The association between organised colorectal cancer screening strategies and reduction of its related mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: To assess the long-term association between organised colorectal cancer (CRC) screening strategies and CRC-relate mortality. METHODS: We systematically reviewed studies on organised CRC screening through PubMed, Ovid Medline, Embase and Cochrane from the inception. We retrieved characteristics of organised CRC screening from included literature and matched mortality (over 50 years) of those areas from the International Agency for Research on Cancer in May 2023. The variations of mortality were reported via the age-standardised mortality ratio. A random-effects model was used to synthesis results. RESULTS: We summarised 58 organised CRC screening programmes and recorded > 2.7 million CRC-related deaths from 22 countries where rollout screening programmes were performed. The CRC screening strategy with faecal tests (guaiac faecal occult blood test (gFOBT) or faecal immunochemical tests (FIT)) or colonoscopy as the primary screening offer was associated with a 41.8% reduction in mortality, which was higher than those offered gFOBT (4.4%), FIT (16.7%), gFOBT or FIT (16.2%), and faecal tests (gFOBT or FIT) or flexible sigmoidoscopy (16.7%) as primary screening test. The longer duration of screening was associated with a higher reduction in the pooled age-standardised mortality ratio. In particular, the pooled age-standardised mortality ratio became non-significant when the screening of FIT was implemented for less than 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: A CRC screening programme running for > 5 years was associated with a reduction of CRC-related mortality. Countries with a heavy burden of CRC should implement sustainable, organised screening providing a choice between faecal tests and colonoscopy as a preferred primary test.

The Non-Invasive Prediction of Colorectal Neoplasia (NIPCON) Study 1995-2022: A Comparison of Guaiac-Based Fecal Occult Blood Test (FOBT) and an Anti-Adenoma Antibody, Adnab-9.

Given the need to improve the sensitivity of non-invasive methods to detect colorectal neoplasia, particularly adenomas, we compared a fecal test using a monoclonal antibody (Mab) raised against constituents of colonic adenomas designated Adnab-9 (Adenoma Antibody 9), recognizing an N-linked 87 kDa glycoprotein, to gFOBT, which is shown to reduce CRC mortality. p87 immunohistochemistry testing is significantly more sensitive (OR 3.64[CI 2.37-5.58]) than gFOBT (guaiac-based fecal occult blood test) for adenomas (<3 in number), advanced adenomas (OR 4.21[CI 2.47-7.15]), or a combination of the two (OR 3.35[CI 2.47-4.53]). p87 immunohistochemistry shows regional Paneth cell (PC) expression mainly in the right-sided colon and is significantly reduced in the ceca of African Americans (p < 0.0001). In a subset of patients, we obtained other body fluids such as urine, colonic effluent, and saliva. Urine tests (organ-specific neoantigen) showed a significant difference for advanced adenomas (p < 0.047). We conclude that fecal p87 testing is more sensitive than gFOBT and Adnab-9 and could be used to better direct the colonoscopy screening effort.

Colonoscopy-Related Adverse Events in Patients With Abnormal Stool-Based Tests: A Systematic Review of Literature and Meta-analysis of Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs based on the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and guaiac-based fecal occult blood (gFOBT) are associated with a substantial reduction in CRC incidence and mortality. We conducted a systematic review and comprehensive meta-analysis to evaluate colonoscopy-related adverse events in individuals with a positive FIT or gFOBT. METHODS: A systematic and detailed search was run in January 2021, with the assistance of a medical librarian for studies reporting on colonoscopy-related adverse events as part of organized CRC screening programs. Meta-analysis was performed using the random-effects model, and the results were expressed for pooled proportions along with relevant 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: A total of 771,730 colonoscopies were performed in patients undergoing CRC screening using either gFOBT or FIT across 31 studies. The overall pooled incidence of severe adverse events in the entire patient cohort was 0.42% (CI 0.20-0.64); I2 = 38.76%. In patients with abnormal gFOBT, the incidence was 0.2% (CI 0.1-0.3); I2 = 24.6%, and in patients with a positive FIT, it was 0.4% (CI 0.2-0.7); I2 = 48.89%. The overall pooled incidence of perforation, bleeding, and death was 0.13% (CI 0.09-0.21); I2 = 22.84%, 0.3% (CI 0.2-0.4); I2 = 35.58%, and 0.01% (CI 0.00-0.01); I2 = 33.21%, respectively. DISCUSSION: Our analysis shows that in colonoscopies performed after abnormal stool-based testing, the overall risk of severe adverse events, perforation, bleeding, and death is minimal.

