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

Community pharmacist-led point-of-care colorectal cancer screening program: Early detection of colorectal cancer in high-risk patients

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of colorectal cancer (CRC) is on the rise among the younger population, with an anticipated increase in new cases for individuals aged 20-49 years by 2030. The accessibility of community pharmacists and their strong community connections present unique opportunities to enhance patient engagement in a population-based CRC screening program.

OBJECTIVES

This study seeks to assess the effectiveness of a community pharmacist-led point-of-care CRC screening program utilizing fecal immunochemical test (FIT) kits to identify CRC prevalence in high-risk individuals.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Over the course of a 10-month prospective intervention conducted in UAE community pharmacies, we evaluated the impact of a pharmacist-led point-of-care colorectal cancer screening program. Six pharmacies were selected based on their services and capabilities. Eligible participants were those identified during medication reviews as exhibiting colorectal cancer risk factors. Pharmacists provided communication materials, distributed FIT kits, and implemented reminders. Participants collected samples for hemoglobin analysis, which served as an indicator of colorectal bleeding. Collected data encompassed demographics, lifestyle, and health-related characteristics. Pharmacists performed medication reviews and offered recommendations.

RESULTS

A total of four hundred and one recruited int the study. The mean age of study cohort at baseline was 66.6 ± 11.3 years. In our study with 401 participants, 36.4 % had undiagnosed colorectal cancer (CRC). Univariate logistic regression identified older age, a history of Type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM), and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) as significant factors associated with increased CRC prevalence, while aspirin users exhibited a lower likelihood of CRC. In the multivariate regression model, the history of Type 2 DM and IBD remained significant predictors for heightened CRC risk.

CONCLUSION

This study strengthens the plausibility of cause-and-effect relationships between colorectal cancer and demographic variables using epidemiological evidence. The significant relationships found between prevalence of CRC and age, type 2 diabetes, IBD and aspirin use support the effectiveness of using FIT kits in community pharmacist-led point-of-care CRC screening program to identify high-risk individuals. The finding highlights the significance of improving efforts on colorectal cancer prevention and control.

Colonoscopy findings after increasing two-stool faecal immunochemical test (FIT) cut-off: Cross-sectional analysis of the SCREESCO randomized trial

BACKGROUND

We determined the impact of an increased two-stool faecal immunochemical test (FIT) cut-off on colonoscopy positivity and relative sensitivity and specificity in the randomized controlled screening trial screening of Swedish colons conducted in Sweden.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional analysis of participants in the FIT arm that performed FIT between March 2014 and 2020 within the study registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02078804, who had a faecal haemoglobin concentration of at least 10 µg/g in at least one of two stool samples and who underwent a colonoscopy (n = 3841). For each increase in cut-off, we computed the positive predictive value (PPV), numbers needed to scope (NNS), sensitivity and specificity for finding colorectal cancer (CRC) and advanced neoplasia (AN; advanced adenoma or CRC) relative to cut-off 10 µg/g.

RESULTS

The PPV for AN increased from 23.0% (95% confidence intervals [CI]: 22.3%-23.6%) at cut-off 10 µg/g to 28.8% (95% CI: 27.8%-29.7%) and 33.1% (95% CI: 31.9%-34.4%) at cut-offs 20 and 40 µg/g, respectively, whereas the NNS to find a CRC correspondingly decreased from 41 to 27 and 19. The PPV for AN was higher in men than women at each cut-off, for example 31.5% (95% CI: 30.1%-32.8%) in men and 25.6% (95% CI: 24.3%-27.0%) in women at 20 µg/g. The relative sensitivity and relative specificity were similar in men and women at each cut-off.

CONCLUSION

A low cut-off of around 20-40 µg/g allows detection and removal of many AN compared to 10 µg/g while reducing the number of colonoscopies in both men and women.

