Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32523623›Full record

ArticleTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology2020

The combination of quantitative faecal occult blood test and faecal calprotectin is a cost-effective strategy to avoid colonoscopies in symptomatic patients without relevant pathology.

Alberto Lué, Gonzalo Hijos, Carlos Sostres, Alba Perales, Mercedes Navarro, Maria Victoria Barra, Barbara Mascialino, Carmen Andalucia, Juan José Puente, Ángel Lanas and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Alberto LuéHospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa, Servicio de Aparato Digestivo, Zaragoza, Spain.
Gonzalo HijosHospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa, Servicio de Aparato Digestivo, Av/ San Juan Bosco, 15, Zaragoza, 50009, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2743-9593
Carlos SostresHospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa, Servicio de Aparato Digestivo, Zaragoza, Spain.
Alba PeralesUniversidad de Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain.
Mercedes NavarroHospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa, Servicio de Aparato Digestivo, Zaragoza, Spain.
Maria Victoria BarraHospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa, Servicio de Bioquímica, Zaragoza, Spain.
Barbara MascialinoThermo Fisher Scientific, Uppsala, Sweden.
Carmen AndaluciaThermo Fisher Scientific, Uppsala, Sweden.
Juan José PuenteHospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa, Servicio de Bioquímica, Zaragoza, Spain.
Ángel LanasHospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa, Servicio de Aparato Digestivo, Zaragoza, Spain.
Fernando GomollonHospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa, Servicio de Aparato Digestivo, Zaragoza, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFaecal occult blood test (FOBT) has demonstrated effectiveness in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Faecal calprotectin (FC) has proven efficient for evaluating activity in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), but its value in CRC detection is less established. Most symptomatic patients have benign pathologies, but still undergo colonoscopy in many settings.

aimsTo evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and cost-effectiveness of the combination of FOBT plus FC in symptomatic patients.

methodsPatients who completed colonic investigations and returned stool samples, on which FOBT and FC were performed, were recruited prospectively. CRC, advanced adenoma, IBD and angiodysplasia were considered as relevant pathologies.

resultsA total of 404 patients were included, of whom 87 (21.5%) had relevant pathologies. Sensitivity and specificity were 50.6% and 69.6% for FOBT, 78.2% and 54.4% for FC. Negative predictive value (NPV) was 90.1% for FC and 86.9% for FOBT. NPV for the combination of FOBT and FC was 94.1%, with a sensitivity and specificity of 88.5% and 50.3%. The area under ROC (receiver operator curve) (AUC) was 0.741 for FOBT, 0.736 for FC and 0.816 for the combination. The total cost for visits and procedures was €233,016 (€577/patient). Using a combination of FOBT and FC as pre-endoscopic tool allows colonoscopies to be reduced by 39.4%, reducing total costs by 20.5%.

conclusionThe combination of FOBT and FC has a better diagnostic accuracy compared with each test alone. Performing both tests before colonoscopy is a less costly and more effective strategy, reducing unnecessary procedures and complications.

Indexed as

colonoscopycolorectal cancerfaecal biomarkershealth economicsinflammatory bowel diseasesymptomatic patients

Identifiers

PMID32523623
PMCPMC7235671

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.