Can patients at high risk for significant colorectal neoplasms and having normal quantitative faecal occult blood test postpone elective colonoscopy?

BACKGROUND: Common reasons for elective screening and surveillance colonoscopy, at predetermined intervals, are family or personal history of colorectal cancer (CRC) or advanced adenoma (AAP). Quantified, human haemoglobin (Hb)-specific, immunochemical faecal occult blood tests (I-FOBT) detect bleeding. AIM: To determine I-FOBT sensitivity for CRC or AAP before elective colonoscopy in patients at high-risk of cancer or advanced adenoma. METHODS: Prospective double-blind study of 1000 ambulatory asymptomatic high-risk patients (555 family history of CRC, 445 surveillance for past neoplasm), who prepared three I-FOBTs before elective colonoscopy. I-FOBTs quantified as ngHb/mL of buffer by OC-MICRO instrument and results >or=50 ngHb/mL considered positive. RESULTS: At colonoscopy, eight patients had CRC, 64 others had AAP. Sensitivity for CRC and/or AAP was the highest, 65.3% (95% CI 54.3, 76.3), when any of the three I-FOBTs was >or=50 ngHb (15.4%), with specificity of 87.5% (95% CI 86.4, 90.5) identifying all CRCs and 62% of AAPs. CONCLUSIONS: All cancers or an AAP were detected every third I-FOBT-positive colonoscopy (47/154), so colonoscopy was potentially not needed at this time in 84.6% (846 patients). I-FOBT screening might provide effective supervision of high-risk patients, delaying unnecessary elective colonoscopies. This favourable evaluation needs confirmation and cost-benefit study by risk-group.

Identification of colorectal adenomas by a quantitative immunochemical faecal occult blood screening test depends on adenoma characteristics, development threshold used and number of tests performed.

BACKGROUND: Faecal occult blood tests (FOBT) are faulted by low sensitivity for advanced adenomatous polyps (AAP). Quantified, immunochemical, haemoglobin (Hb)-specific immunochemical FOBT (I-FOBT) measurements are now used for colorectal screening. AIMS: To correlate adenoma characteristics to amount of faecal Hb lost and to evaluate sensitivity and specificity for AAP by faecal Hb development threshold used and number of I-FOBTs collected. METHODS: Three daily I-FOBTs were collected and analysed in 1221 patients scheduled for colonoscopy. Faecal Hb was analysed as ngHb/mL of buffer and the highest result related to colonoscopy findings. RESULTS: In 1204 patients without cancer, colonoscopy identified adenomas in 294, 99 with AAPs. Adenoma patients had elevated faecal Hb increasing with advanced histology, size, pedunculated shape and multiplicity (P < 0.001 for all). At 50 ngHb/mL threshold, sensitivity and specificity for AAPs were 54.5% (95%CI 44.7, 64.7) and 88.1% (95%CI 86.2, 90.1) for three tests. At higher thresholds, sensitivity decreased, but was significantly higher with more samples collected. Conversely, specificity increased at higher thresholds, but decreased with more samples. CONCLUSIONS: Faecal Hb loss from adenomas is significantly associated with size, number and advanced features. Sensitivity and specificity for AAPs are determined by test threshold chosen and number of samples collected; these determine the number of colonoscopies needed for positive tests.

Quantitative colonoscopic evaluation of relative efficiencies of an immunochemical faecal occult blood test and a sensitive guaiac test for detecting significant colorectal neoplasms.