Clinical performance study of a fecal bacterial signature test for colorectal cancer screening

The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is the most widely used test for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. RAID-CRC Screen is a new non-invasive test based on fecal bacterial markers, developed to complement FIT by increasing its specificity. The test was previously clinically evaluated in FIT-positive patients (>20 μg of hemoglobin/g of feces, "FIT20"), in which it reduced the proportion of false positive results by 16.3% while maintaining most of FIT20's sensitivity. The aim of this study was to compare the sensitivity and specificity of a CRC screening program using RAID-CRC Screen in addition to FIT20 as a triage test in a European screening population undergoing screening colonoscopy with a CRC screening program with FIT20 alone in the same cohort. A cohort of 2481 subjects aged > 55 years from the German screening colonoscopy program was included. The colonoscopy findings were used as the gold standard in calculating the diagnostic capacity of the tests and included 15 CRC and 257 advanced neoplasia cases. RAID-CRC Screen added to FIT20 provided the same sensitivity as FIT20 alone (66.7%) in detecting CRC and a significantly higher specificity (97.0% vs. 96.1%, p<0.0001). The positive predictive value was 11.9% when using RAID-CRC Screen and 9.5% with FIT20 alone, and the negative predictive value was 99.8% in the two scenarios. For advanced neoplasia detection, the use of RAID-CRC Screen yielded significantly lower sensitivity than with FIT20 alone (17.5% vs. 21.8%, p = 0.0009), and the overall specificity was significantly higher when using RAID-CRC Screen compared with FIT20 alone (98.2% vs. 97.8%, p = 0.0039). Our findings confirm the results obtained in previous clinical studies in a CRC screening setting, showing the potential of RAID-CRC Screen to increase the overall specificity of FIT-based screening.

Implementation of an organized colorectal cancer screening program through quantitative fecal immunochemical test followed by colonoscopy in an urban low-income community: Guidance and strategies

Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) followed by a colonoscopy is an efficacious strategy to improve the adenoma detection rate and Colorectal Cancer (CRC). There is no organized national screening program for CRC in Brazil. The aim of this research was to describe the implementation of an organized screening program for CRC through FIT followed by colonoscopy, in an urban low-income community of São Paulo city. The endpoints of the study were: FIT participation rate, FIT positivity rate, colonoscopy compliance rate, Positive Predictive Values (PPV) for adenoma and CRC, and the rate of complications. From May 2016 to October 2019, asymptomatic individuals, 50-75 years old, received a free kit to perform the FIT. Positive FIT (≥ 50 ng/mL) individuals were referred to colonoscopy. 10,057 individuals returned the stool sample for analysis, of which (98.2%) 9,881 were valid. Women represented 64.8% of the participants. 55.3% of individuals did not complete elementary school. Positive FIT was 7.8% (776/9881). The colonoscopy compliance rate was 68.9% (535/776). There were no major colonoscopy complications. Adenoma were detected in 63.2% (332/525) of individuals. Advanced adenomatous lesions were found in 31.4% (165/525). CRC was diagnosed in 5.9% (31/525), characterized as adenocarcinoma: in situ in 3.2% (1/31), intramucosal in 29% (9/31), and invasive in 67.7% (21/31). Endoscopic treatment with curative intent for CRC was performed in 45.2% (14/31) of the cases. Therefore, in an urban low-income community, an organized CRC screening using FIT followed by colonoscopy ensued a high participation rate, and high predictive positive value for both, adenoma and CRC.

Impact of time between faecal immunochemical tests in colorectal cancer screening on screening results: A natural experiment

Repeated rounds of faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) for occult blood is a common method for screening for colorectal cancer (CRC). However, the time interval between FIT rounds is not thoroughly investigated. In a CRC screening trial in South-Eastern Norway, individuals were invited for biennial FIT between 2012 and 2019. The positivity threshold was >15 mcg haemoglobin/g faeces (mcg/g). Due to organizational challenges, the interval between screening rounds randomly varied between 1.5 and 3.5 years, forming a natural experiment. We investigated the detection rate of CRC and advanced neoplasia (AN: CRC or advanced adenoma) at the subsequent round (FIT₂ ), according to the faecal haemoglobin concentration (f-Hb) at the initial screening round (FIT₁ ), and time between the two screening rounds. 18 522 individuals with negative FIT₁ who attended FIT₂ were included in this study. 245 AN were detected at FIT₂ , of which 34 were CRC. The CRC detection rate at FIT₂ for participants with FIT₁  = 0 mcg/g was 0.09% while it was 0.28% for participant with 0 > FIT₁  ≤ 15 mcg/g; odds ratio (OR) 3.22, 95% CI 1.49-6.95. For each 3 months' increment between FITs, the OR for detecting CRC was 1.33 (95% CI 0.98-1.79), while the OR was 1.13 (1.02-1.26) for AN. Individuals with FIT₁ -value of 0 mcg/g, had a lower AN detection rate compared with participants with 0 > FIT₁  ≤ 15 mcg/g, irrespective of time between tests. Although CRC and AN detection rates increase with increasing time interval between FITs, individuals with undetectable f-Hb at first screen have substantially lower risk of CRC at the next screening round compared with individuals with detectable f-Hb.

