Selecting a Cut-off for Colorectal Cancer Screening With a Fecal Immunochemical Test
Published 2017 View Full Article
- Home
- Publications
- Publication Search
- Publication Details
Title
Selecting a Cut-off for Colorectal Cancer Screening With a Fecal Immunochemical Test
Authors
Keywords
-
Journal
Clinical and Translational Gastroenterology
Volume 8, Issue 8, Pages e111
Publisher
Springer Nature
Online
2017-08-03
DOI
10.1038/ctg.2017.37
References
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Related references
Note: Only part of the references are listed.- Real-Time Monitoring of Results During First Year of Dutch Colorectal Cancer Screening Program and Optimization by Altering Fecal Immunochemical Test Cut-Off Levels
- (2017) Esther Toes-Zoutendijk et al. GASTROENTEROLOGY
- Strong subsite-specific variation in detecting advanced adenomas by fecal immunochemical testing for hemoglobin
- (2017) Hermann Brenner et al. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER
- Fecal Immunochemical Test Program Performance Over 4 Rounds of Annual Screening
- (2016) Christopher D. Jensen et al. ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE
- Immunochemical faecal occult blood testing to screen for colorectal cancer: can the screening interval be extended?
- (2016) Ulrike Haug et al. GUT
- Estimation of Benefits, Burden, and Harms of Colorectal Cancer Screening Strategies
- (2016) Amy B. Knudsen et al. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION
- Participation, yield, and interval carcinomas in three rounds of biennial FIT-based colorectal cancer screening
- (2015) I. Stegeman et al. Cancer Epidemiology
- Trends in Adenoma Detection Rates During the First 10 Years of the German Screening Colonoscopy Program
- (2015) Hermann Brenner et al. GASTROENTEROLOGY
- The value of models in informing resource allocation in colorectal cancer screening: the case of the Netherlands
- (2015) Frank van Hees et al. GUT
- Faecal immunochemical tests versus guaiac faecal occult blood tests: what clinicians and colorectal cancer screening programme organisers need to know
- (2015) Jill Tinmouth et al. GUT
- Colorectal cancer screening: a global overview of existing programmes
- (2015) Eline H Schreuders et al. GUT
- Attendance and diagnostic yield of repeated two-sample faecal immunochemical test screening for colorectal cancer
- (2015) Atija Kapidzic et al. GUT
- Accuracy of Fecal Immunochemical Tests for Colorectal Cancer
- (2014) Jeffrey K. Lee et al. ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE
- Difference in Performance of Fecal Immunochemical Tests With the Same Hemoglobin Cutoff Concentration in a Nationwide Colorectal Cancer Screening Program
- (2014) Tsung-Hsien Chiang et al. GASTROENTEROLOGY
- An updated Asia Pacific Consensus Recommendations on colorectal cancer screening
- (2014) J J Y Sung et al. GUT
- Population Screening for Colorectal Cancer Means Getting FIT: The Past, Present, and Future of Colorectal Cancer Screening Using the Fecal Immunochemical Test for Hemoglobin (FIT)
- (2014) James E. Allison et al. Gut and Liver
- Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: Sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012
- (2014) Jacques Ferlay et al. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER
- Fecal immunochemical test accuracy in average-risk colorectal cancer screening
- (2014) Vicent Hernandez WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
- Population-based colorectal cancer screening: comparison of two fecal occult blood test
- (2014) Miren B. Zubero et al. Frontiers in Pharmacology
- Comparative Evaluation of Immunochemical Fecal Occult Blood Tests for Colorectal Adenoma Detection
- (2013) Sabrina Hundt ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE
- Superior diagnostic performance of faecal immunochemical tests for haemoglobin in a head-to-head comparison with guaiac based faecal occult blood test among 2235 participants of screening colonoscopy
- (2013) Hermann Brenner et al. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER
- Long-Term Mortality after Screening for Colorectal Cancer
- (2013) Aasma Shaukat et al. NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE
- Comparison between a guaiac and three immunochemical faecal occult blood tests in screening for colorectal cancer
- (2012) J. Faivre et al. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER
- Efficacy of a Nationwide Screening Colonoscopy Program for Colorectal Cancer
- (2012) Christian P. Pox et al. GASTROENTEROLOGY
- The Miss Rate for Colorectal Adenoma Determined by Quality-Adjusted, Back-to-Back Colonoscopies
- (2012) Sang Bong Ahn et al. Gut and Liver
- Nottingham trial of faecal occult blood testing for colorectal cancer: a 20-year follow-up
- (2011) J H Scholefield et al. GUT
- Sex Differences in Performance of Fecal Occult Blood Testing
- (2010) Hermann Brenner et al. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
- Efficacy and Tolerability of Split-Dose Magnesium Citrate: Low-Volume (2 Liters) Polyethylene Glycol vs. Single- or Split-Dose Polyethylene Glycol Bowel Preparation for Morning Colonoscopy
- (2010) Sin Sil Park et al. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
- Low-Dose Aspirin Use and Performance of Immunochemical Fecal Occult Blood Tests
- (2010) Hermann Brenner et al. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION
- Quantitative Immunochemical Fecal Occult Blood Testing for Colorectal Adenoma Detection: Evaluation in the Target Population of Screening and Comparison With Qualitative Tests
- (2009) Ulrike Haug et al. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
- Screening for colorectal cancer: randomised trial comparing guaiac-based and immunochemical faecal occult blood testing and flexible sigmoidoscopy
- (2009) L Hol et al. GUT
- Cochrane Systematic Review of Colorectal Cancer Screening Using the Fecal Occult Blood Test (Hemoccult): An Update
- (2008) Paul Hewitson et al. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
- Miss rate for colorectal neoplastic polyps: a prospective multicenter study of back-to-back video colonoscopies
- (2008) D. Heresbach et al. ENDOSCOPY
Publish scientific posters with Peeref
Peeref publishes scientific posters from all research disciplines. Our Diamond Open Access policy means free access to content and no publication fees for authors.
Learn MoreAsk a Question. Answer a Question.
Quickly pose questions to the entire community. Debate answers and get clarity on the most important issues facing researchers.
Get Started