Search

Prediction models for colorectal cancer (CRC) detection in symptomatic patients, based on easily obtainable variables such as fecal haemoglobin concentration (f-Hb), age and sex, may simplify CRC diagnosis. We developed, and then externally validated, a multivariable prediction model, the FAST Score, with data from five diagnostic test accuracy studies that evaluated quantitative fecal immunochemical tests in symptomatic patients referred for colonoscopy. The diagnostic accuracy of the Score in derivation and validation cohorts was compared statistically with the area under the curve (AUC) and the Chi-square test. 1,572 and 3,976 patients were examined in these cohorts, respectively. For CRC, the odds ratio (OR) of the variables included in the Score were: age (years): 1.03 (95% confidence intervals (CI): 1.02–1.05), male sex: 1.6 (95% CI: 1.1–2.3) and f-Hb (0–

Background The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) published NG12 in 2015. The referral criteria for suspected colorectal cancer (CRC) caused controversy, because tests for occult blood in faeces were recommended. Faecal immunochemical tests for haemoglobin (FIT), which estimate faecal haemoglobin concentrations (f-Hb), might more than fulfil the intentions. Our aim was to compare the utility of f-Hb as the initial investigation with the NICE NG12 symptom-based guidelines. Methods Data from three studies were included. Patients had sex, age, symptoms, f-Hb and colonoscopy and histology data recorded. Sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of f-Hb and NG12 were calculated for all significant colorectal disease (SCD: CRC, higher risk adenoma and inflammatory bowel disease). Overall diagnostic accuracy was also estimated by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Results A total of 1514 patients were included. At a cut-off of ≥10 µg Hb/g faeces, the sensitivity of f-Hb for CRC was 93.3% (95% confidence interval (CI): 80.7–98.3) with NPV of 99.7% (95%CI: 99.2–99.9). The sensitivity and NPV for SCD were 63.2% (95%CI: 56.6–69.4) and 96.0% (95%CI: 91.4–94.4), respectively. The NG12 sensitivity and NPV for SCD were 58.4% (95%CI: 51.8–64.8) and 87.6% (95%CI: 85.0–89.8), respectively. The AUC for CRC was 0.85 (95% CI: 0.87–0.90) for f-Hb versus 0.65 (95%CI: 0.58–0.73) for NG12 ( P Conclusion f-Hb provides a good rule-out test for SCD and has significantly higher overall diagnostic accuracy than NG12.

ObjectiveTo investigate the relationship between deprivation and faecal haemoglobin concentration (f-Hb).SettingScottish Bowel Screening Programme.MethodsA total of 66725 men and women, aged 50 to 74, were invited to provide a single sample for a faecal immunochemical test. Deprivation was estimated using the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation quintiles: f-Hb was measured (OC-Sensor, Eiken, Japan) on 38439 participants. The relationship between deprivation quintiles and f-Hb was examined.ResultsMedian age was 60 years, 53.6% women, with 14.1%, 19.7%, 17.7%, 25.9% and 22.6% in the lowest to the highest deprivation quintiles respectively. No detectable f-Hb was found in 51.9%, ranging from 45.5% in the most deprived up to 56.5% in the least deprived. As deprivation increased, f-Hb increased (p ConclusionsDeprivation and f-Hb are related. This has important implications for selection of cut-off f-Hb for screening programmes, and supports the inclusion of deprivation in risk-scoring systems.

