SynthesisWorld journal of gastroenterology2019
High-risk symptoms and quantitative faecal immunochemical test accuracy: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in World journal of gastroenterology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 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
30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- 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
- Faecal immunochemical test to triage patients with possible colorectal cancer symptoms: meta-analysis.The British journal of surgery · 2022Pooled it
- Trial
- Triaging colorectal urgent referrals in the COVID-19 era using faecal immunochemical testing: a prospective UK real-world multicentre cohort study.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2025Observational
- Colorectal cancer risk stratification using a polygenic risk score in symptomatic primary care patients-a UK Biobank retrospective cohort study.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2024Article
- Faecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) Sensitivity; A Five Year Audit.British journal of biomedical science · 2024Article
- Neoplasia detection in FIT positive screening colonoscopies compared with an age-controlled symptomatic cohort: a retrospective review.Frontiers in gastroenterology (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Sociodemographic variations in the uptake of faecal immunochemical tests in primary care: a retrospective study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023Article
- Fecal occult blood and calprotectin testing to prioritize primary care patients for colonoscopy referral: The advantage study.United European gastroenterology journal · 2023Article
- Faecal Immunochemical Testing to Detect Colorectal Cancer in Symptomatic Patients: A Diagnostic Accuracy Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Faecal immunochemical testing for haemoglobin in detecting bowel polyps in symptomatic patients: multicentre prospective cohort study.BJS open · 2023Observational
- Prevalence of repeat faecal immunochemical testing in symptomatic patients attending primary care.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2022Observational
- Role of the faecal immunochemical test in patients with risk-stratified suspected colorectal cancer symptoms: A systematic review and meta-analysis to inform the ACPGBI/BSG guidelines.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2022Article
- Article
- Alternative diagnoses and demographics associated with a raised quantitative faecal immunochemical test in symptomatic patients.Annals of clinical biochemistry · 2022Observational
- A cohort study of duplicate faecal immunochemical testing in patients at risk of colorectal cancer from North-West England.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Faecal immunochemical test for suspected colorectal cancer symptoms: patient survey of usability and acceptability.BJGP open · 2022Article
- Combining the quantitative faecal immunochemical test and full blood count reliably rules out colorectal cancer in a symptomatic patient referral pathway.International journal of colorectal disease · 2022Observational
- Impact of a colorectal cancer screening program implantation on delays and prognosis of non-screening detected colorectal cancer.World journal of gastroenterology · 2021Article
- Faecal immunochemical test outside colorectal cancer screening?World journal of gastroenterology · 2021Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe quantitative faecal immunochemical test for haemoglobin (FIT) has been revealed to be highly accurate for colorectal cancer (CRC) detection not only in a screening setting, but also in the assessment of patients presenting lower bowel symptoms. Therefore, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has recommended the adoption of FIT in primary care to guide referral for suspected CRC in low-risk symptomatic patients using a 10 µg Hb/g faeces threshold. Nevertheless, it is unknown whether FIT´s accuracy remains stable throughout the broad spectrum of possible symptoms.
aimTo perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess FIT accuracy for CRC detection in different clinical settings.
methodsA systematic literature search was performed using MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from inception to May 2018 to conduct a meta-analysis of prospective studies including symptomatic patients that evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of quantitative FIT for CRC detection. Studies were classified on the basis of brand, threshold of faecal haemoglobin concentration for a positive test result, percentage of reported symptoms (solely symptomatic, mixed cohorts) and CRC prevalence (< 2.5%, ≥ 2.5%) to limit heterogeneity and perform subgroup analysis to assess the influence of clinical spectrum on FIT´s accuracy to detect CRC.
resultsFifteen cohorts including 13073 patients (CRC prevalence 0.4% to 16.8%) were identified. Pooled estimates of sensitivity for studies using OC-Sensor at 10 µg Hb/g faeces threshold (
conclusionThe results of this meta-analysis confirm that, regardless of CRC prevalence, quantitative FIT is highly sensitive for CRC detection. However, FIT ability to rule out CRC is higher in studies solely including symptomatic patients.
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.