Plasma Septin9 versus fecal immunochemical testing for colorectal cancer screening

A prospective multicenter study

David A. Johnson, Robert L. Barclay, Klaus Mergener, Gunter Weiss, Thomas König, Jürgen Beck, Nicholas Potter

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

65 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Screening improves outcomes related to colorectal cancer (CRC); however, suboptimal participation for available screening tests limits the full benefits of screening. Non-invasive screening using a blood based assay may potentially help reach the unscreened population. Objective: To compare the performance of a new Septin9 DNA methylation based blood test with a fecal immunochemical test (FIT) for CRC screening. Design: In this trial, fecal and blood samples were obtained from enrolled patients. To compare test sensitivity for CRC, patients with screening identified colorectal cancer (n = 102) were enrolled and provided samples prior to surgery. To compare test specificity patients were enrolled prospectively (n = 199) and provided samples prior to bowel preparation for screening colonoscopy. Measurements: Plasma and fecal samples were analyzed using the Epi proColon and OC Fit-Check tests respectively. Results: For all samples, sensitivity for CRC detection was 73.3% (95% CI 63.9-80.9%) and 68.0% (95% CI 58.2-76.5%) for Septin9 and FIT, respectively. Specificity of the Epi proColon test was 81.5% (95% CI 75.5-86.3%) compared with 97.4% (95% CI 94.1-98.9%) for FIT. For paired samples, the sensitivity of the Epi proColon test (72.2% -95% CI 62.5-80.1%) was shown to be statistically non-inferior to FIT (68.0%-95% CI 58.2-76.5%). When test results for Epi proColon and FIT were combined, CRC detection was 88.7% at a specificity of 78.8%. Conclusions: At a sensitivity of 72%, the Epi proColon test is non- inferior to FIT for CRC detection, although at a lower specificity. With negative predictive values of 99.8%, both methods are identical in confirming the absence of CRC. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01580540

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numbere98238
JournalPloS one
Volume9
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 5 2014

Fingerprint

prospective studies
colorectal neoplasms
Early Detection of Cancer
Multicenter Studies
Colorectal Neoplasms
Screening
Prospective Studies
screening
Plasmas
Testing
testing
Blood
sampling
Hematologic Tests
Surgery
DNA Methylation
Colonoscopy
Assays
colonoscopy
hematologic tests

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
  • Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)

Cite this

Plasma Septin9 versus fecal immunochemical testing for colorectal cancer screening : A prospective multicenter study. / Johnson, David A.; Barclay, Robert L.; Mergener, Klaus; Weiss, Gunter; König, Thomas; Beck, Jürgen; Potter, Nicholas.

In: PloS one, Vol. 9, No. 6, e98238, 05.06.2014.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Johnson, David A. ; Barclay, Robert L. ; Mergener, Klaus ; Weiss, Gunter ; König, Thomas ; Beck, Jürgen ; Potter, Nicholas. / Plasma Septin9 versus fecal immunochemical testing for colorectal cancer screening : A prospective multicenter study. In: PloS one. 2014 ; Vol. 9, No. 6.
@article{4a980e0fd4364d06bcb33325ad55c10e,
title = "Plasma Septin9 versus fecal immunochemical testing for colorectal cancer screening: A prospective multicenter study",
abstract = "Background: Screening improves outcomes related to colorectal cancer (CRC); however, suboptimal participation for available screening tests limits the full benefits of screening. Non-invasive screening using a blood based assay may potentially help reach the unscreened population. Objective: To compare the performance of a new Septin9 DNA methylation based blood test with a fecal immunochemical test (FIT) for CRC screening. Design: In this trial, fecal and blood samples were obtained from enrolled patients. To compare test sensitivity for CRC, patients with screening identified colorectal cancer (n = 102) were enrolled and provided samples prior to surgery. To compare test specificity patients were enrolled prospectively (n = 199) and provided samples prior to bowel preparation for screening colonoscopy. Measurements: Plasma and fecal samples were analyzed using the Epi proColon and OC Fit-Check tests respectively. Results: For all samples, sensitivity for CRC detection was 73.3{\%} (95{\%} CI 63.9-80.9{\%}) and 68.0{\%} (95{\%} CI 58.2-76.5{\%}) for Septin9 and FIT, respectively. Specificity of the Epi proColon test was 81.5{\%} (95{\%} CI 75.5-86.3{\%}) compared with 97.4{\%} (95{\%} CI 94.1-98.9{\%}) for FIT. For paired samples, the sensitivity of the Epi proColon test (72.2{\%} -95{\%} CI 62.5-80.1{\%}) was shown to be statistically non-inferior to FIT (68.0{\%}-95{\%} CI 58.2-76.5{\%}). When test results for Epi proColon and FIT were combined, CRC detection was 88.7{\%} at a specificity of 78.8{\%}. Conclusions: At a sensitivity of 72{\%}, the Epi proColon test is non- inferior to FIT for CRC detection, although at a lower specificity. With negative predictive values of 99.8{\%}, both methods are identical in confirming the absence of CRC. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01580540",
author = "Johnson, {David A.} and Barclay, {Robert L.} and Klaus Mergener and Gunter Weiss and Thomas K{\"o}nig and J{\"u}rgen Beck and Nicholas Potter",
year = "2014",
month = "6",
day = "5",
doi = "10.1371/journal.pone.0098238",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "9",
journal = "PLoS One",
issn = "1932-6203",
publisher = "Public Library of Science",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Plasma Septin9 versus fecal immunochemical testing for colorectal cancer screening

