Diagnostic Accuracy of Stool Tests for Colorectal Cancer Surveillance in Hodgkin Lymphoma Survivors.
Hodgkin lymphoma
cancer survivors
colorectal cancer
early detection of cancer
fecal immunochemical testing (FIT)
multi-target stool test
sensitivity and specificity
Journal
Journal of clinical medicine
ISSN: 2077-0383
Titre abrégé: J Clin Med
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101606588
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 Jan 2020
10 Jan 2020
Historique:
received:
12
12
2019
revised:
06
01
2020
accepted:
08
01
2020
entrez:
16
1
2020
pubmed:
16
1
2020
medline:
16
1
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) survivors have an increased colorectal cancer (CRC) risk. Diagnostic accuracy of quantitative fecal immunochemical testing (FIT, OC Sensor) and/or a multi-target stool DNA test (mt-sDNA, Cologuard 101 HL survivors underwent a surveillance colonoscopy and were asked to perform two stool tests (FIT and mt-sDNA). Advanced adenoma (AA), advanced serrated lesion (ASL), and AN (AA, ASL, CRC) were evaluated. Sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) for AN were calculated for different FIT cut-offs and mt-sDNA with colonoscopy as reference. FIT and mt-sDNA were analyzed in 73 (72%) and 82 (81%) participants, respectively. AN was detected in 19 (26%) and 22 (27%), respectively. AN sensitivities for FIT cut-off of 10 ug Hb/g feces (FIT10) and mt-sDNA were 37% (95% confidence interval (CI): 16-62) and 68% (95% CI: 45-86), with corresponding specificities of 91% (95% CI: 80-97) and 70% (95% CI: 57-86), respectively. AUC for FIT was 0.68 (95% CI: 0.54-0.82) and for mt-sDNA 0.76 (95% CI: 0.63-0.89). In HL survivors, mt-sDNA showed highest sensitivity but with relatively low specificity for AN. Cost-effectiveness analyses is necessary to determine the optimal surveillance strategy.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) survivors have an increased colorectal cancer (CRC) risk. Diagnostic accuracy of quantitative fecal immunochemical testing (FIT, OC Sensor) and/or a multi-target stool DNA test (mt-sDNA, Cologuard
METHODS
METHODS
101 HL survivors underwent a surveillance colonoscopy and were asked to perform two stool tests (FIT and mt-sDNA). Advanced adenoma (AA), advanced serrated lesion (ASL), and AN (AA, ASL, CRC) were evaluated. Sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) for AN were calculated for different FIT cut-offs and mt-sDNA with colonoscopy as reference.
RESULTS
RESULTS
FIT and mt-sDNA were analyzed in 73 (72%) and 82 (81%) participants, respectively. AN was detected in 19 (26%) and 22 (27%), respectively. AN sensitivities for FIT cut-off of 10 ug Hb/g feces (FIT10) and mt-sDNA were 37% (95% confidence interval (CI): 16-62) and 68% (95% CI: 45-86), with corresponding specificities of 91% (95% CI: 80-97) and 70% (95% CI: 57-86), respectively. AUC for FIT was 0.68 (95% CI: 0.54-0.82) and for mt-sDNA 0.76 (95% CI: 0.63-0.89).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
In HL survivors, mt-sDNA showed highest sensitivity but with relatively low specificity for AN. Cost-effectiveness analyses is necessary to determine the optimal surveillance strategy.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31936745
pii: jcm9010190
doi: 10.3390/jcm9010190
pmc: PMC7019558
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Subventions
Organisme : Maag Lever Darm Stichting
ID : FP 14-04
Références
Am J Gastroenterol. 2006 Feb;101(2):343-50
pubmed: 16454841
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018 Apr;16(4):504-512.e11
pubmed: 28733262
Gut. 2019 Sep;68(9):1642-1652
pubmed: 30538097
Annu Rev Med. 2020 Jan 27;71:59-69
pubmed: 31451044
N Engl J Med. 2014 Apr 3;370(14):1287-97
pubmed: 24645800
BMJ Open. 2016 Nov 14;6(11):e012799
pubmed: 28137831
N Engl J Med. 2012 Feb 23;366(8):687-96
pubmed: 22356322
Ann Intern Med. 2012 Jun 5;156(11):757-66, W-260
pubmed: 22665813
Hematol Oncol. 2017 Jun;35 Suppl 1:60-66
pubmed: 28591411
Gut. 2013 Mar;62(3):409-15
pubmed: 22387523
BMC Cancer. 2017 Feb 7;17(1):112
pubmed: 28173773
Gut. 2001 Jun;48(6):812-5
pubmed: 11358901
Am J Gastroenterol. 2014 Aug;109(8):1257-64
pubmed: 24980879
Gastroenterology. 2011 Nov;141(5):1648-55.e1
pubmed: 21784045
Cancer Epidemiol. 2015 Jun;39(3):388-93
pubmed: 25910865
J Clin Oncol. 2007 Apr 20;25(12):1489-97
pubmed: 17372278
Int J Cancer. 2018 Jul 15;143(2):234-244
pubmed: 29277897
BMC Cancer. 2017 Feb 7;17(1):116
pubmed: 28173852
Medicine (Baltimore). 2016 Feb;95(5):e2129
pubmed: 26844449
PLoS One. 2019 Sep 4;14(9):e0220234
pubmed: 31483796
BMJ. 2014 Apr 09;348:g2467
pubmed: 24922745
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017 Jun;15(6):872-879.e1
pubmed: 27498176
Endoscopy. 2019 Sep;51(9):877-895
pubmed: 31342472
JAMA Intern Med. 2017 Aug 1;177(8):1110-1118
pubmed: 28628706
Gut. 2017 Jul;66(7):1233-1240
pubmed: 26896459
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019 Dec;17(13):2657-2667.e9
pubmed: 31525516
PLoS One. 2014 Jan 20;9(1):e85659
pubmed: 24465639
Gastroenterology. 2012 Sep;143(3):844-857
pubmed: 22763141
N Engl J Med. 2013 Sep 19;369(12):1095-105
pubmed: 24047059
World J Gastroenterol. 2019 Jan 14;25(2):190-204
pubmed: 30670909
Gastroenterology. 2017 Mar;152(4):767-775.e2
pubmed: 27890769
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2019 Nov 1;111(11):1161-1169
pubmed: 30980665
Cancer. 2019 Mar 15;125(6):990-999
pubmed: 30561773
Gastroenterology. 2000 May;118(5):829-34
pubmed: 10784581
Clin Colorectal Cancer. 2011 Mar 1;10(1):8-23
pubmed: 21609931
N Engl J Med. 2015 Dec 24;373(26):2499-511
pubmed: 26699166
Br J Cancer. 2017 Jul 25;117(3):306-314
pubmed: 28632726
J Clin Oncol. 2011 Nov 1;29(31):4096-104
pubmed: 21969511
Tissue Antigens. 2002 Apr;59(4):325-7
pubmed: 12135434
N Engl J Med. 1993 Dec 30;329(27):1977-81
pubmed: 8247072
Radiology. 2012 Jun;263(3):723-31
pubmed: 22438366
N Engl J Med. 2012 Feb 23;366(8):697-706
pubmed: 22356323
J Clin Oncol. 2012 Jul 10;30(20):2552-8
pubmed: 22665546
Lancet. 2013 Apr 6;381(9873):1194-202
pubmed: 23414650
Am J Gastroenterol. 2012 Oct;107(10):1570-8
pubmed: 22850431
Dig Dis Sci. 2019 Sep;64(9):2555-2562
pubmed: 30835026
Gut. 2012 Apr;61(4):576-81
pubmed: 21930729