Objectives To investigate the characteristics of participants screened for bowel cancer using a faecal immunochemical test for haemoglobin (FIT). Setting Scottish Bowel Screening Programme. Methods 65909 men and women in two NHS Boards, aged 50 to 74, were invited to participate in an evaluation of FIT as a first-line test. Uptake was calculated by sex, age in quintiles, and deprivation in quintiles, and compared with a group who had completed a guaiac faecal occult blood test (gFOBT) and for whom details of sex, age and deprivation were well documented. Results FIT kits from 38672 participants were tested. The overall uptake of 58.7% was significantly higher than the 53.9% for gFOBT (p < 0.0001). Uptakes in the two NHS Boards were 57.6% and 54.4% for men and 63.2% and 59.1% for women, higher than the 49.5% and 58.1% completing gFOBT. Uptake was higher for FIT than gFOBT in all age and deprivation quintiles for both men and women in both NHS Boards. The difference in uptake fell with age for men but rose for women; the increase in uptake was greater for men than women. Uptake fell as deprivation decreased for both sexes, and was similar in both NHS Boards. Conclusions Use of FIT increases uptake over gFOBT, and the greatest increases are seen in men, younger participants, and more deprived individuals, groups for which an increase in uptake is likely to be beneficial. The results support a move to FIT as a first-line screening test for those countries still using gFOBT.

Objectives To evaluate a two-tier reflex guaiac-based faecal occult blood test (gFOBT)/faecal immunochemical test (FIT) algorithm in screening for colorectal cancer. Setting Fourth screening round in NHS Tayside (Scotland). Methods gFOBT were sent to 50–74-year-olds. Participants with five or six windows positive were offered colonoscopy. Participants with one to four windows positive were sent a FIT and, if positive, were offered colonoscopy. Participants providing an untestable gFOBT were sent a FIT and, if positive, were offered colonoscopy. Outcomes following positive results, cancer stages and key performance indicators were assessed. Results Of 131,885 invited, 73,315 (55.6%) responded. There were 66,957 (91.3%) negative, 241 (0.3%) strong positive, 5230 (7.1%) weak positive and 887 (1.2%) untestable results. The 241 participants who had five or six windows positive had more cancers than those positive by other routes: only 3 of the 30 cancers (9.7%) were Dukes' A. Among the 983 positive results from the weak positive gFOBT then positive FIT route, there were fewer cancers and more normal colonoscopies, but more adenomas than in the group with a strong positive gFOBT. In those with an untestable gFOBT, 77 had a positive FIT result, with fewer true and more false positive results than in the other groups. Fewer males had cancer and stages were earlier than in females, but more had adenoma. The detection rate for cancer was 0.18% and the PPV for cancer and all adenomas was 41.3%. Conclusions The algorithm and FIT following a weak positive gFOBT have advantages. FIT following an untestable gFOBT warrants review.

The format of the traditional guaiac faecal occult blood test (gFOBT), particularly the collection technique, might cause difficulties for some. A multistage evaluation of alternative tests was performed. Firstly, four tests with different faecal collection approaches were assessed: a focus group recommended further investigation of a wipe gFOBT. Secondly, 100 faecal samples were analysed using two wipe tests and the routine gFOBT: no differences were found. Thirdly, a wipe gFOBT was introduced. Over 21 months, 400 requests were made and 311 wipe kit sets were submitted for analysis: 153 (49.2%) were negative, 21 (6.8%) positive (all 3 kits positive), 96 (30.9%) weak positive (1 or 2 positive) and 41 (13.2%) un-testable. Forty-three participants were referred for colonoscopy. Outcome data were provided on 39 participants: nine declined colonoscopy, two were judged unsuitable, two did not attend, two were already in follow-up, 13 had normal colonoscopy and two normal barium enema, two had diverticular disease, two had a metaplastic polyp, four had a low-risk adenoma and one had a high-risk adenoma. No participant had cancer. Detection of significant neoplasia was small. The use of the wipe gFOBT was ceased: it cannot be recommended as a screening test for bowel cancer.

The Hallmarks Survey is based on the 85 indicators recommended by the National League for Nursing (NLN) for the Hallmarks of Excellence in Nursing Education. With permission from the NLN, graduate students in nursing education developed this survey as a holistic and systematic tool for nurse faculty to use for assessment of program components. Analysis of data from 53 faculty respondents yielded areas of strength and areas for development for each hallmark category. Recommendations based on survey findings were disseminated to diverse audiences in multiple venues. A follow-up evaluation of the survey was also conducted. The Hallmarks Survey provides comprehensive assessment data that faculty may use to promote excellence in nursing education.