比较内镜检查和基于生物标记物的胃癌筛查的参与度和中期效果:聚类随机对照试验》。

IF 4.3 3区 材料科学 Q1 ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC ACS Applied Electronic Materials Pub Date : 2024-10-07 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.7150/jca.99100
Haifan Xiao, Hao Luo, Ang Qin, Wenxian Shu, Xiangyu Liu, Fengfan Xiao, Xianzhen Liao, Zhaohui Shi, Yanhua Zou, Kekui Xu, Shiyu Cao, Can Li, Yingyun Hu, Senmao Zhang, Jia Guo, Shiyu Wang, Shipeng Yan
{"title":"比较内镜检查和基于生物标记物的胃癌筛查的参与度和中期效果:聚类随机对照试验》。","authors":"Haifan Xiao, Hao Luo, Ang Qin, Wenxian Shu, Xiangyu Liu, Fengfan Xiao, Xianzhen Liao, Zhaohui Shi, Yanhua Zou, Kekui Xu, Shiyu Cao, Can Li, Yingyun Hu, Senmao Zhang, Jia Guo, Shiyu Wang, Shipeng Yan","doi":"10.7150/jca.99100","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> To improve compliance with endoscopic screening for gastric cancer (GC), we assessed five biomarkers-pepsinogen I (PG I), pepsinogen II (PG II), PG I/II ratio, helicobacter pylori antibody (HP-Ab), and gastrin 17 (G17) - for secondary GC screening by comparing participation and effectiveness of traditional endoscopy and biomarker-based screening in a randomized trial with baseline results. <b>Methods:</b> Seventy-four communities were randomly assigned to traditional endoscopy arm (TEA) or biomarker-based endoscopy arm (BEA). TEA uses a questionnaire for risk assessment, and BEA combines a questionnaire with biomarker detection. High-risk individuals in both arms underwent endoscopic screening. Participation and interim screening effectiveness in two arms were reported with baseline analysis. <b>Results:</b> In total, 5,798 participants in TEA and 5,158 in BEA were recruited, with a participation rate of 26.9%. BEA showed a significantly lower high-risk rate than TEA (15.2% vs. 38.9%) and a higher endoscopic participation rate for high-risk individuals (64.9% vs. 53.0%). The endoscopic screening results showed that there was no significant difference in detection rate of GC abnormalities between the two arms. Education level, frequent drinking, hot, rough and hard food consumption, family history of GC, and history of reflux esophagitis or gastropathy influenced participation rates in biomarker-based screening. Age group, sex and regular consumption of meat, eggs and milk products were associated with stomach abnormalities.Cumulative incidence and specific death rates did not significantly differ in intention-to-screen and per-protocol analyses. <b>Conclusions:</b> Biomarker-based screening effectively identifies high-risk individuals and increases endoscopic participation, providing value insights for improving screening efficiency as a secondary procedure.</p>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11492997/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing Participation and Interim Effectiveness of Endoscopy and Biomarker-Based Screening for Gastric Cancer: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Haifan Xiao, Hao Luo, Ang Qin, Wenxian Shu, Xiangyu Liu, Fengfan Xiao, Xianzhen Liao, Zhaohui Shi, Yanhua Zou, Kekui Xu, Shiyu Cao, Can Li, Yingyun Hu, Senmao Zhang, Jia Guo, Shiyu Wang, Shipeng Yan\",\"doi\":\"10.7150/jca.99100\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background:</b> To improve compliance with endoscopic screening for gastric cancer (GC), we assessed five biomarkers-pepsinogen I (PG I), pepsinogen II (PG II), PG I/II ratio, helicobacter pylori antibody (HP-Ab), and gastrin 17 (G17) - for secondary GC screening by comparing participation and effectiveness of traditional endoscopy and biomarker-based screening in a randomized trial with baseline results. <b>Methods:</b> Seventy-four communities were randomly assigned to traditional endoscopy arm (TEA) or biomarker-based endoscopy arm (BEA). TEA uses a questionnaire for risk assessment, and BEA combines a questionnaire with biomarker detection. High-risk individuals in both arms underwent endoscopic screening. Participation and interim screening effectiveness in two arms were reported with baseline analysis. <b>Results:</b> In total, 5,798 participants in TEA and 5,158 in BEA were recruited, with a participation rate of 26.9%. BEA showed a significantly lower high-risk rate than TEA (15.2% vs. 38.9%) and a higher endoscopic participation rate for high-risk individuals (64.9% vs. 53.0%). The endoscopic screening results showed that there was no significant difference