Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016:2016:2492081.
doi: 10.1155/2016/2492081. Epub 2016 Jun 16.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Five Different Fecal Markers for the Detection of Precancerous and Cancerous Lesions of the Colorectum

Affiliations

Diagnostic Accuracy of Five Different Fecal Markers for the Detection of Precancerous and Cancerous Lesions of the Colorectum

Mariann Rutka et al. Mediators Inflamm. 2016.

Abstract

Background. Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second deadliest malignancy worldwide. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of different fecal markers in the detection of colorectal adenomas and cancer. Methods. Stool samples of patients referred to colonoscopy were collected for the analysis of tumor M2 pyruvate kinase (M2PK), human hemoglobin (Hb), hemoglobin/haptoglobin (Hb/Hp) complex, fecal calprotectin (FC), and matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9). Results. Sensitivity and specificity of M2PK for adenomas sized > 1 cm were 60% and 67.5% and for CRC were 94.7% and 67.5%. Sensitivity and specificity of iFOBT for adenomas sized ≥ 1 cm were 80% and 72.5% and for CRC were 94.7% and 72.5%. Sensitivity and specificity of Hb/Hp complex for adenomas sized ≥ 1 cm were 80% and 52.9% and for CRC were 100% and 52.9%. Sensitivity of FC and MMP-9 for CRC was 77.8% and 72.2%. Combined use of M2PK, iFOBT, and FC resulted in a sensitivity and specificity of 95% and 47.5% for the detection of adenomas sized ≥ 1 cm. Discussion. In CRC, sensitivity of M2PK, iFOBT, and Hb/Hp complex proved to be high. Combined use of M2PK, iFOBT, and FC may be valuable in the detection of large adenomas.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Ferlay J., Steliarova-Foucher E., Lortet-Tieulent J., et al. Cancer incidence and mortality patterns in Europe: estimates for 40 countries in 2012. European Journal of Cancer. 2013;49(6):1374–1403. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2012.12.027. - DOI - PubMed
    1. The Hungarian Central Statistical Office. Demographic Yearbook, 1963–2012. Budapest, Hungry: KSH; 2013.
    1. Arvelo F., Sojo F., Cotte C. Biology of colorectal cancer. Ecancermedicalscience. 2015;9, article 520 doi: 10.3332/ecancer.2015.520. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sieg A., Thoms C., Lüthgens K., John M. R., Schmidt-Gayk H. Detection of colorectal neoplasms by the highly sensitive hemoglobin-haptoglobin complex in feces. International Journal of Colorectal Disease. 1999;14(6):267–271. doi: 10.1007/s003840050226. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Vasilyev S., Smirnova E., Popov D., et al. A new-generation fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is superior to quaiac-based test in detecting colorectal neoplasia among colonoscopy referral patients. Anticancer Research. 2015;35(5):2873–2880. - PubMed

MeSH terms