ArticleCureus2026
Stage IV Rectal Adenocarcinoma After Negative Multitarget Stool DNA-Fecal Immunochemical Test in a Symptomatic Patient: Misapplication of a Screening Test in a Diagnostic Context.
Article in Cureus, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multitarget stool DNA-fecal immunochemical testing (mt-sDNA-FIT) is validated for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in asymptomatic, average-risk adults. However, its application in symptomatic patients represents a misuse of a screening tool in a diagnostic context and does not meet diagnostic standards as defined by the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) and the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG). We present a 77-year-old man on warfarin for atrial fibrillation who developed iron deficiency anemia and alternating bowel habits over six months. A prior negative screening mt-sDNA-FIT was interpreted as reassuring one year prior, and colonoscopy was not pursued. Upon hospitalization, computed tomography (CT) revealed a large stool burden and a suspicious hepatic lesion. Colonoscopy demonstrated a circumferential, ulcerated, obstructing rectal adenocarcinoma approximately 8 cm from the anal verge. Positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) confirmed metastatic disease involving the liver and lung. This case illustrates two critical points: (1) stool-based screening tests are not validated for diagnostic evaluation of symptomatic patients, and (2) a large distal rectal cancer was missed despite the patient being on anticoagulation, a factor that would theoretically increase fecal hemoglobin and test sensitivity. This is a single case report, and all observations should be interpreted as hypothesis-generating rather than as evidence of reduced test performance. Clinicians should maintain a high index of suspicion for CRC in symptomatic patients regardless of prior negative noninvasive screening results and should pursue a timely colonoscopy.
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.