Intravenous iron did not reduce the blood transfusion requirement but was more effective than oral iron at treating preoperative anaemia and iron deficiency in patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery.

Background New national guidance on urgent referral for investigation of colorectal cancer included faecal occult blood testing in 2015. A service evaluation of faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) and anaemia as risk stratification tools in symptomatic patients suspected of having CRC was undertaken. Methods Postal FIT was incorporated into the colorectal cancer 2‐week wait (2WW) pathway for all patients without rectal bleeding in 2016. Patients were investigated in the 2WW pathway as normal, and outcomes of investigations were recorded prospectively. Anaemia was defined as a haemoglobin level below 120 g/l in women and 130 g/l in men. Results FIT kits were sent to 1106 patients, with an 80·9 per cent return rate; 810 patients completed investigations and 40 colorectal cancers were diagnosed (4·9 per cent). FIT results were significantly higher in patients with anaemia (median (i.q.r.) 4·8 (0·8–34·1) versus 1·2 (0–6·4) μg Hb/g faeces in those without anaemia; P < 0·001). Some 60·4 per cent of patients (538 of 891) had a result lower than 4 μg haemoglobin (Hb) per g faeces (limit of detectability), and 69·7 per cent (621 of 891) had less than 10 μg Hb/g faeces. Some 60 per cent of patients with colorectal cancer had a FIT reading of 150 μg Hb/g faeces or more. For five colorectal cancers diagnosed in patients with a FIT value below 10 μg Hb/g faeces, there was either a palpable rectal mass or the patient was anaemic. A FIT result of more than 4 μg Hb/g faeces had 97·5 per cent sensitivity and 64·5 per cent specificity for a diagnosis of colorectal cancer. A FIT result above 4 μg Hb/g faeces and/or anaemia had a 100 per cent sensitivity and 45·3 per cent specificity for colorectal cancer diagnosis. Conclusion FIT is most useful at the extremes of detectability; strongly positive readings predict high rates of colorectal cancer and other significant pathology, whereas very low readings in the absence of anaemia or a palpable rectal mass identify a group with very low risk. High return rates for FIT within this 2WW pathway indicate its acceptability.

Anaemia is associated with a reduction in quality of life, and is common in patients with colorectal cancer . We recently reported the findings of the intravenous iron in colorectal cancer-associated anaemia (IVICA) trial comparing haemoglobin levels and transfusion requirements following intravenous or oral iron replacement in anaemic colorectal cancer patients undergoing elective surgery. In this follow-up study, we compared the efficacy of intravenous and oral iron at improving quality of life in this patient group. We conducted a multicentre, open-label randomised controlled trial. Anaemic colorectal cancer patients were randomly allocated at least two weeks pre-operatively, to receive either oral (ferrous sulphate) or intravenous (ferric carboxymaltose) iron. We assessed haemoglobin and quality of life scores at recruitment, immediately before surgery and at outpatient review approximately three months postoperatively, using the Short Form 36, EuroQoL 5-dimension 5-level and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy -Anaemia questionnaires. We recruited 116 anaemic patients across seven UK centres (oral iron n = 61 (53%), and intravenous iron n = 55 (47%)). Eleven quality of life components increased by a clinically significant margin in the intravenous iron group between recruitment and surgery compared with one component for oral iron. Median (IQR [range]) visual analogue scores were significantly higher with intravenous iron at a three month outpatient review (oral iron 70, (60-85 [20-95]); intravenous iron 90 (80-90 [50-100]), p = 0.001). The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy -Anaemia score comprises of subscales related to cancer, fatigue and non-fatigue items relevant to anaemia. Median outpatient scores were higher, and hence favourable, for intravenous iron on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy -Anaemia subscale (oral iron 66 (55-72 [23-80]); intravenous iron 71 (66-77 [46-80]); p = 0.002), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy -Anaemia trial outcome index (oral iron 108 (90-123 [35-135]); intravenous iron 121 (113-124 [81-135]); p = 0.003) and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy -Anaemia total score (oral iron 151 (132-170 [69-183]); intravenous iron 168 (160-174 [125-186]); p = 0.005). These findings indicate that intravenous iron is more efficacious at improving quality of life scores than oral iron in anaemic colorectal cancer patients.