ArticleEuropean journal of public health2023
Optimization of screening strategies for colorectal cancer based on fecal DNA and occult blood testing.
Article in European journal of public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Utility of Stool-Based Tests for Colorectal Cancer Detection: A Comprehensive Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Small nucleolar RNA and its potential role in the oncogenesis and development of colorectal cancer.World journal of gastroenterology · 2024Review
- The Detection of Colorectal Cancer through Machine Learning-Based Breath Sensor Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFecal DNA and occult blood testing have been gradually developed for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Comparison of different testing strategies for these methods in CRC screening is in urgent need. This study aims to examine the efficacy of different testing strategies including multi-target fecal DNA testing, qualitative and quantitative fecal immunoassay tests (FITs).
methodsFecal samples were collected from patients diagnosed by colonoscopy. Tests using fecal DNA, quantitative FIT or qualitative FIT were performed on same fecal samples. Efficiency of different testing strategies within different populations was investigated.
resultsFor high-risk populations (CRC and advanced adenoma), the positive rate of the three methods alone was 74.3-80%; the positive predictive values (PPVs) ranged from 37.3% to 77.8%, and the negative predictive values (NPVs) ranged from 86.3% to 92.2%. For combined testing strategies, the positive rate was 71.4-88.6%, PPVs ranged from 38.3% to 86.2%, and NPVs ranged from 89.6% to 92.9%. Parallel fecal multi-target DNA test and quantitative FIT appears to be superior when using a combined testing strategy. For the normal population, no significant difference was identified in efficacy between these methods when used alone and in combination.
conclusionsSingle testing strategy among the three methods is more suitable for the general population screening, and the combined testing strategy is more suitable for high-risk populations screening. The use of different combination strategies may have superiority in CRC high-risk population screening, but cannot conclude significant differences which may be attributed to the small sample size, large samples controlled trials are needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.