Optimizing the Design of a Repeated Fecal Immunochemical Test Bowel Cancer Screening Programme With a Limited Endoscopy Capacity From a Health Economic Perspective.

OBJECTIVES: In 2016, it was announced that the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) would replace the guaiac fecal occult blood test in the UK Bowel Cancer Screening Programme. England has limited endoscopy capacity. This study informed decision making by determining the most cost-effective FIT screening strategy (age range, frequency, and FIT threshold) under a constrained endoscopy capacity. METHODS: An economic model with a colorectal cancer natural history component was used to model 60 221 screening strategies with first screening at age 50 to 60 years, screening interval of 1 to 6 years, 3+ screening episodes, and FIT integer threshold of 20 to 180 µg hemoglobin/g feces. Screening strategies requiring the same endoscopy capacity were compared to determine the characteristics of the most cost-effective strategies. RESULTS: With 50 000 annual screening referral colonoscopies, the 20 most cost-effective strategies had a starting age of 50 to 53 years, 2-yearly screening, 7 or 8 rounds of screening, and FIT threshold of 127 to 166. Compared with a 2-yearly screening interval, screening less frequently (3-, 4-, 5-, or 6-yearly) with a more sensitive FIT was less cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: The UK Bowel Cancer Screening Programme should use a 2-yearly FIT screening interval. When endoscopy capacity increases, the screening starting age should be reduced first followed by reducing the FIT threshold. These findings are relevant for other colorectal cancer screening programs with constrained endoscopy capacity.

Guaiac-based faecal occult blood tests versus faecal immunochemical tests for colorectal cancer screening in average-risk individuals.

