AIM: To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of transfesrrin dipstick test (Tf) in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and precancerous lesions screening. METHODS: Eight hundreds and sixty-one individuals at high-ri...AIM: To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of transfesrrin dipstick test (Tf) in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and precancerous lesions screening. METHODS: Eight hundreds and sixty-one individuals at high-risk for CRC were recruited. Six hundreds and eleven subsequently received the three fecal occult blood tests and colonoscopy with biopsy performed as needed. Fecal samples were obtained on the day before colonoscopy. Tf, immuno fecal occult blood test (IFOBT) and guaiac fecal occult blood test (g-FOBT) were performed simultaneously on the same stool. To minimize false-negative cases, all subjects with negative samples were asked to provide an additional stool specimen for a second test even a third test. If the results were all negative after testing three repeated samples, the subject was considered a true negative. The performance characteristics of Tf for detecting CRC and precancerous lesions were examined and compared to those of IFOBT and the combination of Tf, IFOBT and g-FOBT. RESULTS: A total of six hundreds and eleven subjects met the study criteria including 25 with CRC and 60 with precancerous lesions. Sensitivity for detecting CRC was 92% for Tf and 96% for IFOBT, specificities of Tf and IFOBT were both 72.0% (95% CI: 68.2%-75.5%; χ2 = 0.4, P > 0.05); positive likelihood ratios of those were 3.3 (95% CI: 2.8-3.9) and 3.4 (95% CI: 2.9-4.0), respectively. In precancerous lesions, sensitivities for Tf and IFOBT were 50% and 58%, respectively (χ 2 = 0.8, P > 0.05); specificities of Tf and IFOBT were 71.5% (95% CI: 67.6%-75.1%) and 72.2% (95% CI: 68.4%-75.8%); positive likelihood ratios of those were 1.8 (95% CI: 1.3-2.3) and 2.1 (95% CI: 1.6-2.7), respectively; compared to IFOBT, g-FOBT+ Tf+ IFOBT had a significantly higher positive rate for precancerous lesions (83% vs 58%, respectively; χ 2 = 9.1, P < 0.05). In patients with CRC and precancerous lesions, the sensitivities of Tf and IFOBT were 62% and 69% (χ 2 = 0.9, P > 0.05); specificities of those were 74.5% (95% CI: 70.6%-78.1%) and 75.5% (95% CI: 71.6%-79.0%); positive likelihood ratios of those were 2.5 (95% CI: 2.0-3.1) and 2.8 (95% CI: 2.3-3.5). Compared to IF-OBT alone, combining g-FOBT, IFOBT and Tf led to significantly increased sensitivity for detecting CRC and cancerous lesions (69% vs 88%, respectively; χ 2 = 9.0, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Tf dipstick test might be used as an ad- ditional tool for CRC and precancerous lesions screening in a high-risk cohort.展开更多
Small bowel capsule endoscopy is a minimally-invasive endoscopic investigation that is often used in clinical practice to investigate overt or occult gastrointestinal(GI) bleeding among other clinical indications. Int...Small bowel capsule endoscopy is a minimally-invasive endoscopic investigation that is often used in clinical practice to investigate overt or occult gastrointestinal(GI) bleeding among other clinical indications. International guidance recommends small bowel capsule endoscopy as a first-line investigation to detect abnormalities in the small bowel, when gastroscopy and colonoscopy fail to identify a cause of GI bleeding. It can diagnose with accuracy abnormalities in the small bowel. However, there has been increasing evidence indicating that small bowel capsule endoscopy may also detect lesions outside the small intestine that are within the reach of conventional endoscopy and have been probably missed during prior endoscopic investigations. Such lesions vary from vascular deformities to malignancy and their detection often alters patient management, leading to further endoscopic and/or surgical interventions. The current study attempts to review all available studies in the literature and summarise their relevant findings.展开更多
