Aqeem Azam, Karuna Sapru, Andrew M Jones, Dipesh H Vasant, Anne-Marie Kelly, Graham Horsman, Rowland J Bright-Thomas, Javaid Iqbal, Peter J Barry
{"title":"粪便免疫化学检测在成人囊性纤维化结直肠癌筛查计划中的有限效用:来自英国一项前瞻性研究的见解。","authors":"Aqeem Azam, Karuna Sapru, Andrew M Jones, Dipesh H Vasant, Anne-Marie Kelly, Graham Horsman, Rowland J Bright-Thomas, Javaid Iqbal, Peter J Barry","doi":"10.1136/bmjgast-2025-001954","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>People with cystic fibrosis (pwCF) are at significantly increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC), prompting international recommendations for earlier screening with colonoscopy. The utility of faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) as a screening adjunct in pwCF remains unclear. This study evaluates FIT's diagnostic performance and uptake within a CRC screening programme in a UK CF centre.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PwCF aged ≥40 years were invited in person to participate in a screening protocol including FIT and colonoscopy. FIT results were interpreted using three thresholds: ≥10 µg Hb/g (primary), ≥80 µg Hb/g and ≥120 µg Hb/g. Colonoscopy findings and polyp histology were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 113 eligible patients, 66 (58.4%) returned FIT, 49 (43.4%) had FIT and colonoscopy, and 27 (23.9%) underwent colonoscopy only. Colonic polyps were detected in 27.6% (21/76), which were predominantly adenomatous, and no CRCs were detected. For polyp detection, FIT demonstrated poor sensitivity (14%) and modest specificity (86%) at the 10 µg Hb/g threshold. Quantitative FIT values did not correlate with polyp presence (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.48). Bowel preparation was generally adequate (mean Boston Bowel Preparation Scale 6.8), with a low repeat colonoscopy rate (14.5%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this study, no cancer was detected in 76 consecutive eligible individuals who underwent colonoscopy. In 49 patients who had both FIT and colonoscopy, FIT did not aid colonic polyp detection, showing low sensitivity and no correlation between faecal haemoglobin and adenoma detection. Given the high adenoma prevalence, the limitations of FIT and the poor FIT return rate, colonoscopy should remain the preferred modality for CRC screening in pwCF.</p>","PeriodicalId":9235,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Gastroenterology","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12421605/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Limited utility of faecal immunochemical testing in a colorectal cancer screening programme for adults with cystic fibrosis: insights from a prospective UK study.\",\"authors\":\"Aqeem Azam, Karuna Sapru, Andrew M Jones, Dipesh H Vasant, Anne-Marie Kelly, Graham Horsman, Rowland J Bright-Thomas, Javaid Iqbal, Peter J Barry\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjgast-2025-001954\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>People with cystic fibrosis (pwCF) are at significantly increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC), prompting international recommendations for earlier screening with colonoscopy. The utility of faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) as a screening adjunct in pwCF remains unclear. This study evaluates FIT's diagnostic performance and uptake within a CRC screening programme in a UK CF centre.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PwCF aged ≥40 years were invited in person to participate in a screening protocol including FIT and colonoscopy. FIT results were interpreted using three thresholds: ≥10 µg Hb/g (primary), ≥80 µg Hb/g and ≥120 µg Hb/g. Colonoscopy findings and polyp histology were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 113 eligible patients, 66 (58.4%) returned FIT, 49 (43.4%) had FIT and colonoscopy, and 27 (23.9%) underwent colonoscopy only. Colonic polyps were detected in 27.6% (21/76), which were predominantly adenomatous, and no CRCs were detected. For polyp detection, FIT demonstrated poor sensitivity (14%) and modest specificity (86%) at the 10 µg Hb/g threshold. Quantitative FIT values did not correlate with polyp presence (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.48). Bowel preparation was generally adequate (mean Boston Bowel Preparation Scale 6.8), with a low repeat colonoscopy rate (14.5%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this study, no cancer was detected in 76 consecutive eligible individuals who underwent colonoscopy. In 49 patients who had both FIT and colonoscopy, FIT did not aid colonic polyp detection, showing low sensitivity and no correlation between faecal haemoglobin and adenoma detection. Given the high adenoma prevalence, the limitations of FIT and the poor FIT return rate, colonoscopy should remain the preferred modality for CRC screening in pwCF.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9235,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Open Gastroenterology\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12421605/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Open Gastroenterology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgast-2025-001954\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Open Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgast-2025-001954","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Limited utility of faecal immunochemical testing in a colorectal cancer screening programme for adults with cystic fibrosis: insights from a prospective UK study.
Objective: People with cystic fibrosis (pwCF) are at significantly increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC), prompting international recommendations for earlier screening with colonoscopy. The utility of faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) as a screening adjunct in pwCF remains unclear. This study evaluates FIT's diagnostic performance and uptake within a CRC screening programme in a UK CF centre.
Methods: PwCF aged ≥40 years were invited in person to participate in a screening protocol including FIT and colonoscopy. FIT results were interpreted using three thresholds: ≥10 µg Hb/g (primary), ≥80 µg Hb/g and ≥120 µg Hb/g. Colonoscopy findings and polyp histology were recorded.
Results: Of 113 eligible patients, 66 (58.4%) returned FIT, 49 (43.4%) had FIT and colonoscopy, and 27 (23.9%) underwent colonoscopy only. Colonic polyps were detected in 27.6% (21/76), which were predominantly adenomatous, and no CRCs were detected. For polyp detection, FIT demonstrated poor sensitivity (14%) and modest specificity (86%) at the 10 µg Hb/g threshold. Quantitative FIT values did not correlate with polyp presence (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.48). Bowel preparation was generally adequate (mean Boston Bowel Preparation Scale 6.8), with a low repeat colonoscopy rate (14.5%).
Conclusion: In this study, no cancer was detected in 76 consecutive eligible individuals who underwent colonoscopy. In 49 patients who had both FIT and colonoscopy, FIT did not aid colonic polyp detection, showing low sensitivity and no correlation between faecal haemoglobin and adenoma detection. Given the high adenoma prevalence, the limitations of FIT and the poor FIT return rate, colonoscopy should remain the preferred modality for CRC screening in pwCF.
期刊介绍:
BMJ Open Gastroenterology is an online-only, peer-reviewed, open access gastroenterology journal, dedicated to publishing high-quality medical research from all disciplines and therapeutic areas of gastroenterology. It is the open access companion journal of Gut and is co-owned by the British Society of Gastroenterology. The journal publishes all research study types, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialist studies. Publishing procedures are built around continuous publication, publishing research online as soon as the article is ready.