000135955 001__ 135955
000135955 005__ 20240229105048.0
000135955 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.1002/ijc.31233
000135955 0247_ $$2pmid$$apmid:29277897
000135955 0247_ $$2ISSN$$a0020-7136
000135955 0247_ $$2ISSN$$a1097-0215
000135955 0247_ $$2altmetric$$aaltmetric:45255737
000135955 037__ $$aDKFZ-2018-00692
000135955 041__ $$aeng
000135955 082__ $$a610
000135955 1001_ $$00000-0002-7823-4216$$aGies, Anton$$b0$$eFirst author
000135955 245__ $$aQuantitative fecal immunochemical tests for colorectal cancer screening.
000135955 260__ $$aBognor Regis$$bWiley-Liss$$c2018
000135955 3367_ $$2DRIVER$$aarticle
000135955 3367_ $$2DataCite$$aOutput Types/Journal article
000135955 3367_ $$0PUB:(DE-HGF)16$$2PUB:(DE-HGF)$$aJournal Article$$bjournal$$mjournal$$s1554371784_31855$$xReview Article
000135955 3367_ $$2BibTeX$$aARTICLE
000135955 3367_ $$2ORCID$$aJOURNAL_ARTICLE
000135955 3367_ $$00$$2EndNote$$aJournal Article
000135955 520__ $$aFecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for hemoglobin (Hb) are increasingly used for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. We aimed to review, summarize and compare reported diagnostic performance of various FITs. PubMed and Web of Science were searched from inception to July 24, 2017. Data on diagnostic performance of quantitative FITs, conducted in colonoscopy-controlled average-risk screening populations, were extracted. Summary receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted and correlations between thresholds, positivity rates (PRs), sensitivities and specificities were assessed. Seven test brands were investigated across 22 studies. Although reported sensitivities for CRC, advanced adenoma (AA) and any advanced neoplasm (AN) varied widely (ranges: 25-100%, 6-44% and 9-60%, respectively), with specificities for AN ranging from 82% to 99%, the estimates were very close to the respective summary ROC curves whose areas under the curve (95% CI) were 0.905 (0.88-0.94), 0.683 (0.67-0.70) and 0.710 (0.70-0.72) for CRC, AA and AN, respectively. The seemingly large heterogeneity essentially reflected variations in test thresholds (range: 2-82 µg Hb/g feces) and showed moderate correlations with sensitivity (r = -0.49) and specificity (r = 0.60) for AN. By contrast, observed PRs (range: 1-21%) almost perfectly correlated with sensitivity (r = 0.84) and specificity (r = -0.94) for AN. The apparent large heterogeneity in diagnostic performance between various FITs can be almost completely overcome by appropriate threshold adjustments. Instead of simply applying the threshold recommended by the manufacturer, screening programs should adjust the threshold to yield a desired PR which is a very good proxy indicator for the specificity and the subsequent colonoscopy workload.
000135955 536__ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF3-313$$a313 - Cancer risk factors and prevention (POF3-313)$$cPOF3-313$$fPOF III$$x0
000135955 588__ $$aDataset connected to CrossRef, PubMed,
000135955 7001_ $$0P:(DE-He78)ac7aed57f26354e8a484b5d257f7bada$$aBhardwaj, Megha$$b1$$udkfz
000135955 7001_ $$0P:(DE-He78)908880209a64ea539ae8dc5fdb7e0a91$$aStock, Christian$$b2$$udkfz
000135955 7001_ $$0P:(DE-He78)01ef71f71b01a3ec3b698653fd43fe86$$aSchrotz-King, Petra$$b3$$udkfz
000135955 7001_ $$0P:(DE-He78)90d5535ff896e70eed81f4a4f6f22ae2$$aBrenner, Hermann$$b4$$eLast author$$udkfz
000135955 773__ $$0PERI:(DE-600)1474822-8$$a10.1002/ijc.31233$$gVol. 143, no. 2, p. 234 - 244$$n2$$p234 - 244$$tInternational journal of cancer$$v143$$x0020-7136$$y2018
000135955 909CO $$ooai:inrepo02.dkfz.de:135955$$pVDB
000135955 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$60000-0002-7823-4216$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b0$$kDKFZ
000135955 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-He78)ac7aed57f26354e8a484b5d257f7bada$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b1$$kDKFZ
000135955 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-He78)908880209a64ea539ae8dc5fdb7e0a91$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b2$$kDKFZ
000135955 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-He78)01ef71f71b01a3ec3b698653fd43fe86$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b3$$kDKFZ
000135955 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-He78)90d5535ff896e70eed81f4a4f6f22ae2$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b4$$kDKFZ
000135955 9131_ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF3-313$$1G:(DE-HGF)POF3-310$$2G:(DE-HGF)POF3-300$$3G:(DE-HGF)POF3$$4G:(DE-HGF)POF$$aDE-HGF$$bGesundheit$$lKrebsforschung$$vCancer risk factors and prevention$$x0
000135955 9141_ $$y2018
000135955 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0420$$2StatID$$aNationallizenz
000135955 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0200$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bSCOPUS
000135955 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0300$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bMedline
000135955 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0310$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bNCBI Molecular Biology Database
000135955 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0100$$2StatID$$aJCR$$bINT J CANCER : 2015
000135955 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0199$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bThomson Reuters Master Journal List
000135955 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0110$$2StatID$$aWoS$$bScience Citation Index
000135955 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0150$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bWeb of Science Core Collection
000135955 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0111$$2StatID$$aWoS$$bScience Citation Index Expanded
000135955 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1030$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bCurrent Contents - Life Sciences
000135955 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1050$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bBIOSIS Previews
000135955 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)9905$$2StatID$$aIF >= 5$$bINT J CANCER : 2015
000135955 9201_ $$0I:(DE-He78)C070-20160331$$kC070$$lKlinische Epidemiologie und Alternsforschung$$x0
000135955 9201_ $$0I:(DE-He78)G110-20160331$$kG110$$lPräventive Onkologie$$x1
000135955 9201_ $$0I:(DE-He78)L101-20160331$$kL101$$lDKTK Heidelberg$$x2
000135955 980__ $$ajournal
000135955 980__ $$aVDB
000135955 980__ $$aI:(DE-He78)C070-20160331
000135955 980__ $$aI:(DE-He78)G110-20160331
000135955 980__ $$aI:(DE-He78)L101-20160331
000135955 980__ $$aUNRESTRICTED