000142934 001__ 142934
000142934 005__ 20240229112536.0
000142934 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.3390/cancers11010120
000142934 0247_ $$2pmid$$apmid:30669538
000142934 0247_ $$2pmc$$apmc:PMC6356298
000142934 0247_ $$2altmetric$$aaltmetric:54222060
000142934 037__ $$aDKFZ-2019-00562
000142934 041__ $$aeng
000142934 082__ $$a610
000142934 1001_ $$0P:(DE-He78)6d4d6a0e2d726f899086ca98cd560922$$aGies, Anton$$b0$$eFirst author$$udkfz
000142934 245__ $$aCombination of Different Fecal Immunochemical Tests in Colorectal Cancer Screening: Any Gain in Diagnostic Performance?
000142934 260__ $$aBasel$$bMDPI$$c2019
000142934 3367_ $$2DRIVER$$aarticle
000142934 3367_ $$2DataCite$$aOutput Types/Journal article
000142934 3367_ $$0PUB:(DE-HGF)16$$2PUB:(DE-HGF)$$aJournal Article$$bjournal$$mjournal$$s1554284413_15713
000142934 3367_ $$2BibTeX$$aARTICLE
000142934 3367_ $$2ORCID$$aJOURNAL_ARTICLE
000142934 3367_ $$00$$2EndNote$$aJournal Article
000142934 520__ $$aA variety of fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) are used for colorectal cancer screening. FIT performance could be improved further. It is unclear, whether the combination of different FITs with different analytical characteristics (such as, different antibodies for the detection of fecal hemoglobin) can yield a better diagnostic performance. Fecal samples were obtained from 2042 participants of screening colonoscopy. All participants with advanced neoplasm (AN, colorectal cancer (n = 16) or advanced adenoma (n = 200)) and 300 randomly selected participants without AN were included. Nine quantitative FITs were evaluated simultaneously. Sensitivity and specificity was calculated for single tests (n = 9) and for their pairwise test combinations (n = 36) (requiring either both FITs (P++) or at least one FIT (P+) to be positive for defining a positive test result). Mean age of the participants (n = 516) was 63 (range: 50⁻79) years and 56% were men. At cutoffs yielding a specificity of 96.7% for single FITs, the median gain in specificity by P++ combination was +1.0%, whereas the median loss in sensitivity for AN was -4.2%. For P+ combination the median gain in sensitivity for AN was +2.8%, at a prize of median loss of -1.0% of specificity. Combinations of different FITs do not yield any relevant gain in diagnostic performance.
000142934 536__ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF3-313$$a313 - Cancer risk factors and prevention (POF3-313)$$cPOF3-313$$fPOF III$$x0
000142934 588__ $$aDataset connected to CrossRef, PubMed,
000142934 7001_ $$0P:(DE-He78)0a8ada1f5d2ea05fc3af10cd808bfa9a$$aCuk, Katarina$$b1$$udkfz
000142934 7001_ $$0P:(DE-He78)01ef71f71b01a3ec3b698653fd43fe86$$aSchrotz-King, Petra$$b2$$udkfz
000142934 7001_ $$0P:(DE-He78)90d5535ff896e70eed81f4a4f6f22ae2$$aBrenner, Hermann$$b3$$eLast author$$udkfz
000142934 773__ $$0PERI:(DE-600)2527080-1$$a10.3390/cancers11010120$$gVol. 11, no. 1, p. 120 -$$n1$$p120$$tCancers$$v11$$x2072-6694$$y2019
000142934 909CO $$ooai:inrepo02.dkfz.de:142934$$pVDB
000142934 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-He78)6d4d6a0e2d726f899086ca98cd560922$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b0$$kDKFZ
000142934 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-He78)0a8ada1f5d2ea05fc3af10cd808bfa9a$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b1$$kDKFZ
000142934 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-He78)01ef71f71b01a3ec3b698653fd43fe86$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b2$$kDKFZ
000142934 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-He78)90d5535ff896e70eed81f4a4f6f22ae2$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b3$$kDKFZ
000142934 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
000142934 9141_ $$y2019
000142934 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0100$$2StatID$$aJCR$$bCANCERS : 2017
000142934 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0200$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bSCOPUS
000142934 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0300$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bMedline
000142934 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0310$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bNCBI Molecular Biology Database
000142934 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0320$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bPubMed Central
000142934 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0501$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bDOAJ Seal
000142934 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0500$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bDOAJ
000142934 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0030$$2StatID$$aPeer Review$$bDOAJ : Blind peer review
000142934 915__ $$0LIC:(DE-HGF)CCBYNV$$2V:(DE-HGF)$$aCreative Commons Attribution CC BY (No Version)$$bDOAJ
000142934 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0600$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bEbsco Academic Search
000142934 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0030$$2StatID$$aPeer Review$$bASC
000142934 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0199$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bClarivate Analytics Master Journal List
000142934 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0111$$2StatID$$aWoS$$bScience Citation Index Expanded
000142934 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0150$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bWeb of Science Core Collection
000142934 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1050$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bBIOSIS Previews
000142934 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)9905$$2StatID$$aIF >= 5$$bCANCERS : 2017
000142934 9201_ $$0I:(DE-He78)C070-20160331$$kC070$$lKlinische Epidemiologie und Alternsforschung$$x0
000142934 9201_ $$0I:(DE-He78)C120-20160331$$kC120$$lPräventive Onkologie$$x1
000142934 9201_ $$0I:(DE-He78)L101-20160331$$kL101$$lDKTK Heidelberg$$x2
000142934 980__ $$ajournal
000142934 980__ $$aVDB
000142934 980__ $$aI:(DE-He78)C070-20160331
000142934 980__ $$aI:(DE-He78)C120-20160331
000142934 980__ $$aI:(DE-He78)L101-20160331
000142934 980__ $$aUNRESTRICTED