首页> 外文期刊>Gut: Journal of the British Society of Gastroenterology >Screening for colorectal cancer: randomised trial comparing guaiac-based and immunochemical faecal occult blood testing and flexible sigmoidoscopy.
【24h】

Screening for colorectal cancer: randomised trial comparing guaiac-based and immunochemical faecal occult blood testing and flexible sigmoidoscopy.

机译:结肠直肠癌的筛查:随机试验,比较了基于愈创木脂和免疫化学的粪便潜血测试和柔性乙状结肠镜检查。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) is widely accepted, but there is no consensus on the preferred strategy. We conducted a randomised trial comparing participation and detection rates (DR) per screenee of guaiac-based faecal occult blood test (gFOBT), immunochemical FOBT (FIT), and flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) for CRC screening. METHODS: A representative sample of the Dutch population (n = 15 011), aged 50-74 years, was 1:1:1 randomised prior to invitation to one of the three screening strategies. Colonoscopy was indicated for screenees with a positive gFOBT or FIT, and for those in whom FS revealed a polyp with a diameter > or = 10 mm; adenoma with > or = 25% villous component or high grade dysplasia; serrated adenoma; > or = 3 adenomas; > or = 20 hyperplastic polyps; or CRC. RESULTS: The participation rate was 49.5% (95% confidence interval (CI) 48.1 to 50.9%) for gFOBT, 61.5% (CI, 60.1 to 62.9%) for FIT and 32.4% (CI, 31.1 to 33.7%) for FS screening. gFOBT was positive in 2.8%, FIT in 4.8% and FS in 10.2%. The DR of advanced neoplasia was significantly higher in the FIT (2.4%; OR, 2.0; CI, 1.3 to 3.1) and the FS arm (8.0%; OR, 7.0; CI, 4.6 to 10.7) than the gFOBT arm (1.1%). FS demonstrated a higher diagnostic yield of advanced neoplasia per 100 invitees (2.4; CI, 2.0 to 2.8) than gFOBT (0.6; CI, 0.4 to 0.8) or FIT (1.5; CI, 1.2 to 1.9) screening. CONCLUSION: This randomised population-based CRC-screening trial demonstrated superior participation and detection rates for FIT compared to gFOBT screening. FIT screening should therefore be strongly preferred over gFOBT screening. FS screening demonstrated a higher diagnostic yield per 100 invitees than both FOBTs.
机译:背景:大肠癌(CRC)的筛查已被广泛接受,但关于首选策略尚无共识。我们进行了一项随机试验,比较了每位接受愈创木脂的粪便潜血试验(gFOBT),免疫化学FOBT(FIT)和柔性乙状结肠镜检查(FS)进行筛查的参与者的参与率和检测率(DR)。方法:在邀请参加三种筛查策略之一之前,以50:74岁的荷兰人群(n = 15 011)的代表性样本为1:1:1随机分组。结肠镜检查适用于gFOBT或FIT阳性的筛查者,以及FS显示直径大于或等于10毫米的息肉的结肠镜检查。绒毛成分≥25%或高度不典型增生的腺瘤;锯齿状腺瘤>或= 3个腺瘤; >或= 20个增生性息肉;或CRC。结果:gFOBT的参与率为49.5%(95%置信区间(CI)48.1至50.9%),FIT的参与率为61.5%(CI,60.1至62.9%)和FS筛查的参与率为32.4%(CI,31.1至33.7%) 。 gFOBT为2.8%,FIT为4.8%,FS为10.2%。 FIT组(2.4%; OR,2.0; CI,1.3至3.1)和FS组(8.0%; OR,7.0; CI,4.6至10.7)的晚期肿瘤形成的DR明显高于gFOBT组(1.1%) )。与gFOBT(0.6; CI,0.4至0.8)或FIT(1.5; CI,1.2至1.9)筛查相比,FS证实每100受邀者(2.4; CI,2.0至2.8)晚期肿瘤形成的诊断率更高。结论:这项基于人群的随机CRC筛查试验表明,与gFOBT筛查相比,FIT的参与率和检出率更高。因此,与gFOBT筛查相比,FIT筛查应更为可取。 FS筛查显示出比两个FOBT更高的每100受邀者诊断率。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号