A True Positive and a False Negative? The Dilemma of Negative Colonoscopy After a Positive Fecal Occult Blood Test

INTRODUCTION

Many colonoscopies following a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) will not identify a probable cause for fecal blood, and missed neoplasia is a concern. The study determined whether the absence of neoplasia at a FIT positive diagnostic colonoscopy was due to a missed lesion and whether the initial FIT hemoglobin (f-Hb) concentration could predict missed lesions.

METHODS

This was a retrospective audit of patients who had undergone diagnostic colonoscopy after FIT screening (2 sample ≥ 20 µg Hb/g feces). Probable bleeding lesions including cancer, advanced adenoma, colitis, and angiodysplasia were considered a "positive colonoscopy outcome." For those with a negative outcome, findings at the subsequent colonoscopy were assessed.

RESULTS

There were 1087 good quality colonoscopies within 12 months of a positive FIT. In total, 171 (15.7%) patients had a positive outcome at the diagnostic colonoscopy. Subsequent colonoscopies of negative outcome cases (n = 418, median of 3.1y later) were reviewed; of these, there were 57 (13.6%) cases with a positive outcome. This included CRC in 0.5% (n = 2) and advanced adenoma in 11.7% (n = 49). High f-Hb and having both FIT samples ≥ 20 µg/g feces were associated with a positive outcome at the original diagnostic colonoscopy (p < 0.05). However, f-Hb was not predictive for a positive outcome at the subsequent colonoscopy by either maximum f-Hb (p = 0.768), total f-Hb (p = 0.459), or both FIT samples ≥ 20 µg/g (p = 0.091).

CONCLUSION

A small proportion of "false" positive FIT results had cancer or advanced adenoma found at the subsequent colonoscopy. A missed lesion could not be predicted by the initial FIT f-Hb.

How a faecal immunochemical test screening programme changes annual colorectal cancer incidence rates: an Italian intention-to-screen study

Background

This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a biennial faecal immunochemical test (FIT) screening programme in reducing annual colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence in its dynamic target population.

Methods

The target population included over 1,000,000 persons aged 50–69 living in a region of northern Italy. The average annual response rate to invitation was 51.4%. Each observed annual age-standardised (Europe) rate per 100,000 persons between 2005, the year of introduction of the programme, and 2016 was compared with each expected annual rate as estimated with age-period-cohort (men) and age-period (women) models.

Results

For both sexes, the rates observed in 1997–2004 and those expected in 2005–2016 were stable. Observed rates increased in 2005, peaked in 2006 (the first full year of screening), dropped significantly below the expected level in 2009, and continued to decrease until 2013 (the eighth full year), after which no further significant changes occurred. In the pooled years 2013–2016, the observed incidence rate per 100,000 persons was 102.2 [95% CI: 97.4, 107.1] for men, 75.6 [95% CI: 71.6, 79.7] for women and 88.4 [95% CI: 85.3, 91.5] for both sexes combined, with an observed:expected incidence rate ratio of 0.68 [95% CI: 0.65, 0.71], 0.79 [95% CI: 0.76, 0.82] and 0.72 [95% CI: 0.66, 0.81], respectively.

Discussion

The study provided multiple consistent proofs of a causal relationship between the introduction of screening and a stable 28% decrease in annual CRC incidence after eight years.

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.

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.

