Review article: faecal occult blood testing for colorectal cancer

Choosing which in-hospital laboratory tests to target for intervention: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Some laboratory testing practices may be of low value, leading to wasted resources and potential patient harm. Our scoping review investigated factors and processes that developers report using to inform decisions about what tests to target for practice improvement.

METHODS

We searched Medline on May 30th, 2019 and June 28th, 2021 and included guidelines, recommendation statements, or empirical studies related to test ordering practices. Studies were included if they were conducted in a tertiary care setting, reported making a choice about a specific test requiring intervention, and reported at least one factor informing that choice. We extracted descriptive details, tests chosen, processes used to make the choice, and factors guiding test choice.

RESULTS

From 114 eligible studies, we identified 30 factors related to test choice including clinical value, cost, prevalence of test, quality of test, and actionability of test results. We identified nine different processes used to inform decisions regarding where to spend intervention resources.

CONCLUSIONS

Intervention developers face difficult choices when deciding where to put scarce resources intended to improve test utilization. Factors and processes identified here can be used to inform a framework to help intervention developers make choices relevant to improving testing practices.

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.

Usefulness of a novel and rapid assay system for fecal calprotectin in pediatric patients with inflammatory bowel diseases

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Fecal calprotectin (FC) has become a reliable biomarker for intestinal inflammation in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs). However, a simple and rapid assay to replace conventional ELISA is necessary for wider use in clinical practice. In this study, we investigated the usefulness of a novel method for measuring FC using a colloidal gold aggregation (CGA) assay for assessing mucosal inflammation in pediatric IBDs.

METHODS

FC levels were determined by ELISA and CGA assay in 309 fecal samples (ulcerative colitis [UC]: 131; Crohn's disease [CD]: 121; healthy controls: 57). For endoscopic evaluation, the modified Matts' grading system for UC and the simple endoscopic score for CD were used.

RESULTS

A strong correlation was found between the FC values determined by the two methods (r = 0.98, P < 0.01). FC levels, determined by CGA assay, strongly correlated with the endoscopic score for UC (r = 0.70, P < 0.01) and CD (r = 0.58, P < 0.01). In the UC patients with endoscopic remission, the FC levels determined by CGA assay (median: 31.5 μg/g, n = 14) were as low as in healthy controls. For patients in clinical remission but showing an active status endoscopically, FC was more likely to be abnormal than commonly used laboratory markers.

CONCLUSIONS

Our simple and rapid assay system has excellent performance for assessing mucosal inflammation of IBDs and can be replaced for ELISA. Practical application of this assay system enables us to use FC measurement more widely in clinical practice.

Comparison of methods for fecal microbiome biospecimen collection

Background

Effective means are needed to efficiently collect fecal samples for microbiome analysis in large-scale epidemiological studies. Using twenty-four fecal aliquots prepared from three healthy individuals, we compared the following four fecal sample collection methods for assessment of human gut microbiome: 1) fecal occult blood test cards, held at room temperature for three days, 2) Eppendorf tubes, at room temperature for three days, 3) Eppendorf tubes with RNAlater, at room temperature, and 4) as controls, samples immediately frozen at −80°C. The 24 samples were assayed by 16S rRNA gene sequencing to compare overall microbiome structure and taxon distributions according to collection method.

Results

Storing fecal occult blood test card samples at room temperature for three days did not affect total DNA purity and relative 16S rRNA bacterial gene contents, compared with fresh frozen collection. Overall microbiome structure, based on phylogenetic UniFrac index, differed significantly by subject (p = 0.001), but microbiome structure (p = 0.497) and relative abundance of major microbial taxa (phyla) (p > 0.05) did not differ significantly by collection method.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that low-cost fecal occult blood test card collection may be a feasible means of sample collection for fecal microbiome assessment in large-scale population-based studies.

