A comparison of the faecal haemoglobin concentrations and diagnostic accuracy in patients suspected with colorectal cancer and serious bowel disease as reported on four different faecal immunochemical test systems

Comparison and commutability study among four faecal immunochemical tests (FIT) systems

OBJECTIVES

Faecal immunochemical tests for haemoglobin (FIT) are used in colorectal cancer screening programs around the world and increasingly for triage of symptomatic patients. FIT results are currently not traceable to a common reference standard and results obtained on various FIT systems may not be equivalent. The size of the bias between the systems is difficult to quantify due to the complex pre-analytical aspects of FIT.

METHODS

This study aimed to quantify the bias and the correlation between four FIT systems by measuring a panel of 38 faecal samples while limiting the effect of the pre-analytical aspects. In addition, the commutability of seven candidate reference materials (RM) was assessed.

RESULTS

Pairwise method comparisons based on faecal samples demonstrated Pearson correlation coefficients ranging between 0.944 and 0.970 and an average proportional bias of -30 to -35 % for one FIT system compared to the other three. The relative standard deviation among biases of the individual samples was around 20 %. Due to these sample specific differences, no decisive conclusions could be drawn in the commutability study. However, two candidate RMs, prepared in the FIT system-specific storage/extraction buffers, had a better commutable profile than the other five.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a common threshold for all FIT systems is currently not possible due to the presence of a proportional bias. We have identified potential commutable RMs to take to further studies on the production of a common calibrator, with the aim being to reduce the analytical bias observed on different FIT systems.

Improved use of faecal immunochemical tests for haemoglobin in the Scottish bowel screening programme

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to develop a risk-scoring model in the Scottish Bowel Screening Programme incorporating faecal haemoglobin concentration with other risk factors for colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Data were collected for all individuals invited to participate in the Scottish Bowel Screening Programme between November 2017 and March 2018 including faecal haemoglobin concentration, age, sex, National Health Service Board, socioeconomic status, and screening history. Linkage with The Scottish Cancer Registry identified all screening participants diagnosed with colorectal cancer. Logistic regression was performed to identify which factors demonstrated significant association with colorectal cancer and could be used in the development of a risk-scoring model.

RESULTS

Of 232,076 screening participants, 427 had colorectal cancer: 286 diagnosed following a screening colonoscopy and 141 arising after a negative screening test result giving an interval cancer proportion of 33.0%. Only faecal haemoglobin concentration and age showed a statistically significant association with colorectal cancer. Interval cancer proportion increased with age and was higher in women (38.1%) than men (27.5%). If positivity in women were mirrored in men at each age quintile interval cancer proportion would still have remained higher in women (33.2%). Moreover, an additional 1201 colonoscopies would be required to detect 11 colorectal cancers.

CONCLUSIONS

Development of a risk scoring model using early data from the Scottish Bowel Screening Programme was not feasible due to most variables showing insignificant association with colorectal cancer. Tailoring the faecal haemoglobin concentration threshold according to age could help to diminish some of the disparity in interval cancer proportion between women and men. Strategies to achieve sex equality using faecal haemoglobin concentration thresholds depend considerably on which variable is selected for equivalency and this requires further exploration.

Faecal haemoglobin: Measurement, applications, and future potential

Faecal hemoglobin concentrations (f-Hb) can be quantitated using faecal immunochemical test for haemoglobin (FIT) analytical systems. FIT are of proven value and widely used in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Several factors affect f-Hb including sex, age, deprivation, geographical region, and FIT system. Thus, FIT data may not be transferable. Women are disadvantaged in programmes using a single f-Hb threshold for all participants, but risk scoring or sex stratified thresholds could be used to minimise this problem. In addition, low but detectable f-Hb, below the threshold, implies future risk of CRC. In several countries, where colonoscopy resources are constrained, FIT are now accepted as of added value in assessment of patients presenting in primary or secondary care with symptoms, although some serious colorectal disease is missed. Elevated f-Hb in the absence of any discernible colorectal lesions is common and has been found in several diseases with a systemic inflammatory component, including circulatory, respiratory, digestive, neuropsychological, blood and endocrine diseases, and others. There is growing evidence for the value of f-Hb in post-polypectomy surveillance, potentially saving costs and colonoscopy. There may be a role for FIT systems which have lower limits of detection than currently available methods. The faecal material remaining in FIT specimen collection devices could be used for further studies, including assessment of the microbiome. The estimation of f-Hb is now a mature investigative tool but further research will undoubtedly expand applications of value.

