Cargando…
Combining faecal immunochemical testing with blood test results for colorectal cancer risk stratification: a consecutive cohort of 16,604 patients presenting to primary care
BACKGROUND: Faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) are used to triage primary care patients with symptoms that could be caused by colorectal cancer for referral to colonoscopy. The aim of this study was to determine whether combining FIT with routine blood test results could improve the performance of F...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8920746/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35287679 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-022-02272-w |
_version_ | 1784669194745282560 |
---|---|
author | Withrow, Diana R. Shine, Brian Oke, Jason Tamm, Andres James, Tim Morris, Eva Davies, Jim Harris, Steve East, James E. Nicholson, Brian D. |
author_facet | Withrow, Diana R. Shine, Brian Oke, Jason Tamm, Andres James, Tim Morris, Eva Davies, Jim Harris, Steve East, James E. Nicholson, Brian D. |
author_sort | Withrow, Diana R. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) are used to triage primary care patients with symptoms that could be caused by colorectal cancer for referral to colonoscopy. The aim of this study was to determine whether combining FIT with routine blood test results could improve the performance of FIT in the primary care setting. METHODS: Results of all consecutive FITs requested by primary care providers between March 2017 and December 2020 were retrieved from the Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust. Demographic factors (age, sex), reason for referral, and results of blood tests within 90 days were also retrieved. Patients were followed up for incident colorectal cancer in linked hospital records. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of FIT alone, FIT paired with blood test results, and several multivariable FIT models, were compared. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-nine colorectal cancers were diagnosed (0.8%). Sensitivity and specificity of FIT alone at a threshold of 10 μg Hb/g were 92.1 and 91.5% respectively. Compared to FIT alone, blood test results did not improve the performance of FIT. Pairing blood test results with FIT increased specificity but decreased sensitivity. Multivariable models including blood tests performed similarly to FIT alone. CONCLUSIONS: FIT is a highly sensitive tool for identifying higher risk individuals presenting to primary care with lower risk symptoms. Combining blood test results with FIT does not appear to lead to better discrimination for colorectal cancer than using FIT alone. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12916-022-02272-w. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8920746 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-89207462022-03-15 Combining faecal immunochemical testing with blood test results for colorectal cancer risk stratification: a consecutive cohort of 16,604 patients presenting to primary care Withrow, Diana R. Shine, Brian Oke, Jason Tamm, Andres James, Tim Morris, Eva Davies, Jim Harris, Steve East, James E. Nicholson, Brian D. BMC Med Research Article BACKGROUND: Faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) are used to triage primary care patients with symptoms that could be caused by colorectal cancer for referral to colonoscopy. The aim of this study was to determine whether combining FIT with routine blood test results could improve the performance of FIT in the primary care setting. METHODS: Results of all consecutive FITs requested by primary care providers between March 2017 and December 2020 were retrieved from the Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust. Demographic factors (age, sex), reason for referral, and results of blood tests within 90 days were also retrieved. Patients were followed up for incident colorectal cancer in linked hospital records. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of FIT alone, FIT paired with blood test results, and several multivariable FIT models, were compared. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-nine colorectal cancers were diagnosed (0.8%). Sensitivity and specificity of FIT alone at a threshold of 10 μg Hb/g were 92.1 and 91.5% respectively. Compared to FIT alone, blood test results did not improve the performance of FIT. Pairing blood test results with FIT increased specificity but decreased sensitivity. Multivariable models including blood tests performed similarly to FIT alone. CONCLUSIONS: FIT is a highly sensitive tool for identifying higher risk individuals presenting to primary care with lower risk symptoms. Combining blood test results with FIT does not appear to lead to better discrimination for colorectal cancer than using FIT alone. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12916-022-02272-w. BioMed Central 2022-03-15 /pmc/articles/PMC8920746/ /pubmed/35287679 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-022-02272-w Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Withrow, Diana R. Shine, Brian Oke, Jason Tamm, Andres James, Tim Morris, Eva Davies, Jim Harris, Steve East, James E. Nicholson, Brian D. Combining faecal immunochemical testing with blood test results for colorectal cancer risk stratification: a consecutive cohort of 16,604 patients presenting to primary care |
title | Combining faecal immunochemical testing with blood test results for colorectal cancer risk stratification: a consecutive cohort of 16,604 patients presenting to primary care |
title_full | Combining faecal immunochemical testing with blood test results for colorectal cancer risk stratification: a consecutive cohort of 16,604 patients presenting to primary care |
title_fullStr | Combining faecal immunochemical testing with blood test results for colorectal cancer risk stratification: a consecutive cohort of 16,604 patients presenting to primary care |
title_full_unstemmed | Combining faecal immunochemical testing with blood test results for colorectal cancer risk stratification: a consecutive cohort of 16,604 patients presenting to primary care |
title_short | Combining faecal immunochemical testing with blood test results for colorectal cancer risk stratification: a consecutive cohort of 16,604 patients presenting to primary care |
title_sort | combining faecal immunochemical testing with blood test results for colorectal cancer risk stratification: a consecutive cohort of 16,604 patients presenting to primary care |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8920746/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35287679 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-022-02272-w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT withrowdianar combiningfaecalimmunochemicaltestingwithbloodtestresultsforcolorectalcancerriskstratificationaconsecutivecohortof16604patientspresentingtoprimarycare AT shinebrian combiningfaecalimmunochemicaltestingwithbloodtestresultsforcolorectalcancerriskstratificationaconsecutivecohortof16604patientspresentingtoprimarycare AT okejason combiningfaecalimmunochemicaltestingwithbloodtestresultsforcolorectalcancerriskstratificationaconsecutivecohortof16604patientspresentingtoprimarycare AT tammandres combiningfaecalimmunochemicaltestingwithbloodtestresultsforcolorectalcancerriskstratificationaconsecutivecohortof16604patientspresentingtoprimarycare AT jamestim combiningfaecalimmunochemicaltestingwithbloodtestresultsforcolorectalcancerriskstratificationaconsecutivecohortof16604patientspresentingtoprimarycare AT morriseva combiningfaecalimmunochemicaltestingwithbloodtestresultsforcolorectalcancerriskstratificationaconsecutivecohortof16604patientspresentingtoprimarycare AT daviesjim combiningfaecalimmunochemicaltestingwithbloodtestresultsforcolorectalcancerriskstratificationaconsecutivecohortof16604patientspresentingtoprimarycare AT harrissteve combiningfaecalimmunochemicaltestingwithbloodtestresultsforcolorectalcancerriskstratificationaconsecutivecohortof16604patientspresentingtoprimarycare AT eastjamese combiningfaecalimmunochemicaltestingwithbloodtestresultsforcolorectalcancerriskstratificationaconsecutivecohortof16604patientspresentingtoprimarycare AT nicholsonbriand combiningfaecalimmunochemicaltestingwithbloodtestresultsforcolorectalcancerriskstratificationaconsecutivecohortof16604patientspresentingtoprimarycare |