Article Text

other Versions

PDF
Screening For Colorectal Cancer; Randomised Trial Comparing Guaiac-Based And Immunochemical Faecal Occult Blood Testing And Flexible Sigmoidoscopy
  1. Lieke Hol (l.hol.1{at}erasmusmc.nl)
  1. Erasmus University Medical Center, Netherlands
    1. Monique E Van Leerdam (m.vanleerdam{at}erasmusmc.nl)
    1. Erasmus University Medical Center, Netherlands
      1. Marjolein Van Ballegooijen (m.vanballegooijen{at}erasmusmc.nl)
      1. Erasmus University Medical Center, Netherlands
        1. Anneke J Van Vuuren (a.vanvuuren{at}erasmusmc.nl)
        1. Erasmus University Medical Center, Netherlands
          1. Herman Van Dekken (h.vandekken{at}slaz.nl)
          1. Erasmus University Medical Center, Netherlands
            1. Jaqueline C.I.Y. Reijerink (reijerink{at}sbbzwn.nl)
            1. Cancer Screening Organisation for Southwest Netherlands, Netherlands
              1. Alexandra C M Van der Togt (vandertogt-vanleeuwen{at}ikr.nl)
              1. Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Rotterdam, Netherlands
                1. Dik J F Habbema (j.d.f.habbema{at}erasmusmc.nl)
                1. Erasmus University Medical Center, Netherlands
                  1. Ernst J Kuipers (e.j.kuipers{at}erasmusmc.nl)
                  1. Erasmus University Medical Center, Netherlands

                    Abstract

                    Background: Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) is widely accepted, but there is no consensus on the preferred strategy. We conducted a randomised trial comparing participation and detection rates (DR) per screenee of guaiac-based faecal occult blood test (gFOBT), immunochemical FOBT (FIT), and flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) for CRC screening.

                    Methods: A representative sample of the Dutch population (n=15.011), aged 50-74 years, was 1:1:1 randomised prior to invitation to one of the three screening strategies. Colonoscopy was indicated for screenees with a positive gFOBT or FIT, and for those in whom FS revealed a polyp with a diameter ≥10 mm; adenoma with ≥25% villous component or high grade dysplasia; serrated adenoma; ≥3 adenomas; ≥20 hyperplastic polyps; or CRC.

                    Results: The participation rate was 49.5% (95% confidence interval(CI) 48.1-50.9%) for gFOBT, 61.5% (CI:60.1-62.9%) for FIT and 32.4% (CI:31.1-33.7%) for FS screening. gFOBT was positive in 2.8%, FIT in 4.8% and FS in 10.2%. The DR of advanced neoplasia was significantly higher in the FIT (2.4%; OR 2.0; CI:1.3-3.1) and the FS arm (8.0%; OR 7.0; CI:4.6-10.7) than the gFOBT arm (1.1%). FS demonstrated a higher diagnostic yield of advanced neoplasia per 100 invitees (2.4; CI:2.0-2.8) than gFOBT (0.6; CI:0.4-0.8) or FIT (1.5; CI:1.2-1.9) screening.

                    Conclusion: This randomised population-based CRC-screening trial demonstrated superior participation and detection rates for FIT compared to gFOBT screening. FIT screening should therefore be strongly preferred over gFOBT screening. FS screening demonstrated a higher diagnostic yield per 100 invitees than both FOBTs.

                    Statistics from Altmetric.com

                    Request permissions

                    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

                    Linked Articles