Identification of Alcohol Use Prior to Major Cancer Surgery: Timeline Follow Back Interview Compared to Four Other Markers

Johanna Nicklasson, Moa Sjödell, Hanne Tønnesen*, Susanne Vahr Lauridsen, Mette Rasmussen

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

6 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The postoperative complication rate is 30-64% among patients undergoing muscle-invasive and recurrent high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer surgery. Preoperative risky alcohol use increases the risk. The aim was to evaluate the accuracy of markers for identifying preoperative risky alcohol.

METHODS: Diagnostic test sub-study of a randomized controlled trial (STOP-OP trial), based on a cohort of 94 patients scheduled for major bladder cancer surgery. Identification of risky alcohol use using Timeline Follow Back interviews (TLFB) were compared to the AUDIT-C questionnaire and three biomarkers: carbohydrate-deficient transferrin in plasma (P-CDT), phosphatidyl-ethanol in blood (B-PEth), and ethyl glucuronide in urine (U-EtG).

RESULTS: The correlation between TLFB and AUDIT-C was strong (ρ = 0.75), while it was moderate between TLFB and the biomarkers (ρ = 0.55-0.65). Overall, sensitivity ranged from 56 to 82% and specificity from 38 to 100%. B-PEth showed the lowest sensitivity at 56%, but the highest specificity of 100%. All tests had high positive predictive values (79-100%), but low negative predictive values (42-55%).

CONCLUSIONS: Despite high positive predictive values, negative predictive values were weak compared to TLFB. For now, TLFB interviews seem preferable for preoperative identification of risky alcohol use.

Original languageEnglish
Article number2261
JournalCancers
Volume16
Issue number12
Number of pages10
ISSN2072-6694
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 18. Jun 2024

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Identification of Alcohol Use Prior to Major Cancer Surgery: Timeline Follow Back Interview Compared to Four Other Markers'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this