41
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Faecal immunochemical tests (FIT) versus colonoscopy for surveillance after screening and polypectomy: a diagnostic accuracy and cost-effectiveness study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective

          The English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) recommends 3 yearly colonoscopy surveillance for patients at intermediate risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) postpolypectomy (those with three to four small adenomas or one ≥10 mm). We investigated whether faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) could reduce surveillance burden on patients and endoscopy services.

          Design

          Intermediate-risk patients (60–72 years) recommended 3 yearly surveillance were recruited within the BCSP (January 2012–December 2013). FITs were offered at 1, 2 and 3 years postpolypectomy. Invitees consenting and returning a year 1 FIT were included. Participants testing positive (haemoglobin ≥40 µg/g) at years one or two were offered colonoscopy early; all others were offered colonoscopy at 3 years. Diagnostic accuracy for CRC and advanced adenomas (AAs) was estimated considering multiple tests and thresholds. We calculated incremental costs per additional AA and CRC detected by colonoscopy versus FIT surveillance.

          Results

          74% (5938/8009) of invitees were included in our study having participated at year 1. Of these, 97% returned FITs at years 2 and 3. Three-year cumulative positivity was 13% at the 40 µg/g haemoglobin threshold and 29% at 10 µg/g. 29 participants were diagnosed with CRC and 446 with AAs. Three-year programme sensitivities for CRC and AAs were, respectively, 59% and 33% at 40 µg/g, and 72% and 57% at 10 µg/g. Incremental costs per additional AA and CRC detected by colonoscopy versus FIT (40 µg/g) surveillance were £7354 and £180 778, respectively.

          Conclusions

          Replacing 3 yearly colonoscopy surveillance in intermediate-risk patients with annual FIT could reduce colonoscopies by 71%, significantly cut costs but could miss 30%–40% of CRCs and 40%–70% of AAs.

          Trial registration number

          ISRCTN18040196; Results.

          Related collections

          Most cited references47

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Multitarget Stool DNA Testing for Colorectal-Cancer Screening

          An accurate, noninvasive test could improve the effectiveness of colorectal-cancer screening. We compared a noninvasive, multitarget stool DNA test with a fecal immunochemical test (FIT) in persons at average risk for colorectal cancer. The DNA test includes quantitative molecular assays for KRAS mutations, aberrant NDRG4 and BMP3 methylation, and β-actin, plus a hemoglobin immunoassay. Results were generated with the use of a logistic-regression algorithm, with values of 183 or more considered to be positive. FIT values of more than 100 ng of hemoglobin per milliliter of buffer were considered to be positive. Tests were processed independently of colonoscopic findings. Of the 9989 participants who could be evaluated, 65 (0.7%) had colorectal cancer and 757 (7.6%) had advanced precancerous lesions (advanced adenomas or sessile serrated polyps measuring ≥1 cm in the greatest dimension) on colonoscopy. The sensitivity for detecting colorectal cancer was 92.3% with DNA testing and 73.8% with FIT (P=0.002). The sensitivity for detecting advanced precancerous lesions was 42.4% with DNA testing and 23.8% with FIT (P<0.001). The rate of detection of polyps with high-grade dysplasia was 69.2% with DNA testing and 46.2% with FIT (P=0.004); the rates of detection of serrated sessile polyps measuring 1 cm or more were 42.4% and 5.1%, respectively (P<0.001). Specificities with DNA testing and FIT were 86.6% and 94.9%, respectively, among participants with nonadvanced or negative findings (P<0.001) and 89.8% and 96.4%, respectively, among those with negative results on colonoscopy (P<0.001). The numbers of persons who would need to be screened to detect one cancer were 154 with colonoscopy, 166 with DNA testing, and 208 with FIT. In asymptomatic persons at average risk for colorectal cancer, multitarget stool DNA testing detected significantly more cancers than did FIT but had more false positive results. (Funded by Exact Sciences; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01397747.).
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Genetic alterations during colorectal-tumor development.