Colorectal cancer screening in an equal access healthcare system

INTRODUCTION

The military health system (MHS) a unique setting to analyze implementation programs as well as outcomes for colorectal cancer (CRC). Here we look at the efficacy of different CRC screening methods, attributes and results within the MHS, and current barriers to increase compliance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search was conducted utilizing PubMed and the Cochrane library. Key-word combinations included colorectal cancer screening, racial disparity, risk factors, colorectal cancer, screening modalities, and randomized control trials. Directed searches were also performed of embedded references.

RESULTS

Despite screening guidelines from several national organizations, extensive barriers to widespread screening remain, especially for minority populations. These barriers are diverse, ranging from education and access problems to personal beliefs. Screening rates in MHS have been reported to be generally higher at 71% compared to national averages of 50-65%.

CONCLUSION

CRC screening can be highly effective at improving detection of both pre-malignant and early cancers. Improved patient education and directed efforts are needed to improve CRC screening both nationally and within the MHS.

Screening for colorectal cancer: what fits best?

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening has been shown to be effective in reducing CRC incidence and mortality. There are currently a number of screening modalities available for implementation into a population-based CRC screening program. Each screening method offers different strengths but also possesses its own limitations as a population-based screening strategy. We review the current evidence base for accepted CRC screening tools and evaluate their merits alongside their challenges in fulfilling their role in the detection of CRC. We also aim to provide an outlook on the demands of a low-risk population-based CRC screening program with a view to providing insight as to which modality would best suit current and future needs.

Immunochemical faecal occult blood tests have superior stability and analytical performance characteristics over guaiac-based tests in a controlled in vitro study

Aims

The aims of this study were (1) to determine the measurement accuracy of a widely used guaiac faecal occult blood test (gFOBT) compared with an immunochemical faecal occult blood test (iFOBT) during in vitro studies, including their analytical stability over time at ambient temperature and at 4°C; and (2) to compare analytical imprecision and other characteristics between two commercially available iFOBT methods.

Methods

Faecal specimens from healthy volunteers negative for occult blood were spiked with red cell lysate to give concentrations of 0 (A), 2.5 (B) and 4.5 (C) mg Hb/g faeces respectively. Samples from each pool were then tested by nine blinded assessors in order to determine the measurement accuracy. Sample stability for the gFOBT at ambient temperature (18°C) was determined by repeating the gFOBT analysis on faecal samples (A, B and C) consecutively for 7 days. Stability for the iFOBT was tested on spiked faecal samples stored at 4°C and also at ambient temperature (18°C). Testing for other analytical performance characteristics including sample carryover and imprecision was performed for both iFOBT methods.

Results

Nine blinded assessors using gFOBT achieved correct readings for eight of nine samples from Pool A, five of nine from Pool B and seven of nine from Pool C. Overall, the sensitivity and specificity of gFOBT were 67% and 89% respectively. No discrepant results were detected with iFOBT. Faecal samples applied to gFOBT cards immediately postcollection gave positive results for the next 7 days only for pool C. In contrast, the results of iFOBT remained stable up to 14 days at 18°C. The within-run imprecision and sample carryover showed robust results with both iFOBT methods.

Conclusions

The superior analytical stability and measurement accuracy demonstrated by the iFOBT in this in vitro study confers advantages over traditional qualitative gFOBTs and supports their suitability for more widespread use in population-based colorectal-cancer screening programmes.

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

OBJECTIVES

There is controversy regarding the sensitivity of fecal occult blood tests (FOBT) for detecting colorectal cancer. Many of the published studies failed to correct for verification bias which may have increased the sensitivity.

METHODS

A meta-analysis of published studies evaluating the sensitivity and specificity of chemical-based FOBT for colorectal cancer was performed. Studies were included if both cancer and control subjects underwent confirmatory testing. We also included studies that attempted to correct for verification bias by either performing colonoscopy on all subjects regardless of the FOBT result or by using longitudinal follow-up. We then compared the sensitivity, specificity, and other diagnostic characteristics of the studies that attempted to correct for verification (n=10) vs. those that did not correct for this bias (n=19).

