Graeme P Young, Sally C Benton, Robert S Bresalier, Han-Mo Chiu, Evelien Dekker, Callum G Fraser, Marieke A M Frasa, Stephen P Halloran, Michael Hoffmeister, Susan Parry, Kevin Selby, Carlo Senore, Harminder Singh, Erin L Symonds
{"title":"粪便免疫化学检验阳性阈值:基于人口的筛查计划国际调查。","authors":"Graeme P Young, Sally C Benton, Robert S Bresalier, Han-Mo Chiu, Evelien Dekker, Callum G Fraser, Marieke A M Frasa, Stephen P Halloran, Michael Hoffmeister, Susan Parry, Kevin Selby, Carlo Senore, Harminder Singh, Erin L Symonds","doi":"10.1007/s10620-024-08664-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The fecal immunochemical test for hemoglobin (FIT) is now a widely used non-invasive test in population-based organized screening programs for colorectal neoplasia. The positivity thresholds of tests currently in use are based on the fecal hemoglobin concentration (f-Hb), but the rationale for the adopted thresholds are not well documented. To understand current global usage of FIT in screening programs we conducted an international survey of the brands of FIT used, the f-Hb positivity threshold applied and the rationale for the choice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All members of the World Endoscopy Organization CRC Screening Committee were invited to complete an eight-element initial electronic survey exploring the key aims. Responses were obtained from 63 individuals, representing 38 specific locations in 28 countries. A follow-up survey on technical issues was offered to the 38 locations, with replies from 17 sites in 13 countries.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In-use quantitative FIT were provided by four main manufacturers; Minaris Medical (2 countries), Eiken Chemical Company/Polymedco (21), Alfresa Pharma (2) and Sentinel Diagnostics (4). Of the 38 screening sites, 15 used the threshold of 20 µg hemoglobin/g feces, while thresholds ranged between 8.5 and 120 ug/g in the remainder. Seven explanations were given for adopted FIT thresholds; maximizing the sensitivity for colorectal neoplasia (n = 23) was the most common followed by the availability of colonoscopy resources (n = 18). Predictive value, specificity, and cost effectiveness were less frequently reported as the rationale. Nine sites found it necessary to change the threshold that they had initially selected.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This international survey has documented the wide range of FIT positivity thresholds that are in current use. Quantitative FITs enable programs to achieve the desired program outcomes within available resource constraints by adjusting the positivity threshold. This supports the need for enabling positivity threshold adjustment of emerging new screening tests based on novel predictive biomarkers, rather than providing inflexible test endpoints.</p>","PeriodicalId":11378,"journal":{"name":"Digestive Diseases and Sciences","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fecal Immunochemical Test Positivity Thresholds: An International Survey of Population-Based Screening Programs.\",\"authors\":\"Graeme P Young, Sally C Benton, Robert S Bresalier, Han-Mo Chiu, Evelien Dekker, Callum G Fraser, Marieke A M Frasa, Stephen P Halloran, Michael Hoffmeister, Susan Parry, Kevin Selby, Carlo Senore, Harminder Singh, Erin L Symonds\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10620-024-08664-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The fecal immunochemical test for hemoglobin (FIT) is now a widely used non-invasive test in population-based organized screening programs for colorectal neoplasia. The positivity thresholds of tests currently in use are based on the fecal hemoglobin concentration (f-Hb), but the rationale for the adopted thresholds are not well documented. To understand current global usage of FIT in screening programs we conducted an international survey of the brands of FIT used, the f-Hb positivity threshold applied and the rationale for the choice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All members of the World Endoscopy Organization CRC Screening Committee were invited to complete an eight-element initial electronic survey exploring the key aims. Responses were obtained from 63 individuals, representing 38 specific locations in 28 countries. A follow-up survey on technical issues was offered to the 38 locations, with replies from 17 sites in 13 countries.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In-use quantitative FIT were provided by four main manufacturers; Minaris Medical (2 countries), Eiken Chemical Company/Polymedco (21), Alfresa Pharma (2) and Sentinel Diagnostics (4). Of the 38 screening sites, 15 used the threshold of 20 µg hemoglobin/g feces, while thresholds ranged between 8.5 and 120 ug/g in the remainder. Seven explanations were given for adopted FIT thresholds; maximizing the sensitivity for colorectal neoplasia (n = 23) was the most common followed by the availability of colonoscopy resources (n = 18). Predictive value, specificity, and cost effectiveness were less frequently reported as the rationale. Nine sites found it necessary to change the threshold that they had initially selected.