that for sigmoidoscopy and higher than that for colonoscopy. The detection rate of CTC was higher than that of one FIT round, similar to that of sigmoidoscopy and lower than that of colonoscopy. However, owing to the higher participation rate in CTC screening with respect to colonoscopy screening, the detection rates per invitee of CTC and colonoscopy would be comparable. These results justify consideration of CTC in organized screening programmes for CRC. However, assessment of other factors such as polyp size threshold for colonoscopy referral, management of extracolonic findings and, most importantly, the forthcoming results of cost-effectiveness analyses are crucial to define the role of CTC in primary screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lapo Sali
- 1 Department of Biomedical Experimental and Clinical Sciences Mario Serio, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Daniele Regge
- 2 Dipartimento di Scienze Chirurgiche, Università di Torino, Turin, Italy.,3 Candiolo Cancer Institute FPO, IRCCS, Turin, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
|
4
|
|
|
5
|
Matsuda T, Ono A, Kakugawa Y, Matsumoto M, Saito Y. Impact of screening colonoscopy on outcomes in colorectal cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2015; 45:900-5. [DOI: 10.1093/jjco/hyv117] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/08/2015] [Accepted: 07/05/2015] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
|
|
6
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common cancers worldwide and a good candidate for screening programmes. However, there is controversy concerning which of the available screening tests should be used. SUMMARY There is general agreement that screening for CRC in the asymptomatic population should begin at the age of 50. Several different screening methods are available which can be separated into those that mainly detect cancers: faecal occult blood tests [guaiac (FOBT) and immunochemical (FIT)], genetic stool tests, blood tests and the M2-pyruvate kinase (M2-PK) test. Methods that detect cancers and polyps are colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, CT-colonography (CT-C) and colon capsule endoscopy. The only tests for which a reduction in CRC mortality compared to no screening have been proven in randomized trials are FOBT and sigmoidoscopy. Several trials suggest that FIT are superior to FOBT in terms of detection rates of cancers and advanced adenomas and possibly compliance. There is indirect evidence suggesting efficacy of colonoscopy as a screening test. The role of CT-C is controversial. There is data suggesting a good sensitivity for neoplasia >9 mm with a lower sensitivity for smaller neoplasia. However, radiation exposure is considered a major limitation in some countries. Unresolved questions include the lesion cut-off for referral to colonoscopy and work-up of extracolonic findings. For other methods, like genetic stool testing using newer markers, blood tests, capsule endoscopy and M2-PK, there is currently insufficient data on screening of the asymptomatic population. Key Messages: Colorectal screening is recommended and should be performed in the form of an organized programme. If detection of early-stage cancers is the aim of a screening programme, FIT seem to be superior to FOBT. If detection and removal of adenomas is the aim of a screening programme, endoscopic methods seem to be good alternatives. Sigmoidoscopy is easier to perform but will likely only have an effect on distal cancers. Colonoscopy is more invasive but enables inspection of the whole colon. The role of CT-C, capsule endoscopy, genetic stool tests, blood tests and M2-PK is currently unknown.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christian P Pox
- Department of Medicine, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Knappschaftskrankenhaus, Bochum, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
|
7
|
Vardhanabhuti V, James J, Nensey R, Hyde C, Roobottom C. Model-based iterative reconstruction in low-dose CT colonography-feasibility study in 65 patients for symptomatic investigation. Acad Radiol 2015; 22:563-71. [PMID: 25683499 DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2014.12.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/15/2014] [Revised: 12/17/2014] [Accepted: 12/18/2014] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES To compare image quality on computed tomographic colonography (CTC) acquired at standard dose (STD) and low dose (LD) using filtered-back projection, adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction, and model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS A total of 65 symptomatic patients were prospectively enrolled for the study and underwent STD and LD CTC with filtered-back projection, adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction, and MBIR to allow direct per-patient comparison. Objective image noise, subjective image analyses, and polyp detection were assessed. RESULTS Objective image noise analysis demonstrates significant noise reduction using MBIR technique (P < .05) despite being acquired at lower doses. Subjective image analyses were superior for LD MBIR in all parameters except visibility of extracolonic lesions (two-dimensional) and visibility of colonic wall (three-dimensional) where there were no significant differences. There was no significant difference in polyp detection rates (P > .05). Doses: LD (dose-length product, 257.7), STD (dose-length product, 483.6). CONCLUSIONS LD MBIR CTC objectively shows improved image noise using parameters in our study. Subjectively, image quality is maintained. Polyp detection shows no significant difference but because of small numbers needs further validation. Average dose reduction of 47% can be achieved. This study confirms feasibility of using MBIR in this context of CTC in symptomatic population.
