To what extent is male excess risk of advanced colorectal neoplasms explained by known risk factors? Results from a large German screening population.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and prevalence of its precursors are substantially higher among males than among females in most countries but the reasons for the male excess risk are incompletely understood. We aimed to assess to what extent it is explained by known risk factors. Prevalence of advanced neoplasia (AN, ie, CRC or advanced adenoma) and CRC risk and preventive factors were ascertained among 15 985 participants of screening colonoscopy aged 55-79 years in Germany. Logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios (ORs) for the association between male sex and AN with and without adjustment for known risk and preventive factors. In age-adjusted comparisons, men had 2-fold increased risk for AN compared to women (OR = 1.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.79-2.19). After comprehensive adjustment for medical, lifestyle and dietary factors, the OR was reduced to 1.52 (95% CI 1.30-1.77), suggesting that these factors accounted for 47% of male excess risk. Male excess risk increased from proximal colon to distal colon and rectum, with age-adjusted ORs (95% CI) of 1.63 (1.38-1.91), 2.13 (1.85-2.45) and 2.36 (1.95-2.85), respectively, and with the proportion of excess risk explained by covariates being lower for AN in the rectum (26%) than for AN in the proximal (52%) or distal colon (46%). Male excess risk was somewhat lower (age-adjusted OR 1.87) and explained excess risk was smaller (36%) when men were compared to women who never used hormone replacement therapy. In conclusion, most of the male excess risk and the potential to overcome it remain to be explored by further research.

Sensitivity of Fecal Immunochemical Test for Colorectal Cancer Detection Differs According to Stage and Location.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) are widely used for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. FITs detect most CRCs. Although detection of CRC at early stages is most relevant for reducing CRC mortality, there is limited evidence for the stage-specific sensitivity of the FIT in CRC detection. We estimated stage- and location-specific sensitivities of a quantitative FIT in a large cohort of patients with CRC. METHODS: Fecal samples were collected before treatment from 435 patients with newly diagnosed CRC. Sensitivities of a quantitative FIT (FOB Gold, Sentinel Diagnostics; Milano, Italy) for tumors of different T stages and overall TNM stages (according to Union for International Cancer Control) were calculated at the cutoff recommended by the manufacturer (17 µg/g feces) and at alternative cutoffs, ranging from 10 to 40 µg/g feces, overall and stratified by tumor location. RESULTS: At the cutoff recommended by the manufacturer, the FIT detected T1 tumors with 52% sensitivity (95% CI, 37%-67%), T2 tumors with 79% sensitivity (95% CI, 68%-88%), T3 tumors with 93% sensitivity (95% CI, 89%-95%), and T4 tumors with 84% sensitivity (95% CI, 72%-92%) (Ptrend < .0001). The FIT detected stage I cancers with 68% sensitivity (95% CI, 57%-78%), stage II cancers with 92% sensitivity (95% CI, 87%-96%), stage III cancers with 82% sensitivity (95% CI, 73%-89%), and stage IV cancers with 89% sensitivity (95% CI, 80%-95%) (Ptrend 0.01). The FIT detected T1 colorectal tumors with sensitivity values that were 22%-52% lower than for tumors of other T stages and stage I CRC with sensitivity values that were 11%-33% lower than for later-stage CRCs, at any of the evaluated cutoff values. The FIT detected T1 and stage I CRCs in the distal colon with sensitivity values of 32% and 52%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although the FIT identifies patients with CRC with overall high sensitivity, it can miss approximately one-third of stage I CRCs. Studies are needed to increase noninvasive detection of early-stage CRC.