Selection of individuals for lung cancer screening based on risk prediction model performance and economic factors - The Ontario experience

INTRODUCTION

Randomized controlled trials have shown that screening with computed tomography reduces lung cancer mortality but is most effective when applied to high-risk individuals. Accurate lung cancer risk prediction models effectively select individuals for screening. Few pilots or programs have implemented risk models for enrolling individuals for screening in real-world, population-based settings. This report describes implementation of the PLCOm2012 risk prediction model in the Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario) lung cancer screening Pilot.

METHODS

In the Pilot's Health Technology Assessment, 576 categorical age/pack-years/quit-years scenarios were evaluated using MISCAN microsimulation modeling and cost-effectiveness analyses. A preferred model was selected which provided the most life-years gained per cost. The PLCOm2012 was compared to the preferred MISCAN scenario at a threshold that yielded the same number eligible (risk ≥2.0 %/6-years).

RESULTS

The PLCOm2012 had significantly higher sensitivity and predictive value (68.1 % vs 59.6 %, p < 0.0001; 4.90 % vs 4.29 %, p = 0.044), and an Expert Panel selected it for use in the Pilot. The Pilot cancer detection rate was significantly higher than in the NLST (p = 0.009) or NELSON (p = 0.003) and there was a significant shift to early stage compared to historical Ontario Cancer Registry statistics (p < 0.0001). Pre- and post-Pilot evaluations found that conducting quality risk assessments were not excessively time consuming or difficult, and participants' satisfaction was high.

CONCLUSIONS

The PLCOm2012 was efficiently implemented in the Pilot in a real-world setting and is being used to transition into a provincial program. Compared to categorical age/pack-years/quit-years criteria, risk assessment using the PLCOm2012 can lead to effective and efficient screening.

The optimal cut-off value in fit-based colorectal cancer screening: An observational study

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs using fecal immunochemical test (FIT) have to choose a cut‐off value to decide which citizens to recall for colonoscopy. The evidence on the optimal cut‐off value is sparse and based on studies with a low number of cancer cases.

Methods

This observational study used data from the Danish Colorectal Cancer Screening Database. Sensitivity and specificity were estimated for various cut‐off values based on a large number of cancers. Traditionally optimal cut‐off values are found by weighting sensitivity and specificity equally. As this might result in too many unnecessary colonoscopies we also provide optimal cut‐off values for different weighting of sensitivity and specificity/number of needed colonoscopies to detect one cancer.

Results

Weighting sensitivity and specificity equally gives an optimal cut‐off value of 45 ng Hb/ml. This, however, means making 24 colonoscopies to detect one cancer. Weighting sensitivity lower and for example, aiming at making about 16 colonoscopies to detect one cancer, gives an optimal cut‐off value of 125 ng Hb/ml.

Conclusions

The optimal cut‐off value in an FIT population‐based screening program is 45 ng Hb/ml, when as traditionally sensitivity and specificity are weighted equally. If, however, 24 colonoscopies needed to detect one cancer is too huge a burden on the health care system and the participants, 80, 125, 175, and 350 ng Hb/ml are optimal cut‐off values when only 19/16/14/10 colonoscopies are accepted to find one cancer.

DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY OF ONE SAMPLE OR TWO SAMPLES QUANTITATIVE FECAL IMMUNOCHEMICAL TESTS FOR INTESTINAL NEOPLASIA DETECTION

BACKGROUND

Rectal bleeding is the most important symptom of intestinal neoplasia; thus, tests of occult blood detection in stools are widely used for pre neoplastic lesions and colorectal cancer (CRC) screening.

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the accuracy of OC-Sensor quantitative test (Eiken Chemical, Tokyo, Japan) at cut-off 10 µg Hb/g feces (50 ng/mL) in a cohort of subjects that had to undergo diagnostic colonoscopy, and if more than one sample collected in consecutive days would improve the diagnostic accuracy of the test.

METHODS

Patients (mean age 56.3±9.7 years) that underwent colonoscopy prospectively randomly received one (1-sample FIT, FIT 1) or two (2-sample FIT, FIT 2) collection tubes. They collected the stool sample before starting colonoscopy preparation. Samples were analyzed by the OC-Auto Micro 80 (Eiken Chemical, Tokyo, Japan). The performance of FIT 1 and FIT 2 were compared to the colonoscopy findings.

