Fecal Occult Blood Testing

Sanford, Kimberly W.; McPherson, Richard A.

doi:10.1016/j.cll.2009.06.008

Cited by 20 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Those include colonoscopy, as well as Fecal Occult Blood Test (FOBT) (Sanford and McPherson, 2009;Heitman et al, 2008), Digital Rectal Examination (DRE) (Gopalswamy et al, 2000), biomedical markers (Karl et al, 2008), CT colonography (Halligan and Taylor, 2007;Yoshida and Dachman, 2004), MR colonography (Shin et al, 2010;Beets and Beets-Tan, 2010), Marvin Positron Emission Tomography (PET) , Ultrasound (Padhani, 1999), Double Contrast Barium Enema (DCBE) (Johnson et al, 2004;Canon, 2008), Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy (CLE) (Kiesslich et al, 2007), and Virtual Endoscopy (Oto, 2002). Interested readers are referred to the following surveys on colorectal cancer screening and clinical staging of colorectal cancer (Jenkinson and Steele, 2010;Tweedle et al, 2007;Barabouti and Wong, 2005) and endoscopic imaging devices (Gaddam and Sharma, 2010).…”

Section: Colorectal Endoscopy and Pathologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Computer-aided colorectal tumor classification in NBI endoscopy using local features

Tamaki

Yoshimuta

Kawakami

et al. 2013

Medical Image Analysis

131

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Colorectal Endoscopy and Pathologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Computer-aided colorectal tumor classification in NBI endoscopy using local features

Tamaki

Yoshimuta

Kawakami

et al. 2013

Medical Image Analysis

131

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…CRC arises in most cases as a benign adenomatous polyp, which develops into an advanced adenoma with high-grade dysplasia and finally progresses to an invasive cancer (Sanford and McPherson, 2009). Genomic instability appears to be an integral part in the transformation process (Al-Sohaily et al, 2012).…”

Section: Colorectal Cancermentioning

confidence: 99%

Mechanisms Linking Colorectal Cancer to the Consumption of (Processed) Red Meat: A Review

Demeyer

Mertens

Smet

et al. 2015

Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition

165

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer in the world. The vast majority of CRC cases have been linked to environmental causes rather than to heritable genetic changes. Over the last decades, epidemiological evidence linking the consumption of red and, more convincingly, of processed red meat to CRC has accumulated. In parallel, hypotheses on carcinogenic mechanisms underlying an association between CRC and the intake of red and processed red meat have been proposed and investigated in biological studies. The hypotheses that have received most attention until now include (1) the presence of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and heterocyclic aromatic amines, two groups of compounds recognized as carcinogenic, (2) the enhancing effect of (nitrosyl)heme on the formation of carcinogenic N-nitroso compounds and lipid peroxidation. However, none of these hypotheses completely explains the link between red and processed red meat intake and the CRC risk. Consequently, scientists have proposed additional mechanisms or refined their hypotheses. This review first briefly summarizes the development of CRC followed by an indepth overview and critical discussion of the different potential carcinogenic mechanisms underlying the increased CRC risk associated with the consumption of red and processed red meat.

show abstract

“…The sampling procedure is relatively simple, making it a more patient-friendly procedure compared to guaiac-based or other forms of FOBT [8–10]. Although colonoscopy is considered to be the most thorough screening test, FOBTs/ iFOBTs have strong evidence of clinical effectiveness [11], and have been shown to lead to a 30% reduction in CRC mortality and a 20% reduction in CRC incidence with acceptable cost-effectiveness [12–15]. As a first line strategy, this easy-to use screening modality may offer a promising way to reach those patients who already face a number of impediments to timely health care.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patients’ Perceptions of Colorectal Cancer Screening Tests and Preparatory Education in Federally Qualified Health Centers

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background This study explored federally qualified health center (FQHC) patients’ perceptions about colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) tests, including immunochemical fecal occult blood tests (iFOBT), as well as preferences for receiving in-clinic education about CRCS. Methods Eight mixed-gender focus groups were conducted with 53 patients. Results Findings centered on three thematic factors: 1) motivators and impediments to CRCS, 2) test-specific preferences and receptivity to iFOBTs, and 3) preferences for entertaining and engaging plain language materials. Conclusion Results informed the development of educational priming materials to increase CRCS using iFOBT in FQHCs.

show abstract

Fecal Occult Blood Testing

Cited by 20 publications

References 54 publications

Computer-aided colorectal tumor classification in NBI endoscopy using local features

Computer-aided colorectal tumor classification in NBI endoscopy using local features

Mechanisms Linking Colorectal Cancer to the Consumption of (Processed) Red Meat: A Review

Patients’ Perceptions of Colorectal Cancer Screening Tests and Preparatory Education in Federally Qualified Health Centers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About