Greenberg P D, Bertario L, Gnauck R, Kronborg O, Hardcastle J D, Epstein M S, Sadowski D, Sudduth R, Zuckerman G R, Rockey D C
University of California, San Francisco, USA.
Am J Gastroenterol. 2000 May;95(5):1331-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2000.02032.x.
Guaiac-based fecal occult blood (FOB) tests, in particular, Hemoccult II (HO), are commonly used to detect colorectal neoplasia. Because the sensitivity and specificity of these tests are critical to cost-effective screening programs, we aimed to investigate the improved performance characteristics of new FOB tests for known colonic lesions.
Nine centers worldwide performed FOB testing with guaiac-based tests (Hemoccult II [HO] and Hemoccult II SENSA [SENSA]) and immunochemical tests (HemeSelect [HS] and FlexSure OBT [FS]) on 554 patients referred for colonoscopy for predetermined indications. A combination testing strategy consisting of SENSA followed by HS or FS (which was considered positive only when both tests were positive) was also evaluated. Results of FOB tests were compared to findings on colonoscopy.
Cancers were identified in 2.9% of subjects, whereas adenomas > or =10 mm were found in 39 patients. Small adenomas, colitis, and other lesions were identified in 141 patients. The positivity rate of HO for adenomas > or =10 mm was less than for SENSA (20.5% vs 35.9%, p < 0.05), whereas the positivity rate of HO, SENSA, FS, HS, or the combination tests for cancers was not statistically different. The overall positivity rates were significantly greater for FS (15.9%, p = 0.0002) and significantly lower using the combination tests (SENSA/FS 6.0%, p = 0.01; SENSA/HS 6.2%, p = 0.02) compared to HO (9.4%). In this study population, the relative specificity (i.e., true-negative tests/true-negatives + false-positives in patients without adenomas > or =10 mm or cancers) of HO (93.9%; 95% CI, 91.7-96.1) was similar to that of SENSA (92.8%; 95% CI, 90.4-95.2) and HS (90.1%; 95% CI, 87.4-92.8), and greater than FS (88.0%; 95% CI, 85.1-90.9, p < 0.001). When considering adenomas > or =10 mm, cancers alone or cancers and adenomas combined, the combination test using SENSA/FS was associated with significantly fewer false-positive tests than any of the individual tests.
Compared to single tests, the combination test with the highly sensitive SENSA and an immunochemical test had slightly reduced sensitivity but significantly fewer false-positive tests than any single test. These data raise the possibility that a combination test (i.e., highly sensitive guaiac plus immunochemical) could reduce the costs of screening for colon cancer, and suggest that further study of combination test strategies is warranted.
基于愈创木脂的粪便潜血(FOB)检测,尤其是隐血试验II(HO),常用于检测结直肠肿瘤。由于这些检测的敏感性和特异性对具有成本效益的筛查计划至关重要,我们旨在研究新型FOB检测对已知结肠病变的改进性能特征。
全球九个中心对554名因预定指征接受结肠镜检查的患者进行了基于愈创木脂的检测(隐血试验II [HO]和隐血试验II SENSA [SENSA])以及免疫化学检测(HemeSelect [HS]和FlexSure OBT [FS])。还评估了一种联合检测策略,即先进行SENSA检测,然后进行HS或FS检测(只有当两种检测均为阳性时才被视为阳性)。将FOB检测结果与结肠镜检查结果进行比较。
2.9%的受试者被诊断为癌症,39名患者发现腺瘤≥10 mm。141名患者被诊断为小腺瘤、结肠炎和其他病变。HO对腺瘤≥10 mm的阳性率低于SENSA(20.5%对35.9%,p<0.05),而HO、SENSA、FS、HS或联合检测对癌症的阳性率无统计学差异。与HO(9.4%)相比,FS的总体阳性率显著更高(15.9%,p = 0.0002),联合检测(SENSA/FS 6.0%,p = 0.01;SENSA/HS 6.2%,p = 0.02)的总体阳性率显著更低。在该研究人群中,HO(93.9%;95% CI,91.7 - 96.1)的相对特异性(即无腺瘤≥10 mm或癌症患者的真阴性检测数/真阴性检测数 + 假阳性检测数)与SENSA(92.8%;95% CI,90.4 - 95.2)和HS(90.1%;95% CI,87.4 - 92.8)相似,且高于FS(88.0%;95% CI,85.1 - 90.9,p<0.001)。当考虑腺瘤≥10 mm、单独的癌症或癌症与腺瘤合并时,使用SENSA/FS的联合检测产生的假阳性检测数明显少于任何单项检测。
与单项检测相比,高灵敏度的SENSA与免疫化学检测的联合检测灵敏度略有降低,但假阳性检测数明显少于任何单项检测。这些数据增加了联合检测(即高灵敏度愈创木脂检测加免疫化学检测)可降低结肠癌筛查成本的可能性,并表明有必要对联合检测策略进行进一步研究。