BACKGROUND: Worldwide, many countries have adopted colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes, often based on faecal occult blood tests (FOBTs). CRC screening aims to detect advanced neoplasia (AN), which is defined as CRC or advanced adenomas. FOBTs fall into two categories based on detection technique and the detected blood component: qualitative guaiac-based FOBTs (gFOBTs) and faecal immunochemical tests (FITs), which can be qualitative and quantitative. Screening with gFOBTs reduces CRC-related mortality. OBJECTIVES: To compare the diagnostic test accuracy of gFOBT and FIT screening for detecting advanced colorectal neoplasia in average-risk individuals. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, BIOSIS Citation Index, Science Citation Index Expanded, and Google Scholar. We searched the reference lists and PubMed-related articles of included studies to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included prospective and retrospective studies that provided the number of true positives, false positives, false negatives, and true negatives for gFOBTs, FITs, or both, with colonoscopy as reference standard. We excluded case-control studies. We included studies in which all participants underwent both index test and reference standard ("reference standard: all"), and studies in which only participants with a positive index test underwent the reference standard while participants with a negative test were followed for at least one year for development of interval carcinomas ("reference standard: positive"). The target population consisted of asymptomatic, average-risk individuals undergoing CRC screening. The target conditions were CRC and advanced neoplasia (advanced adenomas and CRC combined). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened and selected studies for inclusion. In case of disagreement, a third review author made the final decision. We used the Rutter and Gatsonis hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic model to explore differences between tests and identify potential sources of heterogeneity, and the bivariate hierarchical model to estimate sensitivity and specificity at common thresholds: 10 µg haemoglobin (Hb)/g faeces and 20 µg Hb/g faeces. We performed indirect comparisons of the accuracy of the two tests and direct comparisons when both index tests were evaluated in the same population. MAIN RESULTS: We ran the initial search on 25 June 2019, which yielded 63 studies for inclusion. We ran a top-up search on 14 September 2021, which yielded one potentially eligible study, currently awaiting classification. We included a total of 33 "reference standard: all" published articles involving 104,640 participants. Six studies evaluated only gFOBTs, 23 studies evaluated only FITs, and four studies included both gFOBTs and FITs. The cut-off for positivity of FITs varied between 2.4 µg and 50 µg Hb/g faeces. For each Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS)-2 domain, we assessed risk of bias as high in less than 20% of studies. The summary curve showed that FITs had a higher discriminative ability than gFOBTs for AN (P < 0.001) and CRC (P = 0.004). For the detection of AN, the summary sensitivity of gFOBTs was 15% (95% confidence interval (CI) 12% to 20%), which was significantly lower than FITs at both 10 µg and 20 µg Hb/g cut-offs with summary sensitivities of 33% (95% CI 27% to 40%; P < 0.001) and 26% (95% CI 21% to 31%, P = 0.002), respectively. Results were simulated in a hypothetical cohort of 10,000 screening participants with 1% CRC prevalence and 10% AN prevalence. Out of 1000 participants with AN, gFOBTs missed 850, while FITs missed 670 (10 µg Hb/g cut-off) and 740 (20 µg Hb/g cut-off). No significant differences in summary specificity for AN detection were found between gFOBTs (94%; 95% CI 92% to 96%), and FITs at 10 µg Hb/g cut-off (93%; 95% CI 90% to 95%) and at 20 µg Hb/g cut-off (97%; 95% CI 95% to 98%). So, among 9000 participants without AN, 540 were offered (unnecessary) colonoscopy with gFOBTs compared to 630 (10 µg Hb/g) and 270 (20 µg Hb/g) with FITs. Similarly, for the detection of CRC, the summary sensitivity of gFOBTs, 39% (95% CI 25% to 55%), was significantly lower than FITs at 10 µg and 20 µg Hb/g cut-offs: 76% (95% CI 57% to 88%: P = 0.001) and 65% (95% CI 46% to 80%; P = 0.035), respectively. So, out of 100 participants with CRC, gFOBTs missed 61, and FITs missed 24 (10 µg Hb/g) and 35 (20 µg Hb/g). No significant differences in summary specificity for CRC were found between gFOBTs (94%; 95% CI 91% to 96%), and FITs at the 10 µg Hb/g cut-off (94%; 95% CI 87% to 97%) and 20 µg Hb/g cut-off (96%; 95% CI 91% to 98%). So, out of 9900 participants without CRC, 594 were offered (unnecessary) colonoscopy with gFOBTs versus 594 (10 µg Hb/g) and 396 (20 µg Hb/g) with FITs. In five studies that compared FITs and gFOBTs in the same population, FITs showed a higher discriminative ability for AN than gFOBTs (P = 0.003). We included a total of 30 "reference standard: positive" studies involving 3,664,934 participants. Of these, eight were gFOBT-only studies, 18 were FIT-only studies, and four studies combined both gFOBTs and FITs. The cut-off for positivity of FITs varied between 5 µg to 250 µg Hb/g faeces. For each QUADAS-2 domain, we assessed risk of bias as high in less than 20% of studies. The summary curve showed that FITs had a higher discriminative ability for detecting CRC than gFOBTs (P < 0.001). The summary sensitivity for CRC of gFOBTs, 59% (95% CI 55% to 64%), was significantly lower than FITs at the 10 µg Hb/g cut-off, 89% (95% CI 80% to 95%; P < 0.001) and the 20 µg Hb/g cut-off, 89% (95% CI 85% to 92%; P < 0.001). So, in the hypothetical cohort with 100 participants with CRC, gFOBTs missed 41, while FITs missed 11 (10 µg Hb/g) and 11 (20 µg Hb/g). The summary specificity of gFOBTs was 98% (95% CI 98% to 99%), which was higher than FITs at both 10 µg and 20 µg Hb/g cut-offs: 94% (95% CI 92% to 95%; P < 0.001) and 95% (95% CI 94% to 96%; P < 0.001), respectively. So, out of 9900 participants without CRC, 198 were offered (unnecessary) colonoscopy with gFOBTs compared to 594 (10 µg Hb/g) and 495 (20 µg Hb/g) with FITs. At a specificity of 90% and 95%, FITs had a higher sensitivity than gFOBTs. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: FITs are superior to gFOBTs in detecting AN and CRC in average-risk individuals. Specificity of both tests was similar in "reference standard: all" studies, whereas specificity was significantly higher for gFOBTs than FITs in "reference standard: positive" studies. However, at pre-specified specificities, the sensitivity of FITs was significantly higher than gFOBTs.

Incident colorectal cancer screening and associated healthcare resource utilization and Medicare cost among Medicare beneficiaries aged 66-75 years in 2016-2018.

