ArticleAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP2024
Diagnostic Accuracy of Multitarget Stool DNA Test for Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detecting in Thailand.
Article in Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Fecal DNA SDC2 methylation test for colorectal cancer diagnosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Biomolecules & biomedicine · 2026Pooled it
- Diagnostic value of genetic and epigenetic biomarker panels for colorectal cancer detection: a systematic review.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Pooled it
- A scoping review of DNA methylation biomarkers for non-invasive detection of colorectal cancer at the CpG site level.Clinical epigenetics · 2026Article
- The Role of Epigenetic Biomarkers as Diagnostic, Predictive and Prognostic Factors in Colorectal Cancer.Cancers · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA multitarget stool DNA test offers high sensitivity and specificity for screening and detecting colorectal cancer (CRC) in Western populations. However, its accuracy in Asian people is not well known. This study aimed to examine the diagnostic performance of multitarget stool DNA tests in Thailand.
methodsA prospective cross-sectional study was conducted from January 2023 to November 2023 at a tertiary university hospital in Bangkok. The study included both asymptomatic and symptomatic patients who underwent stool DNA testing followed by colonoscopy. The multitarget stool DNA test targeted methylation statuses of SDC2, ADHFE1, and PPP2R5C genes. Sensitivity, specificity, and other diagnostic parameters were analyzed.
resultsA total of 274 patients (mean age 62.1 years, 60.6% female) were enrolled. CRC was diagnosed in 17.2% of participants and 6.2% had advanced adenomas. The multitarget stool DNA test demonstrated a sensitivity of 91.5% (95% CI: 79.6-97.6) and specificity of 90.3% (95% CI: 85.7-93.8) for CRC detection. Its sensitivity for detecting CRC did not differ between right-sided lesions (92.3%) and left-sided lesions (91.2%) (P=0.901). The sensitivity for detecting CRC lesions size less than 2 cm was significantly lower than for larger lesions (25% vs 91.7%, p<0.001). Notably, the test's sensitivity and specificity for advanced colorectal neoplasms/cancer were 75.0% (95% CI: 62.6-85.0) and 91.9% (95% CI: 87.4-95.2), respectively.
conclusionsMultitarget stool DNA testing is highly sensitive and specific for CRC detection in Thai individuals. This testing could represent as a viable non-invasive alternative to colonoscopy especially in settings where colonoscopy is less accessible or less accepted by patients.
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.