Cargando…

Advances in Fecal Occult Blood Tests: The FIT Revolution

There is a wide choice of fecal occult blood tests (FOBTs) for colorectal cancer screening. Goal: To highlight the issues applicable when choosing a FOBT, in particular which FOBT is best suited to the range of screening scenarios. Four scenarios characterize the constraints and expectations of scre...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Young, Graeme P., Symonds, Erin L., Allison, James E., Cole, Stephen R., Fraser, Callum G., Halloran, Stephen P., Kuipers, Ernst J., Seaman, Helen E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4366567/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25492500
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10620-014-3445-3
_version_ 1782362388174995456
author Young, Graeme P.
Symonds, Erin L.
Allison, James E.
Cole, Stephen R.
Fraser, Callum G.
Halloran, Stephen P.
Kuipers, Ernst J.
Seaman, Helen E.
author_facet Young, Graeme P.
Symonds, Erin L.
Allison, James E.
Cole, Stephen R.
Fraser, Callum G.
Halloran, Stephen P.
Kuipers, Ernst J.
Seaman, Helen E.
author_sort Young, Graeme P.
collection PubMed
description There is a wide choice of fecal occult blood tests (FOBTs) for colorectal cancer screening. Goal: To highlight the issues applicable when choosing a FOBT, in particular which FOBT is best suited to the range of screening scenarios. Four scenarios characterize the constraints and expectations of screening programs: (1) limited colonoscopy resource with a need to constrain test positivity rate; (2) a priority for maximum colorectal neoplasia detection with little need to constrain colonoscopy workload; (3) an “adequate” endoscopy resource that allows balancing the benefits of detection with the burden of service provision; and (4) a need to maximize participation in screening. Guaiac-based FOBTs (gFOBTs) have significant deficiencies, and fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for hemoglobin have emerged as better tests. gFOBTs are not sensitive to small bleeds, specificity can be affected by diet or drugs, participant acceptance can be low, laboratory quality control opportunities are limited, and they have a fixed hemoglobin concentration cutoff determining positivity. FITs are analytically more specific, capable of quantitation and hence provide flexibility to adjust cutoff concentration for positivity and the balance between sensitivity and specificity. FITs are clinically more sensitive for cancers and advanced adenomas, and because they are easier to use, acceptance rates are high. Conclusions: FOBT must be chosen carefully to meet the needs of the applicable screening scenario. Quantitative FIT can be adjusted to suit Scenarios 1, 2 and 3, and for each, they are the test of choice. FITs are superior to gFOBT for Scenario 4 and gFOBT is only suitable for Scenario 1.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4366567
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43665672015-03-26 Advances in Fecal Occult Blood Tests: The FIT Revolution Young, Graeme P. Symonds, Erin L. Allison, James E. Cole, Stephen R. Fraser, Callum G. Halloran, Stephen P. Kuipers, Ernst J. Seaman, Helen E. Dig Dis Sci Review There is a wide choice of fecal occult blood tests (FOBTs) for colorectal cancer screening. Goal: To highlight the issues applicable when choosing a FOBT, in particular which FOBT is best suited to the range of screening scenarios. Four scenarios characterize the constraints and expectations of screening programs: (1) limited colonoscopy resource with a need to constrain test positivity rate; (2) a priority for maximum colorectal neoplasia detection with little need to constrain colonoscopy workload; (3) an “adequate” endoscopy resource that allows balancing the benefits of detection with the burden of service provision; and (4) a need to maximize participation in screening. Guaiac-based FOBTs (gFOBTs) have significant deficiencies, and fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for hemoglobin have emerged as better tests. gFOBTs are not sensitive to small bleeds, specificity can be affected by diet or drugs, participant acceptance can be low, laboratory quality control opportunities are limited, and they have a fixed hemoglobin concentration cutoff determining positivity. FITs are analytically more specific, capable of quantitation and hence provide flexibility to adjust cutoff concentration for positivity and the balance between sensitivity and specificity. FITs are clinically more sensitive for cancers and advanced adenomas, and because they are easier to use, acceptance rates are high. Conclusions: FOBT must be chosen carefully to meet the needs of the applicable screening scenario. Quantitative FIT can be adjusted to suit Scenarios 1, 2 and 3, and for each, they are the test of choice. FITs are superior to gFOBT for Scenario 4 and gFOBT is only suitable for Scenario 1. Springer US 2014-12-10 2015 /pmc/articles/PMC4366567/ /pubmed/25492500 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10620-014-3445-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2014 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.
spellingShingle Review
Young, Graeme P.
Symonds, Erin L.
Allison, James E.
Cole, Stephen R.
Fraser, Callum G.
Halloran, Stephen P.
Kuipers, Ernst J.
Seaman, Helen E.
Advances in Fecal Occult Blood Tests: The FIT Revolution
title Advances in Fecal Occult Blood Tests: The FIT Revolution
title_full Advances in Fecal Occult Blood Tests: The FIT Revolution
title_fullStr Advances in Fecal Occult Blood Tests: The FIT Revolution
title_full_unstemmed Advances in Fecal Occult Blood Tests: The FIT Revolution
title_short Advances in Fecal Occult Blood Tests: The FIT Revolution
title_sort advances in fecal occult blood tests: the fit revolution
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4366567/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25492500
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10620-014-3445-3
work_keys_str_mv AT younggraemep advancesinfecaloccultbloodteststhefitrevolution
AT symondserinl advancesinfecaloccultbloodteststhefitrevolution
AT allisonjamese advancesinfecaloccultbloodteststhefitrevolution
AT colestephenr advancesinfecaloccultbloodteststhefitrevolution
AT frasercallumg advancesinfecaloccultbloodteststhefitrevolution
AT halloranstephenp advancesinfecaloccultbloodteststhefitrevolution
AT kuipersernstj advancesinfecaloccultbloodteststhefitrevolution
AT seamanhelene advancesinfecaloccultbloodteststhefitrevolution