Vasilyev Sergey, Smirnova Elena, Popov Dmitry, Semenov Andrew, Eklund Carita, Hendolin Panu, Paloheimo Lea, Syrjänen Kari
Department of Surgical Diseases and the Course of Coloproctology, the First State Medical University (Pavlov), St. Petersburg, Russia Scientific and Practical City Center of Coloproctology, St. Petersburg City Hospital, St. Petersburg, Russia.
Scientific and Practical City Center of Coloproctology, St. Petersburg City Hospital, St. Petersburg, Russia.
Anticancer Res. 2015 May;35(5):2873-80.
To compare a new-generation fecal immunochemical test (FIT) with the leading guaiac-based test in detection of fecal occult blood (FOB) in colonoscopy-referral patients.
A cohort of 300 patients referred for colonoscopy was examined by two different tests for FOB: ColonView quick test (CV) (FIT test for haemoglobin (Hb) and haemoglobin/haptoglobin (Hb/Hp) complex) and HemoccultSENSA (HS) (quaiac test for Hb). Three fecal samples were tested and all subjects were examined by diagnostic colonoscopy with biopsy verification. The test was interpreted positive if any of the three samples tested positive for Hb (HS test) and either Hb or Hb/Hp complex (CV test). The performance indicators (sensitivity (SE), specificity (SP), positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and area under the curve (AUC)) were calculated for both tests using three endpoints (adenoma (A), adenoma/carcinoma (A/AC) and carcinoma (AC)), collectively and were stratified according to tumor site. The two tests were compared regarding their sensitivity/specificity balance (AUC), using the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) comparison test.
Colonoscopy (and biopsies) disclosed normal results in 85 (27.2%) subjects, A in 91 cases (30.3%) and AC in 95 (31.7%) patients. For the combined A+AC endpoint, the HS test had SE of 58.3% and SP of 96.5% (AUC=0.774), while the CV test had 97.2% SE and 85.8% SP (AUC=0.916) (p=0.0001). For the A endpoint, the difference between HS and CV was even more significant, AUC=0.637 and AUC=0.898, respectively (p=0.0001). In CV test, the Hb/Hp complex was 15% (93% vs. 78%) and 8% (96% vs. 88%) more sensitive than Hb alone, for the A and A+AC endpoints, respectively. Being more stable than Hb in the feces, the Hb/Hp complex detected 100% of the tumors in the proximal colon, as contrasted to only 41.2% and 52.9% by the Hb of HS and CV test, respectively (p=0.0001).
With its 100% SE and 95.3% SP for proximal colon neoplasia, as well as 98.2% SE and 95.3% SP for the distal neoplasia, ColonView is superior to current FIT tests on the market, recently shown to exhibit pooled SE of 79% and pooled SP of 94% for colorectal cancer (CRC) in a comprehensive meta-analysis. With these exceptional performance indicators, ColonView quick test should be the test-of-choice for CRC screening.
比较新一代粪便免疫化学检测(FIT)与领先的基于愈创木脂的检测方法在结肠镜检查转诊患者中检测粪便潜血(FOB)的效果。
对300例转诊进行结肠镜检查的患者采用两种不同的FOB检测方法进行检查:ColonView快速检测(CV)(检测血红蛋白(Hb)和血红蛋白/触珠蛋白(Hb/Hp)复合物的FIT检测)和HemoccultSENSA(HS)(检测Hb的愈创木脂检测)。检测三份粪便样本,所有受试者均接受诊断性结肠镜检查及活检验证。如果三份样本中的任何一份Hb检测呈阳性(HS检测)以及Hb或Hb/Hp复合物检测呈阳性(CV检测),则该检测结果判定为阳性。使用三个终点(腺瘤(A)、腺瘤/癌(A/AC)和癌(AC))共同计算两种检测方法的性能指标(敏感性(SE)、特异性(SP)、阳性预测值(PPV)、阴性预测值(NPV)和曲线下面积(AUC)),并根据肿瘤部位进行分层。使用受试者操作特征(ROC)比较检验,比较两种检测方法的敏感性/特异性平衡(AUC)。
结肠镜检查(及活检)显示85例(27.2%)受试者结果正常,91例(30.3%)为腺瘤,95例(31.7%)为腺瘤/癌。对于联合的A+AC终点,HS检测的SE为58.3%,SP为96.5%(AUC = 0.774),而CV检测的SE为97.2%,SP为85.8%(AUC = 0.916)(p = 0.0001)。对于A终点,HS和CV之间的差异更为显著,AUC分别为0.637和0.898(p = 0.0001)。在CV检测中,对于A和A+AC终点,Hb/Hp复合物分别比单独的Hb敏感15%(93%对78%)和8%(96%对88%)。由于Hb/Hp复合物在粪便中比Hb更稳定,它检测出近端结肠100%的肿瘤,而HS检测和CV检测的Hb分别仅检测出41.2%和52.9%(p = 0.0001)。
ColonView对于近端结肠肿瘤的SE为100%,SP为95.3%,对于远端肿瘤的SE为98.2%,SP为95.3%,优于目前市场上的FIT检测,最近一项综合荟萃分析显示,这些检测对于结直肠癌(CRC)的汇总SE为79%,汇总SP为94%。凭借这些优异的性能指标,ColonView快速检测应成为CRC筛查的首选检测方法。