SynthesisJAMA internal medicine2017
Diagnostic Accuracy of Fecal Immunochemical Test in Patients at Increased Risk for Colorectal Cancer: A Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in JAMA internal medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07740122 (FECAL-AI), which is not on this map. Cited by 57 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
FECAL-AI: Prospective Observational Validation of AI-Based Stool Image Analysis Against Quantitative Fecal Immunochemical Testing for Colorectal Neoplasia Risk Assessment
Who cites it
57 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- One- versus two-sample fecal immunochemical testing for colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis of participation, diagnostic performance, and cost-effectiveness.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Pooled it
- Colorectal cancer screening methods: A systematic review.Medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Acceptability of alternative technologies compared with faecal immunochemical test and/or colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening: A systematic review.Journal of medical screening · 2023Pooled it
- Findings from the first colorectal cancer screening among 103 542 individuals in Vietnam with systematic review of colorectal cancer screening programs in Asia-Pacific region.Japanese journal of clinical oncology · 2022Pooled it
- The Accuracy of Fecal Immunochemical Test in Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Meta-Analysis.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2022Pooled it
- Guideline
- Stage-Specific Sensitivity of Fecal Immunochemical Tests for Detecting Colorectal Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2020Pooled it
- Diagnostic accuracy of fecal calprotectin for screening patients with colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2018Pooled it
- Diagnostic Performance of IntestinalChinese medical journal · 2018Pooled it
- Evaluation of a plasma cell-free DNA methylation test for colorectal cancer diagnosis: a multicenter clinical study.BMC medicine · 2024Trial
- Trial
- Cell-Free DNA Analysis With Clinicopathologic Factors for Early Detection and Refining Lymph Node Metastasis Risk in T1 Colorectal Cancer: Results From the COSMOS-CRC Study.JCO precision oncology · 2026Observational
- Diagnostic performance of LINE-1 repetitive elements in stool DNA for non-invasive detection of colorectal cancer.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Article
- A scoping review of DNA methylation biomarkers for non-invasive detection of colorectal cancer at the CpG site level.Clinical epigenetics · 2026Article
- Accuracy of Fecal Immunochemical Tests for Detecting Advanced Colorectal Neoplasia at Surveillance Colonoscopy.Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 2026Article
- High Accuracy Stool Biomarkers of Precancerous Colorectal Cancer Identified Using a 2000-Plex Immunoproteomic Screen.Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP · 2026Article
- Risk factors associated with false-positive fecal immunochemical test results in colorectal cancer screening.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- The association between tongue features and tongue coating microbiota and gastrointestinal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of oral microbiology · 2026Review
- Individual Preference for Fecal Immunochemical Test Options among Younger Adults: A Discrete Choice Experiment.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: The potential role of the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) for screening patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer (CRC) has not yet been elucidated. Objective: To assess the diagnostic accuracy of FIT for CRC or advanced neoplasia (AN) in asymptomatic patients at above-average risk. Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and gray literature sources through August 2016. Study Selection: Diagnostic studies evaluating the accuracy of FIT for CRC or AN in patients with a personal or familial history of CRC using colonoscopy as the reference standard. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two authors (A.K. and P.P.) independently extracted data and evaluated study quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool, and evaluated the quality of the body of evidence by means of GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation). Hierarchical models were used to synthesize available evidence. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the diagnostic performance of FIT for detecting CRC or AN. Results: We included 12 studies (6204 participants). Seven studies were deemed at high or unclear risk of bias. The average sensitivity of FIT for CRC was 93% (95% CI, 53%-99%), and the average specificity was 91% (95% CI, 89%-92%), yielding a positive likelihood ratio (LR+) of 10.30 (CI 7.7-13.9) and a negative likelihood ratio (LR-) of 0.08 (95% CI, 0.01-0.75) (GRADE: very low). The average sensitivity of FIT for AN was 48% (95% CI, 39%-57%); and the average specificity was 93% (95% CI, 91%-94%), yielding an LR+ of 6.55 (95% CI, 5.0-8.5) and an LR- of 0.57 (95% CI, 0.48-0.67) (GRADE: very low). Subgroup analyses indicated that FIT cutoff values between 15- and 25-μg/g feces provided the best combination of sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of CRC (93% and 94%, respectively). Quantitative and 1-sample FIT showed adequate test performance, but data on other FIT brands and multiple samples were insufficient. Conclusions and Relevance: The FIT has high overall diagnostic accuracy for CRC but moderate accuracy for AN in patients at above-average personal or familial risk. Heterogeneity and wide confidence intervals limit the trustworthiness of our findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.