Diagnostic Accuracy of Point-of-Care Fecal Calprotectin and Immunochemical Occult Blood Tests for Diagnosis of Organic Bowel Disease in Primary Care: The Cost-Effectiveness of a Decision Rule for Abdominal Complaints in Primary Care (CEDAR) Study
Open Access
- 1 June 2012
- journal article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in Clinical Chemistry
- Vol. 58 (6), 989-998
- https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2011.177980
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fecal biomarker tests that differentiate between organic bowel disease (OBD) and non-OBD in primary care patients with persistent lower-abdomen complaints could reduce the number of unnecessary referrals for endoscopy. We quantified the accuracy of fecal calprotectin and immunochemical occult blood (iFOBT) point-of-care (POC) tests and a calprotectin ELISA in primary care patients with suspected OBD.METHODS: We performed biomarker tests on fecal samples from 386 patients with lower-abdomen complaints suggestive for OBD. Endoscopic and histological diagnosis served as reference.RESULTS: OBD was diagnosed in 99 patients (prevalence 25.9%); 19 had adenocarcinoma, 53 adenoma, and 27 inflammatory bowel disease. Sensitivity for OBD was 0.64 (95% CI 0.54–0.72) for calprotectin POC, 0.56 (0.46–0.66) for iFOBT POC, and 0.74 (0.65–0.82) for calprotectin ELISA; specificities were 0.53 (0.48–0.59), 0.83 (0.78–0.87), and 0.47 (0.41–0.53), respectively. Negative predictive values (NPVs) were 0.81 (0.74–0.86), 0.85 (0.80–0.88), and 0.84 (0.78–0.89); positive predictive values (PPVs) varied from 0.32 (0.26–0.39) and 0.33 (0.27–0.39) (calprotectin tests) to 0.53 (0.44–0.63) (iFOBT POC). Combining the 2 POC tests improved sensitivity [0.79 (0.69–0.86)] and NPV [0.87 (0.81–0.91)] but lowered specificity [0.49 (0.44–0.55)] and PPV [0.35 (0.29–0.42)]. When adenomas ≤1 cm were considered non-OBD, the NPV of all tests improved to >0.90 [combined POC tests, 0.97 (0.93–0.99)].CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic accuracy of the tests alone or combined was insufficient when all adenomas were considered OBD. When only adenomas >1 cm were considered OBD, all tests could rule out OBD to a reasonable extent, particularly the combined POC tests. The tests were less useful for inclusion of OBD.Keywords
Funding Information
- Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (170992101)
- Alere Health BV
- Tilburg
- Netherlands
- Bühlmann Laboratories AG
- Schonenbüch
- KWF Kankerbestrijding
This publication has 29 references indexed in Scilit:
- Inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review on the value of diagnostic testing in primary careColorectal Disease, 2011
- Guidelines on the irritable bowel syndrome: mechanisms and practical managementGut, 2007
- The European Panel on the Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines colonoscopy in an open‐access endoscopy unit: a prospective studyAlimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 2005
- How useful are the Rome II criteria for identification of upper gastrointestinal disorders in general practice?Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology, 2005
- Abdominal complaints in general practice Diagnoses and characteristics of patientsScandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care, 2004
- Towards Complete and Accurate Reporting of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy: The STARD InitiativeClinical Chemistry, 2003
- Diagnostic yield of open access colonoscopy according to appropriatenessGastrointestinal Endoscopy, 2001
- The Incidence and Outcome of Rectal Bleeding in General PracticeFamily Practice, 1993
- The histopathology of bleeding from polyps and carcinomas of the large intestineCancer, 1985
- Sensitivity of Guaiac-Impregnated Cards for the Detection of Colorectal NeoplasiJournal of Clinical Gastroenterology, 1983