Performance Characteristics of Fecal Immunochemical Tests for Colorectal Cancer and Advanced Adenomatous Polyps: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
- PMID: 30802902
- DOI: 10.7326/M18-2390
Performance Characteristics of Fecal Immunochemical Tests for Colorectal Cancer and Advanced Adenomatous Polyps: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Abstract
Background: Studies report inconsistent performance of fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for colorectal cancer (CRC) and advanced adenomas.
Purpose: To summarize performance characteristics of FITs for CRC and advanced adenomas in average-risk persons undergoing screening colonoscopy (reference standard) and to identify factors affecting these characteristics.
Data sources: Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from inception through October 2018; reference lists of studies and reviews.
Study selection: Two reviewers independently screened records to identify published English-language prospective or retrospective observational studies that evaluated FIT sensitivity and specificity for colonoscopic findings in asymptomatic, average-risk adults.
Data extraction: Two authors independently extracted data and evaluated study quality.
Data synthesis: Thirty-one studies (120 255 participants; 18 FITs) were included; all were judged to have low to moderate risk of bias. Performance characteristics depended on the threshold for a positive result. A threshold of 10 µg/g resulted in sensitivity of 0.91 (95% CI, 0.84 to 0.95) and a negative likelihood ratio of 0.10 (CI, 0.06 to 0.19) for CRC, whereas a threshold of greater than 20 µg/g resulted in specificity of 0.95 (CI, 0.94 to 0.96) and a positive likelihood ratio of 15.49 (CI, 9.82 to 22.39). For advanced adenomas, sensitivity was 0.40 (CI, 0.33 to 0.47) and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.67 (CI, 0.57 to 0.78) at 10 µg/g, and specificity was 0.95 (CI, 0.94 to 0.96) and the positive likelihood ratio was 5.86 (CI, 3.77 to 8.97) at greater than 20 µg/g. Studies had low to high heterogeneity, depending on the threshold. Although several FITs had adequate performance, sensitivity and specificity for CRC for 1 qualitative FIT were 0.90 and 0.91, respectively, at its single threshold of 10 µg/g; positive and negative likelihood ratios were 10.13 and 0.11, respectively. Comparison of 3 FITs at 3 thresholds was inconclusive: CIs overlapped, and the comparisons were across rather than within studies.
Limitations: Only English-language studies were included. Incomplete reporting limited quality assessment of some evidence. Performance characteristics are for 1-time rather than serial testing.
Conclusion: Single-application FITs have moderate to high sensitivity and specificity for CRC, depending on the positivity threshold. Sensitivity of 1-time testing for advanced adenomas is low, regardless of the threshold.
Primary funding source: Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine.
Comment in
-
Why What You May Not Know About Fecal Immunochemical Testing Matters.Ann Intern Med. 2019 Mar 5;170(5):342-343. doi: 10.7326/M19-0301. Epub 2019 Feb 26. Ann Intern Med. 2019. PMID: 30802903 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Guaiac-based faecal occult blood tests versus faecal immunochemical tests for colorectal cancer screening in average-risk individuals.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Jun 6;6(6):CD009276. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009276.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022. PMID: 35665911 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Accuracy of fecal immunochemical tests for colorectal cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis.Ann Intern Med. 2014 Feb 4;160(3):171. doi: 10.7326/M13-1484. Ann Intern Med. 2014. PMID: 24658694 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Screening for Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force [Internet].Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2016 Jun. Report No.: 14-05203-EF-1. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2016 Jun. Report No.: 14-05203-EF-1. PMID: 27441328 Free Books & Documents. Review.
-
Faecal immunochemical tests versus colonoscopy for post-polypectomy surveillance: an accuracy, acceptability and economic study.Health Technol Assess. 2019 Jan;23(1):1-84. doi: 10.3310/hta23010. Health Technol Assess. 2019. PMID: 30618357 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Screening for Colorectal Cancer: An Updated Systematic Review [Internet].Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2008 Oct. Report No.: 08-05-05124-EF-1. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2008 Oct. Report No.: 08-05-05124-EF-1. PMID: 20722162 Free Books & Documents. Review.
Cited by
-
Potential of pre-diagnostic metabolomics for colorectal cancer risk assessment or early detection.NPJ Precis Oncol. 2024 Oct 27;8(1):244. doi: 10.1038/s41698-024-00732-5. NPJ Precis Oncol. 2024. PMID: 39462072 Free PMC article.
-
Where do we stand with screening for colorectal cancer and advanced adenoma based on serum protein biomarkers? A systematic review.Mol Oncol. 2024 Nov;18(11):2629-2648. doi: 10.1002/1878-0261.13734. Epub 2024 Sep 30. Mol Oncol. 2024. PMID: 39344882 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Impact of the serrated pathway on the simulated comparative effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening tests.JNCI Cancer Spectr. 2024 Sep 2;8(5):pkae077. doi: 10.1093/jncics/pkae077. JNCI Cancer Spectr. 2024. PMID: 39240660 Free PMC article.
-
Research progress on the correlation between intestinal flora and colorectal cancer.Front Oncol. 2024 Jul 17;14:1416806. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1416806. eCollection 2024. Front Oncol. 2024. PMID: 39087025 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Serum biomarkers REG1A and REG3A combined with the traditional CEA represent a novel nomogram for the screening and risk stratification of colorectal cancer.Clin Transl Oncol. 2024 Jul 4. doi: 10.1007/s12094-024-03566-6. Online ahead of print. Clin Transl Oncol. 2024. PMID: 38965192
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