Effect of Sex, Age, and Positivity Threshold on Fecal Immunochemical Test Accuracy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Quantitative fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for hemoglobin are commonly used for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. We aimed to quantify the change in CRC and advanced adenoma detection and number of positive test results at different positivity thresholds and by sex and age. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE, selecting articles of FIT for CRC detection in asymptomatic adults undergoing screening. We calculated sensitivity and specificity, as well as detected number of cancers, advanced adenomas, and positive test results at positivity thresholds ≤10 µg hemoglobin/g feces, 10 to ≤20 µg/g, 20 to ≤30 µg/g, and >30 µg/g. We also analyzed results from stratified by patient sex, age, and reference standard. RESULTS: Our meta-analysis comprised 46 studies with 2.4 million participants and 6478 detected cancers. Sensitivity for detection of CRC increased from 69% (95% confidence interval [CI], 63%-75%) at thresholds >10 µg/g and ≤20 µg/g to 80% (95% CI, 76%-83%) at thresholds ≤10 µg/g. At these threshold values, sensitivity for detection of advanced adenomas increased from 21% (95% CI, 18%-25%) to 31% (95% CI, 27%-35%), whereas specificity decreased from 94% (95% CI, 93%-96%) to 91% (95% CI, 89%-93%). In 3 studies stratified by sex, sensitivity of CRC detection was 77% in men (95% CI, 75%-79%) and 81% in women (95% CI, 60%-100%) (P = .68). In 3 studies stratified by age groups, sensitivity of CRC detection was 85% for ages 50-59 years (95% CI, 71%-99%) and 73% for ages 60-69 years (95% CI, 71%-75%) (P = .10). All studies with colonoscopy follow-up had similar sensitivity levels for detection of CRC to studies that analyzed 2-year registry follow-up data (74%; 95% CI, 68%-78% vs 75%; 95% CI, 73%-77%). CONCLUSIONS: In a meta-analysis of studies that analyzed detection of CRC and advanced adenomas at different FIT positivity thresholds, we found the sensitivity and specificity of detection to vary with positive cutoff value. It might be possible to decrease positive threshold values for centers with sufficient follow-up colonoscopy resources. More research is needed to precisely establish FIT thresholds for each sex and age subgroup. PROTOCOL: PROSPERO CRD42017068760.

Effect of long-term frozen storage and thawing of stool samples on faecal haemoglobin concentration and diagnostic performance of faecal immunochemical tests.

Background Faecal samples collected and stored frozen over years may be a valuable resource for efficient retrospective evaluation of faecal immunochemical tests (FITs). We aimed to assess how prolonged frozen storage and freeze-thaw cycles might affect measures of faecal haemoglobin (Hb) and diagnostic performance of FITs. Methods From 2005 through 2010, participants of screening colonoscopy (n = 2042) and clinical colorectal cancer (CRC) cases (n = 184) provided faecal samples in stool containers (60 mL). The samples were stored at -80 °C for up to 11 years and underwent three freeze-thaw cycles. Between each cycle, a defined amount of faeces was extracted using the manufacturer's sampling device of one or two FITs (RIDASCREEN, OC-Sensor). Faecal Hb concentration and diagnostic performance were calculated and compared across freeze-thaw cycles. Results For RIDASCREEN and the OC-Sensor, repeat measurements were available for 504 and 551 study participants, respectively. Hb concentrations correlated strongly (0.77 and 0.85, respectively) and diagnostic performance indicators were similar at the repeat measurements among the same FITs. For RIDASCREEN we found even slightly higher Hb levels, sensitivities and area under the curves (AUCs) after the third than after the first freeze-thaw cycle. For the OC-Sensor the Hb levels, sensitivities and AUCs were slightly lower after prolonged storage and one additional freeze-thaw cycle. Conclusions Measures of Hb and diagnostic performance were fairly stable, even after long-term frozen storage and multiple freeze-thaw cycles of raw faecal samples. Faecal samples collected in prospective screening studies and kept frozen at -80 °C before analysis seem useful for timely and efficient retrospective evaluation of FIT performance.

[Design and quality control of the oral health status examination in the German National Cohort (GNC)]. / Design und Qualitätskontrolle der zahnmedizinischen Untersuchung in der NAKO Gesundheitsstudie.