Collapse
|
|
8
|
[Colorectal cancer screening: evidence and implementation]. Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz 2015; 57:302-6. [PMID: 24562704 DOI: 10.1007/s00103-013-1911-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common cancer among both men and women in Germany. Owing to its relatively slow growth, perspectives for effective early detection are much better than for other forms of cancer. AIM To summarize the evidence on effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of CRC screening, and to provide an overview on the current state and perspectives for effective CRC screening. MATERIALS AND METHODS Summary and critical review of evidence from randomized trials and observational epidemiological studies. RESULTS A reduction in CRC mortality by offering annual fecal occult blood tests or once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy has been demonstrated in randomized trials. Novel fecal immunochemical tests for hemoglobin in stool have been shown to be more sensitive than traditional fecal occult blood tests and could substantially improve noninvasive CRC screening. Epidemiological studies suggest that the majority of CRC cases and deaths could be prevented by colonoscopy and removal of colorectal adenomas. However, adherence to screening offered outside organized screening programs is low. The National Cancer Plan recommends an organized CRC screening program in Germany. The law on the early detection of cancer from April 2013 has paved the way for its implementation. DISCUSSION The great potential for CRC prevention by early detection has so far only been realized to a very limited extent in Germany. Introduction of an organized screening program and the offer of enhanced noninvasive screening tests could strongly enhance the utilization and effectiveness of CRC screening in Germany. The political frame has been set, and timely quality-assured implementation is required.
Collapse
|
|
9
|
van Dam L, Bretthauer M. Ethical issues in colorectal cancer screening. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2014; 28:315-26. [PMID: 24810192 DOI: 10.1016/j.bpg.2014.03.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/18/2014] [Accepted: 03/02/2014] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
In many countries, colorectal cancer screening is currently an established population screening program due to the evidence on its reduction of colorectal cancer mortality. There is general consensus that colorectal cancer screening meets the screening criteria as proposed by Wilson and Jungner. However, as for all population screening programs, colorectal cancer screening also has disadvantages and thereby entails ethical issues. There are the general issues concerning the introduction of screening programs (e.g. medicalization, overdiagnosis and overtreatment, information provision to screenees), evaluation of cancer screening programs (e.g. lead time and length bias), chosen screening method (e.g. false-positive and false-negative test results, reduction of all-cause mortality, choice between different screening methods). The different colorectal cancer screening methods and the ethical issues concerning colorectal cancer screening will be discussed in this review.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Leonie van Dam
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Medical Ethics and Philosophy, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Michael Bretthauer
- Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; Department of Transplantation Medicine, Section of Gastroenterology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
| |
Collapse
|
|
10
|
|
|
11
|
Boellaard TN, van der Paardt MP, Hollmann MW, Eberl S, Peringa J, Schouten LJ, Kavaliauskiene G, Runge JH, Tielbeek JAW, Stoker J. A multi-centre randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the value of a single bolus intravenous alfentanil in CT colonography. BMC Gastroenterol 2013; 13:94. [PMID: 23706123 PMCID: PMC3671205 DOI: 10.1186/1471-230x-13-94] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/30/2013] [Accepted: 05/21/2013] [Indexed: 01/23/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Pain is common during colonic insufflation required for CT colonography. We therefore evaluate whether a single intravenous alfentanil bolus has a clinically relevant analgesic effect compared with placebo in patients undergoing CT colonography. Methods A prospective multi-centre randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial was performed in patients scheduled for elective CT colonography. Patients were randomised to receive either a bolus of 7.5 μg/kg alfentanil (n = 45) or placebo (n = 45). The primary outcome was the difference in maximum pain during colonic insufflation on an 11-point numeric rating scale. We defined a clinically relevant effect as a maximum pain reduction of at least 1.3 points. Secondary outcomes included total pain and burden of CT colonography (5-point scale), the most burdensome aspect and side effects. Our primary outcome was tested using a one-sided independent samples t-test. Results Maximum pain scores during insufflation were lower with alfentanil as compared with placebo, 5.3 versus 3.0 (P < 0.001). Total CT colonography pain and burden were also lower with alfentanil (2.0 vs. 1.6; P = 0.014 and 2.1 vs. 1.7; P = 0.007, respectively). With alfentanil fewer patients rated the insufflation as most burdensome aspect (56.1% vs. 18.6%; P = 0.001). Episodes with desaturations < 90% SpO2 were more common with alfentanil (8.1% vs. 44.4%; P < 0.001, but no clinically relevant desaturations occurred. Conclusions A low-dose intravenous alfentanil bolus provides a clinically relevant reduction of maximum pain during CT colonography and may improve the CT colonography acceptance, especially for patients with a low pain threshold. Trial registration Dutch Trial Register:
