Premium
Colorectal cancer mass‐screening: Estimation of faecal occult blood test sensitivity, taking into account cancer mean sojourn time
Author(s) -
Launoy Guy,
Smith Theresa C.,
Duffy Stephen W.,
Bouvier Véronique
Publication year - 1997
Publication title -
international journal of cancer
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.475
H-Index - 234
eISSN - 1097-0215
pISSN - 0020-7136
DOI - 10.1002/(sici)1097-0215(19971009)73:2<220::aid-ijc10>3.0.co;2-j
Subject(s) - colorectal cancer , medicine , cancer , colonoscopy , sensitivity (control systems) , statistics , gastroenterology , surgery , oncology , mathematics , electronic engineering , engineering
Mass screening using the faecal occult blood test (FOBT) can reduce mortality from colorectal cancer. Reliable estimation of FOBT sensitivity is crucial in assessing the potential effectiveness of a mass‐screening procedure. Available estimates could be inaccurate because they neglect the temporal aspect of screening. The aim of our study was to estimate the sensitivity of the FOBT in mass screening for colorectal cancer, taking into account the duration of the pre‐clinical phase of the disease assessed by the mean sojourn time (MST), and to assess whether MST and FOBT sensitivity differ according to cancer subsite. We analysed data taken from the first round of the mass‐screening programme of the department of Calvados (France), involving 164,364 subjects of whom 43.4% participated in FOB screening. MST and sensitivity were estimated using a simple empirical approach, a traditional maximum likelihood method and log‐linear modelling using the Bayesian technique of Gibbs sampling. MST was estimated as between 4.5 and 5 years for all subsites combined. According to the Gibbs sampling method, MSTs were 3.5, 6.4 and 2.6 years for proximal colon, distal colon and rectal cancer, respectively. Our estimation methods give a low sensitivity for the FOBT (50%), results for different subsites being closer to each other, slightly higher for proximal cancer. Our results strongly suggest that tumour growth rates are very different according to subsite, slowest for distal cancer and speediest for rectal cancer. Consideration of FOBT sensitivity without MST appears unreliable. Our results by subsite suggest that combining FOBT and sigmoidoscopy could be a good strategy for colorectal cancer screening. Int. J. Cancer 73:220–224, 1997. © 1997 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.