BACKGROUND: While prevalence of up-to-date screening status is the usual reported statistic, annual screening incidence may better reflect current clinical practices and is more actionable. Our main purpose was to examine incident colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates in Medicare beneficiaries and to explore characteristics associated with CRC screening. METHODS: Using 20% Medicare random sample data, the study population included 2016-2018 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries covered by Parts A and B aged 66-75 years at average CRC risk. For each study year, we excluded individuals who had a Medicare claim for a colonoscopy within 9 years, flexible sigmoidoscopy within 4 years, and multitarget stool DNA test (mt-sDNA) within 2 years prior; therefore, any observed screening during study year was considered an "incident screening". Incident screening rates were calculated as number of incident screenings per 1000 Medicare beneficiaries. Overall rates were normalized to 2018 Medicare population distributions of age, sex, and race. RESULTS: Each year, > 1.4 million individuals met the inclusion/exclusion criteria from > 6.5 million Medicare beneficiaries. The overall adjusted incident CRC screening rate per 1000 Medicare beneficiaries increased from 85.2 in 2016 to 94.3 in 2018. Incident screening rates decreased 11.4% (22.9 to 20.3) for colonoscopy and 2.4% (58.3 to 56.9) for fecal immunochemical test/guaiac-based fecal occult blood test; they increased 201.5% (6.5 to 19.6) for mt-sDNA. The 2018 unadjusted rate was 76.0 for men and 110.4 for women. By race/ethnicity, the highest 2018 rate was for Asian individuals and the lowest rate was for Black individuals (113.4 and 72.8, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The 2016-2018 observed incident CRC screening rate in average-risk Medicare beneficiaries, while increasing, was still low. Our findings suggest more work is needed to improve CRC screening overall and, especially, among male and Black Medicare beneficiaries.

Transition to quantitative faecal immunochemical testing from guaiac faecal occult blood testing in a fully rolled-out population-based national bowel screening programme.

OBJECTIVE: Faecal immunochemical tests (FIT) are replacing guaiac faecal occult blood tests (FOBT) in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Data from the first year of FIT screening were compared with those from FOBT screening and assumptions based on a pilot evaluation of FIT. DESIGN: Data on uptake, positivity, positive predictive value (PPV) for CRC and higher-risk adenoma from participants in the first year of the FIT-based Scottish Bowel Screening Programme (n=919 665), with a threshold of 80 µg Hb/g faeces, were compared with those from the penultimate year of the FOBT-based programme (n=862 165) and those from the FIT evaluation (n=66 225). RESULTS: Overall, uptake of FIT was 63.9% compared with 56.4% for FOBT. Positivity was 3.1% and 2.2% with FIT and FOBT; increases were seen in both sexes, and across age range and deprivation. More CRC and adenomas were detected by FIT, but the PPV for CRC was less (5.2% with FIT and 6.4% with FOBT). However, for higher-risk adenoma, PPV was greater with FIT (24.3% with FIT and 19.3% with FOBT). In the previous FIT evaluation, uptake was 58.5% with FIT compared with 54.0% with FOBT; positivity was 2.5% with FIT and 2.0% with FOBT. CONCLUSION: Transition to FIT from FOBT produced higher uptake and positivity with lower PPV for CRC and higher PPV for adenoma. The FIT pilot evaluation underestimated uptake and positivity. Introducing FIT at the same threshold as the evaluation caused a 67.2% increase in colonoscopy demand instead of a predicted 10%.

Significant decrease in interval colorectal cancer incidence after implementing immunochemical testing in a multiple-round guaiac-based screening programme.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: We aimed to evaluate the effects of switching to faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) on the cumulative 2-year incidence rate of interval cancers, interval cancer rate and test sensitivity within a mature population-based colorectal cancer screening programme consisting of six rounds of biennial guaiac faecal occult blood testing (gFOBT). METHODS: The FIT results were compared with those of gFOBT used in each of the previous two rounds. For the three rounds analysed, 279,041 tests were performed by 156,186 individuals. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine interval cancer risk factors (Poisson regression) and to compare the sensitivity of FIT to gFOBT. RESULTS: There were 612 cases of screen-detected cancers and 209 cases of interval cancers. The sex- and age-adjusted cumulative 2-year incidence rates of interval cancers were 55.7 (95% CI, 45.3-68.5), 42.4 (95% CI, 32.6-55.2) and 15.8 (95% CI, 10.9-22.8) per 100,000 person-years after the last two rounds of gFOBT and FIT, respectively. The FIT/gFOBT incidence rate ratio was 0.38 [95% CI, 0.27-0.54] (P < 0.001). Sex- and age-adjusted sensitivity was significantly higher with FIT than with gFOBT (OR = 6.70 [95% CI, 4.48-10.01], P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: This population-based study revealed a dramatic decrease in the cumulative incidence rates of interval cancers after switching from gFOBT to FIT. These data provide an additional incentive for countries still using gFOBT to switch to FIT.

[Fecal occult blood test for colorectal cancer screening]. / Test de sangre oculta en deposiciones para programas de cribado de cáncer colorrectal: actualización.

