You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Letter
Getting the best out of faecal immunochemical tests and faecal calprotectin
  1. Charlotte Chuter1,
  2. Ada Keding2,
  3. Hayden Holmes3,
  4. Daniel Turnock4,
  5. James Turvill5
  1. 1 Gastroenterology, York Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, York, North Yorkshire, UK
  2. 2 Health Sciences, University of York, York, North Yorkshire, UK
  3. 3 York Health Economics Consortium, York, North Yorkshire, UK
  4. 4 Biochemistry, York Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, York, North Yorkshire, UK
  5. 5 Gastroenterology, York Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, York, North Yorkshire, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr James Turvill, Gastroenterology, York Hospital, York, UK; james.turvill{at}york.nhs.uk

https://doi.org/10.1136/flgastro-2019-101381

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Faecal calprotectin (FC) and the faecal immunochemical test for haemoglobin (FIT) are recommended for use in primary care where colorectal cancer (CRC) is not suspected.1 2 We are unclear how best to use these two biomarkers in younger patients where lower gastrointestinal symptoms are extremely common. Distinguishing irritable bowel syndrome from inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) from CRC on clinical grounds is often an uncertain exercise. Currently, there is no direct comparative evidence base on which to identify the optimal use of each biomarker. We undertook an illustrative comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of FC in a patient dataset at ‘low risk’ of CRC stratified by age and symptoms, and of FIT, from three existing published studies that included both CRC and IBD in their outcomes.3–11 From an existing dataset of patients using the York Faecal Calprotectin Care Pathway (YFCCP), we identified 1919 patients fulfilling National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) DG30 …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors JT is the guarantor of the article, directed the study and wrote the first draft. CC provided the evaluation dataset and conducted the primary evaluation. AK performed the comparator evaluation. HH provided the health economic analytic model. DT assisted in the preparation of the manuscript. The final version is approved by all the authors.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Patient consent for publication Not required.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.