RESULTS

Among 289 patients, CRC was diagnosed in 14 (4.8%), advanced adenoma in 37 (12.8%), early adenoma in 71 (24.6%) and no abnormalities in 141 (48.8%). For FIT 1, the sensitivity for CRC was 83.3% (95%CI 36.5-99.1%), for advanced adenoma was 24% (95%CI 10.1-45.5%), with specificity of 86.9% (95%CI 77.3-92.9%). For FIT 2, the sensitivity for CRC was 75% (95%CI 35.6-95.5%), for advanced adenoma was 50% (95%CI 22.3-77.7%), with specificity of 92.9% (95%CI 82.2-97.7%). The positive likelihood ratios were 1.8 (95%CI 0.7-4.4 for FIT 1) and 7.1 (95%CI 2.4-21.4 for FIT 2) for advanced adenoma, and 6.4 (95%CI 3.3-12.3, for FIT 1) and 10.7 (95%CI 3.8-29.8, for FIT 2) for CRC. The negative likelihood ratio were 0.9 (95%CI 0.7-1, for FIT 1) and 0.5 (95%CI 0.3-0.9, for FIT 2) for advanced adenoma, and 0.2 (0.03-1.1, for FIT 1) and 0.3 (0.08-0.9, for FIT 2) for CRC. The differences between FIT 1 and FIT 2 performances were not significant. However, the comparison of the levels of hemoglobin in feces of patients of FIT 1 and FIT 2 showed that the differences between no polyp group and advanced adenoma and CRC were significant.

CONCLUSION

The accuracy of OCR Sensor with 10 µg Hb/g feces cut-off was comparable to other reports and two-sample collection improved the detection rate of advanced adenoma, a pre neoplastic condition to prevent CRC incidence.

Is Colorectal Cancer Screening Appropriate in Nigeria?

PURPOSE

The global burden of colorectal cancer (CRC) will continue to increase for the foreseeable future, largely driven by increasing incidence and mortality in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) such as Nigeria.

METHODS

We used the Wilson-Jungner framework (1968) to review the literature relevant to CRC screening in Nigeria and propose areas for future research and investment.

RESULTS

Screening is effective when the condition sought is both important and treatable within the system under evaluation. The incidence of CRC is likely increasing, although the exact burden of disease in Nigeria remains poorly understood and access to definitive diagnosis and treatment has not been systematically quantified. In high-income countries (HICs), CRC screening builds on a well-known natural history. In Nigeria, a higher proportion of CRC seems to demonstrate microsatellite instability, which is dissimilar to the molecular profile in HICs. Prospective trials, tissue banking, and next-generation sequencing should be leveraged to better understand these potential differences and the implications for screening. Fecal immunochemical test for hemoglobin (FIT) is recommended for LMICs that are considering CRC screening. However, FIT has not been validated in Nigeria, and questions about the impact of high ambient temperature, endemic parasitic infection, and feasibility remain unanswered. Prospective trials are needed to validate the efficacy of stool-based screening, and these trials should consider concomitant ova and parasite testing.

CONCLUSION

Using the Wilson-Jungner framework, additional work is needed before organized CRC screening will be effective in Nigeria. These deficits can be addressed without missing the window to mitigate the increasing burden of CRC in the medium to long term.

An Exploratory Analysis of Fecal Immunochemical Test Performance for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Nigeria

INTRODUCTION

The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) for hemoglobin is recommended for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in resource-limited environments. However, there are several unique variables that may alter FIT performance in this setting, including endemic intestinal parasites and high ambient temperature. This prospective study evaluated the performance of FIT in asymptomatic, average-risk individuals of screening age in rural Nigeria.

METHODS

Three hundred and twenty-four community volunteers completed a questionnaire and provided stool specimens for parasitology and microbiome analysis. Specimens were frozen and stored at -80 °C. Of 324 subjects, 139 met criteria for average-risk CRC screening and had a stool sample for analysis. These were thawed and tested with a qualitative FIT. Specimens positive for occult blood were retested every two days to evaluate the impact of time and temperature on test performance.