BACKGROUND: Caries and periodontitis are highly prevalent worldwide. Because detailed data on these oral diseases were collected within the framework of the German National Cohort (GNC), associations between oral and systemic diseases and conditions can be investigated. OBJECTIVES: The study protocol for the oral examination was designed to ensure a comprehensive collection of dental findings by trained non-dental staff within a limited examination time. At the mid-term of the GNC baseline examination, a first quality evaluation was performed to check the plausibility of results and to propose measures to improve the data quality. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A dental interview, saliva sampling and oral diagnostics were conducted. As part of the level­1 examination, the number of teeth and prostheses were recorded. As part of the level­2 examination, detailed periodontal, cariological and functional aspects were examined. All examinations were conducted by trained non-dental personnel. Parameters were checked for plausibility and variable distributions were descriptively analysed. RESULTS: Analyses included data of 57,967 interview participants, 56,913 level­1 participants and 6295 level­2 participants. Percentages of missing values for individual clinical parameters assessed in level 1 and level 2 ranged between 0.02 and 3.9%. Results showed a plausible distribution of the data; rarely, implausible values were observed, e.g. for measurements of horizontal and vertical overbite (overjet and overbite). Intra-class correlation coefficients indicated differences in individual parameters between regional clusters, study centres and across different examiners. CONCLUSIONS: The results confirm the feasibility of the study protocol by non-dental personnel and its successful integration into the GNC's overall assessment program. However, rigorous dental support of the study centres is required for quality management.

Direct Comparison of Diagnostic Performance of 9 Quantitative Fecal Immunochemical Tests for Colorectal Cancer Screening.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: A variety of fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for hemoglobin (Hb) are used in colorectal cancer screening. It is unclear to what extent differences in reported sensitivities and specificities reflect true heterogeneity in test performance or differences in study populations or varying pre-analytical conditions. We directly compared the sensitivity and specificity values with which 9 quantitative (laboratory-based and point-of-care) FITs detected advanced neoplasms (AN) in a single colorectal cancer screening study. METHODS: Pre-colonoscopy stool samples were obtained from participants of screening colonoscopy in Germany from 2005 through 2010 and frozen at -80°C until analysis. The stool samples were thawed, homogenized, and used for 9 different quantitative FITs in parallel. Colonoscopy and histology reports were collected from all participants and evaluated by 2 independent, trained research assistants who were blinded to the test results. Comparative evaluations of diagnostic performance for AN were made at preset manufacturers' thresholds (range, 2.0-17.0 µg Hb/g feces), at a uniform threshold (15 µg Hb/g feces), and at adjusted thresholds yielding defined levels of specificity (99%, 97%, and 93%). RESULTS: Of the 1667 participants who fulfilled the inclusion criteria, all cases with AN (n = 216) and 300 randomly selected individuals without AN were included in the analysis. Sensitivities and specificities for AN varied widely when we used the preset thresholds (21.8%-46.3% and 85.7%-97.7%, respectively) or the uniform threshold (16.2%-34.3% and 94.0%-98.0%, respectively). Adjusting thresholds to yield a specificity of 99%, 97%, or 93% resulted in almost equal sensitivities for detection of AN (14.4%-18.5%, 21.3%-23.6%, and 30.1%-35.2%, respectively) and almost equal positivity rates (2.8%-3.4%, 5.8%-6.1%, and 10.1%-10.9%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Apparent heterogeneity in diagnostic performance of quantitative FITs can be overcome to a large extent by adjusting thresholds to yield defined levels of specificity or positivity rates. Rather than simply using thresholds recommended by the manufacturer, screening programs should choose thresholds based on intended levels of specificity and manageable positivity rates.

