ArticlePreventive medicine reports2021
Individualized faecal immunochemical test cut-off based on age and sex in colorectal cancer screening.
Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stratified/risk-based screening for colorectal cancer in the UK: an overview.Colorectal cancer · 2025Review
- Colonoscopy outcomes of primary screening negative participants highlight the missed diagnosis problem of colorectal cancer screening: an observational study from Yuexiu district in Guangzhou, China.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Comparative Performance of Common Fecal Immunochemical Tests : A Cross-Sectional Study.Annals of internal medicine · 2024Article
- Maximizing scarce colonoscopy resources: the crucial role of stool-based tests.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2024Article
- Improved use of faecal immunochemical tests for haemoglobin in the Scottish bowel screening programme.Journal of medical screening · 2023Article
- Implementation of risk stratification within bowel cancer screening: a community jury study exploring public acceptability and communication needs.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Colorectal Cancer Risk Assessment and Precision Approaches to Screening: Brave New World or Worlds Apart?Gastroenterology · 2023Review
- Sex variation in colorectal cancer mortality: trends and implications for screening.European journal of public health · 2023Article
- Impact of time between faecal immunochemical tests in colorectal cancer screening on screening results: A natural experiment.International journal of cancer · 2023Article
- Molecular methods for colorectal cancer screening: Progress with next-generation sequencing evolution.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2023Review
- Risk-stratified selection to colonoscopy in FIT colorectal cancer screening: development and temporal validation of a prediction model.British journal of cancer · 2022Observational
- A scoping review of risk-stratified bowel screening: current evidence, future directions.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2022Article
- Faecal haemoglobin concentrations in women and men diagnosed with colorectal cancer in a national screening programme.Journal of medical screening · 2022Article
- Future of Colorectal Cancer Screening: From One-Size-FITs-All to Tailor-Made.Frontiers in gastroenterology (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The risk of having colorectal cancer (CRC) or its precursors vary with age and sex. Yet, most CRC screening programs using the quantitative faecal immunochemical test (FIT) use a uniform FIT cut-off. We aimed to calculate individualized FIT cut-offs based on age and sex. Data from a study of 1,112 asymptomatic average-risk screening participants undergoing colonoscopy without preselection were used to build a logistic regression model to calculate the risk of having advanced neoplasia (AN) at colonoscopy using age, sex, and FIT concentration as variables. We calculated age- and sex-adjusted FIT cut-off concentrations based on a uniform risk threshold. In a total of 101 of the 1,112 participants AN was detected at colonoscopy. We selected a risk threshold that would produce a specificity of 96.9% in the study group, matching the specificity of FIT at a cut-off of 20 µg Hb/g faeces. At this threshold, age- and sex-adjusted FIT cut-off concentrations ranged from 36.9 µg Hb/g faeces for 50-year-old women to 9.5 µg Hb/g faeces for 75-year old men. At this level of specificity, the risk-based model reached a sensitivity for AN of 28.7% (95%CI: 20.8 to 38.2) versus 27.7% (95%CI: 19.9 to 37.1) for FIT only. Using a risk threshold instead of a uniform FIT-based threshold for inviting screening participants to follow-up colonoscopy ensures that everyone has a comparable risk of AN prior to colonoscopy and may improve the detection of advanced neoplasia, although the absolute magnitude of the increase is likely to be limited.
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.