Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 10 de 10
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
País/Región como asunto
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Gut ; 66(9): 1631-1644, 2017 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27267903

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The National Health Service Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) in England uses a guaiac-based faecal occult blood test (gFOBt). A quantitative faecal immunochemical test (FIT) for haemoglobin (Hb) has many advantages, including being specific for human blood, detecting Hb at a much lower concentration with a single faecal sample and improved uptake. METHODS: In 2014, a large comparative pilot study was performed within BCSP to establish the acceptability and diagnostic performance of FIT. Over a 6-month period, 40 930 (1 in 28) subjects were sent a FIT (OC-SENSOR) instead of a gFOBt. A bespoke FIT package was used to mail FIT sampling devices to and from FIT subjects. All participants positive with either gFOBt or FIT (cut-off 20 µg Hb/g faeces) were referred for follow-up. Subgroup analysis included cut-off concentrations, age, sex, screening history and deprivation quintile. RESULTS: While overall uptake increased by over 7 percentage points with FIT (66.4% vs 59.3%, OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.33 to 1.38), uptake by previous non-responders almost doubled (FIT 23.9% vs gFOBt 12.5%, OR 2.20, 95% CI 2.10 to 2.29). The increase in overall uptake was significantly higher in men than women and was observed across all deprivation quintiles. With the conventional 20 µg/g cut-off, FIT positivity was 7.8% and ranged from 5.7% in 59-64-year-old women to 11.1% in 70-75-year-old men. Cancer detection increased twofold and that for advanced adenomas nearly fivefold. Detection rates remained higher with FIT for advanced adenomas, even at 180 µg Hb/g. CONCLUSIONS: Markedly improved participation rates were achieved in a mature gFOBt-based national screening programme and disparities between men and women were reduced. High positivity rates, particularly in men and previous non-respondents, challenge the available colonoscopy resource, but improvements in neoplasia detection are still achievable within this limited resource.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Sangre Oculta , Participación del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Colorrectales/epidemiología , Neoplasias Colorrectales/patología , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/normas , Inglaterra/epidemiología , Heces , Femenino , Guayaco/farmacología , Hemoglobinas/análisis , Humanos , Inmunoquímica/métodos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Evaluación de Procesos y Resultados en Atención de Salud , Proyectos Piloto , Mejoramiento de la Calidad
2.
Cancer ; 122(6): 826-39, 2016 Mar 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26828588

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: New screening tests for colorectal cancer continue to emerge, but the evidence needed to justify their adoption in screening programs remains uncertain. METHODS: A review of the literature and a consensus approach by experts was undertaken to provide practical guidance on how to compare new screening tests with proven screening tests. RESULTS: Findings and recommendations from the review included the following: Adoption of a new screening test requires evidence of effectiveness relative to a proven comparator test. Clinical accuracy supported by programmatic population evaluation in the screening context on an intention-to-screen basis, including acceptability, is essential. Cancer-specific mortality is not essential as an endpoint provided that the mortality benefit of the comparator has been demonstrated and that the biologic basis of detection is similar. Effectiveness of the guaiac-based fecal occult blood test provides the minimum standard to be achieved by a new test. A 4-phase evaluation is recommended. An initial retrospective evaluation in cancer cases and controls (Phase 1) is followed by a prospective evaluation of performance across the continuum of neoplastic lesions (Phase 2). Phase 3 follows the demonstration of adequate accuracy in these 2 prescreening phases and addresses programmatic outcomes at 1 screening round on an intention-to-screen basis. Phase 4 involves more comprehensive evaluation of ongoing screening over multiple rounds. Key information is provided from the following parameters: the test positivity rate in a screening population, the true-positive and false-positive rates, and the number needed to colonoscope to detect a target lesion. CONCLUSIONS: New screening tests can be evaluated efficiently by this stepwise comparative approach.


