Diagnostic accuracy of risk assessment and fecal immunochemical test in colorectal cancer screening: Results from a population‐based program and meta‐analysis

Author:

Wang Ziyang12,Teng Jiaoyue12,Wu Weimiao12,Dou Jianming3,Wong Martin C. S.4,Gong Yangming3,Huang Junjie4ORCID,Gu Kai3,Xu Wanghong12ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Epidemiology Fudan University School of Public Health Shanghai China

2. Yiwu Research Institute Fudan University Yiwu China

3. The Shanghai Municipal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Shanghai China

4. Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine The Chinese University of Hong Kong Hong Kong China

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundFecal immunochemical test (FIT) is a commonly used initial test for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Parallel use of FIT with risk assessment (RA) could improve the detection of non‐bleeding lesions, but at the expense of compromising sensitivity. In this study, we evaluated the accuracy of FIT and/or RA in the Shanghai CRC screening program, and systematically reviewed the relevant evaluations worldwide.MethodsRA and 2‐specimen FIT were used in parallel in the Shanghai screening program, followed by a colonoscopy among those with positive results. Sensitivity, specificity, detection rate of CRC, positive predictive value (PPV), and other measures with their 95% confident intervals were calculated for each type of tests and several assumed combined tests. We further searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library for relevant studies published in English up to January 5, 2022.ResultsBy the end of 2019, a total of 1,901,360 participants of the screening program completed 3,045,108 tests, with 1,901,360 first‐time tests and 1,143,748 subsequent tests. Parallel use of RA and 2‐specimen FIT achieved a sensitivity of 0.78 (0.77–0.80), a specificity of 0.78 (0.78–0.78), PPV of 0.89% (0.86–0.92), and a detection rate of 1.99 (1.93–2.05) for CRC per 1000 among participants enrolled in the first screening round, and performed similarly among those who participated for several times. A meta‐analysis of 103 published observational studies demonstrated a higher sensitivity [0.76 (0.36, 0.94)] but a much lower specificity [0.59 (0.28, 0.85)] of parallel use of RA and FIT for detecting CRC in average‐risk populations than in our subjects. One‐specimen FIT, the most commonly used initial test, had a pooled specificity comparable to the Shanghai screening program (0.92 vs. 0.91), but a much higher pooled sensitivity (0.76 vs. 0.57).ConclusionOur results indicate the limitation of FIT only as an initial screening test for CRC in Chinese populations, and highlight the higher sensitivity of parallel use of RA and FIT. Attempts should be made to optimize RA to improve effectiveness of screening in the populations.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Cancer Research,Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and imaging,Oncology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3