NTR2902
Collapse
|
|
12
|
Meertens R, Brealey S, Nightingale J, McCoubrie P. Diagnostic accuracy of radiographer reporting of computed tomography colonography examinations: A systematic review. Clin Radiol 2013; 68:e177-90. [DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2012.11.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/10/2012] [Revised: 11/10/2012] [Accepted: 11/20/2012] [Indexed: 10/27/2022]
|
|
13
|
van Dam L, Kuipers EJ, Steyerberg EW, van Leerdam ME, de Beaufort ID. The price of autonomy: should we offer individuals a choice of colorectal cancer screening strategies? Lancet Oncol 2013; 14:e38-46. [DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(12)70455-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
|
|
14
|
Screening computed tomography colonography with 256-slice scanning: should patient radiation burden and associated cancer risk constitute a major concern? Invest Radiol 2012; 47:451-6. [PMID: 22766908 DOI: 10.1097/rli.0b013e318250a58c] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/09/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to determine the radiation burden and the lifetime attributable risk (LAR) of radiation-induced cancer in patients undergoing screening 256-slice computed tomography colonography (CTC) and compare CTC-related radiogenic risks to corresponding nominal lifetime intrinsic risk of cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS A Monte Carlo simulation software dedicated for computed tomography (CT) dosimetry was used to determine absorbed doses to primarily exposed radiosensitive organs of 31 women and 29 men subjected to screening CTC on a 256-slice CT scanner. Effective dose was estimated from (a) organ dose data and (b) dose-length product. Organ-specific and total LARs of cancer were estimated using published risk factors. Cumulative LARs from repeated CTC studies on individuals participating in a colorectal cancer screening program were compared with corresponding lifetime intrinsic risks. RESULTS The mean organ dose-derived effective dose was estimated to be 2.92 and 2.61 mSv for female and male individuals, respectively. The dose-length product method was found to overestimate effective dose from CTC by 26% and 13% in female and male individuals, respectively. Compared with previously published results for 64-slice CT scanners, 256-slice CTC was found to be associated with up to 45% less radiation burden. The cumulative LAR of radiation-induced cancer from repeated quinquennial screening CTC studies between the ages of 50 and 80 years was estimated to increase the lifetime intrinsic risk of cancer by less than 0.2%. CONCLUSION The level of patient radiation burden and theoretical radiogenic cancer risks associated with screening CTC performed using modern low-dose protocols and techniques may not justify disapproval of CTC as a mass screening tool.
Collapse
|
|
15
|
[Screening for colorectal cancer. Current evidence and novel developments]. Radiologe 2012; 52:504-10. [PMID: 22618623 DOI: 10.1007/s00117-011-2281-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/28/2022]
Abstract
CLINICAL ISSUE Colorectal cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer-related morbidity and mortality. Screening has been demonstrated to reduce both the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer. In addition to the large group with a normal risk level, two further risk groups need to be distinguished: increased family risk and hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes. STANDARD METHODS FOR SCREENING: The highest evidence for all screening tests has been demonstrated for guaiac-based fecal occult blood testing. Colonoscopy is a diagnostic and therapeutic tool and it serves as the reference standard for other tests in clinical studies. INNOVATIONS Fecal immunochemical tests have a higher sensitivity than guaiac-based tests. Several novel techniques are under development and could be adopted by screening programs in the future. Next to colonoscopy, computed tomography (CT) colonography and colon capsule endoscopy have the highest sensitivity for colorectal neoplasia. Molecular tests which are based on the detection of genetic and epigenetic changes of DNA released by the tumor into feces or blood have a high potential and could potentially replace occult blood tests in the future. PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS Colonoscopy is the primary instrument for screening for colorectal neoplasia. Fecal occult blood testing should only be performed if colonoscopy is denied and CT colonography has not yet been approved for screening in Germany.