Asunto(s)
Biomarcadores de Tumor/análisis , Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Estudios de Evaluación como Asunto , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos , Sangre Oculta , Proyectos de Investigación , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Colonoscopía , Reacciones Falso Positivas , Humanos , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto/normas , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Tamaño de la Muestra
3.
Br J Cancer ; 114(3): 327-33, 2016 Feb 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26766733

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The primary colorectal cancer screening test in England is a guaiac faecal occult blood test (gFOBt). The NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) interprets tests on six samples on up to three test kits to determine a definitive positive or negative result. However, the test algorithm fails to achieve a definitive result for a significant number of participants because they do not comply with the programme requirements. This study identifies factors associated with failed compliance and modifications to the screening algorithm that will improve the clinical effectiveness of the screening programme. METHODS: The BCSP Southern Hub data for screening episodes started in 2006-2012 were analysed for participants aged 60-69 years. The variables included age, sex, level of deprivation, gFOBt results and clinical outcome. RESULTS: The data set included 1,409,335 screening episodes; 95.08% of participants had a definitively normal result on kit 1 (no positive spots). Among participants asked to complete a second or third gFOBt, 5.10% and 4.65%, respectively, failed to return a valid kit. Among participants referred for follow up, 13.80% did not comply. Older age was associated with compliance at repeat testing, but non-compliance at follow up. Increasing levels of deprivation were associated with non-compliance at repeat testing and follow up. Modelling a reduction in the threshold for immediate referral led to a small increase in completion of the screening pathway. CONCLUSIONS: Reducing the number of positive spots required on the first gFOBt kit for referral for follow-up and targeted measures to improve compliance with follow-up may improve completion of the screening pathway.


Asunto(s)
Algoritmos , Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Sangre Oculta , Cooperación del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Colonoscopía , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/estadística & datos numéricos , Inglaterra , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Derivación y Consulta , Factores Sexuales , Clase Social , Medicina Estatal
4.
Curr Gastroenterol Rep ; 17(2): 428, 2015 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25673567

RESUMEN

Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) reduces CRC mortality; many countries have implemented population-based CRC screening programmes and many more are poised to do so. Whilst several different CRC screening modalities are available, choice will be influenced by cost, available resources (e.g. high-quality colonoscopy) and acceptability of the test by the invited population. For CRC screening, no screening test has so far surpassed the practicality, affordability and effectiveness of tests for the presence of blood in faeces (faecal occult blood tests, FOBt). The results of several large FOBt-based randomised controlled trials provide the best clinical evidence to support their use in population-based CRC screening. This review considers the current options for CRC screening and the future for FOBt.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Sangre Oculta , Biomarcadores/análisis , Colonoscopía , ADN de Neoplasias/análisis , Heces/química , Guayaco , Hemoglobinas/análisis , Humanos , Inmunoquímica , Indicadores y Reactivos
5.
Dig Dis Sci ; 60(3): 609-22, 2015 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25492500

RESUMEN

UNLABELLED: There is a wide choice of fecal occult blood tests (FOBTs) for colorectal cancer screening. GOAL: To highlight the issues applicable when choosing a FOBT, in particular which FOBT is best suited to the range of screening scenarios. Four scenarios characterize the constraints and expectations of screening programs: (1) limited colonoscopy resource with a need to constrain test positivity rate; (2) a priority for maximum colorectal neoplasia detection with little need to constrain colonoscopy workload; (3) an "adequate" endoscopy resource that allows balancing the benefits of detection with the burden of service provision; and (4) a need to maximize participation in screening. Guaiac-based FOBTs (gFOBTs) have significant deficiencies, and fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for hemoglobin have emerged as better tests. gFOBTs are not sensitive to small bleeds, specificity can be affected by diet or drugs, participant acceptance can be low, laboratory quality control opportunities are limited, and they have a fixed hemoglobin concentration cutoff determining positivity. FITs are analytically more specific, capable of quantitation and hence provide flexibility to adjust cutoff concentration for positivity and the balance between sensitivity and specificity. FITs are clinically more sensitive for cancers and advanced adenomas, and because they are easier to use, acceptance rates are high. CONCLUSIONS: FOBT must be chosen carefully to meet the needs of the applicable screening scenario. Quantitative FIT can be adjusted to suit Scenarios 1, 2 and 3, and for each, they are the test of choice. FITs are superior to gFOBT for Scenario 4 and gFOBT is only suitable for Scenario 1.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Heces/química , Hemoglobinas/análisis , Pruebas Inmunológicas , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos , Sangre Oculta , Humanos , Tamizaje Masivo/organización & administración
6.
Neuroepidemiology ; 32(2): 150-63, 2009.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19088488