Screening programs for colorectal cancer (CRC) are standard in most developed countries because they reduce mortality and are cost-effective. Within them, colonoscopy allows to directly visualize the colon and remove neoplastic lesions. However, it is an expensive exam with low adherence in asymptomatic individuals. The fecal occult blood test (FOBT) is a low-cost and risk-free method for the user, which results in a high rate of adherence, explaining its use in most screening programs. This article analyzes the effectiveness of different fecal occult blood tests in screening programs. The main conclusions are that the sensitivity of the guaiac-based chemical test for the detection of colorectal cancer is lower than that observed with qualitative and quantitative immunological tests. Automated quantitative methods allow objective readings independent of the operator and the reaction reading time, necessary for the analysis of large numbers of samples. The participation rate with immunological FOBTs is higher than with chemical ones, which is why they are preferred by the different countries that have screening programs. The use of quantitative tests allows stratification of symptomatic and asymptomatic patients at higher risk, in the screening programs.

[Colorectal carcinoma - How can we improve prevention?] / Kolonkarzinom.

Colorectal carcinoma - How can we improve prevention? Abstract. Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer-related death in Europe. Comprehensive screening is useful and cost-effective. However, participation in screening programs in Switzerland is low and falls below 20 %. Immunological stool tests (FIT tests) can - when carried out every two years - detect tumours and advanced adenomas, and thus reduce mortality. These tests have replaced older guaiac faecal tests (e. g. Hämoccult®). The detection and removal of small colon polyps is still only possible through colonoscopy, which is applied for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes and continues to be the gold standard for CRC screening. The decisive factors for screening are risk-adapted prevention with stratification of patients according to risk groups and the general optimization of risk factors. Educating the patient about the advantages and disadvantages of the various screening procedures and making a shared decision are necessary prerequisites for greater participation in screening programs.

Association between time to colonoscopy after a positive guaiac fecal test result and risk of colorectal cancer and advanced stage disease at diagnosis.

We evaluated time to colonoscopy after a positive guaiac-based fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) result and its association with the risk of overall colorectal cancer (CRC) and advanced-stage disease at diagnosis. We conducted a retrospective cohort study (2011-2013) within the Clalit Health Services, Israel. Participants were patients between 50 and 74 years old with a positive gFOBT result who had follow-up colonoscopies within 24 months. The exposure was time to colonoscopy, and the main outcome measure was a risk for overall and advanced CRC (defined as Stages III-IV). Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were adjusted for patient demographics and baseline risk factors. Of the 17,958 patients with positive gFOBT results (median age, 61 years [interquartile range, 56-67 years]; women, 52.2%), there were 685 cases of CRC and 156 cases of an advanced-stage disease diagnosed. The rate of cancer diagnosis at 0-3, 4-6, 7-9, 10-12 and 13-24 months was 3.9%, 2.5%, 3.5%, 4.2% and 7.3%, respectively (p < 0.001). Compared to colonoscopy follow-up within 0-3 months, risks for any CRC and advanced stage disease were higher for a follow-up of 12-24 months: OR, 1.97 (95% CI, 1.51-2.56) and 1.88 (95% CI, 1.43-2.46), respectively. For right-sided cancer (n = 194), an increased risk starts at 10 months, OR, 1.91 (95% CI 1.03-3.56). A result of 3-6 positive fields was significantly associated diagnosis of cancer (OR, 5.52; 95% CI, 4.71-6.46) and advanced stage disease (OR, 8.07; 95% CI, 5.74-11.36). Encouraging an early uptake of colonoscopy and targeting those with 10-24 months delay and a 3-6 positive fields is warranted.

Benefits of switching from guaiac-based faecal occult blood to faecal immunochemical testing: experience from the Wallonia-Brussels colorectal cancer screening programme.

BACKGROUND: Faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) have replaced guaiac-based faecal occult blood test (gFOBTs) in several colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes. We aimed to evaluate the benefits of this transition based on the Wallonia-Brussels-organised CRC screening programme. METHODS: A total of 1,569,868 individuals aged 50-74 years, who were invited to screening during 2009-2017, were studied by linking their screening records with insurance, pathology and cancer data in the Belgian Cancer Registry. We compared neoplasm detection rates and positive predictive values (PPVs) of gFOBT and FIT at 15 µg haemoglobin per gram cut-off in screen-naive individuals. We furthermore examined the incidence rates of interval cancer in gFOBT- and FIT-based screening programme. RESULTS: Advanced neoplasms were detected less frequently by gFOBT (0.8%) than by FIT (1.3%), with a difference of 0.5% (P < 0.01). PPVs were lower for gFOBT (15.1%) than for FIT (21.7%) for advanced neoplasms (difference 6.6%, P < 0.01). Compared to participants with negative gFOBT, those with negative FIT were 77% less likely to develop interval cancer (incidence rate ratio 0.23, 95% confidence interval 0.16-0.33). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated that in an organised CRC screening programme, replacing gFOBT with FIT improved neoplasm detection rate and substantially reduced interval cancer incidence.

