SynthesisGastroenterology2019
Effect of Sex, Age, and Positivity Threshold on Fecal Immunochemical Test Accuracy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Gastroenterology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 49 papers, 4 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
49 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 84 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness and Safety of Colorectal Cancer Screening Via Fecal Occult Blood Testing: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2026Pooled it
- Second-generation capsule endoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps: An updated systematic review and comparative meta-analysis of prospective studies.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2026Pooled it
- Benefits of colorectal cancer screening using fecal immunochemical testing with varying positivity thresholds by age and sex.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2025Pooled it
- Where do we stand with screening for colorectal cancer and advanced adenoma based on serum protein biomarkers? A systematic review.Molecular oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Mailed Outreach for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Community Health Centers: The CARES Pragmatic Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA internal medicine · 2026Trial
- Performance of Faecal Immunochemical Testing for Colorectal Cancer Screening at Varying Positivity Thresholds.Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2025Trial
- Using FIT Thresholds for Priority Triage and Risk Stratification in Resource-Constrained Systems.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026Article
- Head-to-head comparison of fecal occult blood tests for colorectal neoplasia detection in Chinese outpatients: a multicenter diagnostic trial.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Factors related to participation in colorectal cancer screening in a Southern European region: a prevalence survey.European journal of public health · 2026Article
- Composite proteomic and metabolomic plasma biomarkers for detection of colorectal, lung and ovarian cancers.Molecular cancer · 2026Article
- Feasibility and clinical utility of home-based fecal immunochemical testing for self-monitoring of disease activity in ulcerative colitis.Crohn's & colitis 360 · 2026Article
- Variation in diagnostic performance of fecal immunochemical test (FIT) by cutoffs used in screening programs globally.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
- Is Negative Fecal Immunochemical Test Reassuring? The Cumulative Risk of Colorectal Cancer after Multiple Negative Tests.Gut and liver · 2026Article
- Risk-based guidance for choosing fecal immunochemical test or colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening: a modeling study.American journal of epidemiology · 2026Article
- Diagnostic performance of colonoscopy after positive FIT in National Cancer Screening Program.Medicine · 2026Article
- Colorectal cancer screening and management in the aging society: a narrative review of benefit, risk, and the biological imperative for rural and community medicine.Journal of rural medicine : JRM · 2026Article
- Gender and sex differences in colorectal cancer screening, diagnosis and treatment.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025Review
- Does Colonoscopy as a First Screening Test Still Make Sense?-Counterpoint.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2025Review
- Stool and blood biomarkers for colorectal cancer management: an update on screening and disease monitoring.Molecular cancer · 2024Review
- Comparative Performance of Common Fecal Immunochemical Tests : A Cross-Sectional Study.Annals of internal medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedCorrigendum.2026
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND &
aimsQuantitative fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for hemoglobin are commonly used for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. We aimed to quantify the change in CRC and advanced adenoma detection and number of positive test results at different positivity thresholds and by sex and age.
methodsWe searched MEDLINE and EMBASE, selecting articles of FIT for CRC detection in asymptomatic adults undergoing screening. We calculated sensitivity and specificity, as well as detected number of cancers, advanced adenomas, and positive test results at positivity thresholds ≤10 μg hemoglobin/g feces, 10 to ≤20 μg/g, 20 to ≤30 μg/g, and >30 μg/g. We also analyzed results from stratified by patient sex, age, and reference standard.
resultsOur meta-analysis comprised 46 studies with 2.4 million participants and 6478 detected cancers. Sensitivity for detection of CRC increased from 69% (95% confidence interval [CI], 63%-75%) at thresholds >10 μg/g and ≤20 μg/g to 80% (95% CI, 76%-83%) at thresholds ≤10 μg/g. At these threshold values, sensitivity for detection of advanced adenomas increased from 21% (95% CI, 18%-25%) to 31% (95% CI, 27%-35%), whereas specificity decreased from 94% (95% CI, 93%-96%) to 91% (95% CI, 89%-93%). In 3 studies stratified by sex, sensitivity of CRC detection was 77% in men (95% CI, 75%-79%) and 81% in women (95% CI, 60%-100%) (P = .68). In 3 studies stratified by age groups, sensitivity of CRC detection was 85% for ages 50-59 years (95% CI, 71%-99%) and 73% for ages 60-69 years (95% CI, 71%-75%) (P = .10). All studies with colonoscopy follow-up had similar sensitivity levels for detection of CRC to studies that analyzed 2-year registry follow-up data (74%; 95% CI, 68%-78% vs 75%; 95% CI, 73%-77%).
conclusionsIn a meta-analysis of studies that analyzed detection of CRC and advanced adenomas at different FIT positivity thresholds, we found the sensitivity and specificity of detection to vary with positive cutoff value. It might be possible to decrease positive threshold values for centers with sufficient follow-up colonoscopy resources. More research is needed to precisely establish FIT thresholds for each sex and age subgroup. PROTOCOL: PROSPERO CRD42017068760.
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.