in detection rate of GC abnormalities between the two arms. Education level, frequent drinking, hot, rough and hard food consumption, family history of GC, and history of reflux esophagitis or gastropathy influenced participation rates in biomarker-based screening. Age group, sex and regular consumption of meat, eggs and milk products were associated with stomach abnormalities.Cumulative incidence and specific death rates did not significantly differ in intention-to-screen and per-protocol analyses. <b>Conclusions:</b> Biomarker-based screening effectively identifies high-risk individuals and increases endoscopic participation, providing value insights for improving screening efficiency as a secondary procedure.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":3,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11492997/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7150/jca.99100\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"材料科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7150/jca.99100","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:为了提高胃癌(GC)内镜筛查的依从性,我们评估了胃蛋白酶原 I (PG I)、胃蛋白酶原 II (PG II)、胃蛋白酶原 I/II 比值、幽门螺杆菌抗体 (HP-Ab) 和胃泌素 17 (G17) 这五种生物标记物在胃癌二次筛查中的作用,在一项随机试验中比较了传统内镜检查和基于生物标记物的筛查的参与度和有效性,并得出了基线结果。方法:74个社区被随机分配到传统内镜检查组(TEA)或基于生物标志物的内镜检查组(BEA)。传统内窥镜检查使用问卷进行风险评估,生物标志物内窥镜检查则将问卷与生物标志物检测相结合。两组的高危人群都接受了内窥镜筛查。通过基线分析报告了两组的参与情况和中期筛查效果。结果:TEA共招募了5798名参与者,BEA共招募了5158名参与者,参与率为26.9%。东亚医院的高风险率明显低于东亚医院(15.2% 对 38.9%),高风险人群的内镜参与率更高(64.9% 对 53.0%)。内镜筛查结果显示,两组患者的 GC 异常检出率无显著差异。教育程度、经常饮酒、食用热、粗糙和坚硬的食物、GC 家族史以及反流性食管炎或胃病史影响了基于生物标志物筛查的参与率。在意向筛查和按协议分析中,累积发病率和特定死亡率没有显著差异。结论基于生物标志物的筛查能有效识别高危人群并提高内镜检查的参与率,为提高筛查效率提供了有价值的启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparing Participation and Interim Effectiveness of Endoscopy and Biomarker-Based Screening for Gastric Cancer: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background: To improve compliance with endoscopic screening for gastric cancer (GC), we assessed five biomarkers-pepsinogen I (PG I), pepsinogen II (PG II), PG I/II ratio, helicobacter pylori antibody (HP-Ab), and gastrin 17 (G17) - for secondary GC screening by comparing participation and effectiveness of traditional endoscopy and biomarker-based screening in a randomized trial with baseline results. Methods: Seventy-four communities were randomly assigned to traditional endoscopy arm (TEA) or biomarker-based endoscopy arm (BEA). TEA uses a questionnaire for risk assessment, and BEA combines a questionnaire with biomarker detection. High-risk individuals in both arms underwent endoscopic screening. Participation and interim screening effectiveness in two arms were reported with baseline analysis. Results: In total, 5,798 participants in TEA and 5,158 in BEA were recruited, with a participation rate of 26.9%. BEA showed a significantly lower high-risk rate than TEA (15.2% vs. 38.9%) and a higher endoscopic participation rate for high-risk individuals (64.9% vs. 53.0%). The endoscopic screening results showed that there was no significant difference in detection rate of GC abnormalities between the two arms. Education level, frequent drinking, hot, rough and hard food consumption, family history of GC, and history of reflux esophagitis or gastropathy influenced participation rates in biomarker-based screening. Age group, sex and regular consumption of meat, eggs and milk products were associated with stomach abnormalities.Cumulative incidence and specific death rates did not significantly differ in intention-to-screen and per-protocol analyses. Conclusions: Biomarker-based screening effectively identifies high-risk individuals and increases endoscopic participation, providing value insights for improving screening efficiency as a secondary procedure.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
567
期刊最新文献
Hyperbaric oxygen treatment promotes tendon-bone interface healing in a rabbit model of rotator cuff tears. Oxygen-ozone therapy for myocardial ischemic stroke and cardiovascular disorders. Comparative study on the anti-inflammatory and protective effects of different oxygen therapy regimens on lipopolysaccharide-induced acute lung injury in mice. Heme oxygenase/carbon monoxide system and development of the heart. Hyperbaric oxygen for moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury: outcomes 5-8 years after injury.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1