Use of Fecal Occult Blood Testing as a Diagnostic Tool for Clinical Indications: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Fecal occult blood tests (FOBTs) are validated only for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, but are commonly used as a diagnostic test in other clinical settings. We performed a systematic review to assess performance characteristics of FOBT as a diagnostic test for clinical indications. METHODS: Bibliographic databases were searched to identify studies in adult patients with a specific gastrointestinal symptom or condition who underwent FOBT and a reference test and provided data on diagnoses. Our primary end point was sensitivity. Risk of bias was assessed with the QUADAS-2 tool. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies met the inclusion criteria: 12 in iron deficiency anemia (IDA) (5 fecal immunochemical (FIT) and 7 guaiac based), 8 in ulcerative colitis (FIT), and 2 in acute diarrhea (guaiac based). Only 2 studies had low risk of bias on all domains of the QUADAS-2. On meta-analysis, FOBT had a sensitivity of 0.58 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53-0.63) and a specificity of 0.84 (95% CI 0.75-0.89) in predicting presumptive causes of IDA at endoscopy, with comparable results for guaiac-based tests and FIT. Sensitivity was higher for CRC (0.83) than non-CRC lesions (0.54). FIT had a sensitivity of 0.72 (95% CI 0.57-0.84) and a specificity of 0.80 (95% CI 0.67-0.89) in predicting endoscopic activity in UC. Sensitivities of FOBT for positive stool culture in acute diarrhea were 0.38 and 0.87. DISCUSSION: Sensitivity of FOBT is poor for IDA: 42% of patients with identifiable causes of IDA had false-negative FOBT. Our results did not show acceptable performance characteristics for FOBT to guide decisions regarding endoscopic evaluation and do not support its use in IDA.

Evaluation of the guaiac fecal occult blood test for detection of gastrointestinal bleeding in the rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta).

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal (GI) hemorrhage accompanies several common diseases of rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta). Guaiac fecal occult blood testing (gFOBT) is a non-invasive means to detect such bleeding in several species; however, there are currently no data indicating reliability of this test to detect GI hemorrhage in macaques. METHODS: We evaluated sensitivity and specificity of gFOBT to detect simulated and biopsy-associated bleeding in the stomach, duodenum, and colon of 15 rhesus macaques. Fecal samples were analyzed via gFOBT for 72 hours. RESULTS: Guaiac fecal occult blood testing was more sensitive to detect lower vs upper GI bleeding; sensitivity was volume-dependent in the upper GI tract. Single-test specificity was 95.2%. Repeated fecal collections increased gFOBT sensitivity without affecting specificity. CONCLUSIONS: Guaiac fecal occult blood testing is a useful screening test for both upper and lower GI bleeding in rhesus macaques. For highest sensitivity, gFOBT should be performed on three fecal samples collected 24 hours apart.

Potential for prevention: a cohort study of colonoscopies and removal of adenomas in a FIT-based colorectal cancer screening programme.

Introduction: Evidence suggests that colorectal cancer (CRC) screening using guaiac faecal occult blood tests (gFOBT) reduces the CRC burden by facilitating timely removal of adenomas. Yet, the faecal immunochemical test (FIT) is being implemented in many countries. The aim of this study was to analyse the risk of having adenomas detected when invited for FIT-based screening as compared to those not yet invited. Material and Methods: The study was designed as a register-based retrospective cohort study. The potential for prevention was estimated as number of individuals who had no adenomas, non-advanced adenomas, and advanced adenomas detected per 1000 invited/not yet invited individuals and the relative risk (RR) of each of the three outcomes. Results: A total of 1,359,340 individuals were included, 29.6% of whom had been invited and 70.4% had not yet been invited to participate in CRC screening. Compared with the not yet invited population, the invited group had a RR of no adenomas of 2.28 (2.22-2.34) and a RR of advanced adenomas of 7.41 (6.93-7.91). The RR of colonoscopy was 2.93 (2.87-2.99) for the invited population compared with the not yet invited population. Conclusion: The RR of having a colonoscopy was three times higher among those invited compared to those not yet invited for CRC screening and twice as often those who had been invited compared to those not yet invited had no adenomas detected. Still, the risk of advanced adenomas was more than seven times higher among the invited population, indicating that the screening programme holds great potential for reducing the CRC burden. Abbreviations: CI: Confidence interval; CRC: Colorectal cancer; FIT: Faecal immunochemical test; ICD: International Classification of Disease; RR: Relative risk.