Collapse
|
|
16
|
Cost-effectiveness of computed tomography colonography in colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2012; 28:415-23. [PMID: 23006522 DOI: 10.1017/s0266462312000542] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The European Code Against Cancer recommends individuals aged ≥ 50 should participate in colorectal cancer screening. CT-colonography (CTC) is one of several screening tests available. We systematically reviewed evidence on, and identified key factors influencing, cost-effectiveness of CTC screening. METHODS PubMed, Medline, and the Cochrane library were searched for cost-effectiveness or cost-utility analyses of CTC-based screening, published in English, January 1999 to July 2010. Data was abstracted on setting, model type and horizon, screening scenario(s), comparator(s), participants, uptake, CTC performance and cost, effectiveness, ICERs, and whether extra-colonic findings and medical complications were considered. RESULTS Sixteen studies were identified from the United States (n = 11), Canada (n = 2), and France, Italy, and the United Kingdom (1 each). Markov state-transition (n = 14) or microsimulation (n = 2) models were used. Eleven considered direct medical costs only; five included indirect costs. Fourteen compared CTC with no screening; fourteen compared CTC with colonoscopy-based screening; fewer compared CTC with sigmoidoscopy (8) or fecal tests (4). Outcomes assessed were life-years gained/saved (13), QALYs (2), or both (1). Three considered extra-colonic findings; seven considered complications. CTC appeared cost-effective versus no screening and, in general, flexible sigmoidoscopy and fecal occult blood testing. Results were mixed comparing CTC to colonoscopy. Parameters most influencing cost-effectiveness included: CTC costs, screening uptake, threshold for polyp referral, and extra-colonic findings. CONCLUSION Evidence on cost-effectiveness of CTC screening is heterogeneous, due largely to between-study differences in comparators and parameter values. Future studies should: compare CTC with currently favored tests, especially fecal immunochemical tests; consider extra-colonic findings; and conduct comprehensive sensitivity analyses.
Collapse
|
|
17
|
Boellaard TN, Venema HW, Streekstra GJ, Stoker J. Effective radiation dose in CT colonography: is there a downward trend? Acad Radiol 2012; 19:1127-33. [PMID: 22750132 DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2012.04.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/21/2012] [Revised: 04/25/2012] [Accepted: 04/26/2012] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES Radiation dose is an important drawback of computed tomography (CT) colonography, especially for its use as a screening tool for colorectal cancer. It is therefore important to know the present radiation dose. Our objective is to assess the effective radiation doses used for CT colonography and its trend over time. MATERIALS AND METHODS Institutions performing CT colonography research were asked to provide their CT colonography protocols. Median effective doses were calculated and compared with a 2007 inventory. Separate analyses were performed for protocols using intravenous contrast medium and for academic versus nonacademic institutions. Differences in effective dose were tested for significance, using Wilcoxon rank-sum or Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS Sixty-two of 109 (57%) institutions responded, providing protocols for 58 institutions. Median effective dose for daily practice protocols was 7.6 mSv (4.3 mSv and 2.0 mSv for supine and prone, respectively) and for screening 4.4 mSv (2.6 mSv and 2.0 mSv, respectively; P = .01). For daily practice with and without contrast medium, the median effective doses were 10.5 mSv and 4.0 mSv (P < .001), respectively. Academic and nonacademic institutions used similar doses (all comparisons P > .05). For institutions also participating in the 2007 inventory, effective dose for both daily practice and screening protocols were similar (P > .05). CONCLUSION In 2011 the median effective radiation dose for daily practice protocols was 7.6 mSv and for screening 4.4 mSv. Median effective doses have not decreased as compared to 2007. Academic and nonacademic institutions use similar radiation dose.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thierry N Boellaard
- Department of Radiology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
18
|
Patel SS, Floyd A, Doorly MG, Ortega AE, Ault GT, Kaiser AM, Senagore AJ. Current controversies in the management of colon cancer. Curr Probl Surg 2012; 49:398-460. [PMID: 22682507 DOI: 10.1067/j.cpsurg.2012.03.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
|
|
19
|
Chen JG, Cai J, Wu HL, Xu H, Zhang YX, Chen C, Wang Q, Xu J, Yuan XL. Colorectal cancer screening: Comparison of transferrin and immuno fecal occult blood test. World J Gastroenterol 2012; 18:2682-8. [PMID: 22690078 PMCID: PMC3370006 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v18.i21.2682] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2011] [Revised: 02/13/2012] [Accepted: 04/09/2012] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
AIM: To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of transfesrrin dipstick test (Tf) in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and precancerous lesions screening.