BACKGROUND: The guaiac faecal occult blood test (G-FOBT), HemoccultSENSA, is sensitive for significant neoplasms [colorectal cancer (CRC), advanced adenomatous polyps (AAP)], but faulted by non-specificity for human haemoglobin (Hb). Quantified, Hb- specific, immunochemical faecal occult blood tests (I-FOBT) are now used. AIMS: To (i) compare I-FOBT and G-FOBT efficacy in identifying significant neoplasms and colonoscopy needs for positive tests and (ii) examine number of I-FOBTs needed and test threshold to use for equivalent or better sensitivity than G-FOBT and fewest colonoscopies for positive tests. METHODS: Three daily G-FOBTs and I-FOBTs were collected and analysed in 330 patients scheduled for colonoscopy. RESULTS: Colonoscopy found significant neoplasms in 32 patients, 6 CRC, 26 AAP. G-FOBT, sensitivity and specificity were 53.1% (17 neoplasms) and 59.4%, resulting in 8.1 colonoscopies/neoplasm. One I-FOBT having >or=50 ngHb/mL of buffer provided equivalent sensitivity but 94.0% specificity, resulting in 2.1 colonoscopies/neoplasm. By analysing the higher of two I-FOBTs at 50 ngHb/mL threshold, sensitivity increased to 68.8% (22 neoplasms, P = 0.063), specificity fell to 91.9% (P < 0.001), but still required 2.1 colonoscopies/neoplasm. CONCLUSIONS: In this population, quantified I-FOBT had significantly better specificity than G-FOBT for significant neoplasms, reducing the number of colonoscopies needed/neoplasm detected. Results depend on the number of I-FOBTs performed and the chosen development threshold.

Can quantification of faecal occult blood predetermine the need for colonoscopy in patients at risk for non-syndromic familial colorectal cancer?

BACKGROUND: Patients at risk for non-syndromic (Lynch or polyposis) familial colorectal neoplasia undergo colonoscopic surveillance at intervals determined by clinically ascertained protocols. The quantitative immunochemical faecal occult blood test for human haemoglobin is specific and sensitive for significant colorectal neoplasia (cancer or advanced adenomatous polyp). AIM: To determine immunochemical faecal occult blood test efficacy for identifying significant neoplasia in at-risk patients undergoing elective colonoscopy. METHODS: We retrospectively identified consecutive at-risk patients who provided three immunochemical faecal occult blood tests before colonoscopy. Quantitative haemoglobin analysis was performed by the OC-MICRO automated instrument using the 100 ng Hb/mL threshold to determine positivity. RESULTS: In 252 at-risk patients undergoing colonoscopy; five had cancer, 14 an advanced adenoma and 46 a non-advanced adenoma. The immunochemical faecal occult blood test was positive in 31 patients (12.3%). Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values for cancer were: 100%, 90%, 16% and 100%, and for all significant neoplasia: 74%, 93%, 45% and 98%. With 88% fewer colonoscopies, all colorectal cancers and 74% of all significant neoplasia would have been identified by this one-time immunochemical faecal occult blood test screening. CONCLUSIONS: A sensitive, non-invasive, interval screening test might be useful to predetermine the need for colonoscopy in this at-risk population and minimize unnecessary examinations. This favourable retrospective evaluation will be extended to a prospective study.

A quantitative immunochemical faecal occult blood test is more efficient for detecting significant colorectal neoplasia than a sensitive guaiac test.

BACKGROUND: The sensitive guaiac faecal occult blood test, Haemoccult SENSA (HOS; Beckman Coulter, Fullerton, CA, USA), is our standard screening test for significant colorectal neoplasia. We evaluated an automatically-developed, quantified human haemoglobin immunochemical faecal test, OC-MICRO (Eiken Chemical Co., Tokyo, Japan), to improve test specificity and so reduce the colonoscopy burden. AIM: To compare guaiac faecal occult blood test and immunochemical faecal test diagnostic efficacy and costs for identifying significant neoplasia. METHODS: Colonoscopies were performed on patients who prepared three daily guaiac faecal occult blood tests with or without immunochemical faecal tests. RESULTS: Total colonoscopy was performed on 151 subjects who prepared both guaiac and immunochemical faecal tests (group 1) and the positive predictive values (PPV) were also compared to those of 162 subjects undergoing colonoscopy for positive guaiac faecal occult blood tests (group 2). In group 1, comparative sensitivity, specificity, and PPVs for significant neoplasia with guaiac faecal occult blood test were 75%, 34%, and 12% (PPV, 18% for group 2) and with immunochemical faecal test were 75%, 94% and 60% (P < 0.01 for specificity). The number of colonoscopy examinations needed to detect a significant neoplasm because of positive faecal occult blood tests was six to eight with HOS and two with OC-MICRO at 21-31% the cost of evaluating a positive guaiac faecal occult blood test. CONCLUSION: An immunochemical faecal test maintains the high sensitivity of guaiac faecal occult blood test, but significantly reduces the colonoscopy burden and screening costs.