SynthesisThe Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology2018
Diagnostic accuracy of fecal calprotectin for screening patients with colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis.
Synthesis in The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- The role of faecal calprotectin in diagnosis and staging of colorectal neoplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC gastroenterology · 2022Pooled it
- Comparison of faecal protein biomarkers' diagnostic accuracy for colorectal advanced neoplasms: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2022Pooled it
- The Diagnostic Accuracy of Fecal Calprotectin for Colonoscopic Abnormalities in Patients With Chronic Diarrhea.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Article
- In Search of Ideal Solutions for Cancer Diagnosis: From Conventional Methods to Protein Biomarkers in Liquid Biopsy.Proteomes · 2025Review
- Research progress on the diagnostic value of fecal calprotectin in colorectal tumors.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Predicting novel biomarkers for early diagnosis and dynamic severity monitoring of human ulcerative colitis.Frontiers in genetics · 2024Article
- Future of Colorectal Cancer Screening: From One-Size-FITs-All to Tailor-Made.Frontiers in gastroenterology (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Colorectal Carcinoma in Childhood.JPGN reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsFecal calprotectin (FC) is reported to have a broad diagnostic accuracy for colorectal cancer (CRC). Therefore, we explored the diagnostic value of FC for CRC using meta-analytical techniques to substantiate the assertion. MATERIALS AND
methodsAn electronic search of the MEDLINE and Embase databases was conducted to identify studies that assessed the diagnostic accuracy of FC for CRC. The sensitivities and specificities of the eligible studies were summarized using a bivariable random-effects model.
resultsIn total, 20 studies were included in the final analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio of FC for CRC detection were 0.83 (95% confidence interval CI, 0.77-0.88), 0.61 (95% CI, 0.54-0.68), 2.15 (95% CI, 1.82-2.55), and 0.28 (95% CI, 0.21-0.37), respectively. The overall diagnostic odds ratio of FC for CRC was 7.76 (95% CI, 5.41-11.12) with an area under the curve of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.77-0.84), whereas the diagnostic value of FC for colorectal adenoma was relatively inferior (area under the curve, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.51-0.59; diagnostic odds ratio, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.91-1.78).
conclusionThe results imply that the FC test, as currently implemented, cannot be recommended for CRC detection.
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.