RESULTS

Of 139 individuals, 69 (49.6%) were positive for intestinal parasites and 10 (7.2%) were positive for occult blood. The most common pathogen was Cryptosporidium (40.6%). Among patients with intestinal parasites, 10.1% (7/69) had a positive FIT. Only 4.3% (3/70) of patients without parasites had a positive FIT (p = 0.208). On bivariate analysis, sociodemographic variables were not associated with a positive FIT result. Thirty percent (3/10) of the FIT-positive specimens became FIT-negative with routine storage.

CONCLUSION

Although a positive FIT result was more common in those with parasitic infection, the relationship was not significant in this small cohort. The impact of high ambient temperature on test positivity may necessitate shorter processing time guidelines for equatorial countries. Additional prospective studies are needed to validate FIT performance in Nigeria.

Lower Abnormal Fecal Immunochemical Test Cut-Off Values Improve Detection of Colorectal Cancer in System-Level Screens

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Noninvasive tests used in colorectal cancer screening, such as the fecal immunochemical test (FIT), are more acceptable but detect neoplasias with lower levels of sensitivity than colonoscopy. We investigated whether lowering the cut-off concentration of hemoglobin for designation as an abnormal FIT result increased the detection of advanced neoplasia in a mailed outreach program.

METHODS

We performed a prospective study of 17,017 uninsured patients, age 50 to 64 years, who were not current with screening and enrolled in a safety-net system in Texas. We reduced the cut-off value for an abnormal FIT result from 20 or more to 10 or more μg hemoglobin/g feces a priori. All patients with abnormal FIT results were offered no-cost diagnostic colonoscopy. We compared proportions of patients with abnormal FIT results and neoplasia yield for standard vs lower cut-off values, as well as absolute hemoglobin concentration distribution among 5838 persons who completed the FIT. Our primary aim was to determine the effects of implementing a lower hemoglobin concentration cut-off value on colonoscopy demand and yield, specifically colorectal cancer (CRC) and advanced neoplasia detection, compared with the standard, higher, hemoglobin concentration cut-off value.

RESULTS

The proportions of patients with abnormal FIT results were 12.3% at the 10 or more μg hemoglobin/g feces and 6.6% at the standard 20 or more μg hemoglobin/g feces cut-off value (P = .0013). Detection rates for the lower vs the standard threshold were 10.2% vs 12.7% for advanced neoplasia (P = .12) and 0.9% vs 1.2% for CRC (P = .718). The positive predictive values were 18.9% for the lower threshold vs 24.4% for the standard threshold for advanced neoplasia (P = .053), and 1.7% vs 2.4% for CRC (P = .659). The number needed to screen to detect 1 case with advanced neoplasia was 45 at the lower threshold compared with 58 at the standard threshold; the number needed to scope to detect 1 case with advanced neoplasia increased from 4 to 5. Most patients with CRC (72.7%) or advanced adenoma (67.3%) had hemoglobin concentrations of 20 or more μg/g feces. In the group with 10 to 19 μg hemoglobin/g feces, there were 3 patients with CRC (3 of 11; 27.3%) and 36 with advanced adenoma (36 of 110; 32.7%) who would not have been detected at the standard positive threshold (advanced neoplasia Pcomparison < .001). The proportion of patients found to have no neoplasia after an abnormal FIT result (false positives) was not significantly higher with the lower cut-off value (44.4%) than the standard cut-off value (39.1%) (P = .1103).

CONCLUSIONS

In a prospective study of 17,017 uninsured patients, we found that reducing the abnormal FIT result cut-off value (to ≥10 μg hemoglobin/g feces) might increase detection of advanced neoplasia, but doubled the proportion of patients requiring a diagnostic colonoscopy. If colonoscopy capacity permits, health systems that use quantitative FITs should consider lowering the abnormal cut-off value to optimize CRC detection and prevention. (ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT01946282.).

Global Prevalence of Colorectal Neoplasia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Most colorectal cancers (CRC) arise from colorectal adenomas, yet there is not enough information on global prevalence to inform health care policy. We examined the prevalence of any type of adenomas, advanced adenomas (AADs), and CRC according to age, sex, ethnicity, geographic regions, and anatomic location (proximal vs distal).

