Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42279081›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2026

Fecal Immunochemical Test and Multitarget Stool DNA Testing for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Real-World Practice: A Literature Review.

Ashish Sharma, Angad Tiwari, Ishita Ray, Ruchir Paladiya, Harendra Kumar, Sukhmani Sidhu, Saloni Haldule, Hareesha Rishab Bharadwaj, Saqr Alsakarneh, Manesh Kumar Gangwani and 2 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

12 authors.

Ashish SharmaDepartment of Internal Medicine, Yale New Haven Hospital, New Haven, CT 06510, USA.ORCID 0009-0005-2698-0128
Angad TiwariDepartment of Internal Medicine, Maharani Laxmi Bai Medical College, Jhansi 284128, Uttar Pradesh, India.ORCID 0009-0002-9018-8328
Ishita RayDepartment of Internal Medicine, Mahatma Gandhi Memorial Medical College, Indore 452001, Madhya Pradesh, India.ORCID 0000-0001-8250-535X
Ruchir PaladiyaDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Connecticut School of Medicine, Hartford, CT 06106, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8027-106X
Harendra KumarMayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6801-0633
Sukhmani SidhuDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Connecticut School of Medicine, Hartford, CT 06106, USA.ORCID 0009-0000-0519-4121
Saloni HalduleDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Connecticut School of Medicine, Hartford, CT 06106, USA.
Hareesha Rishab BharadwajDepartment of Internal Medicine, Royal Stoke University Hospital, University Hospitals of North Midlands NHS, Stoke-on-Trent ST4 6QG, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7979-2834
Saqr AlsakarnehMayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA.
Manesh Kumar GangwaniDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Arkansas For Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR 72205, USA.
Hassam AliDepartment of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Brody School of Medicine, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC 27834, USA.
Dushyant Singh DahiyaDivision of Gastroenterology, Hepatology & Motility, The University of Kansas School of Medicine, Kansas City, KS 66160, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8544-9039

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is responsible for a high cancer burden and a high number of deaths all over the world, although effective screening can make it preventable to a significant extent. Stool-based tests, such as the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and multitarget stool DNA (mt-sDNA) testing, are gaining considerable popularity as non-invasive procedures that can be a replacement for colonoscopies for people at an average risk for colon cancer. Despite evidence from several randomized controlled trials supporting the use of these tests for colorectal cancer screening, their external validity in a real-world setting is influenced by many factors such as adherence, timely follow-up post testing, the healthcare cost burden, accessibility and the capacity of the health system. In this article, we have performed an extensive narrative literature review of research published between 2020 and 2025 comparing FIT and the mt-sDNA test with reference to diagnostic accuracy, cost-effectiveness, adherence and outcomes of implementation. We discuss the issues of sensitivity and specificity, look at post-test requirements for colonoscopy and check if there is any discrimination in healthcare. These findings suggest that FIT and mt-sDNA tests should not be considered competing technologies but rather complementary screening methods, with their overall effectiveness contingent upon appropriate patient selection and widespread system-level implementation. It is crucial to combine strategic test selection with a robust follow-up infrastructure to ensure that the entire population benefits from the CRC prevention program.

Indexed as

colorectal cancerfecal immunochemical test (FIT)multitarget stool DNA test (mt-sDNA)preventive oncology

Identifiers

PMID42279081
PMCPMC13257604

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.