BACKGROUND The quantitative faecal immunochemical test for haemoglobin(FIT) has been revealed to be highly accurate for colorectal cancer(CRC) detection not only in a screening setting, but also in the assessment of p...BACKGROUND The quantitative faecal immunochemical test for haemoglobin(FIT) has been revealed to be highly accurate for colorectal cancer(CRC) detection not only in a screening setting, but also in the assessment of patients presenting lower bowel symptoms. Therefore, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has recommended the adoption of FIT in primary care to guide referral for suspected CRC in low-risk symptomatic patients using a 10 μg Hb/g faeces threshold.Nevertheless, it is unknown whether FIT′s accuracy remains stable throughout the broad spectrum of possible symptoms.AIM To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess FIT accuracy for CRC detection in different clinical settings.METHODS A systematic literature search was performed using MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from inception to May 2018 to conduct a meta-analysis of prospective studies including symptomatic patients that evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of quantitative FIT for CRC detection. Studies were classified on the basis of brand,threshold of faecal haemoglobin concentration for a positive test result,percentage of reported symptoms(solely symptomatic, mixed cohorts) and CRC prevalence(< 2.5%, ≥ 2.5%) to limit heterogeneity and perform subgroup analysis to assess the influence of clinical spectrum on FIT′s accuracy to detect CRC.RESULTS Fifteen cohorts including 13073 patients(CRC prevalence 0.4% to 16.8%) were identified. Pooled estimates of sensitivity for studies using OC-Sensor at 10 μg Hb/g faeces threshold(n = 10400) was 89.6% [95% confidence interval(CI): 82.7%to 94.0%). However, pooled estimates of sensitivity for studies formed solely by symptomatic patients(n = 4035) and mixed cohorts(n = 6365) were 94.1%(95%CI: 90.0% to 96.6%) and 85.5%(95%CI: 76.5% to 91.4%) respectively(P <0.01), while there were no statistically significant differences between pooled sensitivity of studies with CRC prevalence < 2.5%(84.9%, 95%CI: 73.4% to 92.0%)and ≥ 2.5%(91.7%, 95%CI: 83.3% to 96.1%)(P = 0.25). At the same threshold, OCSensor? sensitivity to rule out any significant colonic lesion was 78.6%(95%CI:75.6% to 81.4%). We found substantial heterogeneity especially when assessing specificity.CONCLUSION The results of this meta-analysis confirm that, regardless of CRC prevalence,quantitative FIT is highly sensitive for CRC detection. However, FIT ability to rule out CRC is higher in studies solely including symptomatic patients.展开更多
基金Supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China,No. 81071832the Key Scientific Research Project of the Health Bureau of Hubei Province, No. JX5A01
文摘AIM: To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of transfesrrin dipstick test (Tf) in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and precancerous lesions screening. METHODS: Eight hundreds and sixty-one individuals at high-risk for CRC were recruited. Six hundreds and eleven subsequently received the three fecal occult blood tests and colonoscopy with biopsy performed as needed. Fecal samples were obtained on the day before colonoscopy. Tf, immuno fecal occult blood test (IFOBT) and guaiac fecal occult blood test (g-FOBT) were performed simultaneously on the same stool. To minimize false-negative cases, all subjects with negative samples were asked to provide an additional stool specimen for a second test even a third test. If the results were all negative after testing three repeated samples, the subject was considered a true negative. The performance characteristics of Tf for detecting CRC and precancerous lesions were examined and compared to those of IFOBT and the combination of Tf, IFOBT and g-FOBT. RESULTS: A total of six hundreds and eleven subjects met the study criteria including 25 with CRC and 60 with precancerous lesions. Sensitivity for detecting CRC was 92% for Tf and 96% for IFOBT, specificities of Tf and IFOBT were both 72.0% (95% CI: 68.2%-75.5%; χ2 = 0.4, P > 0.05); positive likelihood ratios of those were 3.3 (95% CI: 2.8-3.9) and 3.4 (95% CI: 2.9-4.0), respectively. In precancerous lesions, sensitivities for Tf and IFOBT were 50% and 58%, respectively (χ 2 = 0.8, P > 0.05); specificities of Tf and IFOBT were 71.5% (95% CI: 67.6%-75.1%) and 72.2% (95% CI: 68.4%-75.8%); positive likelihood ratios of those were 1.8 (95% CI: 1.3-2.3) and 2.1 (95% CI: 1.6-2.7), respectively; compared to IFOBT, g-FOBT+ Tf+ IFOBT had a significantly higher positive rate for precancerous lesions (83% vs 58%, respectively; χ 2 = 9.1, P < 0.05). In patients with CRC and precancerous lesions, the sensitivities of Tf and IFOBT were 62% and 69% (χ 2 = 0.9, P > 0.05); specificities of those were 74.5% (95% CI: 70.6%-78.1%) and 75.5% (95% CI: 71.6%-79.0%); positive likelihood ratios of those were 2.5 (95% CI: 2.0-3.1) and 2.8 (95% CI: 2.3-3.5). Compared to IF-OBT alone, combining g-FOBT, IFOBT and Tf led to significantly increased sensitivity for detecting CRC and cancerous lesions (69% vs 88%, respectively; χ 2 = 9.0, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Tf dipstick test might be used as an ad- ditional tool for CRC and precancerous lesions screening in a high-risk cohort.
