Impact of Fecal Hb Levels on Advanced Neoplasia Detection and the Diagnostic Miss Rate For Colorectal Cancer Screening in High‐Risk vs. Average‐Risk Subjects: a Multi‐Center Study. Issue 8 (August 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Aniwan, Satimai; Ratanachu‐Ek, Thawee; Pongprasobchai, Supot; Limsrivilai, Julajak; Praisontarangkul, Ong‐Ard; Pisespongsa, Pises; Mairiang, Pisaln; Sangchan, Apichat; Sottisuporn, Jaksin; Wisedopas, Naruemon; Kullavanijaya, Pinit; Rerknimitr, Rungsun
• Is Part Of: Clinical and translational gastroenterology. Volume 8:Issue 8(2017)
• Publication Date: 2017-08
• Subjects: Stomach -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Intestines -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Gastroenterology; Gastrointestinal Diseases; Liver Diseases; Intestines -- Diseases; Stomach -- Diseases; Periodical; Periodicals; Fulltext; Internet Resources; Periodicals; Electronic journals; 616.33
• DOI: 10.1038/ctg.2017.40
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2155-384X

Abstract

Abstract : OBJECTIVES: : The Asia‐Pacific Colorectal Screening (APCS) scoring system was developed to identify high‐risk subjects for advanced neoplasia. However, the appropriate fecal immunochemical test (FIT) cutoff for high‐risk population may be different from that of average‐risk population. We aimed to evaluate the FIT performance at different cutoffs in high‐risk subjects undergoing colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. METHODS: : We prospectively enrolled asymptomatic subjects aged 50–75 years. Using the APCS score, subjects were stratified into either the average‐risk or high‐risk groups. All subjects were tested with one‐time quantitative FIT and underwent colonoscopy. We compared the FIT performance for advanced neoplasia between two groups using different cutoffs (5 (FIT5), 10 (FIT10), 20 (FIT20), 30 (FIT30), and 40 (FIT40) μg Hb/g feces). RESULTS: : Overall, 1, 713 subjects were recruited, and 1, 222 (71.3%) and 491 (28.7%) were classified as average‐risk and high‐risk, respectively. Advanced neoplasia was detected in 90 (7.4%) of the average‐risk subjects and 65 (13.2%) of the high‐risk subjects. In the high‐risk group, by decreasing the cutoff from FIT40 to FIT5, the sensitivity increased by 33.8 percentage points with decreased specificity by 11 percentage points. In the average‐risk group, the sensitivity increased by 20 percentage points with decreased specificity by 9.6 percentage points. At the lowest cutoff (FIT5), the number of needed colonoscopies to find one advanced neoplasia was 2.8 and 6.1 for the high‐risk and average‐risk groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: : Using an appropriate FIT cutoff for CRC screening in high‐risk subjects could improve CRC screening performance and reduce the unnecessary colonoscopies. To maintain high sensitivity and specificity for advanced neoplasia, the optimal cutoff FIT in the high‐risk subjects should be lower than that in the average‐risk subjects.