Cargando…

Use of ColonFlag score for prioritisation of endoscopy in colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVE: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth most common cancer in UK. Symptomatic patients are referred via an urgent pathway and although most are investigated with colonoscopy <4% are diagnosed with cancer. There is therefore a need for a suitable triage tool to prioritise investigations....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ayling, Ruth M, Wong, A, Cotter, Finbarr
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8183282/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34083226
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgast-2021-000639
_version_ 1783704346201948160
author Ayling, Ruth M
Wong, A
Cotter, Finbarr
author_facet Ayling, Ruth M
Wong, A
Cotter, Finbarr
author_sort Ayling, Ruth M
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth most common cancer in UK. Symptomatic patients are referred via an urgent pathway and although most are investigated with colonoscopy <4% are diagnosed with cancer. There is therefore a need for a suitable triage tool to prioritise investigations. This study retrospectively examined performance of various triage tools in patients awaiting investigation on the urgent lower gastrointestinal cancer pathway DESIGN: All patients over 40 years of age on the urgent pathway awaiting investigation for suspected CRC on 1 May were included. After 6 months, outcomes were evaluated and the performance of the faecal immunochemical test (FIT), faecal haemoglobin concentration, age and sex test (FAST) and the artificial intelligence algorithm ColonFlag were examined. RESULTS: 532 completed investigations and received a diagnosis; 15 had CRC. 388 had a valid FIT result, of whom 11 had CRC; FAST Score ≥4.5 had sensitivity of 72.7%, specificity of 80.6% and would have failed to detect three tumours. Faecal haemoglobin (f-Hb) at cut-off of 10 µg/g and ColonFlag had equal sensitivity of 81.82%, ColonFlag had greater specificity 73.47%, compared with 64.99%. Both tests would have failed to detect two tumours but not in the same patients; when used in combination, sensitivity and specificity were 100% and 49.4%. When ColonFlag was applied to the cohort of 532, an additional four tumours would have been detected in patients without a valid FIT. CONCLUSION: This study showed ColonFlag to have equal sensitivity and greater specificity than f-Hb at a cut-off of 10 µg/g as a triage tool for CRC
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8183282
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81832822021-06-17 Use of ColonFlag score for prioritisation of endoscopy in colorectal cancer Ayling, Ruth M Wong, A Cotter, Finbarr BMJ Open Gastroenterol Colorectal Cancer OBJECTIVE: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth most common cancer in UK. Symptomatic patients are referred via an urgent pathway and although most are investigated with colonoscopy <4% are diagnosed with cancer. There is therefore a need for a suitable triage tool to prioritise investigations. This study retrospectively examined performance of various triage tools in patients awaiting investigation on the urgent lower gastrointestinal cancer pathway DESIGN: All patients over 40 years of age on the urgent pathway awaiting investigation for suspected CRC on 1 May were included. After 6 months, outcomes were evaluated and the performance of the faecal immunochemical test (FIT), faecal haemoglobin concentration, age and sex test (FAST) and the artificial intelligence algorithm ColonFlag were examined. RESULTS: 532 completed investigations and received a diagnosis; 15 had CRC. 388 had a valid FIT result, of whom 11 had CRC; FAST Score ≥4.5 had sensitivity of 72.7%, specificity of 80.6% and would have failed to detect three tumours. Faecal haemoglobin (f-Hb) at cut-off of 10 µg/g and ColonFlag had equal sensitivity of 81.82%, ColonFlag had greater specificity 73.47%, compared with 64.99%. Both tests would have failed to detect two tumours but not in the same patients; when used in combination, sensitivity and specificity were 100% and 49.4%. When ColonFlag was applied to the cohort of 532, an additional four tumours would have been detected in patients without a valid FIT. CONCLUSION: This study showed ColonFlag to have equal sensitivity and greater specificity than f-Hb at a cut-off of 10 µg/g as a triage tool for CRC BMJ Publishing Group 2021-06-03 /pmc/articles/PMC8183282/ /pubmed/34083226 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgast-2021-000639 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Colorectal Cancer
Ayling, Ruth M
Wong, A
Cotter, Finbarr
Use of ColonFlag score for prioritisation of endoscopy in colorectal cancer
title Use of ColonFlag score for prioritisation of endoscopy in colorectal cancer
title_full Use of ColonFlag score for prioritisation of endoscopy in colorectal cancer
title_fullStr Use of ColonFlag score for prioritisation of endoscopy in colorectal cancer
title_full_unstemmed Use of ColonFlag score for prioritisation of endoscopy in colorectal cancer
title_short Use of ColonFlag score for prioritisation of endoscopy in colorectal cancer
title_sort use of colonflag score for prioritisation of endoscopy in colorectal cancer
topic Colorectal Cancer
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8183282/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34083226
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgast-2021-000639
work_keys_str_mv AT aylingruthm useofcolonflagscoreforprioritisationofendoscopyincolorectalcancer
AT wonga useofcolonflagscoreforprioritisationofendoscopyincolorectalcancer
AT cotterfinbarr useofcolonflagscoreforprioritisationofendoscopyincolorectalcancer