Comparison of Performance of Two Stool DNA Tests and a Fecal Immunochemical Test in Detecting Colorectal Neoplasm: A Multicenter Diagnostic Study

Jin, Peng; Peng, You; Fang, Jing‐Yuan; Kang, Qian; Gu, Fangyi; Cai, Yunlong; Zhai, Huihong; Wang, Bangmao; Li, Yanqing; Xu, Junfeng; Wang, Jiheng; He, Yuqi; Wang, Yan; Dai, Min; Sheng, Jian-qiu

doi:10.1158/1055-9965.epi-21-0991

Cited by 13 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… 13 The present study also revealed that sDNA has better sensitivity than FIT for detecting LGIN, AA, and ACN, with an overall sensitivity of FIT for AA of 41.7%, corresponding to the previously reported range of 27.0%–67.0%, while the FIT specificity was higher than that of the sDNA method, 27 which was consistent with the results of a previous study. 20 While the FIT and sDNA test results presented some fluctuation, 17 it can be stated that the risk of malignant transformation could be reduced by early lesion detection, and further colonoscopy is required to detect high-risk groups. 28 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Comparison of Single and Combined Schemes of Asia-Pacific Colorectal Screening, Faecal Immunochemical and Stool Deoxyribonucleic Acid Testing for Community Colorectal Cancer Screening

Ze¹,

Tu²,

Zhang³

et al. 2023

JMDH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To compare the screening efficacy of colonoscopy and pathologically confirmed single and combined Asia-Pacific colorectal screening (APCS), faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) and stool deoxyribonucleic acid (sDNA) testing protocols. Methods From April 2021 to April 2022, 842 volunteers participated in primary colorectal cancer (CRC) screenings using APCS scoring, FIT and sDNA testing and 115 underwent a colonoscopy. One hundred high-risk participants were then identified from the results of both processes. The differences in the three CRC screening tests in combination with the colonoscopy pathology diagnostics were evaluated using Cochran’s Q test, the Dunn–Bonferroni test and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) value analysis. Results Both FIT and sDNA testing demonstrated a 100% performance in detecting CRC. For advanced adenoma, the sensitivity of the FIT + sDNA test scheme (double positive) was 29.2%, and the sensitivities of the combined FIT + sDNA test and APCS scoring + sDNA test schemes were 62.5% and 95.8%, respectively. The FIT + sDNA testing kappa value of advanced colorectal neoplasia was 0.344 ( p = 0.011). The sensitivity for nonadvanced adenoma of the APCS score + sDNA test scheme was 91.1%. In terms of positive results, the sensitivity of the APCS score + FIT + sDNA detection protocol was significantly higher than that of the APCS score, FIT, sDNA detection, and FIT + sDNA detection methods (adjusted p < 0.001, respectively). For the FIT + sDNA test, the kappa value was 0.220 ( p = 0.015) and the AUC was 0.634 ( p = 0.037). The specificity of the FIT + sDNA test scheme was 69.0%. Conclusion The FIT + sDNA test scheme demonstrated superior diagnostic efficacy, and the combined APCS score + FIT + sDNA test scheme demonstrated remarkable improvements in CRC screening efficiency and sensitivity for detecting positive lesions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… 18 Meanwhile, Sharma demonstrated that FIT is better than sDNA testing in reducing CRC incidence and mortality, 19 while Jin et al concluded that two sDNA tests represent no significant advantage over FIT. 20 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison of Single and Combined Schemes of Asia-Pacific Colorectal Screening, Faecal Immunochemical and Stool Deoxyribonucleic Acid Testing for Community Colorectal Cancer Screening

Ze¹,

Tu²,

Zhang³

et al. 2023

JMDH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…All experimental procedures related to the MT-sDNA tests [ KRAS mutation, NDRG4, BMP3 methylation and Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT)] were carried out in the laboratory of NHH Technology (Hangzhou, China). The details regarding probes and primers, as well as the risk prediction algorithm were the same as those in a previously published article[ 13 ]. In this risk prediction model, a risk score is provided as a single output.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic accuracy of the multi-target stool DNA test in detecting colorectal cancer: A hospital-based study

