ArticleBMJ open gastroenterology2025
Limited utility of faecal immunochemical testing in a colorectal cancer screening programme for adults with cystic fibrosis: insights from a prospective UK study.
Article in BMJ open gastroenterology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivePeople with cystic fibrosis (pwCF) are at significantly increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC), prompting international recommendations for earlier screening with colonoscopy. The utility of faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) as a screening adjunct in pwCF remains unclear. This study evaluates FIT's diagnostic performance and uptake within a CRC screening programme in a UK CF centre.
methodsPwCF aged ≥40 years were invited in person to participate in a screening protocol including FIT and colonoscopy. FIT results were interpreted using three thresholds: ≥10 µg Hb/g (primary), ≥80 µg Hb/g and ≥120 µg Hb/g. Colonoscopy findings and polyp histology were recorded.
resultsOf 113 eligible patients, 66 (58.4%) returned FIT, 49 (43.4%) had FIT and colonoscopy, and 27 (23.9%) underwent colonoscopy only. Colonic polyps were detected in 27.6% (21/76), which were predominantly adenomatous, and no CRCs were detected. For polyp detection, FIT demonstrated poor sensitivity (14%) and modest specificity (86%) at the 10 µg Hb/g threshold. Quantitative FIT values did not correlate with polyp presence (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.48). Bowel preparation was generally adequate (mean Boston Bowel Preparation Scale 6.8), with a low repeat colonoscopy rate (14.5%).
conclusionIn this study, no cancer was detected in 76 consecutive eligible individuals who underwent colonoscopy. In 49 patients who had both FIT and colonoscopy, FIT did not aid colonic polyp detection, showing low sensitivity and no correlation between faecal haemoglobin and adenoma detection. Given the high adenoma prevalence, the limitations of FIT and the poor FIT return rate, colonoscopy should remain the preferred modality for CRC screening in pwCF.
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.