RESULTS

The pooled sensitivity of guaiac-based FOBT for colorectal cancer of studies without verification bias was significantly lower than those studies with this bias [0.36 (95% CI 0.25-0.47) vs. 0.70 (95% CI 0.60-0.80), p=0.001]. The pooled specificity of the studies without verification bias was higher [0.96 (95% CI 0.94-0.97) vs. 0.88 (95% CI 0.84-0.91), p<0.005]. There was no significant difference in the area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curves. More sensitive chemical-based FOBT methods (e.g., Hemoccult® SENSA®) had a higher sensitivity but a lower specificity than standard guaiac methods.

CONCLUSIONS

The sensitivity of guaiac-based FOBT for colorectal cancer has been overestimated as a result of verification bias. This test may not be sensitive enough to serve as an effective screening option for colorectal cancer.

Comparison of guaiac-based and quantitative immunochemical fecal occult blood testing in a population at average risk undergoing colorectal cancer screening

OBJECTIVES

Although some studies have shown that the quantitative, immunochemical fecal occult blood test (FOBT) (qFIT) has better performance characteristics than the standard guaiac-based FOBT (GT) for identifying advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACRN), there is limited information on test performance of these tests in average-risk populations.

METHODS

Seven hundred seventy consecutive average-risk patients from four centers who were undergoing screening colonoscopy also provided stool samples. Stool specimens from three consecutive bowel movements were applied to a hemoccult II test card (Beckman Coulter, Fullerton, CA) and OC-SENSA MICRO (Eiken Chemical, Tokyo, Japan) sampling probes at the same time. We measured the diagnostic value of the qFIT for detecting an ACRN by using three criteria: sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios. A receiver operating characteristic curve for determining the qFIT cutoff values and the number of tests that best discriminated between ACRNs and other findings were determined.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight ACRNs were identified during colonoscopy. At all hemoglobin thresholds, the sensitivity of the qFIT was higher than that of the GT for cancer or ACRN. The sensitivity and specificity of the GT for detecting advanced adenomas, cancer, and ACRNs were 13.6%/92.4%, 30.8%/92.4%, and 16.7%/92.9%, respectively. Using the 100 ng/ml cut point and three-sample qFIT results, the sensitivity and specificity of the qFIT for detecting advanced adenomas, cancer, and ACRNs were 33.9%/90.6%, 84.6%/89.8%, and 43.7%/91.9%, respectively. The area under the curve for cancer indicated that using either 2 or 3 tests provided the best discrimination for cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

The qFIT provides a higher sensitivity for detecting ACRN and cancer than the GT, and has an acceptable specificity that significantly reduces the need for colonoscopic evaluation in the screened population.

Prevalence of significant neoplasia in FOBT-positive patients on warfarin compared with those not on warfarin

OBJECTIVES

The fecal occult blood test (FOBT) is widely used for colorectal cancer screening. However, the impact of warfarin use on FOBT sensitivity and specificity remains unclear. This study compares the relative risk of neoplasia in FOBT-positive patients stratified by warfarin use.

METHODS

The Clinical Outcomes Research Initiative database was used to identify patients with positive FOBT as the only indication for colonoscopy during 2005-2006. Patients were categorized on the basis of documented warfarin status within a 30-day period before FOBT. We compared the demographics and prevalence of significant colon findings (defined as polyp >9 mm or suspected malignant tumor) among the two groups. After adjusting for confounding variables, logistic regression was used to estimate the odds ratio of significant findings in warfarin-positive vs. warfarin-negative patients.

