Meta‐analysis: adherence to colorectal cancer screening and the detection rate for advanced neoplasia, according to the type of screening test

Hassan, Cesare; Rossi, Paolo Giorgi; Camilloni, Laura; Rex, Douglas K.; Jimenez-Cendales, B.; Ferroni, Eliana; Borgia, Piero; Zullo, Angelo; Guasticchi, Gabriella; Group, HTA

doi:10.1111/apt.12071

Cited by 131 publications

(108 citation statements)

References 48 publications

(77 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The actual participation rates for each round are in keeping those reported previously for FIT [30,31]. Similarly, there were no significant changes in the sex or age profile of the respondents between the two rounds.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 65%

Sustained participation, colonoscopy uptake and adenoma detection rates over two rounds of the Tallaght–Trinity College colorectal cancer screening programme with the faecal immunological test

McNamara

Leen

Seng-Lee

et al. 2014

European Journal of Gastroenterology &Amp; Hepatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 65%

Sustained participation, colonoscopy uptake and adenoma detection rates over two rounds of the Tallaght–Trinity College colorectal cancer screening programme with the faecal immunological test

McNamara

Leen

Seng-Lee

et al. 2014

European Journal of Gastroenterology &Amp; Hepatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Because of the slow progression from detectable and curable precancerous lesions to colorectal cancer and the strong dependence of prognosis on stage at diagnosis, early detection of colorectal cancer has great potential to reduce the burden of this disease (2)(3)(4). Colonoscopy is the gold standard for detecting colorectal cancer and its precursors, but its application as primary screening test is impaired by high costs, limited capacities, and typically lower adherence (5,6). Noninvasive stool tests are an attractive alternative for colorectal cancer screening due to their low cost and suitability for home use or in a primary care setting.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of a 5-Marker Blood Test for Colorectal Cancer Early Detection in a Colorectal Cancer Screening Setting

Werner

Krause

Rolny

et al. 2016

Clinical Cancer Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: In initial studies that included colorectal cancer patients undergoing diagnostic colonoscopy, we had identified a serum marker combination able to detect colorectal cancer with similar diagnostic performance as fecal immunochemical test (FIT). In this study, we aimed to validate the results in participants of a large colorectal cancer screening study conducted in the average-risk, asymptomatic screening population.Experimental Design: We tested serum samples from 1,200 controls, 420 advanced adenoma patients, 4 carcinoma in situ patients, and 36 colorectal cancer patients with a 5-marker blood test [carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA)þanti-p53þosteopontinþ sepraseþferritin]. The diagnostic performance of individual markers and marker combinations was assessed and compared with stool test results.Results: AUCs for the detection of colorectal cancer and advanced adenomas with the 5-marker blood test were 0.78 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.68-0.87] and 0.56 (95% CI, 0.53-0.59), respectively, which now is comparable with guaiacbased fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) but inferior to FIT. With cutoffs yielding specificities of 80%, 90%, and 95%, the sensitivities for the detection of colorectal cancer were 64%, 50%, and 42%, and early-stage cancers were detected as well as late-stage cancers. For osteopontin, seprase, and ferritin, the diagnostic performance in the screening setting was reduced compared with previous studies in diagnostic settings while CEA and anti-p53 showed similar diagnostic performance in both settings.Conclusions: Performance of the 5-marker blood test under screening conditions is inferior to FIT even though it is still comparable with the performance of gFOBT. CEA and anti-p53 could contribute to the development of a multiple marker blood-based test for early detection of colorectal cancer.

show abstract

“…Due to the slow progression from precancerous lesions to colorectal cancer, early detection could strongly reduce the burden of this disease (2)(3)(4)(5). However, sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy, the current gold standards for detection of colorectal cancer in the distal and total colorectum, respectively, are limited by several disadvantages, such as high costs, limited resources, and low compliance (6,7). Established noninvasive screening tests are based on stool testing, such as guaiac-based fecal occult blood tests (gFOBT) and fecal immunochemical tests (FIT).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Head-to-Head Comparison and Evaluation of 92 Plasma Protein Biomarkers for Early Detection of Colorectal Cancer in a True Screening Setting

Chen

Zucknick

Werner

et al. 2015

Clinical Cancer Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Novel noninvasive blood-based screening tests are strongly desirable for early detection of colorectal cancer. We aimed to conduct a head-to-head comparison of the diagnostic performance of 92 plasma-based tumor-associated protein biomarkers for early detection of colorectal cancer in a true screening setting.Experimental Design: Among all available 35 carriers of colorectal cancer and a representative sample of 54 men and women free of colorectal neoplasms recruited in a cohort of screening colonoscopy participants in 2005-2012 (N ¼ 5,516), the plasma levels of 92 protein biomarkers were measured. ROC analyses were conducted to evaluate the diagnostic performance. A multimarker algorithm was developed through the Lasso logistic regression model and validated in an independent validation set. The .632þ bootstrap method was used to adjust for the potential overestimation of diagnostic performance.Results: Seventeen protein markers were identified to show statistically significant differences in plasma levels between colorectal cancer cases and controls. The adjusted area under the ROC curves (AUC) of these 17 individual markers ranged from 0.55 to 0.70. An eight-marker classifier was constructed that increased the adjusted AUC to 0.77 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.59-0.91]. When validating this algorithm in an independent validation set, the AUC was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.65-0.85), and sensitivities at cutoff levels yielding 80% and 90% specificities were 65% (95% CI, 41-80%) and 44% (95% CI, 24-72%), respectively.Conclusions: The identified profile of protein biomarkers could contribute to the development of a powerful multimarker blood-based test for early detection of colorectal cancer.

show abstract

Meta‐analysis: adherence to colorectal cancer screening and the detection rate for advanced neoplasia, according to the type of screening test

Abstract: SUMMARY BackgroundA variety of tests have been proposed for colorectal cancer (CRC), giving rise to uncertainty regarding the optimal approach. The efficacy and effectiveness of different tests are related to both screenee participation and the detection rate.

Cited by 131 publications

References 48 publications

Sustained participation, colonoscopy uptake and adenoma detection rates over two rounds of the Tallaght–Trinity College colorectal cancer screening programme with the faecal immunological test

Sustained participation, colonoscopy uptake and adenoma detection rates over two rounds of the Tallaght–Trinity College colorectal cancer screening programme with the faecal immunological test

Evaluation of a 5-Marker Blood Test for Colorectal Cancer Early Detection in a Colorectal Cancer Screening Setting

Head-to-Head Comparison and Evaluation of 92 Plasma Protein Biomarkers for Early Detection of Colorectal Cancer in a True Screening Setting

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About