METHODS: Eight hundreds and sixty-one individuals at high-risk for CRC were recruited. Six hundreds and eleven subsequently received the three fecal occult blood tests and colonoscopy with biopsy performed as needed. Fecal samples were obtained on the day before colonoscopy. Tf, immuno fecal occult blood test (IFOBT) and guaiac fecal occult blood test (g-FOBT) were performed simultaneously on the same stool. To minimize false-negative cases, all subjects with negative samples were asked to provide an additional stool specimen for a second test even a third test. If the results were all negative after testing three repeated samples, the subject was considered a true negative. The performance characteristics of Tf for detecting CRC and precancerous lesions were examined and compared to those of IFOBT and the combination of Tf, IFOBT and g-FOBT.
RESULTS: A total of six hundreds and eleven subjects met the study criteria including 25 with CRC and 60 with precancerous lesions. Sensitivity for detecting CRC was 92% for Tf and 96% for IFOBT, specificities of Tf and IFOBT were both 72.0% (95% CI: 68.2%-75.5%; χ2 = 0.4, P > 0.05); positive likelihood ratios of those were 3.3 (95% CI: 2.8-3.9) and 3.4 (95% CI: 2.9-4.0), respectively. In precancerous lesions, sensitivities for Tf and IFOBT were 50% and 58%, respectively (χ2 = 0.8, P > 0.05); specificities of Tf and IFOBT were 71.5% (95% CI: 67.6%-75.1%) and 72.2% (95% CI: 68.4%-75.8%); positive likelihood ratios of those were 1.8 (95% CI: 1.3-2.3) and 2.1 (95% CI: 1.6-2.7), respectively; compared to IFOBT, g-FOBT+ Tf+ IFOBT had a significantly higher positive rate for precancerous lesions (83% vs 58%, respectively; χ2 = 9.1, P < 0.05). In patients with CRC and precancerous lesions, the sensitivities of Tf and IFOBT were 62% and 69% (χ2 = 0.9, P > 0.05); specificities of those were 74.5% (95% CI: 70.6%-78.1%) and 75.5% (95% CI: 71.6%-79.0%); positive likelihood ratios of those were 2.5 (95% CI: 2.0-3.1) and 2.8 (95% CI: 2.3-3.5). Compared to IFOBT alone, combining g-FOBT, IFOBT and Tf led to significantly increased sensitivity for detecting CRC and cancerous lesions (69% vs 88%, respectively; χ2 = 9.0, P < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: Tf dipstick test might be used as an additional tool for CRC and precancerous lesions screening in a high-risk cohort.
Collapse
|
|
20
|
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer death around the World. An effective way to reduce colorectal cancer mortality is to screen for it and its precursor, the adenoma. In industrialized countries the mortality related to CRC is decreasing probably due to better screening programmes in average-risk individuals as well as changes in risk factors. Screening procedures are various including faecal screening tests--which primarily detect colon cancer--and structural tests (endoscopy--flexible sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy--, Barium enema, Computed Tomography Colonography) that may detect not only cancer but also its precursors. Video-colon capsule is a new tool for exploring the colon but needs further studies before becoming a screening test. The choice of a screening test includes several factors as cost, invasiveness, acceptability, adherence to repeat testing and acceptance referral for colonoscopy for positive tests as well as local financial resources. Every screening programme has advantages and limitations. Enhancing use and quality of CRC screening programmes is mandatory.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Van Gossum
- Clinic of Intestinal Diseases and Nutritional Support, Department of Gastroenterology, Erasme Hospital (Université Libre de Bruxelles), Brussels, Belgium.
| |
Collapse
|