Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Difference in performance of fecal immunochemical tests with the same hemoglobin cutoff concentration in a nationwide colorectal cancer screening program

  • Tsung Hsien Chiang
  • , Shu Lin Chuang
  • , Sam Li Sheng Chen
  • , Han Mo Chiu
  • , Amy Ming Fang Yen
  • , Sherry Yueh Hsia Chiu
  • , Jean Ching Yuan Fann
  • , Chu Kuang Chou
  • , Yi Chia Lee*
  • , Ming Shiang Wu
  • , Hsiu Hsi Chen
  • *Corresponding author for this work
  • National Taiwan University
  • Taipei Medical University
  • Kainan University
  • Chia-Yi Christian Hospital

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal Article › peer-review

102 Scopus citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We investigated whether 2 quantitative fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) with the same cutoff concentration of fecal hemoglobin perform equivalently in identifying patients with colorectal cancer (CRC).

METHODS: A total of 956,005 Taiwanese subjects, 50 to 69 years old, participated in a nationwide CRC screening program to compare results from 2 FITs; 78% were tested using the OC-Sensor (n = 747,076; Eiken Chemical Co, Tokyo, Japan) and 22% were tested using the HM-Jack (n = 208,929; Kyowa Medex Co Ltd, Tokyo, Japan), from 2004 through 2009. The cutoff concentration for a positive finding was 20 μg hemoglobin/g feces, based on a standardized reporting unit system. The tests were compared using short-term and long-term indicators of performance.

RESULTS: The OC-Sensor test detected CRC in 0.21% of patients, with a positive predictive value of 6.8%. The HM-Jack test detected CRC in 0.17% of patients, with a positive predictive value of 5.2%. The rate of interval cancer rate was 30.7/100,000 person-years among subjects receiving the OC-Sensor test and 40.6/100,000 person-years among those receiving the HM-Jack test; there was significant difference in test sensitivity (80% vs 68%, P =.005) that was related to the detectability of proximal CRC. After adjusting for differences in city/county, age, sex, ambient temperature, and colonoscopy quality, significant differences were observed between the tests in the positive predictive value for cancer detection (adjusted relative risk = 1.29; 95% confidence interval, 1.14-1.46) and the rates of interval cancer (0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.62-0.92). Although each test was estimated to reduce CRC mortality by approximately 10%, no significant difference in mortality was observed when the 2 groups were compared.

CONCLUSIONS: Different brands of quantitative FITs, even with the same cutoff hemoglobin concentration, perform differently in mass screening. Population-level data should be gathered to verify the credibility of quantitative laboratory findings.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1317-1326
Number of pages10
JournalGastroenterology
Volume147
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - 01 12 2014

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2014 AGA Institute.

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Keywords

  • Colorectal Cancer
  • Interval Cancer
  • Population Screening
  • Screening Test Sensitivity

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Difference in performance of fecal immunochemical tests with the same hemoglobin cutoff concentration in a nationwide colorectal cancer screening program'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this