2022
DOI: 10.3390/cancers14041073
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Global Evaluation of the Performance Indicators of Colorectal Cancer Screening with Fecal Immunochemical Tests and Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract: (1) Background: To summarize the achievements of the performance indicators of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs that used the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) as a primary screening modality and colonoscopy as a subsequent confirmatory test. (2) Methods: PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane were searched from inception to September 2020. We included original articles published in English, and performed hand searching for relevant national reports. We generated pooled achievement estimates of the… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Additionally, a single study reported FIT’s sensitivity for proximal CRC is notably lower than for distal CRC, with a significant difference (71.1% vs 94.2%, p<0.001) 27. Furthermore, the participation rate in FIT screening hovers around 50% 28 29. In contrast, exhaled H 2 S analysis offers a breakthrough by addressing the limitations associated with bleeding and eliminating the influence of other haemorrhagic conditions on FIT results, such as haemorrhoids.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Additionally, a single study reported FIT’s sensitivity for proximal CRC is notably lower than for distal CRC, with a significant difference (71.1% vs 94.2%, p<0.001) 27. Furthermore, the participation rate in FIT screening hovers around 50% 28 29. In contrast, exhaled H 2 S analysis offers a breakthrough by addressing the limitations associated with bleeding and eliminating the influence of other haemorrhagic conditions on FIT results, such as haemorrhoids.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The studies showed that people were more likely to participate in the FIT screening than in the screening using colonoscopy [ 14 , 41 , 42 ] or sigmoidoscopy [ 9 ]. In countries where CRC screening is based on FIT, the median reporting rate is 54% [95% CI: (49.28%; 58.69%)] [ 43 ]. For comparison in Poland, where the screening program is based solely on colonoscopy (in a system where the potential participant receives a personal invitation to the study), it is below 20% [ 44 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[37,38] In relation to CRC, its prevalence in colonoscopic studies ranges from 0.28-0.42% for all types of CRC. [39,40] As the serrated pathway accounts for up to 30% of CRC, the small number of SAC serum samples available for our study was expected. This precluded the construction of cfDNA pooled samples from SAC cases, that therefore were retained for the biomarker evaluation phase.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%