Effect of Imperfect Compliance With Instructions for Fecal Sample Collection on Diagnostic Performance of 9 Fecal Immunochemical Tests.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) measure hemoglobin in stool to identify individuals at risk for colorectal cancer (CRC). However, there are many different FITs, with different instructions for fecal sample collection. In routine practice, participants do not always follow these instructions exactly. We assessed the effects of violations of fecal sampling instructions on the diagnostic performance of 9 quantitative FITs. METHODS: We obtained stool samples from 76 patients with CRC scheduled for surgery at 4 hospitals in Germany and 100 participants without advanced neoplasms who participated in a prospective colonoscopy screening program. We filled fecal sample tubes according to the manufacturers' instructions or with 3 violations that are likely to occur in routine practice. The diagnostic performance was assessed for a total of 6336 FIT samples (176 participants × 9 FITs × 4 sampling methods). RESULTS: Sample collection instructions varied widely among FITs but included 3 key components: multiple insertions of the sampling rod into stool, a visual check of rod for complete filling with stool, and once-only insertion of the stool-filled rod into the tube. Violation of the first 2 components (inserting the rod into the stool sample only 1 time or not visually checking the rod for complete filling) reduced levels of hemoglobin measured. However, the effect on diagnostic performance was generally small. Violation of the third component (insertion of more stool into the tube than recommended) increased levels of hemoglobin measured in samples and identified more patients with CRC (increase of median sensitivity by almost 10% units) at a small loss of specificity (decrease of median specificity by 2% units), and produced the highest area under the curve for detection of CRC cases for 6 FITs. CONCLUSIONS: Violations of fecal sampling instructions can lead to non-negligible variations in fecal hemoglobin measurements. The limited adverse effects on diagnostic performance indicate the robustness of FITs. The potential for increasing diagnostic performance by collecting more stool material should be followed up in further research.

Overestimated Sensitivity of Fecal Immunochemical Tests in Screening Cohorts With Registry-Based Follow-up.

OBJECTIVES: Several recent studies have reported very high estimates of sensitivity and specificity of fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) at seemingly high levels of precision using registry-based follow-up of participants in very large FIT-based screening programs. We aimed to assess the validity of estimates of diagnostic performance parameters derived by this indirect approach. METHODS: We modeled expected values of sensitivity and specificity of colorectal cancer detection in studies using the indirect approach and their deviation from true values under a broad range of plausible assumptions, and we compared these expected values with recently reported estimates of FIT sensitivity and specificity from such studies. RESULTS: Using a sensitivity of 75% and specificity of 93.6% (from studies using a direct approach, i.e., colonoscopy follow-up of all participants), the indirect approach would be expected to yield sensitivities between 84.5% and 91.1% and specificities between 93.4% and 93.6% under a range of realistic assumptions regarding colonoscopic follow-up rates of positive FITs and clinical manifestation rates of preclinical colorectal cancer. DISCUSSION: Very high sensitivities of FITs recently reported with seemingly very high levels of precision by several large-scale registry-based studies, which are in line with expected results based on our model calculations, are likely to be strongly overestimated and need to be interpreted with due caution.

Quantitative fecal immunochemical tests for colorectal cancer screening.

Fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for hemoglobin (Hb) are increasingly used for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. We aimed to review, summarize and compare reported diagnostic performance of various FITs. PubMed and Web of Science were searched from inception to July 24, 2017. Data on diagnostic performance of quantitative FITs, conducted in colonoscopy-controlled average-risk screening populations, were extracted. Summary receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted and correlations between thresholds, positivity rates (PRs), sensitivities and specificities were assessed. Seven test brands were investigated across 22 studies. Although reported sensitivities for CRC, advanced adenoma (AA) and any advanced neoplasm (AN) varied widely (ranges: 25-100%, 6-44% and 9-60%, respectively), with specificities for AN ranging from 82% to 99%, the estimates were very close to the respective summary ROC curves whose areas under the curve (95% CI) were 0.905 (0.88-0.94), 0.683 (0.67-0.70) and 0.710 (0.70-0.72) for CRC, AA and AN, respectively. The seemingly large heterogeneity essentially reflected variations in test thresholds (range: 2-82 µg Hb/g feces) and showed moderate correlations with sensitivity (r = -0.49) and specificity (r = 0.60) for AN. By contrast, observed PRs (range: 1-21%) almost perfectly correlated with sensitivity (r = 0.84) and specificity (r = -0.94) for AN. The apparent large heterogeneity in diagnostic performance between various FITs can be almost completely overcome by appropriate threshold adjustments. Instead of simply applying the threshold recommended by the manufacturer, screening programs should adjust the threshold to yield a desired PR which is a very good proxy indicator for the specificity and the subsequent colonoscopy workload.

Variation of Positive Predictive Values of Fecal Immunochemical Tests by Polygenic Risk Score in a Large Screening Cohort.

