Diagnosis of rectal cancer by Tissue Resonance Interaction Method.
BACKGROUND
Since population screening has the potential to reduce mortality from rectal cancer (RC), novel methods with improved cost-effectiveness warrant consideration. In a previous pilot study, we found that the rapid, inexpensive and non-invasive electromagnetic detection of RC is a highly specific and sensitive technique. The aim of the present prospective study was to evaluate the prediction accuracy of electromagnetic detection of RC.


METHODS
304 eligible subjects were consecutively enrolled in our Institute and subjected to electromagnetic detection followed by colonoscopy and histopathologic analysis of biopsies. A putative RC carrier status was attributed to subjects showing an electromagnetic signal < 50 units (U).


RESULTS
RC patients showed a significantly lower electromagnetic signal (40.9 +/- 0.9 U; mean +/- S.E.) than did non-RC subjects (79.2 +/- 1.4 U; P < 2.2e-16). At a threshold < 50 U, electromagnetic detection identified 103 putative patients, whereas colonoscopy detected 108 patients, with an overlap of 91 patients between the two methods. The 15.7% false-negative rate by electromagnetic detection was brought to zero by raising the threshold value to 70 U; on the other hand, such a threshold increased the false-positive rate to 30%.


CONCLUSIONS
Electromagnetic detection of RC at a signal threshold < 70 U appears to eliminate false-negative results. Although colonoscopy would still be required in examining the false-positives associated with the < 70 U electromagnetic threshold, the need for this method would be reduced. Thus, electromagnetic detection represents a new accurate, rapid, simple, and inexpensive tool for early detection of RC that merits testing in large population-based programs.
Vannelli
Alberto
A
Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale Tumori, Milan, Italy. alberto.vannelli@istitutotumori.mi.it
Battaglia
Luigi
L
Poiasina
Elia
E
Leo
Ermanno
E
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D001706:Biopsy; D003113:Colonoscopy; D003937:Diagnosis, Differential; D004574:Electromagnetic Fields; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008403:Mass Screening / Q000379:methods*; D008875:Middle Aged; D011237:Predictive Value of Tests; D011446:Prospective Studies; D012372:ROC Curve; D012004:Rectal Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis*; D055815:Young Adult
N Engl J Med. 2001 Aug 23;345(8):555-60
11529208
Scand J Gastroenterol. 2004 Sep;39(9):846-51
15513382
Am J Surg. 2008 Dec;196(6):904-8; discussion 908
19095107
Int J Urol. 2009 Jun;16(6):580-3
19456986
Endoscopy. 2005 Oct;37(10):937-44
16189765
Bioinformatics. 2005 Oct 15;21(20):3940-1
16096348
Gastroenterology. 2005 May;128(6):1685-95
15887159
Hepatogastroenterology. 2007 Mar;54(74):442-4
17523293
Urology. 2008 Aug;72(2):340-4
18336888
Cancer Imaging. 2006 Oct 31;6:S13-21
17114066
Ann Intern Med. 2009 Jan 6;150(1):1-8
19075198
Gastroenterology. 2007 Jan;132(1):96-102
17241863
Gastroenterology. 2008 May;134(5):1570-95
18384785
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2008 Sep;17(9):2205-7
18768483
Dis Colon Rectum. 2009 Jan;52(1):162-6
19273973
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2007 Nov;19(9):639-48
17764916
Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2009 May;70(2):160-82
19059790
Gastrointest Endosc. 2002 Mar;55(3):307-14
11868001