METHODS

MEDLINE and Embase were searched from their inception through May 1, 2018, to identify population-based, observational studies that reported the prevalence of colorectal neoplasia. Studies on participants 15 years or older, with a sample size of 500 persons or more, were included. Metaprop (College Station, TX) was used to model within-study variability by binomial distribution and Freeman-Tukey Double Arcsine Transformation to stabilize the variances. The prevalence figures were presented by proportions and their 95% CIs using random-effects models.

RESULTS

Our meta-analysis included 70 studies involving 637,414 individuals. The overall prevalence rates of adenoma (23.9%; 95% CI, 22.2%-25.8%), AAD (4.6%; 95% CI, 3.8%-5.5%), and CRC (0.4%, 95% CI, 0.3%-0.5%) were calculated. Subgroup analysis indicated that prevalence values (adenomas, AADs, and CRCs) were higher among men (29.7%, 6.5%, and 0.8%, respectively) than women (19.3%, 3.8% and 0.4%, respectively), among older adults (25.9%, 5.2%, and 0.6%, respectively) than younger adults (14.6%, 1.6%, and 0.1%, respectively), among Caucasians (23.7%, 6.6%, and 0.5%, respectively) than other ethnicities, in European countries (25.9%, 8.4%, and 0.8%, respectively) than other countries, and among patients with proximal (25.9%, 5.3%, and 0.1%, respectively) vs distal neoplasia.

CONCLUSIONS

In a systematic review and meta-analysis, we found a high prevalence of colorectal neoplasia among some populations. This indicates a need to expand CRC screening programs for these groups. The pooled prevalence estimates can be used as quality indicators for established CRC screening programs.

Colorectal carcinoma screening: Established methods and emerging technology

Colorectal carcinoma screening programs have shown success in lowering both the incidence and mortality rate of colorectal carcinoma at a population level, in part because this carcinoma is relatively slow growing and has an identifiable premalignant lesion. Still, many patients do not undergo the recommended screening for colorectal carcinoma, and of those who do, a subset may be over- or under-diagnosed by the currently available testing methods. The primary purpose of this article is to review the data regarding currently available colorectal cancer screening modalities, which include fecal occult blood testing, direct colonic visualization, and noninvasive imaging techniques. In addition, readers will be introduced to a variety of biomarkers that may serve as stand-alone or adjunct tests in the future. Finally, there is a brief discussion of the current epidemiologic considerations that public health officials must address as they create population screening guidelines. The data we provide as laboratory physicians and scientists are critical to the construction of appropriate recommendations that ultimately decrease the burden of disease from colorectal carcinoma.

Towards risk-stratified colorectal cancer screening. Adding risk factors to the fecal immunochemical test: Evidence, evolution and expectations

With increasing incidence and mortality, colorectal cancer (CRC) is a growing health problem worldwide. An effective way to address CRC is by screening for fecal (occult) blood by the fecal immunochemical test (FIT). However, there is room for improvement since precursor lesions and CRC bleed intermittent and can therefore be missed by the FIT (false negatives) or, the detected blood did not result from precursor lesions or CRC (false positives). This review provides the latest evidence on risk prediction models using FIT combined with additional risk factors before colonoscopy, which risk factors to include and if these models will better discriminate between normal findings and CRC compared to the FIT-only. Many prediction models are known for CRC, but compared to the FIT, these are less effective in detecting CRC. The literature search resulted in 645 titles where 11 papers matched the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Comparing the FIT-only with the risk prediction models for detecting CRC resulted in a significantly increased discrimination for the models. In addition, 2 different risk-stratification categories before colonoscopy were distinguished, namely the 1-model approach which combined risk factors with FIT results in a prediction model while the 2 step approach used risk factors apart from the FIT. Finally, combining FIT with CRC risk factors by means of a model before colonoscopy seems effective regarding discriminative power, however, more research is needed for validation combined with transparent and standardized reporting to improve quality assessment, for which suggestions are reported in this study.

Time to colonoscopy, cancer probability, and precursor lesions in the Danish colorectal cancer screening program

Purpose

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of response time from the Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) based screening invitation to the conclusive screening Optical Colonoscopy (OC) on the risk of detecting colorectal cancer (CRC), advanced stage disease and precursor lesions.

