Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Oct;10(4):347-355.
doi: 10.1136/flgastro-2018-101052. Epub 2018 Oct 9.

Experience of adopting faecal immunochemical testing to meet the NICE colorectal cancer referral criteria for low-risk symptomatic primary care patients in Oxfordshire, UK

Affiliations

Experience of adopting faecal immunochemical testing to meet the NICE colorectal cancer referral criteria for low-risk symptomatic primary care patients in Oxfordshire, UK

Brian D Nicholson et al. Frontline Gastroenterol. 2019 Oct.

Abstract

Objective: To compare the diagnostic performance of guaiac faecal occult blood (gFOB) testing with faecal immunochemical test (FIT) in a low-risk symptomatic primary care population to provide objective data on which to base local referral guidelines.

Design: Stool samples from routine primary care practice sent for faecal occult blood testing were analysed by a standard gFOB method and the HM-JACKarc FIT between January and March 2016. Symptoms described on the test request were recorded. Patients were followed up over 21 months for evidence of serious gastrointestinal pathology including colorectal adenocarcinoma.

Results: In 238 patients, the sensitivity and specificity for colorectal adenocarcinoma detection using gFOB were 85.7% and 65.8%, respectively, compared with 85.7% and 89.2% for FIT. The positive predictive value (PPV) for gFOB was 7.1% and negative predictive value (NPV) was 99.3%. Comparatively, the PPV for FIT was 19.4% and NPV 99.5%. The improved performance of FIT over gFOB was due to a lower false positive rate (10.8 vs 34.2, p≤0.01) with no increase in the false negatives rate. For any significant colorectal disease, the PPV for FIT increased to 35.5% with a reduction in NPV to 95.7%.

Conclusion: In this low-risk symptomatic patient group, the proportion of samples considered positive by FIT was considerably lower than gFOB with the same rate of colorectal adenocarcinoma detection. One in three of those with positive FIT had a significant colorectal disease. This supports National Institute of Health and Care Excellence recommendation that FIT can be reliably used as a triage test in primary care without overburdening endoscopy resources.

Keywords: colorectal cancer; guaiac test; primary care; stool markers.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
FIT and gFOB results of patients by outcome category. FIT, faecal immunochemical test; gFOB, guaiac faecal occult blood; GI, gastrointestinal.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of FIT for the detection of adenocarcinoma (solid line) and significant colorectal disease (dashed line). Black dots represent a single estimated true positive/false positive rate of gFOB for adenocarcinoma (ACa) and significant colorectal disease (SCD). Cross-hatches correspond to the true positive/false positive rate estimates for thresholds of (7 µg/g, 10 µg/g, 20 µg/g and 50 µg/g). AUC, area under the curve; FIT, faecal immunochemical test; gFOB, guaiac faecal occult blood.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Changes in workload and positivity rates before and after the transition to FIT testing. The total number of tests (top panel) and the number of tests that were positive (bottom panel) for the period in which gFOB was used and the period in which FIT replaced gFOB. Lines in bottom panel are fitted trend lines estimated by Poisson regression. Shaded area represents the month in which the change from gFOB to FIT occurred. FIT, faecal immunochemical test; gFOB, guaiac faecal occult blood.

References

    1. NICE. Suspected cancer: recognition and referral (NG12). London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, 2015. - PubMed
    1. Nicholson BD, Oke JL, Rose PW, et al. . Variation in direct access to tests to investigate cancer: a survey of english general practitioners. PLoS One 2016;11:e0159725 10.1371/journal.pone.0159725 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. UKCCR. Faecal occult blood testing; report of United Kingdom Coordinating Committee on Cancer Research Working Party: UKCCR, 1989.
    1. Hamilton W, Hajioff S, Graham J, et al. . Authors' reply to Steele and colleagues. BMJ 2015;351:h4258 10.1136/bmj.h4258 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Steele R, Forgacs I, McCreanor G, et al. . Use of faecal occult blood tests in symptomatic patients. BMJ 2015;351:h4256 10.1136/bmj.h4256 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources