Accuracy of Fecal Immunochemical Tests for Colorectal Cancer Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

被引:526
|
作者
Lee, Jeffrey K. [1 ]
Liles, Elizabeth G. [2 ]
Bent, Stephen [3 ]
Levin, Theodore R. [4 ]
Corley, Douglas A. [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA
[2] Kaiser Permanente, Ctr Hlth Res, Portland, OR 97227 USA
[3] Univ Calif San Francisco, Vet Affairs Med Ctr, Osher Ctr Integrat Med, Dept Med, San Francisco, CA 94121 USA
[4] Kaiser Permanente, Div Res, Oakland, CA 94612 USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
OCCULT BLOOD-TEST; DIAGNOSTIC-TEST; AVERAGE-RISK; LONGITUDINAL ADHERENCE; COLONOSCOPY; POPULATION; PERFORMANCE; SENSITIVITY; NEOPLASMS; LANGUAGE;
D O I
10.7326/M13-1484
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: Performance characteristics of fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) to screen for colorectal cancer (CRC) have been inconsistent. Purpose: To synthesize data about the diagnostic accuracy of FITs for CRC and identify factors affecting its performance characteristics. Data Sources: Online databases, including MEDLINE and EMBASE, and bibliographies of included studies from 1996 to 2013. Study Selection: All studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of FITs for CRC in asymptomatic, average-risk adults. Data Extraction: Two reviewers independently extracted data and critiqued study quality. Data Synthesis: Nineteen eligible studies were included and metaanalyzed. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio of FITs for CRC were 0.79 (95% CI, 0.69 to 0.86), 0.94 (CI, 0.92 to 0.95), 13.10 (CI, 10.49 to 16.35), 0.23 (CI, 0.15 to 0.33), respectively, with an overall diagnostic accuracy of 95% (CI, 93% to 97%). There was substantial hetero-geneity between studies in both the pooled sensitivity and specificity estimates. Stratifying by cutoff value for a positive test result or removal of discontinued FIT brands resulted in homogeneous sensitivity estimates. Sensitivity for CRC improved with lower assay cutoff values for a positive test result (for example, 0.89 [CI, 0.80 to 0.95] at a cutoff value less than 20 mu g/g vs. 0.70 [CI, 0.55 to 0.81] at cutoff values of 20 to 50 mu g/g) but with a corresponding decrease in specificity. A single-sample FIT had similar sensitivity and specificity as several samples, independent of FIT brand. Limitations: Only English-language articles were included. Lack of data prevented complete subgroup analyses by FIT brand. Conclusion: Fecal immunochemical tests are moderately sensitive, are highly specific, and have high overall diagnostic accuracy for detecting CRC. Diagnostic performance of FITs depends on the cutoff value for a positive test result.
引用
收藏
页码:171 / +
页数:23
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Test Characteristics of Fecal Immunochemical Tests for Colorectal Cancer and Advanced Adenoma: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Barrett, Patrick
    Stump, Timothy
    Monahan, Patrick
    Imperiale, Thomas
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2014, 109 : S677 - S677
  • [2] Stage-Specific Sensitivity of Fecal Immunochemical Tests for Detecting Colorectal Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Niedermaier, Tobias
    Balavarca, Yesilda
    Brenner, Hermann
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2020, 115 (01): : 56 - 69
  • [3] Performance Characteristics of Fecal Immunochemical Tests for Colorectal Cancer and Advanced Adenomatous Polyps A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Imperiale, Thomas F.
    Gruber, Rachel N.
    Stump, Timothy E.
    Emmett, Thomas W.
    Monahan, Patrick O.
    ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2019, 170 (05) : 319 - +
  • [4] Fecal Occult Blood Tests in Colorectal Cancer Screening: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Traditional and New-generation Fecal Immunochemical Tests
    Meklin, Jannica
    Syrjanen, Kari
    Eskelinen, Matti
    ANTICANCER RESEARCH, 2020, 40 (07) : 3591 - 3604
  • [5] A Systematic Review on Diagnostic Test Accuracy of Fecal Immunochemical Tests for Colorectal Cancer Screening
    van Roon, Aafke H.
    van Dam, Leonie
    Arends, Lidia R.
    Zauber, Ann G.
    Young, Graeme P.
    van Ballegooijen, Marjolein
    Habbema, Dik F.
    van Leerdam, Monique E.
    Steyerberg, Ewout W.
    Kuipers, Ernst J.
    GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2014, 146 (05) : S409 - S410
  • [6] A Global Evaluation of the Performance Indicators of Colorectal Cancer Screening with Fecal Immunochemical Tests and Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Ding, Hanyue
    Lin, Jiaye
    Xu, Zijun
    Chen, Xiao
    Wang, Harry H. X.
    Huang, Liwen
    Huang, Junjie
    Zheng, Zhijie
    Wong, Martin C. S.
    CANCERS, 2022, 14 (04)
  • [7] Systematic Review and Bivariate/HSROC Meta-Analysis of Immunochemical and Guaiac Fecal Occult Blood Tests for Colorectal Cancer Screening
    Launois, Robert
    Uzzan, Bernard
    Le Moine, Jean-Gabriel
    Navarrete, Lucia Fiestas
    Benamouzig, Robert
    GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2014, 146 (05) : S404 - S404
  • [8] Effect of anticoagulants and NSAIDs on accuracy of faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) in colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Nieuwenburg, Stella A. V.
    Vuik, Fanny E. R.
    Kruip, Marieke J. H. A.
    Kuipers, Ernst J.
    Spaander, Manon C. W.
    GUT, 2019, 68 (05) : 866 - 872
  • [9] Accuracy of the Quantitative Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) for Colorectal Cancer and Advanced Adenoma Detection: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Levine, Emma
    Selby, Kevin
    Doan, Cecilia
    Gies, Anton
    Brenner, Hermann
    Lee, Jeffrey
    Corley, Douglas
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2018, 113 : S145 - S145
  • [10] FECAL IMMUNOCHEMICAL TESTS FOR COLORECTAL CANCER SCREENING HOW ADENOMA CHARACTERISTICS IMPACT TEST SENSITIVITY: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS
    Todorovic, Jovan
    Jahn, Beate
    Mladenovic, Marija
    Sroczynski, Gaby
    Rochau, Ursula
    Puntscher, Sibylle
    Santamaria, Julia
    Allende, Valentino
    Oefner, Dietmar
    Ferlitsch, Monika
    Haider, Karin
    Greuter, Marjolein J. E.
    Coupe, Veerle M. H.
    Stojnev, Slavica
    Siebert, Uwe
    MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2021, 41 (04) : E171 - E173