RESULTS

Of 10,266 patients with positive FOBT, 372 used warfarin, 9,265 did not use warfarin, and 629 were excluded because of missing warfarin status. Warfarin-positive patients were more likely male (65 vs. 50%; P<0.0001), Caucasian (88 vs. 80%; P<0.0001), and veterans (53 vs. 33%; P<0.0001). The prevalence of a significant finding was greater in the warfarin group, 16 vs. 11.4% (P<0.01). After adjusting for age and sex, the relative risk of significant colon findings among warfarin-positive patients was not significantly different from warfarin-negative patients (odds ratio 1.1, 95% confidence interval: 0.81-1.44).

CONCLUSIONS

No increased risk for significant colonic findings among FOBT-positive patients according to warfarin use was identified. These findings suggest that continuing warfarin before FOBT will not affect the positive predictive value of this screening test.

Prediction of flare-ups of ulcerative colitis using quantitative immunochemical fecal occult blood test

AIM: To examine the feasibility of predicting the flare-up of ulcerative colitis (UC) before symptoms emerge using the immunochemical fecal occult blood test (I-FOBT).

METHODS: We prospectively measured fecal hemoglobin concentrations in 78 UC patients using the I-FOBT every 1 or 2 mo.

RESULTS: During a 20 mo-period, 823 fecal samples from 78 patients were submitted. The median concentration of fecal hemoglobin was 41 ng/mL (range: 0-392 500 ng/mL). There were three types of patients with regard to the correlation between I-FOBT and patient symptoms; the synchronous transition type with symptoms (44 patients), the unrelated type with symptoms (19 patients), and the flare-up predictive type (15 patients). In patients with the flare-up predictive type, the values of I-FOBT were generally low during the study period with stable symptoms. Two to four weeks before the flare-up of symptoms, the I-FOBT values were high. Thus, in these patients, I-FOBT could predict the flare-up before symptoms emerged.

CONCLUSION: Flare-up could be predicted by I-FOBT in approximately 20% of UC patients. These results warrant periodical I-FOBT in UC patients.

Colonoscopy-controlled intra-individual comparisons to screen relevant neoplasia: faecal immunochemical test vs. guaiac-based faecal occult blood test

BACKGROUND

Guaiac-based faecal occult blood tests (g-FOBTs) are most commonly used in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes. Faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) are thought to be superior.

AIM

To compare performance of a g-FOBT and a quantitative FIT for detection of CRCs and advanced adenomas in a colonoscopy-controlled population.

METHODS

We assessed sensitivity and specificity of both FIT (OC-sensor) and g-FOBT (Hemoccult-II) prior to patients' scheduled colonoscopies.

RESULTS

Of the 62 invasive cancers detected in 1821 individuals, g-FOBT was positive in 46 and FIT in 54 (74.2% vs. 87.1%, P = 0.02). Among 194 patients with advanced adenomas, g-FOBT was positive in 35 and FIT in 69 (18.0% vs. 35.6%, P < 0.001). Sensitivity for screen relevant tumours (197 advanced adenomas and 28 stage I or II cancers) was 23.0% for g-FOBT and 40.5% for FIT (P < 0.001). Specificity of g-FOBT compared to FIT for the detection of cancer was 95.7% vs. 91.0%, P < 0.001) and for advanced adenomas (97.4% vs. 94.2%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Faecal immunochemical test is more sensitive for CRC and advanced adenomas. Sensitivity of FIT for screen relevant tumours, early-stage cancers and advanced adenomas, is significantly higher. Specificity of g-FOBT is higher compared with FIT.

[Chemical or immunological tests for the detection of fecal occult blood in colorectal cancer screening?]