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: This systematic literature review of the epidemiology of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) identifies trends in incidence rates by age, study method and cause of disease. It is important to have a reliable estimate of incidence to determine and investigate any changes: no previous systematic reviews of GBS have been found. METHODS: After critical assessment of the reliability of the reported data, incidence rates were extracted from all relevant papers published between 1980 and 2008, identified through searches of Medline, Embase and Science Direct. RESULTS: Sixty-three papers were included in this review; these studies were prospective, retrospective reviews of medical records or retrospective database studies. Ten studies reported on the incidence in children (0-15 years old), and found the annual incidence to be between 0.34 and 1.34/100,000. Most studies investigated populations in Europe and North America and reported similar annual incidence rates, i.e. between 0.84 and 1.91/100,000. A decrease in incidence over the time between the 1980s and 1990s was found. Up to 70% of cases of GBS were caused by antecedent infections. CONCLUSIONS: Our best estimate of the overall incidence of GBS was between 1.1/100,000/year and 1.8/100,000/year. The incidence of GBS increased with age after 50 years from 1.7/100,000/year to 3.3/100,000/year.


Asunto(s)
Salud Global , Síndrome de Guillain-Barré/epidemiología , Síndrome de Guillain-Barré/diagnóstico , Humanos , Vigilancia de la Población/métodos , Factores de Riesgo
7.
Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) ; 69(5): 687-96, 2008 Nov.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-18673466

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To undertake a systematic review of literature published between 1980 and 2008 on the incidence of autoimmune thyroid disease. DESIGN: All relevant papers found through searches of Medline, EMBASE and ScienceDirect were critically appraised and an assessment was made of the reliability of the reported incidence data. RESULTS: The reported incidence of autoimmune hypothyroidism varied between 2.2/100 000/year (males) and 498.4/100 000/year (females) and for autoimmune hyperthyroidism, incidence ranged from 0.70/100 000/year (Black males) to 99/100 000/year (Caucasian females). Higher incidence rates were found in women compared to men for all types of autoimmune thyroid disease. The majority of studies included in the review investigated Caucasian populations mainly from Scandinavia, Spain, the UK and the USA. It is possible that nonautoimmune cases were included in the incidence rates reported here, which would give an overestimation in the incidence rates of autoimmune disease presented. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge this is the most comprehensive systematic review of autoimmune thyroid disease conducted in the past two decades. Studies of incidence of autoimmune thyroid disease have only been conducted in a small number of mainly western countries. Our best estimates of the incidence of hypothyroidism is 350/100 000/year in women and 80/100 000/year in men; the incidence of hyperthyroidism is 80/100 000/year in women and 8/100 000/year in men.


Asunto(s)
Enfermedades Autoinmunes/epidemiología , Enfermedades de la Tiroides/epidemiología , Enfermedades Autoinmunes/complicaciones , Humanos , Hipertiroidismo/complicaciones , Hipertiroidismo/epidemiología , Hipotiroidismo/complicaciones , Hipotiroidismo/epidemiología , Incidencia , Enfermedades de la Tiroides/complicaciones
8.
Clin Biochem ; 47(10-11): 921-39, 2014 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24769265

