scholarly journals Improving Adenoma Detection Rates: The Role of the Fecal Immunochemical Test

Cureus ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eugene C Nwankwo ◽  
Jefferson Lines ◽  
Sahiba Trehan ◽  
Michelle Marsh ◽  
Amit Trehan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Fecal Immunochemical Test ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Adenoma Detection ◽  
Adenoma Detection Rates ◽  
Immunochemical Test

Long-term performance of colorectal cancer screening programmes based on the faecal immunochemical test

Gut ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 67 (12) ◽  
pp. 2124-2130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manuel Zorzi ◽  
Cesare Hassan ◽  
Giulia Capodaglio ◽  
Chiara Fedato ◽  
Adriana Montaguti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Detection Rate ◽  
Advanced Adenoma ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Adenoma Detection ◽  
Adenoma Detection Rates ◽  
Immunochemical Test ◽  
Long Term Performance ◽  
Term Performance

BackgroundThe long-term performance of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes based on a 2-year faecal immunochemical test (FIT) is still unclear.MethodsIn a sample of 50 to 69-year-olds repeatedly screened with the FIT (OC-Hemodia latex agglutination test; cut-off: 20 µg haemoglobin/g faeces), we examined: (1) the FIT positivity rate, the CRC and advanced adenoma detection rate and the FIT’s positive predictive value (PPV) for advanced neoplasia, at each round of screening and (2) the cumulative CRC and advanced adenoma detection rate after five rounds of FIT.ResultsOver 12 years (2002–2014), 123 347 individuals were administered the FIT up to six times, and 781 CRCs and 4713 advanced adenomas were diagnosed. The CRC and advanced adenoma detection rates declined substantially from the first to the third (rate ratio (RR) 0.25, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.32) and second (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.56) rounds, respectively, and then remained stable. The PPV for advanced neoplasia dropped by 18% in the second round (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.89), with no further reduction thereafter due to a concomitant decline in the FIT positivity rate (RR first to sixth rounds: 0.56, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.60).The cumulative CRC and advanced adenoma detection rates over five consecutive rounds were 8.5‰ (95% CI 7.8 to 9.2), and 58.9‰ (95% CI 56.9 to 61.0), respectively.ConclusionsRepeated FIT significantly reduces the burden of colorectal disease while facilitating an efficient use of colonoscopy resources. The cumulative detection rate after five rounds of FIT is similar to primary screening with colonoscopy, supporting the need to account for the cumulative sensitivity of repeated FITs when evaluating the test’s efficacy.

scholarly journals Management of large polyps in a colorectal cancer screening program with fecal immunochemical test: a community- and population-based observational study

2021 ◽  
Vol 09 (11) ◽  
pp. E1649-E1657
Author(s):  
Bernard Denis ◽  
Isabelle Gendre ◽  
Philippe Perrin ◽  
Nicolas Tuzin ◽  
Mathieu Pioche
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Observational Study ◽  
Endoscopic Resection ◽  
Screening Program ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Fecal Immunochemical Test ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Cancer Screening Program ◽  
Adenoma Detection ◽  
Immunochemical Test

Abstract Background and study aims The aim of this study was to analyze presentation, management, and outcomes of large polyps (LPs; ≥ 20 mm) detected in a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program using a quantitative fecal immunochemical test (FIT). Patients and methods This was a retrospective community- and population-based observational study of all LPs detected in patients aged 50 to 74 years between 2015 and 2019 during FIT-positive colonoscopies within the screening program organized in Alsace (France). Results Among 13,633 FIT-positive colonoscopies, 1256 LPs (8.5 % malignant and 51.8 % nonpedunculated) were detected by 102 community gastroenterologists in 1164 patients (one in 12 colonoscopies). The sensitivity of optical diagnosis of malignancy was 54 % for nonpedunculated and 27 % for pedunculated T1 CRCs. The endoscopic resection rate was 82.7 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 80.3–84.9) for benign LPs (70.2 % [95 % CI 66.4–74.1]) nonpedunculated, 95.2 % [95 % CI 93.4–97.1] pedunculated), varying from 0 to 100 % depending on the endoscopist. It was correlated with cecal intubation (Pearson r = 0.49, P < 0.01) and adenoma detection rates (r = 0.25, P = 0.01). Most endoscopists did not refer patients to more experienced endoscopists, and as a result, 60 % to 90 % of 183 surgeries for benign LPs were unwarranted. Endoscopic resection was curative for 4.3 % (95 % CI 0.9–12.0) of nonpedunculated and 37.8 % (95 % CI 22.5–55.2) of pedunculated T1 CRCs. Overall, 22 endoscopic submucosal dissections had to be performed to avoid one surgery. Conclusions Compared with current recommendations, there is tremendous room for improvement in community endoscopy practices in the diagnosis and management of LPs. Detection and polypectomy competencies are correlated and highly variable among endoscopists. Endoscopic resection is curative for 83 % of benign LPs and 16 % of T1 CRCs.

M1049 ABIM Recertification Status and Colonoscopy Adenoma Detection Rates: A Retrospective Study of 2011 Patients Undergoing Colonoscopy

2009 ◽  
Vol 136 (5) ◽  
pp. A-339
Author(s):  
Anna M. Buchner ◽  
Herbert C. Wolfsen ◽  
Muhammad W. Shahid ◽  
Kanwar R. Gill ◽  
Anthony Schore ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Adenoma Detection ◽  
Adenoma Detection Rates

scholarly journals Good is better than excellent: bowel preparation quality and adenoma detection rates

2015 ◽  
Vol 81 (3) ◽  
pp. 691-699.e1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Audrey H. Calderwood ◽  
Katherine D. Thompson ◽  
Paul C. Schroy ◽  
David A. Lieberman ◽  
Brian C. Jacobson
Keyword(s):  
Bowel Preparation ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Adenoma Detection ◽  
Adenoma Detection Rates ◽  
Better Than

Su1324 A Case for Using a Confidence Interval-Based Approach to Adenoma Detection Rates

2012 ◽  
Vol 75 (4) ◽  
pp. AB293-AB294
Author(s):  
Albert Do ◽  
Janice Weinberg ◽  
Aarti Kakkar ◽  
Brian C. Jacobson
Keyword(s):  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Adenoma Detection ◽  
Adenoma Detection Rates
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document