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This international survey has documented the wide range of FIT positivity thresholds that are in current use. Quantitative FITs enable programs to achieve the desired program outcomes within available resource constraints by adjusting the positivity threshold. This supports the need for enabling positivity threshold adjustment of emerging new screening tests based on novel predictive biomarkers, rather than providing inflexible test endpoints.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11378,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Digestive Diseases and Sciences\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Digestive Diseases and Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-024-08664-7\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Digestive Diseases and Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-024-08664-7","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:粪便血红蛋白免疫化学检验(FIT)是目前在以人群为基础的有组织结直肠肿瘤筛查计划中广泛使用的一种非侵入性检验。目前使用的检验的阳性阈值是基于粪便血红蛋白浓度(f-Hb),但所采用的阈值的合理性并没有很好的记录。为了了解目前全球筛查项目中 FIT 的使用情况,我们对使用的 FIT 品牌、采用的 f-Hb 阳性阈值以及选择的理由进行了一次国际调查:方法:我们邀请世界内镜组织 CRC 筛查委员会的所有成员完成一项包含八项内容的初步电子调查,以探讨主要目标。来自 28 个国家 38 个特定地点的 63 位代表做出了回复。针对这 38 个地点的技术问题进行了后续调查,13 个国家的 17 个地点做出了答复:结果:使用中的定量 FIT 由四家主要制造商提供:Minaris Medical(2 个国家)、Eiken Chemical Company/Polymedco(21 家)、Alfresa Pharma(2 家)和 Sentinel Diagnostics(4 家)。在 38 个筛查点中,15 个使用了 20 微克血红蛋白/克粪便的阈值,其余筛查点的阈值在 8.5 至 120 微克/克之间。采用 FIT 临界值有七种解释;最大限度地提高结直肠肿瘤的敏感性(23 例)是最常见的解释,其次是结肠镜检查资源的可用性(18 例)。预测值、特异性和成本效益是较少报告的理由。有九个研究机构认为有必要改变他们最初选择的阈值:这项国际调查记录了目前使用的各种 FIT 阳性阈值。通过调整阳性阈值,定量 FIT 能够使项目在现有资源限制范围内实现预期的项目成果。这支持了根据新的预测性生物标志物调整新出现的筛查试验阳性阈值的必要性,而不是提供不灵活的试验终点。
Fecal Immunochemical Test Positivity Thresholds: An International Survey of Population-Based Screening Programs.
Background: The fecal immunochemical test for hemoglobin (FIT) is now a widely used non-invasive test in population-based organized screening programs for colorectal neoplasia. The positivity thresholds of tests currently in use are based on the fecal hemoglobin concentration (f-Hb), but the rationale for the adopted thresholds are not well documented. To understand current global usage of FIT in screening programs we conducted an international survey of the brands of FIT used, the f-Hb positivity threshold applied and the rationale for the choice.
Methods: All members of the World Endoscopy Organization CRC Screening Committee were invited to complete an eight-element initial electronic survey exploring the key aims. Responses were obtained from 63 individuals, representing 38 specific locations in 28 countries. A follow-up survey on technical issues was offered to the 38 locations, with replies from 17 sites in 13 countries.
Results: In-use quantitative FIT were provided by four main manufacturers; Minaris Medical (2 countries), Eiken Chemical Company/Polymedco (21), Alfresa Pharma (2) and Sentinel Diagnostics (4). Of the 38 screening sites, 15 used the threshold of 20 µg hemoglobin/g feces, while thresholds ranged between 8.5 and 120 ug/g in the remainder. Seven explanations were given for adopted FIT thresholds; maximizing the sensitivity for colorectal neoplasia (n = 23) was the most common followed by the availability of colonoscopy resources (n = 18). Predictive value, specificity, and cost effectiveness were less frequently reported as the rationale. Nine sites found it necessary to change the threshold that they had initially selected.
Conclusions: This international survey has documented the wide range of FIT positivity thresholds that are in current use. Quantitative FITs enable programs to achieve the desired program outcomes within available resource constraints by adjusting the positivity threshold. This supports the need for enabling positivity threshold adjustment of emerging new screening tests based on novel predictive biomarkers, rather than providing inflexible test endpoints.
期刊介绍:
Digestive Diseases and Sciences publishes high-quality, peer-reviewed, original papers addressing aspects of basic/translational and clinical research in gastroenterology, hepatology, and related fields. This well-illustrated journal features comprehensive coverage of basic pathophysiology, new technological advances, and clinical breakthroughs; insights from prominent academicians and practitioners concerning new scientific developments and practical medical issues; and discussions focusing on the latest changes in local and worldwide social, economic, and governmental policies that affect the delivery of care within the disciplines of gastroenterology and hepatology.