Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
A comparative effectiveness trial of two faecal immunochemical tests for haemoglobin (FIT). Assessment of test performance and adherence in a single round of a population-based screening programme for colorectal cancer.
Passamonti, Basilio; Malaspina, Morena; Fraser, Callum G; Tintori, Beatrice; Carlani, Angela; D'Angelo, Valentina; Galeazzi, Paola; Di Dato, Eugenio; Mariotti, Loretta; Bulletti, Simonetta; D'Amico, Maria Rosaria; Gustinucci, Daniela; Martinelli, Nadia; Spita, Nicoletta; Cesarini, Elena; Rubeca, Tiziana; Giaimo, Mariadonata; Segnan, Nereo; Senore, Carlo.
Afiliação
  • Passamonti B; Azienda USL Umbria 1 Perugia, Laboratorio Unico di Screening, Perugia, Italy.
  • Malaspina M; Azienda USL Umbria 1 Perugia, Laboratorio Unico di Screening, Perugia, Italy.
  • Fraser CG; Centre for Research into Cancer Prevention and Screening, University of Dundee School of Medicine, Dundee, UK.
  • Tintori B; Azienda USL Umbria 1 Perugia, Laboratorio Unico di Screening, Perugia, Italy.
  • Carlani A; Azienda USL Umbria 1 Perugia, Laboratorio Unico di Screening, Perugia, Italy.
  • D'Angelo V; Azienda USL Umbria 1 Perugia, Laboratorio Unico di Screening, Perugia, Italy.
  • Galeazzi P; Azienda USL Umbria 1 Perugia, Laboratorio Unico di Screening, Perugia, Italy.
  • Di Dato E; Azienda USL Umbria 1 Perugia, Laboratorio Unico di Screening, Perugia, Italy.
  • Mariotti L; Azienda USL Umbria 1 Perugia, Laboratorio Unico di Screening, Perugia, Italy.
  • Bulletti S; Azienda USL Umbria 1 Perugia, Laboratorio Unico di Screening, Perugia, Italy.
  • D'Amico MR; Azienda USL Umbria 1 Perugia, Laboratorio Unico di Screening, Perugia, Italy.
  • Gustinucci D; Azienda USL Umbria 1 Perugia, Laboratorio Unico di Screening, Perugia, Italy.
  • Martinelli N; Azienda USL Umbria 1 Perugia, Laboratorio Unico di Screening, Perugia, Italy.
  • Spita N; Azienda USL Umbria 1 Perugia, Laboratorio Unico di Screening, Perugia, Italy.
  • Cesarini E; Azienda USL Umbria 1 Perugia, Laboratorio Unico di Screening, Perugia, Italy.
  • Rubeca T; Laboratorio Regionale Prevenzione Oncologica ISPO-Istituto per lo Studio e la Prevenzione Oncologica, Firenze, Italy.
  • Giaimo M; Servizio Prevenzione, Sanità Veterinaria, Direzione Regionale Salute, Perugia, Italy.
  • Segnan N; Città della Salute e della Scienza University Hospital, SC Epidemiology, Screening, Cancer Registry, CPO, Turin, Italy.
  • Senore C; Città della Salute e della Scienza University Hospital, SC Epidemiology, Screening, Cancer Registry, CPO, Turin, Italy.
Gut ; 67(3): 485-496, 2018 03.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27974550
ABSTRACT

AIM:

To compare acceptability and diagnostic accuracy of a recently available faecal immunochemical test (FIT) system (HM-JACKarc) with the FIT routinely used in an established screening programme (OC-Sensor).

DESIGN:

Randomised controlled trial (ISRCTN20086618) within a population-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programme. Subjects eligible for invitation in the Umbria Region (Italy) programme were randomised (ratio 11) to be screened using one of the FIT systems.

RESULTS:

Screening uptake among the 48 888 invitees was the same for both systems among subjects invited in the first round and higher with OC-Sensor than with HM-JACKarc (relative risk (RR) 1.03; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.04) among those invited in subsequent rounds. Positivity rate (PR) was similar with OC-Sensor (6.5%) as with HM-JACKarc (6.2%) among subjects performing their first FIT screening and higher with OC-Sensor (5.6%, RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.40) than with HM-JACKarc (4.4%) among those screened in previous rounds. Positive predictive value (PPV) (OC-Sensor 25.9%, HM-JACKarc 25.6%) and detection rate (DR) (OC-Sensor 1.40%; HM-JACKarc 1.42%) for advanced neoplasia (AN CRC + advanced adenoma) were similar among subjects performing their first FIT screening. The differences in the AN PPV (OC-Sensor 20.3%, HM-JACKarc 22.6%) and DR (OC-Sensor 0.96%, HM-JACKarc 0.83%) among those screened in previous rounds were not statistically significant. The number needed to scope to detect one AN was 3.9 (95% CI 5.8 to 2.9) and 3.9 (95% CI 5.5 to 2.9) at first and 4.9 (95% CI 5.8 to 4.2) and 4.4 (95% CI 5.3 to 3.7) at subsequent screening, with OC-Sensor and HM-JACKarc, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS:

Our results suggest that acceptability and diagnostic performance of HM-JACKarc and of OC-Sensor systems are similar in a screening setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER ISRCTN20086618; Results.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Hemoglobinas / Neoplasias Colorretais / Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde / Detecção Precoce de Câncer / Fezes Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Prognostic_studies / Screening_studies Limite: Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: Gut Ano de publicação: 2018 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Itália

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Hemoglobinas / Neoplasias Colorretais / Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde / Detecção Precoce de Câncer / Fezes Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Prognostic_studies / Screening_studies Limite: Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: Gut Ano de publicação: 2018 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Itália