Gao¹,

Lv²,

Zhao³

et al. 2023

World J Gastrointest Oncol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND The multi-target stool DNA test (MT-sDNA) has potential utility in the detection of colorectal cancer (CRC), but validation of its clinical accuracy has been limited in China. AIM To evaluate the diagnostic performance of MT-sDNA and investigate the combined diagnostic value of alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), and carbohydrate antigen 199 (CA199) with MT-sDNA in CRC and adenomas. METHODS We evaluated the performance of the MT-sDNA kit based on a hospital clinical trial. In this case-control study, 135 participants from the Affiliated Hospital of Medical School of Ningbo University, including 51 CRC patients, 23 patients with adenomas, and 61 healthy controls were enrolled. We used a risk scoring system to determine the positivity of tests with histological diagnosis or colonoscopy as the reference standard. RESULTS The main indices of sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were evaluated. The sensitivity and specificity for CRC detection were 90.2% and 83.3%, respectively, with an accuracy of 89.8%. For adenoma, the sensitivity and specificity were 56.5% and 68.9%, respectively, with an accuracy of 73.1%. The sensitivity and specificity of MT-sDNA combined with CEA in the diagnosis of adenoma were 78.3% and 60.7%, respectively. CONCLUSION The MT-sDNA test showed better performance in the detection of CRC, which was superior to AFP, CEA, and CA199 separately, but not for predicting adenomas. The combination of MT-sDNA with CEA further improved the sensitivity for adenoma diagnosis.

show abstract

“…Compared with miRNA, the DNA methylation biomarker is more stable and specific for each cancer type, and the whole process procedure for the DNA methylation test is simpler than that of the miRNA-based test; thus, DNA methylation is more suitable as a biomarker for the early detection of cancer than other biomarkers [ 11 ]. Up to now, various DNA methylation-based biomarkers for the early detection of gastrointestinal cancer have been reported [ 12 , 13 , 14 ], and several commercial kits for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening or early detection have been approved by the FDA and NMPA [ 15 , 16 , 17 ]. The successful application of DNA methylation markers in CRC early detection indicated that they may serve as a potential effective method for UGC detection.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Novel Plasma-Based Methylation Panel for Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Early Detection

Peng

Zhao

Pei

et al. 2022

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Upper gastrointestinal cancer (UGC) is an important cause of cancer death in China, with low five-year survival rates due to the majority of UGC patients being diagnosed at an advanced stage. Therefore, there is an urgent need to develop cost-effective, reliable and non-invasive methods for the early detection of UGC. Methods: A novel plasma-based methylation panel combining simultaneous detection of three methylated biomarkers (ELMO1, ZNF582 and TFPI2) and an internal control gene were developed and used to examine plasma samples from 186 UGC patients and 190 control subjects. Results: The results indicated excellent PCR amplification efficiency and reproducibility of ELMO1, ZNF582 and TFPI2 in the range of 10–100,000 copies per PCR reaction of fully methylated genomic DNA. The methylation levels of ELMO1, ZNF582 and TFPI2 were significantly higher in UGC samples than those in control subjects. The sensitivities of ELMO1, ZNF582 and TFPI2 alone for UGC detection were 32.3%, 61.3% and 30.6%, respectively; when three markers were combined, the sensitivity was improved to 71.0%, with a specificity of 90.0%, and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.870 (95% CI: 0.832–0.902). Conclusion: Methylated ELMO1, ZNF582 and TFPI2 were specific for UGC and the three-methylated gene panel provided an alternative non-invasive choice for UGC early detection.

show abstract

Comparison of Performance of Two Stool DNA Tests and a Fecal Immunochemical Test in Detecting Colorectal Neoplasm: A Multicenter Diagnostic Study

Cited by 13 publications

References 25 publications

A Comparison of Single and Combined Schemes of Asia-Pacific Colorectal Screening, Faecal Immunochemical and Stool Deoxyribonucleic Acid Testing for Community Colorectal Cancer Screening

A Comparison of Single and Combined Schemes of Asia-Pacific Colorectal Screening, Faecal Immunochemical and Stool Deoxyribonucleic Acid Testing for Community Colorectal Cancer Screening

Diagnostic accuracy of the multi-target stool DNA test in detecting colorectal cancer: A hospital-based study

A Novel Plasma-Based Methylation Panel for Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Early Detection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About