INTRODUCTION: Prevalence of colorectal neoplasms varies by polygenic risk scores (PRS). We aimed to assess to what extent a PRS might be relevant for defining personalized cutoff values for fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) in colorectal cancer screening. METHODS: Among 5,306 participants of screening colonoscopy who provided a stool sample for a quantitative FIT (Ridascreen Hemoglobin or FOB Gold) before colonoscopy, a PRS was determined, based on the number of risk alleles in 140 single nucleotide polymorphisms. Subjects were classified into low, medium, and high genetic risk of colorectal neoplasms according to PRS tertiles. We calculated positive predictive values (PPVs) and numbers needed to scope (NNS) to detect 1 advanced neoplasm (AN) by the risk group, and cutoff variation needed to achieve comparable PPVs across risk groups in the samples tested with Ridascreen (N = 1,271) and FOB Gold (N = 4,035) independently, using cutoffs yielding 85%, 90%, or 95% specificity. RESULTS: Performance of both FITs was very similar within each PRS group. For a given cutoff, PPVs were consistently higher by 11%-15% units in the high-risk PRS group compared with the low-risk group (all P values < 0.05). Correspondingly, NNS to detect 1 advanced neoplasm varied from 2 (high PRS, high cutoff) to 5 (low PRS, low cutoff). Conversely, very different FIT cutoffs would be needed to ensure comparable PPVs across PRS groups. DISCUSSION: PPVs and NNS of FITs varied widely across people with high and low genetic risk score. Further research should evaluate the relevance of these differences for personalized colorectal cancer screening.

Risk Factors of Inadequate Bowel Preparation for Screening Colonoscopy.

The success of a colonoscopy in detecting and removing pre-cancerous and cancerous lesions depends heavily on the quality of bowel preparation. Despite efforts, 20-44% of colonoscopy participants have an inadequate bowel preparation. We aimed to assess and compare risk factors for inadequate bowel preparation and for the presence of advanced colorectal neoplasms in routine screening practice. In this cross-sectional study, among 8125 participants of screening colonoscopy in Germany with a comprehensive assessment of sociodemographic factors, lifestyle and medical history, we examined factors associated with inadequate bowel preparation and with findings of advanced neoplasms using adjusted log-binomial regression models. Among the identified risk factors assessed, three factors were identified that were significantly associated with inadequate bowel preparation: age ≥ 70 years (adjusted prevalence ratios, aPR, 1.50 95%CI 1.31-1.71), smoking (aPR 1.29 95%CI 1.11-1.50) and abdominal symptoms (aPR 1.14 95%CI 1.02-1.27). The same risk factors were also associated with the prevalence of advanced neoplasms in our study (aPR 1.72, 1.62 and 1.44, respectively). The risk factors associated with inadequate bowel preparation in this study were also associated with a higher risk for advanced neoplasms. Inadequate bowel preparation for colonoscopy might lead to missed colorectal cancer (CRC) precursors and the late diagnosis of CRC. People at high risk of advanced neoplasms are in particular need of enhanced bowel preparation.

Fecal Immunochemical Tests Detect Screening Participants with Multiple Advanced Adenomas Better than T1 Colorectal Cancers.

BACKGROUND: Fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) are widely used for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. The detection of early-stage cancer and advanced adenoma (AA), the most important premalignant lesion, is highly relevant to reducing CRC-related deaths. We aimed to assess sensitivity for the detection of CRC and AA stratified by tumor stage; number; size; histology of AA; and by location, age, sex, and body mass index (BMI). METHODS: Participants of screening colonoscopy (n = 2043) and newly diagnosed CRC patients (n = 184) provided a stool sample before bowel preparation or CRC surgery. Fecal hemoglobin concentration was determined in parallel by nine different quantitative FITs among 94 CRC patients, 200 AA cases, and 300 participants free of advanced neoplasm. Sensitivities were calculated at original cutoffs and at adjusted cutoffs, yielding 93% specificity among all FITs. RESULTS: At adjusted cutoffs, UICC stage I cancers yielded consistently lower sensitivities (range: 62-68%) compared to stage II-IV cancers (range: 73-89%). An even stronger gradient was observed according to T status, with substantially lower sensitivities for T1 (range: 39-57%) than for T2-T4 cancers (range: 71-100%). Sensitivities for the detection of participants with multiple AAs ranged from 55% to 64% and were by up to 25% points higher than sensitivities for T1 cancers. CONCLUSIONS: FITs detect stage I cancers and especially T1 cancers at substantially lower sensitivities than more advanced cancer stages. Participants with multiple AAs were detected with slightly lower sensitivities than stage I cancers and with even higher sensitivities than T1 cancers. Further research should focus on improving the detection of early-stage cancers.

