SynthesisBMC medicine2017
Faecal immunochemical tests (FIT) can help to rule out colorectal cancer in patients presenting in primary care with lower abdominal symptoms: a systematic review conducted to inform new NICE DG30 diagnostic guidance.
Synthesis in BMC medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 69 papers, 6 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
69 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 119 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quantitative faecal immunochemical tests to guide colorectal cancer pathway referral in primary care. A systematic review, meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- The Accuracy of Fecal Immunochemical Test in Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Meta-Analysis.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2022Pooled it
- Identifying Novel Biomarkers Ready for Evaluation in Low-Prevalence Populations for the Early Detection of Upper Gastrointestinal Cancers: A Systematic Review.Advances in therapy · 2021Pooled it
- Cancer diagnostic tools to aid decision-making in primary care: mixed-methods systematic reviews and cost-effectiveness analysis.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2020Pooled it
- High-risk symptoms and quantitative faecal immunochemical test accuracy: Systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of gastroenterology · 2019Pooled it
- Development and external validation of a machine-learning risk model for colorectal cancer triage in Sweden's fast-track pathway.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Two-sample fecal immunochemical testing as a tool to avert colonoscopy in symptomatic patients: a prospective multicenter cohort study.Endoscopy · 2026Observational
- Integrated perspectives on colorectal carcinogenesis: molecular pathogenesis, genomic alterations, diagnostic paradigms, therapeutic interventions and AI-driven directions in precision oncology.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Age-stratified colonoscopy outcomes and referral-factor associations in the Swedish colorectal cancer fast-track pathway: a retrospective cohort study.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Article
- Observational
- Article
- Stool-based methylated syndecan-2 testing has a high positive predictive value in an average/increased-risk population: a multicenter retrospective study.Gastroenterology report · 2025Article
- Straight-to-Test Pathway in Faecal Immunochemical Testing (FIT)-Negative Patients: A Cost-Effective Approach.Cureus · 2024Article
- Diagnostic application of the ColonFlag AI tool in combination with faecal immunochemical test in patients on an urgent lower gastrointestinal cancer pathway.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Article
- Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Colorectal Cancer.Cancers · 2024Review
- FIT negative clinic as a safety net for low-risk patients with colorectal cancer: impact on endoscopy and radiology utilisation-a retrospective cohort study.Frontline gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Letter to the Editor: Faecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) Sensitivity: A Five Year Audit.British journal of biomedical science · 2024Article
9 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study has attempted to assess the effectiveness of quantitative faecal immunochemical tests (FIT) for triage of people presenting with lower abdominal symptoms, where a referral to secondary care for investigation of suspected colorectal cancer (CRC) is being considered, particularly when the 2-week criteria are not met.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review following published guidelines for systematic reviews of diagnostic tests. Twenty-one resources were searched up until March 2016. Summary estimates were calculated using a bivariate model or a random-effects logistic regression model.
resultsNine studies are included in this review. One additional study, included in our systematic review, was provided as 'academic in confidence' and cannot be described herein. When FIT was based on a single faecal sample and a cut-off of 10 μg Hb/g faeces, sensitivity estimates indicated that a negative result using either the OC-Sensor or HM-JACKarc may be adequate to rule out nearly all CRC; the summary estimate of sensitivity for the OC-Sensor was 92.1% (95% confidence interval, CI 86.9-95.3%), based on four studies (n = 4091 participants, 176 with CRC), and the only study of HM-JACKarc to assess the 10 μg Hb/g faeces cut-off (n = 507 participants, 11 with CRC) reported a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI 71.5-100%). The corresponding specificity estimates were 85.8% (95% CI 78.3-91.0%) and 76.6% (95% CI 72.6-80.3%), respectively. When the diagnostic criterion was changed to include lower grades of neoplasia, i.e. the target condition included higher risk adenoma (HRA) as well as CRC, the rule-out performance of both FIT assays was reduced.
conclusionsThere is evidence to suggest that triage using FIT at a cut-off around 10 μg Hb/g faeces has the potential to correctly rule out CRC and avoid colonoscopy in 75-80% of symptomatic patients. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO 42016037723.
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.