The performance of FIT-based and other risk prediction models for colorectal neoplasia in symptomatic patients: a systematic review

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality are increasing internationally. Endoscopy services are under significant pressure with many overwhelmed. Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) has been advocated to identify a high-risk population of symptomatic patients requiring definitive investigation by colonoscopy. Combining FIT with other factors in a risk prediction model could further improve performance in identifying those requiring investigation most urgently. We systematically reviewed performance of models predicting risk of CRC and/or advanced colorectal polyps (ACP) in symptomatic patients, with a particular focus on those models including FIT.

Methods

The review protocol was published on PROSPERO (CRD42022314710). Searches were conducted from database inception to April 2023 in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane libraries, SCOPUS and CINAHL. Risk of bias of each study was assessed using The Prediction study Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool. A narrative synthesis based on the guidelines for Synthesis Without Meta-Analysis was performed due to study heterogeneity.

Findings

We included 62 studies; 23 included FIT (n = 22) or guaiac Faecal Occult Blood Testing (n = 1) combined with one or more other variables. Twenty-one studies were conducted solely in primary care. Generally, prediction models including FIT consistently had good discriminatory ability for CRC/ACP (i.e. AUC >0.8) and performed better than models without FIT although some models without FIT also performed well. However, many studies did not present calibration and internal and external validation were limited. Two studies were rated as low risk of bias; neither model included FIT.

Interpretation

Risk prediction models, including and not including FIT, show promise for identifying those most at risk of colorectal neoplasia. Substantial limitations in evidence remain, including heterogeneity, high risk of bias, and lack of external validation. Further evaluation in studies adhering to gold standard methodology, in appropriate populations, is required before widespread adoption in clinical practice.

Funding

National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) [Health Technology Assessment Programme (HTA) Programme (Project number 133852).

Do faecal test-based colorectal cancer screening pilots provide data that are reflected in subsequent programmes? Evidence from interval cancer proportions

Objective

Guidelines on colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with guaiac faecal occult blood tests (gFOBTs) and faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) include the need for a pilot before a programme is introduced. Interval cancers (ICs), cancers arising after a negative screening test result but before the next scheduled invite, are important indicators of programme quality. Our aim was to compare IC in the gFOBT-based Scottish Bowel Screening Programme (SBoSP), a FIT-based pilot, and the FIT-based SBoSP, to assess if the pilot provided data that was reflected in the subsequent programme.

Design

The IC proportions (ICPs) data ([IC/(IC + screen detected CRC)] x 100) from the penultimate year of the gFOBT-based SBoSP, the 6-month pilot and the first year of the FIT-based SBoSP were compared. To ensure appropriate comparison, these data were only from the two pilot NHS Boards.

Results

For all participants, and females and males, the ICPs were very similar in the gFOBT-based SBoSP and the pilot. The faecal haemoglobin concentration (f-Hb) threshold for the pilot was set at ≥80 μg Hb/g faeces. However, in marked contrast, in the FIT-based SBoSP, at the same threshold, the ICPs were lower. In all three groups, the ICPs were higher in females than in males.

Conclusions

Data on variables in pilots, including ICP, can be informative, but only if variables such as FIT system are held consistent between pilot and programme. Lowering the f-Hb threshold for females to give the same ICP as males might be a strategy to minimise sex inequality.

Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) in patients with signs or symptoms of suspected colorectal cancer (CRC): a joint guideline from the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) and the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG)

Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) has a high sensitivity for the detection of colorectal cancer (CRC). In a symptomatic population FIT may identify those patients who require colorectal investigation with the highest priority. FIT offers considerable advantages over the use of symptoms alone, as an objective measure of risk with a vastly superior positive predictive value for CRC, while conversely identifying a truly low risk cohort of patients. The aim of this guideline was to provide a clear strategy for the use of FIT in the diagnostic pathway of people with signs or symptoms of a suspected diagnosis of CRC. The guideline was jointly developed by the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland/British Society of Gastroenterology, specifically by a 21-member multidisciplinary guideline development group (GDG). A systematic review of 13 535 publications was undertaken to develop 23 evidence and expert opinion-based recommendations for the triage of people with symptoms of a suspected CRC diagnosis in primary care. In order to achieve consensus among a broad group of key stakeholders, we completed an extended Delphi of the GDG, and also 61 other individuals across the UK and Ireland, including by members of the public, charities and primary and secondary care. Seventeen research recommendations were also prioritised to inform clinical management.