Colorectal cancer (CRC) can be prevented by screening programs in the population at average risk (men and women aged between 50 and 74 years) and at high risk (first degree relatives, CRC hereditary syndromes and chronic inflammatory bowel disease). Early CRC (with submucosal invasion) and advanced adenomas (size > or =10mm, with severe dysplasia or >20% villous component) produce intermittent microscopic blood losses that can be detected through chemical and immunological testing for fecal occult blood (C-FOBT and I-FOBT). Among the screening strategies in the population at average risk, annual or biannual fecal occult blood testing is the most widely used due to its non-invasiveness and low cost. Four randomized clinical trials have shown that annual or biannual screening with guaiac-based tests (C-FOBT) reduces overall mortality due to CRC by 16% and CRC incidence by 20% and 17% respectively. However, these tests have major drawbacks, especially their low sensitivity in detecting early CRC and advanced adenoma, their lack of specificity in detecting human hemoglobin (Hb), and their high fecal Hb detection threshold (>300microgHb/gfeces). In the last few years, major developments have occurred in immunological tests (I-FOBT), based on an antigen-antibody reaction that specifically detects human Hb, and these tests are currently available as an alternative to C-FOBT. Their main advantages are as follows: firstly, I-FOBT specifically detect human Hb in stools and at much lower levels (40-300microgHb/gfeces) than C-FOBT; secondly, automated analysis avoids subjectivity in reading qualitative tests and allows large population groups to be studied in a short time, making I-FOBT ideal for population-based screening; thirdly, I-FOBT fairly accurately selects individuals for colonoscopy so that approximately half of patients with an I-FOBT test show clinically significant colorectal neoplasia (advanced adenoma or invasive CRC); fourthly, the cut-off point for fecal Hb detection can be modified, depending on the availability of endoscopic resources; fifthly, when cut-off points for fecal Hb of 50-150microgHb/gfeces are used, more than twice the number of CRC and advanced adenomas are detected than with C-FOBT, with a reasonable false-positive rate; and sixthly, I-FOBT are better accepted by the population due to their simplicity and ease of use, increasing participation in screening programs. For all these reasons, the current recommendation is that the new quantitative I-FOBT tests replace C-FOBT tests when the strategy of population-based screening through annual or biannual fecal occult blood testing is considered.

Random comparison of guaiac and immunochemical fecal occult blood tests for colorectal cancer in a screening population

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Despite poor performance, guaiac-based fecal occult blood tests (G-FOBT) are most frequently implemented for colorectal cancer screening. Immunochemical fecal occult blood tests (I-FOBT) are claimed to perform better, without randomized comparison in screening populations. Our aim was to randomly compare G-FOBT with I-FOBT in a screening population.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based study on a random sample of 20,623 individuals 50-75 years of age, randomized to either G-FOBT (Hemoccult-II) or I-FOBT (OC-Sensor). Tests and invitations were sent together. For I-FOBT, the standard cutoff of 100 ng/ml was used. Positive FOBTs were verified with colonoscopy. Advanced adenomas were defined as >or=10 mm, high-grade dysplasia, or >or=20% villous component.

RESULTS

There were 10,993 tests returned: 4836 (46.9%) G-FOBTs and 6157 (59.6%) I-FOBTs. The participation rate difference was 12.7% (P < .01). Of G-FOBTs, 117 (2.4%) were positive versus 339 (5.5%) of I-FOBTs. The positivity rate difference was 3.1% (P < .01). Cancer and advanced adenomas were found, respectively, in 11 and 48 of G-FOBTs and in 24 and 121 of I-FOBTs. Differences in positive predictive value for cancer and advanced adenomas and cancer were, respectively, 2.1% (P = .4) and -3.6% (P = .5). Differences in specificities favor G-FOBT and were, respectively, 2.3% (P < .01) and -1.3% (P < .01). Differences in intention-to-screen detection rates favor I-FOBT and were, respectively, 0.1% (P < .05) and 0.9% (P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

The number-to-scope to find 1 cancer was comparable between the tests. However, participation and detection rates for advanced adenomas and cancer were significantly higher for I-FOBT. G-FOBT significantly underestimates the prevalence of advanced adenomas and cancer in the screening population compared with I-FOBT.