T2 - A prospective multicenter study

AU - Johnson, David A.

AU - Barclay, Robert L.

AU - Mergener, Klaus

AU - Weiss, Gunter

AU - König, Thomas

AU - Beck, Jürgen

AU - Potter, Nicholas

PY - 2014/6/5

Y1 - 2014/6/5

N2 - Background: Screening improves outcomes related to colorectal cancer (CRC); however, suboptimal participation for available screening tests limits the full benefits of screening. Non-invasive screening using a blood based assay may potentially help reach the unscreened population. Objective: To compare the performance of a new Septin9 DNA methylation based blood test with a fecal immunochemical test (FIT) for CRC screening. Design: In this trial, fecal and blood samples were obtained from enrolled patients. To compare test sensitivity for CRC, patients with screening identified colorectal cancer (n = 102) were enrolled and provided samples prior to surgery. To compare test specificity patients were enrolled prospectively (n = 199) and provided samples prior to bowel preparation for screening colonoscopy. Measurements: Plasma and fecal samples were analyzed using the Epi proColon and OC Fit-Check tests respectively. Results: For all samples, sensitivity for CRC detection was 73.3% (95% CI 63.9-80.9%) and 68.0% (95% CI 58.2-76.5%) for Septin9 and FIT, respectively. Specificity of the Epi proColon test was 81.5% (95% CI 75.5-86.3%) compared with 97.4% (95% CI 94.1-98.9%) for FIT. For paired samples, the sensitivity of the Epi proColon test (72.2% -95% CI 62.5-80.1%) was shown to be statistically non-inferior to FIT (68.0%-95% CI 58.2-76.5%). When test results for Epi proColon and FIT were combined, CRC detection was 88.7% at a specificity of 78.8%. Conclusions: At a sensitivity of 72%, the Epi proColon test is non- inferior to FIT for CRC detection, although at a lower specificity. With negative predictive values of 99.8%, both methods are identical in confirming the absence of CRC. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01580540

AB - Background: Screening improves outcomes related to colorectal cancer (CRC); however, suboptimal participation for available screening tests limits the full benefits of screening. Non-invasive screening using a blood based assay may potentially help reach the unscreened population. Objective: To compare the performance of a new Septin9 DNA methylation based blood test with a fecal immunochemical test (FIT) for CRC screening. Design: In this trial, fecal and blood samples were obtained from enrolled patients. To compare test sensitivity for CRC, patients with screening identified colorectal cancer (n = 102) were enrolled and provided samples prior to surgery. To compare test specificity patients were enrolled prospectively (n = 199) and provided samples prior to bowel preparation for screening colonoscopy. Measurements: Plasma and fecal samples were analyzed using the Epi proColon and OC Fit-Check tests respectively. Results: For all samples, sensitivity for CRC detection was 73.3% (95% CI 63.9-80.9%) and 68.0% (95% CI 58.2-76.5%) for Septin9 and FIT, respectively. Specificity of the Epi proColon test was 81.5% (95% CI 75.5-86.3%) compared with 97.4% (95% CI 94.1-98.9%) for FIT. For paired samples, the sensitivity of the Epi proColon test (72.2% -95% CI 62.5-80.1%) was shown to be statistically non-inferior to FIT (68.0%-95% CI 58.2-76.5%). When test results for Epi proColon and FIT were combined, CRC detection was 88.7% at a specificity of 78.8%. Conclusions: At a sensitivity of 72%, the Epi proColon test is non- inferior to FIT for CRC detection, although at a lower specificity. With negative predictive values of 99.8%, both methods are identical in confirming the absence of CRC. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01580540

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84902449237&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84902449237&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0098238

DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0098238

M3 - Article

VL - 9

JO - PLoS One

JF - PLoS One

SN - 1932-6203

IS - 6

M1 - e98238

ER -