RESUMEN

Worldwide, colorectal (CRC) is the third most common form of cancer, after lung and breast cancer, and the fourth most common cause of cancer death, although in developed countries CRC incidence is higher and it accounts for an even higher proportion of cancer deaths. Successful treatment of early-stage CRC confers substantial survival advantage, and there is now overwhelming evidence that screening average-risk individuals for CRC reduces the incidence and disease-specific mortality. In spite of considerable research for new biomarkers for CRC, the detection of blood in faeces remains the most effective screening tool. The best evidence to date for population-based CRC screening comes from randomised-controlled trials that used a guaiac-based faecal occult blood test (gFOBt) as the first-line screening modality, whereby test-positive individuals are referred for follow-up investigations, usually colonoscopy. A major innovation in the last ten years or so has been the development of other more analytically sensitive and specific screening techniques for blood in faeces. The faecal immunochemical test for haemoglobin (FIT) confers substantial benefits over gFOBt in terms of analytical sensitivity, specificity and practicality and FIT are now recommended for CRC screening by the European guidelines for quality assurance in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis. The challenge internationally is to develop high quality CRC screening programmes for which uptake is high. This is especially important for developing countries witnessing an increase in the incidence of CRC as populations adopt more westernised lifestyles. This review describes the tests available for CRC screening and how they are being used worldwide. The reader will gain an understanding of developments in CRC screening and issues that arise in choosing the most appropriate screening test (or tests) for organised population-based screening internationally and optimising the performance of the chosen test (or tests). Whilst a wide range of literature has been cited, this is not a systematic review. The authors provide FOBT CRC screening for a population of 14.6 million in the south of England and the senior author (SPH) was the lead author of the European guidelines for quality assurance in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis and leads the World Endoscopy Organization Colorectal Cancer Committee's Expert Working Group on 'FIT for Screening'.


Asunto(s)
Biomarcadores de Tumor/análisis , Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Colorrectales/metabolismo , Heces , Hemoglobinas/análisis , Biomarcadores de Tumor/metabolismo , Neoplasias Colorrectales/mortalidad , Hemoglobinas/metabolismo , Humanos , Incidencia , Tamizaje Masivo
10.
BJU Int ; 99(6): 1398-403, 2007 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17537215

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) associated with the use of cyproterone acetate (CPA) amongst men with prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using data from the General Practice Research Database, cases of VTE were identified amongst men with prostate cancer. Four controls with no evidence of a VTE were selected for each case. The time from diagnosis of prostate cancer to first hormonal treatment, and from first hormonal treatment to VTE, was compared for different treatments. Adjusted risk estimates for VTE were derived from further analysis using a nested case-control study design amongst all men with advanced prostate cancer, qualified by evidence of hormonal treatment. RESULTS: The time between diagnosis and first treatment was significantly shorter for men first treated with CPA than for men first treated with a luteinizing hormone releasing hormone (LHRH) analogue (adjusted hazard ratio 1.33, 95% confidence interval, CI, 1.06-1.67). When the first treatment was CPA, the treatment-free period after diagnosis was significantly shorter for men who later had a VTE than for those who did not. The case-control study yielded an adjusted risk estimate for VTE amongst CPA users that was significantly higher than amongst men who were prescribed an LHRH analogue or who had had an orchidectomy (adjusted odds ratio 5.23, 95% CI 3.12-8.79). CONCLUSION: There was a greater risk of VTE associated with CPA, which might be due to differences in disease severity between users of different products. The clinical significance of this finding is unclear.


Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos/efectos adversos , Acetato de Ciproterona/efectos adversos , Neoplasias de la Próstata/tratamiento farmacológico , Tromboembolia/inducido químicamente , Trombosis de la Vena/inducido químicamente , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Estudios de Cohortes , Bases de Datos como Asunto , Medicina Familiar y Comunitaria , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Orquiectomía , Neoplasias de la Próstata/cirugía , Factores de Riesgo , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Análisis de Supervivencia , Tromboembolia/mortalidad , Trombosis de la Vena/mortalidad
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA