Article

Fecal occult blood testing when colonoscopy capacity is limited.

Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
CancerSpectrum Knowledge Environment (Impact Factor: 14.07). 11/2011; 103(23):1741-51. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djr385
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) can be adapted to a limited colonoscopy capacity by narrowing the age range or extending the screening interval, by using a more specific test or hemoglobin cutoff level for referral to colonoscopy, and by restricting surveillance colonoscopy. Which of these options is most clinically effective and cost-effective has yet to be established.
We used the validated MISCAN-Colon microsimulation model to estimate the number of colonoscopies, costs, and health effects of different screening strategies using guaiac FOBT or fecal immunochemical test (FIT) at various hemoglobin cutoff levels between 50 and 200 ng hemoglobin per mL, different surveillance strategies, and various age ranges. We optimized the allocation of a limited number of colonoscopies on the basis of incremental cost-effectiveness.
When colonoscopy capacity was unlimited, the optimal screening strategy was to administer an annual FIT with a 50 ng/mL hemoglobin cutoff level in individuals aged 45-80 years and to offer colonoscopy surveillance to all individuals with adenomas. When colonoscopy capacity was decreasing, the optimal screening adaptation was to first increase the FIT hemoglobin cutoff value to 200 ng hemoglobin per mL and narrow the age range to 50-75 years, to restrict colonoscopy surveillance, and finally to further decrease the number of screening rounds. FIT screening was always more cost-effective compared with guaiac FOBT. Doubling colonoscopy capacity increased the benefits of FIT screening up to 100%.
FIT should be used at higher hemoglobin cutoff levels when colonoscopy capacity is limited compared with unlimited and is more effective in terms of health outcomes and cost compared with guaiac FOBT at all colonoscopy capacity levels. Increasing the colonoscopy capacity substantially increases the health benefits of FIT screening.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
103 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Faecal occult blood tests are often the initial test in population-based screening. We aimed to: 1) compare the results of single sample faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) with colonoscopy, and 2) calculate the sensitivity for proximal vs. distal adenomatous polyps or cancer.
    Journal of Medical Screening 06/2014; · 2.72 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background & Aims The latest generation of fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) allows for quantitation of hemoglobin in feces, allowing for selection of an optimal cut-off concentrations. We investigated whether individuals with positive results from quantitative FITs, in combination with other factors, could be identified as being at greatest risk for advanced colorectal neoplasia. Methods In a retrospective study, we analyzed data from a consecutive series of 3109 participants with positive results from FITs (≥20 μg/g of feces) included in the 1st round of the Barcelona colorectal cancer screening program, from December 2009 through February 2012. All participants underwent colonoscopy and were assigned groups with any advanced colorectal neoplasia or with non-advanced colorectal neoplasia (but other diagnosis or normal examination findings). Results Median fecal hemoglobin concentrations were significantly higher in participants with advanced colorectal neoplasia (105 μg/g; interquartile range [IQR], 38–288 μg/g) compared to participants with non-advanced colorectal neoplasia (47 μg/g; IQR, 23–119 μg/g) (P<.001). Positive predictive values for advanced colorectal neoplasia, determined using arbitrary fecal hemoglobin concentrations, differed with sex and age. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified sex (men: odds ratio [OR], 2.07; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.78–2.41), age (60–69 years old: OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.07–1.44), and fecal hemoglobin concentration (>177 μg/g: OR, 3.80; 95% CI, 3.07–4.71) as independent predictive factors for advanced colorectal neoplasia. Combining these factors, we identified 16 risk categories associated with different probabilities of identifying advanced colorectal neoplasia. Risk for advanced colorectal neoplasia increased 11.46-fold among individuals in the highest category compared with the lowest; positive predictive values ranged from 21.3% to 75.6%. Conclusions Fecal hemoglobin concentration, in addition to sex and age, in individuals with positive results from FITs can be used to stratify probability for detection of advanced colorectal neoplasia. These factors should be used to prioritize individuals for colonoscopy examination.
    Gastroenterology 09/2014; · 13.93 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives. We assessed the protocols and system processes for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening at federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) in 4 midwestern states. Methods. We identified 49 FQHCs in 4 states. In January 2013, we mailed their medical directors a 49-item questionnaire about policies on CRC screening, use of electronic medical records, types of CRC screening recommended, clinic tracking systems, referrals for colonoscopy, and barriers to providing CRC. Results. Forty-four questionnaires (90%) were returned. Thirty-three of the respondents (75%) estimated the proportion of their patients up-to-date with CRC screening, with a mean of 35%. One major barrier to screening was inability to provide colonoscopy for patients with a positive fecal occult blood test (59%). The correlation of system strategies and estimated percentage of patients up-to-date with CRC screening was 0.43 (P = .01). Conclusions. CRC system strategies were associated with higher CRC screening rates. Implementing system strategies for CRC screening takes time and effort and is important to maintain, to help prevent, or to cure many cases of CRC, the second leading cause of cancer in the United States. (Am J Public Health. Published online ahead of print May 15, 2014: e1-e8. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2013.301790).
    American Journal of Public Health 05/2014; · 3.93 Impact Factor