Consistent Major Differences in Sex- and Age-Specific Diagnostic Performance among Nine Faecal Immunochemical Tests Used for Colorectal Cancer Screening.

Evidence on diagnostic performance of faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) by sex and age is scarce. We aimed to evaluate FIT performance for detection of advanced colorectal neoplasia (AN) by sex and age across nine different FIT brands in a colonoscopy-controlled setting. The faecal samples were obtained from 2042 participants of colonoscopy screening. All eligible cases with AN (n = 216) and 300 randomly selected participants without AN were included. Diagnostic performance for detection of AN was assessed by sex and age (50-64 vs. 65-79 years for each of the nine FITs individually and for all FITs combined. Sensitivity was consistently lower, and specificity was consistently higher for females as compared with males (pooled values at original FIT cutoffs, 25.7% vs. 34.6%, p = 0.12 and 96.2% vs. 90.8%, p < 0.01, respectively). Positive predictive values (PPVs) were similar between both sexes, but negative predictive values (NPVs) were consistently higher for females (pooled values, 91.8% vs. 86.6%, p < 0.01). Sex-specific cutoffs attenuated differences in sensitivities but increased differences in predictive values. According to age, sensitivities and specificities were similar, whereas PPVs were consistently lower and NPVs were consistently higher for the younger participants. A negative FIT is less reliable in ruling out AN among men than among women and among older than among younger participants. Comparisons of measures of diagnostic performance among studies with different sex or age distributions should be interpreted with caution.

The Effects of Different Invitation Schemes on the Use of Fecal Occult Blood Tests for Colorectal Cancer Screening: Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Personal invitations for fecal occult blood tests (nowadays mostly fecal immunochemical tests) are increasingly used to raise their usage for colorectal cancer screening. However, there is a large heterogeneity in applied invitation schemes. We aimed to review evidence for the effectiveness of various invitation schemes. The main outcome was the fecal occult blood test usage rate. A systematic search was performed in Medline and Web of Science (up to 9 July 2020). Randomized controlled trials or cluster-randomized controlled trials were eligible, which reported on general invitations for fecal occult blood test-based colorectal cancer screening sent to the general population at average colorectal cancer risk. (PROSPERO 2020 CRD42020169409). Overall, 34 studies were included. Invitations with an attached, i.e., mailed fecal occult blood test consistently increased test usage by 4-19.7% points, compared to other methods of test provision. Likewise, the introduction of advance notification consistently led to a higher usage rate, with an increase of 3.3-10.8% points. Reminders showed positive but varying effects by method. With an increase of 8.5-15.8% points, letter or email reminders were more effective than reminders by phone call or text message (0.6-6.5% points). Inconsistent results were found for financial incentives ((-8.4)-20% points) and for added or changed invitation material ((-3.5)-11.8% points). With 3.5-24.7% points, the strongest increases in use were achieved by multifaceted invitation, implementing multiple components. Any invitation scheme was superior over no invitation. Advance notification, mailing of fecal occult blood test, and reminders were consistently shown to have major, complementary potential to increase participation in fecal occult blood test-based colorectal cancer screening settings.

