Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36884345›Full record

Observational studyBJS open2023

Faecal immunochemical testing for haemoglobin in detecting bowel polyps in symptomatic patients: multicentre prospective cohort study.

Michael F Bath, Aman Malhi, Ruth M Ayling, Edward Seward, Kathy Pritchard-Jones, Helga E Laszlo, Allan Hackshaw, Michael R Machesney

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BJS open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Michael F BathBarts Health NHS Trust, The Royal London Hospital, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1879-1093
Aman MalhiCancer Research UK & UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, UK.
Ruth M AylingBarts Health NHS Trust, The Royal London Hospital, London, UK.
Edward SewardNorth Central London Cancer Alliance, London, UK.
Kathy Pritchard-JonesNorth Central London Cancer Alliance, London, UK.
Helga E LaszloNorth Central London Cancer Alliance, London, UK.
Allan HackshawCancer Research UK & UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, UK.
Michael R MachesneyBarts Health NHS Trust, The Royal London Hospital, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8088-6766
Barts Health NHS Trust · GBCancer Research UK · GBUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBLondon Cancer · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK CTUQQR-DEC22/100009NHS England Cancer AllianceNorth Central London Cancer AllianceNorth London Partners in Health and CareUniversity College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre, and Cancer Research UK
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMeasurement of faecal haemoglobin using faecal immunochemistry testing is recommended in patients presenting with symptoms suspicious for colorectal cancer, to aid in triage and prioritization of definitive investigations. While its role in colorectal cancer has been extensively investigated, the ability of faecal immunochemistry testing to detect adenomas in symptomatic patients is unclear.

methodsA multicentre prospective observational study was conducted between April 2017 and March 2019, recruiting adults from 24 hospitals across England and 59 general practices in London who had been urgently referred with suspected colorectal cancer symptoms. Each patient provided a stool sample for faecal immunochemistry testing, in parallel with definitive investigation. A final diagnosis for each patient was recorded, including the presence, size, histology, and risk type of colonic polyps. The outcome of interest was the sensitivity of faecal immunochemistry testing in detecting the presence of adenomas.

resultsOf 3496 patients included in the analysis, 553 (15.8 per cent) had polyps diagnosed. Sensitivity of faecal immunochemistry testing for polyp detection was low across all ranges; with a cut-off for faecal haemoglobin of 4 µg/g or lower, sensitivity was 34.9 per cent and 46.8 per cent for all polyp types and high-risk polyps respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve in detection probability was relatively low for both intermediate-risk (0.63) and high-risk polyps (0.63).

conclusionWhile faecal immunochemistry testing may be useful in prioritizing investigations to diagnose colorectal cancer, if used as a sole test, the majority of polyps would be missed and the opportunity to prevent progression to colorectal cancer may be lost.

Indexed as

AdenomaColorectal NeoplasmsAdultHemoglobinsHumansProspective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityHemoglobins

Identifiers

PMID36884345
PMCPMC9994599
OpenAlexW4323532059

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.