Sample heterogeneity, delayed analysis and sample preparation, reduces specificity and sensitivity due to probe activation by light, air, probe leakage from cells or cellular activation by sample manipulation.
The preparation and specificity of this antibody has been previously described and demonstrated (Gutfeld et al, 2006).
The most preferred screening test had the following features: stool sample, no preparation, 100% specificity, 70% sensitivity, without pain and with an associated cost of $50.
Overall, our analyses showed that participants preferred a CRC screening test with the following characteristics: stool sample, no preparation, 100% specificity, 70% sensitivity and without pain.
The least preferred screening test had the combination of colonoscopy, special diet for preparation, 80% specificity, 90% sensitivity, with mild pain and no associated cost (Table 4 and Table 5).
With the exception of the random-effects logistic and probit models, the ranking (from most important to least important) of the six attributes for assessing participation or opt-out (stage-two), was as follows: cost, sensitivity, preparation, process, specificity and pain.
It should be noted, however, that array-based studies are limited by the quality of the target preparation, probe specificity and sensitivity, and for the Affymetrix platform we used the lack of interrogation of exons < 25 bp., and can be confounded by tumor tissue heterogeneity.
Animal studies have shown that the sensitivity may be increased by inclusion of the genetically related CFP-10 antigen in the preparation without loosing specificity.
The ranking from random-effects models was: cost, sensitivity, process, specificity, preparation and pain.