Screening for Colorectal Neoplasms With New Fecal Occult Blood Tests: Update on Performance Characteristics

BACKGROUND

One type of fecal occult blood test (FOBT), the unrehydrated guaiac fecal occult blood test (GT), is recommended by the United States Preventive Services Task Force and the Institute of Medicine for use in screening programs, but it has relatively low sensitivity as a single test for detecting advanced colonic neoplasms (cancer and adenomatous polyps > or = 1 cm in diameter). Thus, improving the sensitivity of FOBT should make colon cancer screening programs that use these tests more effective.

METHODS

We assessed prospectively the performance characteristics of two newer FOBTs in 5841 subjects at average risk for colorectal cancer in a large group-model managed care organization. The tests evaluated included a sensitive GT, a fecal immunochemical test (FIT), and the combination of both tests. Patients with positive and negative test results were advised to have colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy, respectively. Sensitivity and specificity for detecting advanced neoplasms in the left colon within 2 years after the FOBT screening were evaluated for the two tests administered separately and in combination.

RESULTS

A total of 139 patients were diagnosed with advanced colorectal neoplasms (n = 14 cancers, n = 128 adenomas) within the 2 years following their initial FOBT screening. Sensitivity for detecting cancer was 81.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 47.8% to 96.8%) for the FIT alone and 64.3% (95% CI = 35.6% to 86.0%) for the sensitive GT and the combination test. Sensitivity for detecting advanced colorectal adenomas was 41.3% (95% CI = 32.7% to 50.4%) for the sensitive GT, 29.5% (95% CI = 21.4% to 38.9%) for the FIT, and 22.8% (95% CI =16.1% to 31.3%) for the combination test. Specificity for detecting cancer and adenomas was 98.1% (95% CI = 97.7% to 98.4%) and 98.4% (95% CI = 98.0% to 98.7%), respectively, for the combination test; 96.9% (95% CI = 96.4% to 97.4%) and 97.3% (95% CI = 96.8% to 97.7%), respectively, for the FIT; and 90.1% (95% CI = 89.3% to 90.8%) and 90.6% (95% CI = 89.8% to 91.4%), respectively, for the sensitive GT.

CONCLUSIONS

The FIT has high sensitivity and specificity for detecting left-sided colorectal cancer, and it may be a useful replacement for the GT.

Guaiac versus immunochemical tests: faecal occult blood test screening for colorectal cancer in a rural community

OBJECTIVE

To describe patient participation and clinical performance in a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program utilising faecal occult blood test (FOBT).

METHODS

A community-based intervention was conducted in a small, rural community in north Queensland, 2000/01. One of two FOBT kits--guaiac (Hemoccult-II) or immunochemical (!nform)--was assigned by general practice and mailed to participants (3,358 patients aged 50-74 years listed with the local practices).

RESULTS

Overall participation in FOBT screening was 36.3%. Participation was higher with the immunochemical kit than the guaiac kit (OR=1.9, 95% CI 1.6-2.2). Women were more likely to comply with testing than men (OR=1.4, 95% CI 1.2-1.7), and people in their 60s were less likely to participate than those 70-74 years (OR=0.8, 95% CI 0.6-0.9). The positivity rate was higher for the immunochemical (9.5%) than the guaiac (3.9%) test (chi2=9.2, p=0.002), with positive predictive values for cancer or adenoma of advanced pathology of 37.8% (95% CI 28.1-48.6) for !nform and 40.0% (95% CI 16.8-68.7) for Hemoccult-II. Colonoscopy follow-up was 94.8% with a medical complication rate of 2-3%.

CONCLUSIONS

An immunochemical FOBT enhanced participation. Higher positivity rates for this kit did not translate into higher false-positive rates, and both test types resulted in a high yield of neoplasia.

IMPLICATIONS

In addition to type of FOBT, the ultimate success of a population-based screening program for CRC using FOBT will depend on appropriate education of health professionals and the public as well as significant investment in medical infrastructure for colonoscopy follow-up.