Effectiveness, benefit harm and cost effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening in Austria.

BACKGROUND: Clear evidence on the benefit-harm balance and cost effectiveness of population-based screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) is missing. We aim to systematically evaluate the long-term effectiveness, harms and cost effectiveness of different organized CRC screening strategies in Austria. METHODS: A decision-analytic cohort simulation model for colorectal adenoma and cancer with a lifelong time horizon was developed, calibrated to the Austrian epidemiological setting and validated against observed data. We compared four strategies: 1) No Screening, 2) FIT: annual immunochemical fecal occult blood test age 40-75 years, 3) gFOBT: annual guaiac-based fecal occult blood test age 40-75 years, and 4) COL: 10-yearly colonoscopy age 50-70 years. Predicted outcomes included: benefits expressed as life-years gained [LYG], CRC-related deaths avoided and CRC cases avoided; harms as additional complications due to colonoscopy (physical harm) and positive test results (psychological harm); and lifetime costs. Tradeoffs were expressed as incremental harm-benefit ratios (IHBR, incremental positive test results per LYG) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios [ICER]. The perspective of the Austrian public health care system was adopted. Comprehensive sensitivity analyses were performed to assess uncertainty. RESULTS: The most effective strategies were FIT and COL. gFOBT was less effective and more costly than FIT. Moving from COL to FIT results in an incremental unintended psychological harm of 16 additional positive test results to gain one life-year. COL was cost saving compared to No Screening. Moving from COL to FIT has an ICER of 15,000 EUR per LYG. CONCLUSIONS: Organized CRC-screening with annual FIT or 10-yearly colonoscopy is most effective. The choice between these two options depends on the individual preferences and benefit-harm tradeoffs of screening candidates.

Contribution of the OC Sensor® immunoassay in comparison to the Hemoccult II® guaiac-test in organized colorectal cancer screening.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major cause of cancer-related death of worldwide with high incidence and mortality rate, accessible to a screening program in France, first with guaiac- based fecal occult blood test (g-FOBT) then with fecal immunochemical tests (FIT), since 2015, because of better accuracy. The aim of our study was to compare the characteristics of screen-detected lesions in two successive CRC screening campaigns, using two different tests (Hemoccult II® and OC Sensor®) in the department of Maine-et-Loire, and to precise the performance of these tests [participation rate, detection rates (DR), positive predictive value (PPV)]. Participants, invited by CAP SANTE 49, with polyps or cancer at the colonoscopy after a positive screening test between 01/01/2013 and 31/12/2016 were included. A guaiac-based fecal occult blood test (g-FOBT) was used from January 2013 to December 2014 and a FIT was used from June 2015 to December 2016). 2575 participants, 642 in g-FOBT group and 1933 in FIT group had lesions. Participation rate was not different between tests (p = 0.104), whereas DR and PPV were statistically higher in FIT for all lesions (2.61, 95% CI [2.50-2.70] vs 0.93, 95% CI [0.90-1.00], p < 0.0001 and 64.84, 95% CI [63.10-66.60], 50.00, 95% CI [47.30-52.70], p < 0.0001 respectively). FIT detects more precancerous lesions (adenomas, p < 0.001, and advanced adenomas, p < 0.001) than g-FOBT but g-FOBT detects more serrated polyps (p = 0.025). AAs were more in right colon in FIT than g-FOBT (p = 0.035). No different participation rate was detected between FIT and g-FOBT but DR and PPV of all lesions was higher with FIT.

The utility of guaiac stool testing in the detection of gastrointestinal complications in infants with critical congenital heart disease.

BACKGROUND: Guaiac stool testing has been routinely used as a method to detect gastrointestinal complications in infants with critical congenital heart disease (CHD); however, the sensitivity and specificity have not been established. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed investigating the presence of heme-positive stools and subsequent gastrointestinal complications as well as time to goal caloric intake and radiograph exposure. RESULTS: The presence of heme-positive stools was not a statistically significant factor in patients with critical CHD that experienced gastrointestinal complications. Additionally, patients with heme-positive stools did undergo more abdominal X-rays than those with heme-negative stools. CONCLUSIONS: The routine use of guaiac stool testing in infants with critical CHD is not a predictor of possible gastrointestinal complications and leads to more radiograph exposure for the patient. Close clinical monitoring can be used to evaluate feeding tolerance in infants with critical CHD.