文摘Small bowel capsule endoscopy is a minimally-invasive endoscopic investigation that is often used in clinical practice to investigate overt or occult gastrointestinal(GI) bleeding among other clinical indications. International guidance recommends small bowel capsule endoscopy as a first-line investigation to detect abnormalities in the small bowel, when gastroscopy and colonoscopy fail to identify a cause of GI bleeding. It can diagnose with accuracy abnormalities in the small bowel. However, there has been increasing evidence indicating that small bowel capsule endoscopy may also detect lesions outside the small intestine that are within the reach of conventional endoscopy and have been probably missed during prior endoscopic investigations. Such lesions vary from vascular deformities to malignancy and their detection often alters patient management, leading to further endoscopic and/or surgical interventions. The current study attempts to review all available studies in the literature and summarise their relevant findings.
文摘BACKGROUND The quantitative faecal immunochemical test for haemoglobin(FIT) has been revealed to be highly accurate for colorectal cancer(CRC) detection not only in a screening setting, but also in the assessment of patients presenting lower bowel symptoms. Therefore, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has recommended the adoption of FIT in primary care to guide referral for suspected CRC in low-risk symptomatic patients using a 10 μg Hb/g faeces threshold.Nevertheless, it is unknown whether FIT′s accuracy remains stable throughout the broad spectrum of possible symptoms.AIM To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess FIT accuracy for CRC detection in different clinical settings.METHODS A systematic literature search was performed using MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from inception to May 2018 to conduct a meta-analysis of prospective studies including symptomatic patients that evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of quantitative FIT for CRC detection. Studies were classified on the basis of brand,threshold of faecal haemoglobin concentration for a positive test result,percentage of reported symptoms(solely symptomatic, mixed cohorts) and CRC prevalence(< 2.5%, ≥ 2.5%) to limit heterogeneity and perform subgroup analysis to assess the influence of clinical spectrum on FIT′s accuracy to detect CRC.RESULTS Fifteen cohorts including 13073 patients(CRC prevalence 0.4% to 16.8%) were identified. Pooled estimates of sensitivity for studies using OC-Sensor at 10 μg Hb/g faeces threshold(n = 10400) was 89.6% [95% confidence interval(CI): 82.7%to 94.0%). However, pooled estimates of sensitivity for studies formed solely by symptomatic patients(n = 4035) and mixed cohorts(n = 6365) were 94.1%(95%CI: 90.0% to 96.6%) and 85.5%(95%CI: 76.5% to 91.4%) respectively(P <0.01), while there were no statistically significant differences between pooled sensitivity of studies with CRC prevalence < 2.5%(84.9%, 95%CI: 73.4% to 92.0%)and ≥ 2.5%(91.7%, 95%CI: 83.3% to 96.1%)(P = 0.25). At the same threshold, OCSensor? sensitivity to rule out any significant colonic lesion was 78.6%(95%CI:75.6% to 81.4%). We found substantial heterogeneity especially when assessing specificity.CONCLUSION The results of this meta-analysis confirm that, regardless of CRC prevalence,quantitative FIT is highly sensitive for CRC detection. However, FIT ability to rule out CRC is higher in studies solely including symptomatic patients.