A quantitative immunochemical faecal occult blood test is more efficient for detecting significant colorectal neoplasia than a sensitive guaiac test

BACKGROUND

The sensitive guaiac faecal occult blood test, Haemoccult SENSA (HOS; Beckman Coulter, Fullerton, CA, USA), is our standard screening test for significant colorectal neoplasia. We evaluated an automatically-developed, quantified human haemoglobin immunochemical faecal test, OC-MICRO (Eiken Chemical Co., Tokyo, Japan), to improve test specificity and so reduce the colonoscopy burden.

AIM

To compare guaiac faecal occult blood test and immunochemical faecal test diagnostic efficacy and costs for identifying significant neoplasia.

METHODS

Colonoscopies were performed on patients who prepared three daily guaiac faecal occult blood tests with or without immunochemical faecal tests.

RESULTS

Total colonoscopy was performed on 151 subjects who prepared both guaiac and immunochemical faecal tests (group 1) and the positive predictive values (PPV) were also compared to those of 162 subjects undergoing colonoscopy for positive guaiac faecal occult blood tests (group 2). In group 1, comparative sensitivity, specificity, and PPVs for significant neoplasia with guaiac faecal occult blood test were 75%, 34%, and 12% (PPV, 18% for group 2) and with immunochemical faecal test were 75%, 94% and 60% (P < 0.01 for specificity). The number of colonoscopy examinations needed to detect a significant neoplasm because of positive faecal occult blood tests was six to eight with HOS and two with OC-MICRO at 21-31% the cost of evaluating a positive guaiac faecal occult blood test.

CONCLUSION

An immunochemical faecal test maintains the high sensitivity of guaiac faecal occult blood test, but significantly reduces the colonoscopy burden and screening costs.

Comparative evaluation of a new bedside faecal occult blood test in a prospective multicentre study

BACKGROUND

Faecal occult blood testing is an established method of colorectal neoplasia screening. Guaiac-based tests are limited by poor patient compliance, low sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value. Newer immunochemical-based tests, accurate but tedious, require a well-established laboratory set up. There is need for simpler immunochemical tests that can be performed at the out-patient clinic.

AIM

To compare the performance characteristics of a new bedside immunological test strip device with a sensitive Guaiac-based and established immunochemical test for detection of faecal occult blood in patients undergoing colonoscopy.

METHODS

A total of 389 consecutive patients from four centres who were referred for colonoscopy also provided the stool samples for detection of occult blood without dietary restrictions. Stool tests performed were (i) Guaiac-based, (ii) immunochemical enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and (iii) bedside immunochemical strip test.

RESULTS

At the optimal threshold level, the sensitivity and specificity of the beside immunochemical strip test for detection of significant colorectal neoplasia (adenomas >1.0 cm and carcinomas) were 60% and 95%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This bedside immunochemical strip test proved to be a simple, convenient, non-cumbersome and accurate tool with similar performance characteristics for detection of any bleeding lesion including colorectal neoplasia when compared with an established immunochemical faecal occult blood test.

Positive predictive value of fecal occult blood testing in persons taking warfarin

BACKGROUND

In clinical practice, some physicians discontinue warfarin prior to fecal occult blood testing (FOBT). Although anticoagulant use is associated with an increased risk of overt gastrointestinal bleeding, the impact of warfarin on the positive predictive value of FOBT is unknown.

METHODS

During a 5-yr period, we prospectively studied all patients taking warfarin who were referred for the evaluation of a positive FOBT. For each patient taking warfarin, we enrolled one age- and gender-matched control subject with a positive FOBT who was not taking anticoagulants. A detailed clinical history was obtained, and all subjects underwent colonoscopy and esophagogastroduodenoscopy.

