ABSTRACT
Objectives To evaluate whether quantitative measurement of faecal haemoglobin (f-Hb) using faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) can be used to rule out colorectal cancer (CRC) for patients who present to primary care with ‘high risk’ symptoms defined by national guidelines for urgent referral for suspected cancer (NICE NG12).
Design Prospective cohort study carried out between April 2017 and March 2019.
Setting 59 GP practices in London and 24 hospitals in England.
Participants Symptomatic patients in England referred to the urgent CRC pathway who provided a faecal sample for FIT in addition to standard investigations for cancer.
Main outcome measures CRC was confirmed by established clinical and histopathology procedures. f-Hb (μg per gram of stool) was measured in a central laboratory blinded to cancer outcome. We calculated sensitivity (percentage of patients with CRC who have f-Hb exceeding specified cut-offs); false-positive rate [FPR] (percentage of patients without CRC whose f-Hb exceeds the same cut-offs); and positive predictive value [PPV] (percentage of all patients with f-Hb above the cut-offs who have CRC).
Results 4676 patients were recruited of whom 3596 patients were included (had a valid FIT test and a known definitive diagnosis). Among the 3596, median age was 67 years, 53% were female and 78% had colonoscopy. 90 patients were diagnosed with CRC, 7 with other cancers, and 3499 with no cancer found. f-Hb did not correlate with age, sex or ethnicity. Using f-Hb ≥4μg/g (lowest limit of detection), sensitivity, FPR and PPV were 87.8%, 27.0% and 7.7% respectively. Using f-Hb ≥10μg/g, the corresponding measures were 83.3%, 19.9% and 9.7%. 15 patients with CRC had f-Hb below 10μg/g. If FIT had been used at thresholds of 10μg/g or 4μg/g, 1 in 6 or 1 in 8 patients with cancer respectively would have been missed. If the absence of anaemia or abdominal pain is used alongside f-Hb 10 μg/g, only 1 in 18 cancers would be missed but 56% of people without CRC could potentially avoid further investigations including colonoscopies.
Conclusions In our study, if FIT alone had been used to determine urgent referral for patients with ‘high risk’ symptoms for definitive cancer investigation, some patients with bowel cancer would not have been diagnosed. If used in conjunction with clinical features, particularly in the absence of anaemia, the efficacy of FIT is significantly improved. With appropriate safety netting, FIT could be used to focus secondary care diagnostic capacity on patients most at risk of CRC.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The study was funded by NHS England Cancer Alliance programme (formerly known as the National Cancer Vanguard, part of the New Care Models programme), North London Partners in Health and Care (North Central London’s Sustainability and transformation partnership), NIHR University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre and Cancer Research UK and was conducted independently by the North Central London Cancer Alliance (formerly known as UCLH Cancer Collaborative and North Central and East London Cancer Alliance). The Mast Group provided 2000 FIT test tubes.
Author Declarations
All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.
Yes
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Additional summary tables and analyses are available upon request from the senior author, Mr Michael Machesney.
