...
首页> 外文期刊>Gastroenterology >Difference in Performance of Fecal Immunochemical Tests With the Same Hemoglobin Cutoff Concentration in a Nationwide Colorectal Cancer Screening Program
【24h】

Difference in Performance of Fecal Immunochemical Tests With the Same Hemoglobin Cutoff Concentration in a Nationwide Colorectal Cancer Screening Program

机译:全国大肠癌筛查计划中相同血红蛋白截留浓度的粪便免疫化学测试的性能差异

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We investigated whether 2 quantitative fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) with the same cutoff concentration of fecal hemoglobin perform equivalently in identifying patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). METHODS: A total of 956,005 Taiwanese subjects, 50 to 69 years old, participated in a nationwide CRC screening program to compare results from 2 FITs; 78% were tested using the OC-Sensor (n = 747,076; Eiken Chemical Co, Tokyo, Japan) and 22% were tested using the HM-Jack (n = 208,929; Kyowa Medex Co Ltd, Tokyo, Japan), from 2004 through 2009. The cutoff concentration for a positive finding was 20 mg hemoglobin/g feces, based on a standardized reporting unit system. The tests were compared using short-term and long-term indicators of performance. RESULTS: The OC-Sensor test detected CRC in 0.21% of patients, with a positive predictive value of 6.8%. The HM-Jack test detected CRC in 0.17% of patients, with a positive predictive value of 5.2%. The rate of interval cancer rate was 30.7/100,000 person-years among subjects receiving the OC-Sensor test and 40.6/100,000 person-years among those receiving the HM-Jack test; there was significant difference in test sensitivity (80% vs 68%, P = .005) that was related to the detectability of proximal CRC. After adjusting for differences in city/county, age, sex, ambient temperature, and colonoscopy quality, significant differences were observed between the tests in the positive predictive value for cancer detection (adjusted relative risk = 1.29; 95% confidence interval, 1.14-1.46) and the rates of interval cancer (0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.62-0.92). Although each test was estimated to reduce CRC mortality by approximately 10%, no significant difference in mortality was observed when the 2 groups were compared. CONCLUSIONS: Different brands of quantitative FITs, even with the same cutoff hemoglobin concentration, perform differently in mass screening. Population-level data should be gathered to verify the credibility of quantitative laboratory findings.
机译:背景与目的:我们调查了两种相同的粪便血红蛋白截断浓度的定量粪便免疫化学测试(FIT)在识别大肠癌(CRC)患者方面是否表现相同。方法:共有956,005名50至69岁的台湾受试者参加了一项全国性的CRC筛查计划,以比较2个FIT的结果;从2004年到2008年,使用OC传感器(n = 747,076; Eiken Chemical Co,日本东京)测试了78%,使用HM-Jack(n = 208,929; Kyowa Medex Co Ltd,日本东京)测试了22%。 2009年。基于标准化报告单位系统,阳性结果的临界浓度为20 mg血红蛋白/ g粪便。使用短期和长期性能指标对测试进行了比较。结果:OC-Sensor测试在0.21%的患者中检测到CRC,阳性预测值为6.8%。 HM-Jack测试在0.17%的患者中检测到CRC,阳性预测值为5.2%。在接受OC-Sensor测试的受试者中,间隔癌的发生率为30.7 / 100,000人年,在接受HM-Jack测试的受试者中为40.6 / 100,000人年。与近端CRC的可检测性相关的测试灵敏度存在显着差异(80%对68%,P = .005)。调整城市/县,年龄,性别,环境温度和结肠镜检查质量的差异后,测试之间的癌症检测阳性预测值存在显着差异(校正后的相对风险= 1.29; 95%置信区间1.14-1.46) )和间隔癌的发生率(0.75; 95%置信区间0.62-0.92)。尽管估计每个测试可将CRC死亡率降低约10%,但将两组进行比较时,死亡率没有显着差异。结论:即使截留血红蛋白浓度相同,不同品牌的定量FIT在质量筛选中的表现也不同。应当收集总体水平的数据以验证定量实验室结果的可信度。

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