Trial reportUnited European gastroenterology journal2026
Sex- and Age-Stratified Outcomes of Colonoscopy Versus Faecal Immunochemical Testing: Post-Analysis of the COLONPREV Study.
Trial report in United European gastroenterology journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00906997 (Colorectal Cancer Screening in Average-risk Population), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Colorectal Cancer Screening in Average-risk Population: a Multicenter, Randomized Control Trial Comparing Immunochemical Fecal Occult Blood Testing Versus Colonoscopy.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effective Colorectal Cancer Screening-Adherence is Key.United European gastroenterology journal · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) screening is effective and cost-effective in average-risk individuals. The COLONPREV study recently showed that individuals invited to a faecal immunochemical test (FIT) were more likely to participate in screening than those invited to colonoscopy, and that FIT-based screening was non-inferior to colonoscopy with respect to CRC-related mortality and CRC incidence.
objectiveTo assess whether the outcomes of colonoscopy- and FIT-based screening differ according to sex and age in the invited population.
methodsPresumptively healthy men and women aged 50-69 years were randomised to either a one-time screening colonoscopy or biennial FIT. In this analysis, we report participation and crossover rates, CRC-related mortality, CRC incidence, all-cause mortality, and diagnostic yield for both screening strategies, stratified by sex and by age group (50-59 and 60-69 years).
resultsThe eligible population consisted of 26,332 individuals assigned to colonoscopy and 26,719 assigned to FIT. As expected, participation and crossover rates were higher in women than in men and in older individuals compared with younger individuals. Participation was also consistently higher in those invited to FIT screening than in those assigned to colonoscopy across both sexes and age groups. The observed reductions in CRC-related mortality and CRC incidence, which were consistent across both screening strategies, were independent of sex or age. However, CRC-related mortality, all-cause mortality, and CRC incidence remained higher in men and older participants than in women and younger participants. Colonoscopy screening showed a higher diagnostic yield of premalignant precursor lesions across all demographic subgroups.
conclusionParticipation and reductions in CRC-related mortality and incidence were consistent across sex and age groups for both FIT- and colonoscopy-based screening strategies. The higher baseline risk observed in men could not be fully mitigated by screening.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00906997.
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.