Patients and methods

We used a cross-sectional study design and included all 62,554 screening participants registered in the Danish Colorectal Cancer Screening Database who tested FIT-positive between March 2014 and December 2016. The main exposure was response time, measured as the time from initial invitation to the conclusive OC. Our main outcomes were the probability of being diagnosed with CRC, advanced stage disease or precursor lesions.

Results

Of the 62,554 FIT-positive participants, 53,171 (85%) received an OC and were eligible for analysis (median age 63.7 years, 56% men). In this group, 3,639 cancers were registered, 2,890 of which were registered with a defined stage of disease (79%), and 1,042 (36%) of these were advanced stage (UICC III & IV). In addition, 17,732 high-risk and 10,605 low-risk adenomas were identified. Compared to participants receiving the conclusive examination within 30 days, those receiving the examination more than 90 days after initial invitation were 3.49 times more likely to be diagnosed with any CRC (OR 3.49 [95% CI, 3.13–3.89]) and 2.10 times more likely to have advanced stage disease (OR 2.10 [95% CI, 1.73–2.56]). Those waiting for the longest were also more likely to have one or more high-risk adenomas (OR 1.59 [95% CI, 1.50–1.68]).

Conclusion

Increased screening response time was associated with a higher probability of detecting high-risk adenomas, any stage CRC and advanced stage cancer. More research is needed to explain what causes these associations.

Performance of two faecal immunochemical tests for the detection of advanced neoplasia at different positivity thresholds: a cross-sectional study of the Dutch national colorectal cancer screening programme

BACKGROUND

Faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) are recommended for colorectal cancer screening. Two frequently used FIT methods (FOB-Gold, Sentinel Diagnostics, Milan, Italy and OC-Sensor, Eiken Chemical, Tokyo, Japan) perform similarly in detecting advanced neoplasia (ie, colorectal cancer and advanced adenoma) at a fixed positivity cutoff for faecal haemoglobin concentration. It is unclear whether the performance of the two methods is also comparable at other thresholds. We compared the accuracy of the two assays in detecting advanced neoplasia across various thresholds.

METHODS

In a cross-sectional study in the Dutch national screening programme, individuals who were screening naive in 2016 (aged 55-75 years) living in the southwest region of the Netherlands were invited to use two different FIT assays on the same bowel movement. Eligible participants were randomly selected from municipal registers. Participants were referred for colonoscopy if either FIT assay result met the predefined positivity threshold (≥15 μg haemoglobin per g faeces). We compared the respective distributions of reported haemoglobin concentration and positivity rates with various FIT positivity thresholds. The performance of each FIT for identifying advanced neoplasia at colonoscopy in FIT-positive assays was compared with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.

FINDINGS

21 078 (50·0%) of 42 179 invitees completed both FIT assays. The distribution of haemoglobin concentrations differed significantly between the two FITs (p<0·0001), with higher positivity rates for OC-Sensor at FIT thresholds of 5 and 10 μg haemoglobin per g faeces, similar positivity rates at 15 and 20 μg haemoglobin per g faeces, and higher rates for FOB-Gold at FIT thresholds of 25-150 μg haemoglobin per g faeces. 2046 (9·7%) of 21 078 participants had at least one FIT assay that was positive and of these, 1724 (84·3%) attended colonoscopy. The accuracy of results in individuals undergoing colonoscopy did not significantly differ between the FITs, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0·675 (95% CI 0·649 to 0·702) for FOB-Gold and 0·686 (0·661 to 0·712) for OC-Sensor (p=0·40). At identical positivity rates, the positive predictive value of the two FIT assays was similar (difference varying from 0·5% [95% CI -2·6 to 3·7] at a positivity rate of 3·5% to 2·4% [-2·5 to 7·3] at a positivity rate of 2·0%).

INTERPRETATION

The two widely used FITs have significantly different distributions of reported haemoglobin concentration and yield different positivity rates at equal thresholds. However, they perform similarly in detecting advanced neoplasia at a preset positivity rate. When implementing either FIT in a screening programme, the desired positivity rate that identifies participants to be referred for colonoscopy should first be set, guided by available resources and feasibility.

FUNDING

The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development.