Trial reportGut2021
Faecal immunochemical test is superior to symptoms in predicting pathology in patients with suspected colorectal cancer symptoms referred on a 2WW pathway: a diagnostic accuracy study.
Trial report in Gut, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07740122 (FECAL-AI), which is not on this map. Cited by 91 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.
FECAL-AI: Prospective Observational Validation of AI-Based Stool Image Analysis Against Quantitative Fecal Immunochemical Testing for Colorectal Neoplasia Risk Assessment
Who cites it
91 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 157 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
- Delphi Initiative for Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer (DIRECt) International Management Guidelines.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2023Guideline
- Faecal immunochemical test to triage patients with possible colorectal cancer symptoms: meta-analysis.The British journal of surgery · 2022Pooled it
- Guideline
- Trial
- Mechanism-Driven Diagnostic Development: A Specimen-Aware Framework Illustrated by Colorectal Cancer and Solid Tumours.Cancers · 2026Review
- Faecal haemoglobin-based referral and investigation prioritisation is associated with colorectal cancer-specific survival in symptomatic patients: a retrospective observational study.British journal of cancer · 2026Observational
- Diagnostic Potential of Exosomes in Colorectal Cancer: Current Advances and Future Perspectives.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Knowledge, Symptom Awareness, and Referral Practices of Primary Care Providers in Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer.Population health management · 2026Article
- Hologenomic analysis of rectal mucus sampling for detection of adenomatous polyps and colorectal cancer.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Article
- Assessing the impact of a single qualitative fecal immunochemical test on colonoscopy prioritization and mortality in risk-stratified patients with suspected colorectal cancer: a retrospective cohort study.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Article
- Non-invasive breath testing to detect colorectal cancer: protocol for a multicentre, case-control development and validation study (COBRA2 study).BMC cancer · 2025Article
- 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
- Article
- Barriers and facilitators to faecal immunochemical testing in symptomatic populations: A rapid systematic scoping review and gap analysis.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2025Article
- Fecal Immunochemical Testing for Colorectal Cancer Prevention in Two Public Hospitals.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2025Article
31 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess whether a faecal immunochemical test (FIT) could be used to select patients with suspected colorectal cancer (CRC) symptoms for urgent investigation.
designMulticentre, double-blinded diagnostic accuracy study in 50 National Health Service (NHS) hospitals across England between October 2017 and December 2019. Patients referred to secondary care with suspected CRC symptoms meeting NHS England criteria for urgent 2 weeks wait referral and triaged to investigation with colonoscopy were invited to perform a quantitative FIT. The sensitivity of FIT for CRC, and effect of relevant variables on its diagnostic accuracy was assessed.
results9822 patients were included in the final analysis. The prevalence of CRC at colonoscopy was 3.3%. The FIT positivity decreased from 37.2% to 19.0% and 7.6%, respectively, at cut-offs of 2, 10 and 150 µg haemoglobin/g faeces (µg/g). The positive predictive values of FIT for CRC at these cut-offs were 8.7% (95% CI, 7.8% to 9.7%), 16.1% (95% CI 14.4% to 17.8%) and 31.1% (95% CI 27.8% to 34.6%), respectively, and the negative predictive values were 99.8% (95% CI 99.7% to 99.9%), 99.6% (95% CI 99.5% to 99.7%) and 98.9% (95% CI 98.7% to 99.1%), respectively. The sensitivity of FIT for CRC decreased at the same cut-offs from 97.0% (95% CI 94.5% to 98.5%) to 90.9% (95% CI 87.2% to 93.8%) and 70.8% (95% CI 65.6% to 75.7%), respectively, while the specificity increased from 64.9% (95% CI 63.9% to 65.8%) to 83.5% (95% CI 82.8% to 84.3%) and 94.6% (95% CI 94.1% to 95.0%), respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.93 (95% CI 0.92 to 0.95).
conclusionFIT sensitivity is maximised to 97.0% at the lowest cut-off (2 µg/g); a negative FIT result at this cut-off can effectively rule out CRC and a positive FIT result is better than symptoms to select patients for urgent investigations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN49676259.
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.