Interval Colorectal Cancer Incidence Among Subjects Undergoing Multiple Rounds of Fecal Immunochemical Testing.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Among subjects screened for colorectal cancer (CRC) by the guaiac fecal occult blood test, interval cancers develop in 48% to 55% of the subjects. Data are limited on how many persons screened by fecal immunochemical tests (FIT), over multiple rounds, develop interval cancers. In the Netherlands, a pilot FIT-based biennial CRC screening program was conducted between 2006 and 2014. We collected and analyzed data from the program on CRCs detected during screening (SD-CRC) and CRCs not detected within the screening program (non-SD-CRC; such as FIT interval cancers, colonoscopy interval cancers, and cancer in nonparticipants). METHODS: Screenees with a negative FIT result received a letter explaining that no blood had been detected in the stool sample and were re-invited, if eligible, for screening biennially. Screenees with a positive FIT result (hemoglobin concentration of 10 µg Hb/g feces) were invited for consultation and scheduled for colonoscopy; results were collected. After the fourth round of FIT screening, the cohort was linked to the Netherlands Cancer Registry, through March 31, 2015; participant characteristics, data on tumor stage, location (at time of resection), and survival status were collected for all identified CRC cases. A reference group comprised all persons with CRC diagnosed in the Netherlands general population during the same period, in the same age range (50-76 years), who had not been offered CRC screening. The median time between invitations (2.37 years) was used as a cutoff to categorize participants within the FIT interval cancer category. We compared participant characteristics, tumor characteristics, and mortality among subjects with SD-CRC and with non-SD-CRC. RESULTS: A total of 27,304 eligible individuals were invited for FIT screening, of whom 18,716 (69%) participated at least once. Of these, 3005 (16%) had a positive result from the FIT in 1 of the 4 screening rounds. In total, CRC was detected in 261 participants: 116 SD-CRCs and 145 non-SD-CRCs (27 FIT interval cancers, 9 colonoscopy interval cancers, and 109 CRCs in nonparticipants). The FIT interval cancer proportion after 3 completed screening rounds was 23%. Participants with SD-CRC had more early-stage tumors than participants with non-SD-CRCs (P < .001). Of persons with SD-CRC and FIT interval cancers, significantly higher proportions survived (89% and 81%, respectively) compared with persons with colonoscopy interval cancers (44% survival) and nonparticipants with CRC (60% survival) (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In an analysis of data from a pilot FIT-based biennial screening program, we found that among persons screened by FIT, 23% developed FIT interval cancer. FIT therefore detects CRC with 77% sensitivity. The proportion of FIT interval cancers in FIT screening appears to be lower than that with guaiac fecal occult blood testing. Clinical trial registry: yes, www.trialregister.nl, trial number: NTR5385.

Detection of Colorectal Neoplasia in a Cohort Before and After the Change of Fecal Occult Blood Test in a French Colorectal Cancer Screening Program.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the change in the participation rate and the change in neoplasia incidence before and after the change of the Fecal Occult Blood Test (FOBT) in the cohort included in the Colorectal Cancer Screening Program (CRCSP). METHODS: Cohort of 279,210 people, aged 50-74 years, invited at least once before 2009, to participate in a CRCSP campaign. The participation rate and the cumulative neoplasia incidence were described on 4 campaigns (≤2008, 2009-2010, 2011-2012 and 2013-2014) with a Guaiac FOBT (gFOBT) and a first campaign (2015-2016) with a Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT). The cumulative incidence was estimated by the actuarial method and its confidence interval by the Greenwood method. RESULTS: The participation rate decreased from 32.7% (first gFOBT-campaign) to 24.4% (fourth gFOBT-campaign) then, made a significant bound in the FIT-campaign (28.4%; p < 0.001). 35.4% of the 965 high-risk-polyps screened in this cohort were detected in the FIT-campaign. CRC incidence gradually decreased from 0.4 to 0.1/1000 person-years from the first to the fourth gFOBT-campaign before reaching a bound to 0.4/1000 person-years in the FIT-campaign. CONCLUSION: Although it was still below the minimum European target (45%), the participation rate has increased between the last gFOBT-campaign and FIT-campaign, justifying the impact of promotional campaigns and the acceptance of the new test by people and GPs. A decline in the neoplasia incidence was observed between the initial and the fourth gFOBT-campaign. The change from gFOBT to FIT between the fourth and fifth campaigns, was associated with a significant increase in detection of neoplasia.