Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) in patients with signs or symptoms of suspected colorectal cancer (CRC): a joint guideline from the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) and the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG).

Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) has a high sensitivity for the detection of colorectal cancer (CRC). In a symptomatic population FIT may identify those patients who require colorectal investigation with the highest priority. FIT offers considerable advantages over the use of symptoms alone, as an objective measure of risk with a vastly superior positive predictive value for CRC, while conversely identifying a truly low risk cohort of patients. The aim of this guideline was to provide a clear strategy for the use of FIT in the diagnostic pathway of people with signs or symptoms of a suspected diagnosis of CRC. The guideline was jointly developed by the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland/British Society of Gastroenterology, specifically by a 21-member multidisciplinary guideline development group (GDG). A systematic review of 13 535 publications was undertaken to develop 23 evidence and expert opinion-based recommendations for the triage of people with symptoms of a suspected CRC diagnosis in primary care. In order to achieve consensus among a broad group of key stakeholders, we completed an extended Delphi of the GDG, and also 61 other individuals across the UK and Ireland, including by members of the public, charities and primary and secondary care. Seventeen research recommendations were also prioritised to inform clinical management.

Faecal immunochemical test for suspected colorectal cancer symptoms: patient survey of usability and acceptability.

BACKGROUND: Recent evidence suggests that the faecal immunochemical test (FIT) can rule out colorectal cancer (CRC) in symptomatic patients. To date, there is no research on usability and perception of FIT for these patients. AIM: To measure variation in attitudes and perception of FIT in patients with suspected CRC symptoms. DESIGN & SETTING: A cross-sectional survey of a subset of participants of the NICE FIT study. METHOD: A questionnaire was co-developed with patients covering four themes on a Likert scale: FIT feasibility, faecal aversion, patient knowledge, and future intentions. Questionnaire and FIT kits were sent to patients with suspected CRC symptoms participating in the NICE FIT study. Logistic regression explored differences in patients' test perception by ethnic group, language, age, location, deprivation, FIT use, and previous experience. RESULTS: A total of 1151 questionnaires were analysed; 90.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 88.3% to 91.8%) of patients found faecal collection straightforward, 76.3% (95% CI = 73.7% to 78.6%) disagreed FIT was unhygienic, and 78.1% (95% CI = 75.6% to 80.4%) preferred FIT to colonoscopy. Preference for FIT over colonoscopy was weaker in patients aged 40-64 years than those >65 years (odds ratio [OR] 0.60; 95% CI = 0.43 to 0.84). Intention to use FIT again was stronger in patients who successfully used FIT than those unsuccessful (OR 11.08; 95% CI = 2.74 to 44.75), and white compared with non-white patients assessed (OR 3.20; 95% CI = 1.32 to 7.75). CONCLUSION: While most patients found FIT practical and hygienic, perception differences were found. Strategies to engage patients with more negative FIT perception should underpin symptomatic FIT pathways.

The rectosigmoid problem.

The lack of consensus over the transition point for the end of the sigmoid and beginning of the rectum is a problem for the colorectal multidisciplinary team. In this review, we survey the wide number of landmarks for the rectosigmoid junction, and describe the theoretical and evidence-based strengths and weaknesses of each one. Without a reliable definition of the rectum, sigmoid and rectal cancers will be classified inconsistently. As the treatment strategies for sigmoid and rectal cancers are radically different, incorrect tumour localisation has a substantial impact on patient management, leading to under or over treatment. Inconsistent classification will confound investigation of metastatic patterns and treatment outcomes. Now that the rectosigmoid junction has been recognised as a distinct segment of colon by the International Classification of Diseases, further heterogeneity in management and outcomes could result to the detriment of patients and research. We describe a bespoke, anatomical and reliable landmark for the rectosigmoid junction; the sigmoid take-off.