RESULTS

Lesions consistent with occult bleeding were identified in 59.0% of the 210 patients in the warfarin group and 53.8% of the 210 control subjects (p= 0.27). Although more lesions were identified by colonoscopy in the warfarin group than in control subjects (36.2%vs 25.7%, p= 0.02), there was no difference in the frequency of lesions identified by esophagogastroduodenoscopy (35.2%vs 39.5%, p= 0.43). Overall, adenomas > or =1 cm in diameter (16.2%) and colorectal carcinoma (9.5%) were the most common lesions identified by colonoscopy, while erosive gastritis (15.5%) and erosive duodenitis (11.0%) were the most frequent lesions found by esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Among individuals with colorectal cancer, 83.3% of patients in the warfarin group had early cancers (Dukes' stage A or B) compared with 50.0% of control subjects (p= 0.046).

CONCLUSIONS

Warfarin use did not decrease the positive predictive value of FOBT. These findings suggest that warfarin should not be discontinued prior to FOBT.

A prospective study of a new immunochemical fecal occult blood test in Korean patients referred for colonoscopy

OBJECTIVES

The exquisite performance characteristics of an immunochemical fecal occult blood test (IFOBT) are well understood. We evaluated the diagnostic validity of a new IFOBT for colorectal neoplasia in patients undergoing colonoscopy and compared its results with two other commercially available IFOBTs.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Eighty-five consecutive patients referred for colonoscopy were studied. We performed three different IFOBTs, namely, HM-Jack, Instant-View, and a newly developed OcculTech on each fecal specimen.

RESULTS

OcculTech was easy to perform and had a sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value of 58.3%, 76.3%, and 27.9%, respectively, for the detection of colorectal cancers and >or=1 cm adenomas. OcculTech showed higher sensitivity than the automatic analyzer, HM-Jack. No improvement was obtained by combining tests.

CONCLUSIONS

The OcculTech test had performance characteristics comparable to the two other IFOBTs. This study confirms the usefulness of the OcculTech test for colorectal neoplasia screening.

Screening for colorectal cancer using the faecal occult blood test: a critical literature review

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major health problem whose outcome is crucially dependent on the stage of disease at the time of diagnosis. Consequently, early detection of CRC by mass population screening is the subject of much international research and debate. A critical literature review was undertaken to determine the effectiveness of faecal occult blood (FOB) testing in CRC screening. Four issues were addressed: an appraisal of available FOB tests, their impact on CRC mortality, the appropriate screening interval and the factors influencing public compliance with FOB screening. A computerized literature search was conducted, supplemented by cross-referencing and hand searching. Forty studies which fulfilled pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria were appraised. A thorough assessment of methodology, combined with an applied hierarchy of evidence, resulted in the selection of 22 studies for review. The evidence from this review is that no single (currently used) FOB test provides optimal screening performance, that biennial FOB screening reduces CRC mortality by between 6-18%, that there is a small advantage in annual screening and that better dissemination of information can improve compliance rates. An appreciation of the current evidence and issues surrounding CRC screening is important to nurses in their capacity as health promoters and educators. Definitive answers to many important questions regarding FOB screening for CRC do not currently exist. Before the concept of a national screening programme could be supported, further research is needed, the key elements of which must include the assessment of more sensitive and specific FOB tests and the promotion of population compliance.

Colonic screening and surveillance

Screening for colorectal cancer has not obtained worldwide acceptance in spite of its proven survival benefit for average-risk persons and some high-risk groups. The incidence of and mortality from colorectal cancer are worrying in Europe as well as in the USA, Australia and Japan. The best evidence-based studies are those published on screening using faecal occult blood tests, endoscopic methods and different tumour markers having been evaluated to a lesser degree. Feasibility studies are necessary before massive screening can be undertaken because the results obtained from randomized studies may not be reproduced to a satisfactory degree in average- as well as high-risk populations. Primary prevention by dietary intervention and drugs has been studied in great detail, so far without any major breakthrough. This chapter will address different screening methods in populations with a varying risk of colorectal cancer, together with providing a short review of prevention and intervention strategies.