Probiotic/Synbiotic Treatment and Postoperative Complications in Colorectal Cancer Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Post-CRC resection complications and lower quality of life (QoL) are associated with a lower long-term survival. Perioperative administration of probiotics/synbiotics might lower prevalence of side effects and improve QoL and survival among CRC patients. Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane database, Embase, and clinical trials registries were searched in January 2020. Altogether, 16 randomized placebo-controlled probiotic/synbiotic clinical trials that included patients undergoing CRC surgery and investigated postoperative complications and QoL side effects were found. Meta-analyses using random-effects model were performed on data from 11 studies to calculate the effects of probiotics/synbiotics on common CRC resection postoperative side effects and complications. Perioperative probiotics/synbiotics administration was associated with lower infection incidence (odds ratio [OR] = 0.34, P < 0.001), lower diarrheal incidence (OR = 0.38, P < 0.001), faster return to normal gut function (mean difference [MD] -0.66 days, P < 0.001), shorter postoperative antibiotics use (MD -0.64 days, P < 0.001), lower incidence of septicemia (OR = 0.31, P < 0.001), and shorter length of hospital stay (MD -0.41 days, P = 0.110). The results support the hypothesis that short-term perioperative administration of probiotics/synbiotics, which are easy to administer, have few side-effects, and are low cost compared with alternatives, might help to alleviate gastrointestinal symptoms and postoperative complications among CRC patients.

Impact of Inadequate Bowel Cleansing on Colonoscopic Findings in Routine Screening Practice.

INTRODUCTION: Colonoscopy is an imperfect gold standard for detecting colorectal neoplasms because some proportion of adenomas may be missed, mainly small lesions. This proportion is expected to be higher in case of inadequate bowel cleansing, which is frequently seen in routine practice. We estimated the proportions of neoplasms that are in principle detectable by colonoscopy but might be missed in case of incomplete bowel preparation. METHODS: For 8,193 participants of screening colonoscopy in South-Western Germany, recruited between 2005 and 2016, the prevalence and numbers of different findings were extracted from colonoscopy reports and compared according to the reported bowel preparation quality. RESULTS: Bowel preparation quality was reported as good, poor, or was unspecified in 30.3%, 11.1%, and 58.6% of colonoscopy records. Reported prevalences of nonadvanced adenomas (NAAs) were similar among participants with poor and unspecified bowel preparation quality but substantially lower than among participants with good bowel preparation (adjusted prevalence rate ratio [RR] 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.77-0.96). The differences were observed for proximal but not for distal NAAs (RRs 0.82, 95% CI: 0.71-0.95 and 0.95, 95% CI: 0.82-1.10). DISCUSSION: Our study suggests that a significant proportion of NAAs located in the proximal colon might be missed during colonoscopy if bowel cleansing is not adequate. Major efforts should be made to further facilitate and enhance high-quality bowel preparation in routine screening practice.

Combination of Different Fecal Immunochemical Tests in Colorectal Cancer Screening: Any Gain in Diagnostic Performance?

A variety of fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) are used for colorectal cancer screening. FIT performance could be improved further. It is unclear, whether the combination of different FITs with different analytical characteristics (such as, different antibodies for the detection of fecal hemoglobin) can yield a better diagnostic performance. Fecal samples were obtained from 2042 participants of screening colonoscopy. All participants with advanced neoplasm (AN, colorectal cancer (n = 16) or advanced adenoma (n = 200)) and 300 randomly selected participants without AN were included. Nine quantitative FITs were evaluated simultaneously. Sensitivity and specificity was calculated for single tests (n = 9) and for their pairwise test combinations (n = 36) (requiring either both FITs (P++) or at least one FIT (P+) to be positive for defining a positive test result). Mean age of the participants (n = 516) was 63 (range: 50⁻79) years and 56% were men. At cutoffs yielding a specificity of 96.7% for single FITs, the median gain in specificity by P++ combination was +1.0%, whereas the median loss in sensitivity for AN was -4.2%. For P+ combination the median gain in sensitivity for AN was +2.8%, at a prize of median loss of -1.0% of specificity. Combinations of different FITs do not yield any relevant gain in diagnostic performance.

Fecal Immunochemical Tests for Colorectal Cancer Screening: Is Fecal Sampling from Multiple Sites Necessary?

Fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for hemoglobin (Hb) are increasingly used for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Most FIT manufacturers instruct that fecal samples from multiple parts of one bowel movement should be obtained. Our aim was to compare the FIT diagnostic performance based on fecal samples from just one versus two different sites of one bowel movement. A total of 1141 participants of screening colonoscopy provided two fecal samples from two different sites of a single bowel movement for FIT analyses. There was no statistically significant difference in the diagnostic performance of the FIT when either one or both fecal samples were used for analysis, with area under the curve (AUC) for detecting CRC ranging from 0.94 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84⁻0.99) for one FIT to 0.95 (95%CI 0.86⁻0.99) for a geometric mean of two FITs. The manufacturers' recommendation of sampling multiple sites of the stool aims to reduce intra-individual Hb variability and improve diagnostic performance. If no such improvement can be achieved, the recommendation for multiple-site sampling might have potential adverse effects on population adherence to FIT-based CRC screening. Our results point to a potential of increasing adherence to FIT screening by simplifying instructions for fecal sampling at no loss of the diagnostic performance.

Evaluation and Validation of Plasma Proteins Using Two Different Protein Detection Methods for Early Detection of Colorectal Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Plasma protein biomarkers could be an efficient alternative for population-based screening for early detection of colorectal cancer (CRC). The objective of this study was to evaluate and validate plasma proteins individually and as a signature for early detection of CRC. METHODS: In a three-stage design, proteins were measured firstly by liquid chromatography/multiple reaction monitoring-mass spectrometry (LC/MRM-MS) and later by proximity extension assay (PEA) in a discovery set consisting of 96 newly diagnosed CRC cases and 94 controls free of neoplasms at screening colonoscopy. Two algorithms (one for each measurement method) were derived by Lasso regression and .632+ bootstrap based on 11 proteins that were included in both the LC/MRM-MS and PEA measurements. Additionally, another algorithm was constructed from the same eleven biomarkers plus amphireglin, the most promising protein marker in the PEA measurements that had not been available from the LC/MRM-MS measurements. Lastly the three prediction signatures were validated with PEA in independent samples of participants of screening colonoscopy (CRC (n = 56), advanced adenoma (n = 101), and participants free of neoplasm (n = 102)). RESULTS: The same four proteins were included in all three prediction signatures; mannan binding lectin serine protease 1, osteopontin, serum paraoxonase lactonase 3 and transferrin receptor protein 1, and the third prediction signature additionally included amphiregulin. In the independent validation set from a true screening setting, the five-marker blood-based signature including AREG presented areas under the curves of 0.82 (95% CI, 0.74-0.89), 0.86 (95% CI, 0.77-0.92) and 0.76 (95% CI, 0.64-0.86) for all, early and late stages CRC, respectively. CONCLUSION: Two different measurement methods consistently identified four protein markers and an algorithm additionally including amphiregulin, a marker measured by PEA only, showed promising performance for detecting early stage CRC in an independent validation in a true screening setting. These proteins may be potential candidates for blood-based tests for early detection of CRC.

Direct comparison of ten quantitative fecal immunochemical tests for hemoglobin stability in colorectal cancer screening.

OBJECTIVES: To systematically investigate and directly compare, for the first time, the sample stability of a large number of quantitative fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) at different storage conditions. METHODS: Stool samples were obtained from participants of the German screening colonoscopy program between 2005 and 2010. After an initial FIT-based hemoglobin (Hb) measurement, stool samples were kept frozen at -80 °C until analysis. Twenty randomly selected participants with initial measurements ranging from 10 to 100 µg Hb/g feces were included. Ten quantitative FITs were investigated in parallel. A defined stool amount was extracted using each manufacturer's brand-specific fecal sampling device and stored at 5 °C, 20 °C, and 35 °C, respectively. After 1, 4, 5, and 7 days, the samples were analyzed blinded. Median fecal Hb concentrations and positivity rates were calculated. RESULTS: Mean age of the participants was 67 years (range: 56-80 years) and 60% were male. The most advanced finding at screening colposcopy was advanced adenoma in five and non-advanced adenoma in eight cases. Hyperplastic polyps were found in two participants and five participants were without any findings. At 5 °C storage temperature, almost all FITs showed fairly stable results throughout the 7-day observation period. At 20 °C, most FITs still showed fairly stable results over 4 days, whereas positivity rates significantly declined from day 4 on for most FITs at 35 °C. Major differences regarding the sample stability between FITs were observed. CONCLUSION: FIT-specific Hb decay according to ambient temperature and time period between sampling and test evaluation requires careful consideration in the design of FIT-based screening programs.