ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2018
Evaluation of Patients with an Apparent False Positive Stool DNA Test: The Role of Repeat Stool DNA Testing.
Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robust performance of a novel stool DNA test of methylated SDC2 for colorectal cancer detection: a multicenter clinical study.Clinical epigenetics · 2020Trial
- Navigating false-positive outcomes after stool-based colorectal cancer screening tests: a scoping review.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Article
- ColoViT: a synergistic integration of EfficientNet and vision transformers for advanced colon cancer detection.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2025Article
- Review
- The stoolTranslational cancer research · 2023Article
- Identification of faecal extracellular vesicles as novel biomarkers for the non-invasive diagnosis and prognosis of colorectal cancer.Journal of extracellular vesicles · 2023Article
- Current and future colorectal cancer screening strategies.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2022Review
- The Value of Multi-targeted Fecal DNA Methylation Detection for Colorectal Cancer Screening in a Chinese Population.Journal of Cancer · 2021Article
- Multitarget Stool DNA for Average Risk Colorectal Cancer Screening: Major Achievements and Future Directions.Gastrointestinal endoscopy clinics of North America · 2020Review
- Multi-Target Stool DNA Testing for Colorectal Cancer Screening: Emerging Learning on Real-world Performance.Current treatment options in gastroenterology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is uncertainty as to the appropriate follow-up of patients who test positive on multimarker stool DNA (sDNA) testing and have a colonoscopy without neoplasia.
aimsTo determine the prevalence of missed colonic or occult upper gastrointestinal neoplasia in patients with an apparent false positive sDNA.
methodsWe prospectively identified 30 patients who tested positive with a commercially available sDNA followed by colonoscopy without neoplastic lesions. Patients were invited to undergo repeat sDNA at 11-29 months after the initial test followed by repeat colonoscopy and upper endoscopy. We determined the presence of neoplastic lesions on repeat evaluation stratified by results of repeat sDNA.
resultsTwelve patients were restudied. Seven patients had a negative second sDNA test and a normal second colonoscopy and upper endoscopy. In contrast, 5 of 12 subjects had a persistently positive second sDNA test, and 3 had positive findings, including a 3-cm sessile transverse colon adenoma with high-grade dysplasia, a 2-cm right colon sessile serrated adenoma with dysplasia, and a nonadvanced colon adenoma (p = 0.045). These corresponded to a positive predictive value of 0.60 (95% CI 0.17-1.00) and a negative predictive value of 1.00 (95% CI 1.00-1.00) for the second sDNA test. In addition, the medical records of all 30 subjects with apparent false positive testing were reviewed and no documented cases of malignant tumors were recorded.
conclusionsRepeat positive sDNA testing may identify a subset of patients with missed or occult colorectal neoplasia after negative colonoscopy for an initially positive sDNA. High-quality colonoscopy with careful attention to the right colon in patients with positive sDNA is critically important and may avoid false negative colonoscopy.
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.