            Because most colorectal carcinomas appear to arise from adenomas, studies of different stages of colorectal neoplasia may shed light on the genetic alterations involved in tumor progression. We looked for four genetic alterations (ras-gene mutations and allelic deletions of chromosomes 5, 17, and 18) in 172 colorectal-tumor specimens representing various stages of neoplastic development. The specimens consisted of 40 predominantly early-stage adenomas from 7 patients with familial adenomatous polyposis, 40 adenomas (19 without associated foci of carcinoma and 21 with such foci) from 33 patients without familial polyposis, and 92 carcinomas resected from 89 patients. We found that ras-gene mutations occurred in 58 percent of adenomas larger than 1 cm and in 47 percent of carcinomas. However, ras mutations were found in only 9 percent of adenomas under 1 cm in size. Sequences on chromosome 5 that are linked to the gene for familial adenomatous polyposis were not lost in adenomas from the patients with polyposis but were lost in 29 to 35 percent of adenomas and carcinomas, respectively, from other patients. A specific region of chromosome 18 was deleted frequently in carcinomas (73 percent) and in advanced adenomas (47 percent) but only occasionally in earlier-stage adenomas (11 to 13 percent). Chromosome 17p sequences were usually lost only in carcinomas (75 percent). The four molecular alterations accumulated in a fashion that paralleled the clinical progression of tumors. These results are consistent with a model of colorectal tumorigenesis in which the steps required for the development of cancer often involve the mutational activation of an oncogene coupled with the loss of several genes that normally suppress tumorigenesis.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Comparative lesion sequencing provides insights into tumor evolution.

              We show that the times separating the birth of benign, invasive, and metastatic tumor cells can be determined by analysis of the mutations they have in common. When combined with prior clinical observations, these analyses suggest the following general conclusions about colorectal tumorigenesis: (i) It takes approximately 17 years for a large benign tumor to evolve into an advanced cancer but <2 years for cells within that cancer to acquire the ability to metastasize; (ii) it requires few, if any, selective events to transform a highly invasive cancer cell into one with the capacity to metastasize; (iii) the process of cell culture ex vivo does not introduce new clonal mutations into colorectal tumor cell populations; and (iv) the rates at which point mutations develop in advanced cancers are similar to those of normal cells. These results have important implications for understanding human tumor pathogenesis, particularly those associated with metastasis.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Gut
                Gut
                gutjnl
                gut
                Gut
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                0017-5749
                1468-3288
                September 2019
                11 December 2018
                : 68
                : 9
                : 1642-1652
                Affiliations
                [1 ] departmentCancer Screening and Prevention Research Group (CSPRG), Department of Surgery and Cancer , Imperial College London , London, UK
                [2 ] Bowel Cancer Screening Programme Southern Hub , Guildford, UK
                [3 ] departmentDepartment of Applied Health Research , University College London , London, UK
                [4 ] departmentCentre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine , Queen Mary University , London, UK
                [5 ] departmentResearch Department of Behavioural Science and Health , University College London , London, UK
                [6 ] departmentFaculty of Health and Medical Sciences , University of Surrey , Guildford, UK
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Amanda J Cross, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London W2 1PG, UK; amanda.cross1@ 123456imperial.ac.uk
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0893-2377
                Article
                gutjnl-2018-317297
                10.1136/gutjnl-2018-317297
                6709777
                30538097
                af11e135-c744-458c-8e03-0dfea132e7db
                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 31 July 2018
                : 21 November 2018
                : 25 November 2018
                Funding
                Funded by: The Bobby Moore Fund for Cancer Research UK;
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000664, Health Technology Assessment Programme;
                Categories
                Colon
                1506
                2312
                Original article
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Gastroenterology & Hepatology
                adenoma,colorectal cancer,surveillance,stool markers,colonoscopy
                Gastroenterology & Hepatology
                adenoma, colorectal cancer, surveillance, stool markers, colonoscopy

                Comments

                Comment on this article