Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22586008›Full record

ArticleAnnals of internal medicine2012

Diagnostic accuracy of laxative-free computed tomographic colonography for detection of adenomatous polyps in asymptomatic adults: a prospective evaluation.

Michael E Zalis, Michael A Blake, Wenli Cai, Peter F Hahn, Elkan F Halpern, Imrana G Kazam, Myles Keroack, Cordula Magee, Janne J Näppi, Rocio Perez-Johnston and 4 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of internal medicine, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01200303 (Prospective Evaluation of Computer-Assisted, Non-Cathartic CT Colonography for Detection of Adenomatous Colonic Polyps in a Screening Cohort), which is not on this map. Cited by 48 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
7.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01200303 phase2 / phase3completednot on this map

Prospective Evaluation of Computer-Assisted, Non-Cathartic CT Colonography for Detection of Adenomatous Colonic Polyps in a Screening Cohort

TypeinterventionalSponsorMassachusetts General HospitalRan2005 to 2011Enrolled605ConditionsColonic PolypsArmsnon-cathartic CTC
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

48 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 127 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Guideline
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Safety and importance of colonoscopy in nonagenarians.Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Michael E ZalisDepartment of Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital, Suite 400A, 25 New Chardon Street, Boston, MA 02114, USA. mzalis@mgh.harvard.edu
Michael A Blake
Wenli Cai
Peter F Hahn
Elkan F Halpern
Imrana G Kazam
Myles Keroack
Cordula Magee
Janne J Näppi
Rocio Perez-Johnston
John R Saltzman
Abhinav Vij
Judy Yee
Hiroyuki Yoshida
Brigham and Women's Hospital · US

Funding

Computerized Detection of Polyps in CT ColonographyR01CA095279 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI YOSHIDA, HIROYUKI · 2003 to 2013
$3.3M
Colon Cancer Screening Augmented by Image ProcessingK22CA098422 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI ZALIS, MICHAEL ETHAN · 2004 to 2006
$473k
NCI NIH HHS 1K22CA098422NCI NIH HHS 1 RO1 CA095279
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundColon screening by optical colonoscopy (OC) or computed tomographic colonography (CTC) requires a laxative bowel preparation, which inhibits screening participation.

objectiveTo assess the performance of detecting adenomas 6 mm or larger and patient experience of laxative-free, computer-aided CTC.

designProspective test comparison of laxative-free CTC and OC. The CTC included electronic cleansing and computer-aided detection. Optical colonoscopy examinations were initially blinded to CTC results, which were subsequently revealed during colonoscope withdrawal; this method permitted reexamination to resolve discrepant findings. Unblinded OC served as a reference standard. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT01200303)

settingMulticenter ambulatory imaging and endoscopy centers.

participants605 adults aged 50 to 85 years at average to moderate risk for colon cancer. MEASUREMENTS: Per-patient sensitivity and specificity of CTC and first-pass OC for detecting adenomas at thresholds of 10 mm or greater, 8 mm or greater, and 6 mm or greater; per-lesion sensitivity and survey data describing patient experience with preparations and examinations.

resultsFor adenomas 10 mm or larger, per-patient sensitivity of CTC was 0.91 (95% CI, 0.71 to 0.99) and specificity was 0.85 (CI, 0.82 to 0.88); sensitivity of OC was 0.95 (CI, 0.77 to 1.00) and specificity was 0.89 (CI, 0.86 to 0.91). Sensitivity of CTC was 0.70 (CI, 0.53 to 0.83) for adenomas 8 mm or larger and 0.59 (CI, 0.47 to 0.70) for those 6 mm or larger; sensitivity of OC for adenomas 8 mm or larger was 0.88 (CI, 0.73 to 0.96) and 0.76 (CI, 0.64 to 0.85) for those 6 mm or larger. The specificity of OC at the threshold of 8 mm or larger was 0.91 and at 6 mm or larger was 0.94. Specificity for OC was greater than that for CTC, which was 0.86 at the threshold of 8 mm or larger and 0.88 at 6 mm or larger (P= 0.02). Reported participant experience for comfort and difficulty of examination preparation was better with CTC than OC. LIMITATIONS: There were 3 CTC readers. The survey instrument was not independently validated.

conclusionComputed tomographic colonography was accurate in detecting adenomas 10 mm or larger but less so for smaller lesions. Patient experience was better with laxative-free CTC. These results suggest a possible role for laxative-free CTC as an alternate screening method.

Indexed as

Adenomatous PolypsAgedAged, 80 and overAsymptomatic DiseasesColonic PolypsColonography, Computed TomographicColonoscopyFemaleHumansLaxativesMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsProspective StudiesLaxatives

Identifiers

PMID22586008
OpenAlexW2019884211

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.