6533b834fe1ef96bd129cc3f

RESEARCH PRODUCT

Comparison between a guaiac and three immunochemical faecal occult blood tests in screening for colorectal cancer

Bernard DenisJean FaivreChristine PietteRomuald LevillainJérôme ViguierJ.m. BidanVincent DancourtJf BretagneEtienne DorvalC. JardS. JungPh. Perrin

subject

AdenomaMaleCancer Researchmedicine.medical_specialtyColorectal cancerhealth care facilities manpower and serviceseducationColonoscopyGastroenterologyScreening programmeFecesHemoglobinsPredictive Value of TestsInternal medicineBiomarkers TumormedicineHumansMass Screeninghealth care economics and organizationsAgedmedicine.diagnostic_testAdvanced adenomasbusiness.industryCarcinomaColonoscopyFaecal occult bloodMiddle Agedmedicine.diseaseImmunohistochemistrydigestive system diseasessurgical procedures operativeOncologyOccult BloodPredictive value of testsFemaleFranceDetection rateFaecal occult blood testColorectal NeoplasmsGuaiacbusiness

description

Abstract Background The aim of this study was to compare the performance of the guaiac-based faecal occult blood test (G-FOBT), with that of three immunochemical faecal occult blood tests (I-FOBT) which allow automatic interpretation. Patients and methods Under the French organised screening programme, 85,149 average-risk individuals aged 50–74 participating in the third screening round, performed both the G-FOBT (Hemoccult-II test) and one of the I-FOBTs: FOB-Gold, Magstream and OC-Sensor. Results Given the chosen threshold, the positivity ratio between the different I-FOBTs and the G-FOBT was 2.4 for FOB-Gold, 2.0 for Magstream and 2.2 for OC-Sensor (P = 0.17). The three I-FOBTs were superior to the G-FOBT for colorectal cancer (CRC) detection. The ratios for detection rates were 1.6 (FOB-Gold), 1.7 (Magstream) and 2.1 (OC-Sensor) (P = 0.74). For non-invasive CRC they were, respectively, 2.5, 3.0 and 4.0 (P = 0.83) and for advanced adenomas 3.6, 3.1 and 4.0 (P = 0.39). Conclusions This study provides further evidence that I-FOBT is superior to G-FOBT. None of the three I-FOBTs studied appeared to be significantly better than the others.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2012.04.007