Background A novel pathway incorporating faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) for rapid colorectal cancer diagnosis (RCCD) was introduced in 2017. This paper reports on the service evaluation after 2 years of pathway implementation. Methods The RCCD protocol was based on FIT, blood results and symptoms to stratify adult patients in primary care. Two-week-wait (2WW) investigation was indicated for patients with rectal bleeding, rectal mass and faecal haemoglobin (fHb) level of 10 µg Hb/g faeces or above or 4 µg Hb/g faeces or more in the presence of anaemia, low ferritin or thrombocytosis, in all other symptom groups. Patients with 100 µg Hb/g faeces or above had expedited investigation . A retrospective audit of colorectal cancer detected between 2017 and 2019 was conducted, fHb thresholds were reviewed and critically assessed for cancer diagnoses. Results In 2 years, 14788 FIT tests were dispatched with 13361 (90.4 per cent) completed returns. Overall, fHb was less than 4 µg Hb/g faeces in 9208 results (68.9 per cent), 4–9.9 µg Hb/g in 1583 (11.8 per cent), 10–99.9 µg Hb/g in 1850 (13.8 per cent) and 100 µg Hb/g faeces or above in 720 (5.4 per cent). During follow-up (median 10.4 months), 227 colorectal cancers were diagnosed. The cancer detection rate was 0.1 per cent in patients with fHb below 4 µg Hb/g faeces, 0.6 per cent in those with fHb 4–9.9 µg Hb/g faeces, 3.3 per cent for fHb 10–99.9 µg Hb/g faeces and 20.7 per cent for fHb 100 µg Hb/g faeces or above. The detection rate in the cohort with 10–19.9 µg Hb/g faeces was 1.4 per cent, below the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence threshold for urgent referral. The colorectal cancer rate in patients with fHb below 20 µg Hb/g faeces was less than 0.3 per cent. Conclusion Use of FIT to "rule out" urgent referral from primary care misses a small number of cases. The threshold for referral may be adjusted with blood results to improve stratification .

ObjectivesCurrently, NICE recommends the use of faecal immunochemical test (FIT) at faecal haemoglobin concentrations (f-Hb) of 10 μg Hb/g faeces to stratify for colorectal cancer (CRC) risk in symptomatic populations. This f-Hb cut-off is advised across all analysers, despite the fact that a direct comparison of analyser performance, in a clinical setting, has not been performed.MethodsTwo specimen collection devices (OC-Sensor, OC-S; HM-JACKarc, HM-J) were sent to 914 consecutive individuals referred for follow up due to their increased risk of CRC. Agreement of f-Hb around cut-offs of 4, 10 and 150 µg Hb/g faeces and CRC detection rates were assessed. Two OC-S devices were sent to a further 114 individuals, for within test comparisons.ResultsA total of 732 (80.1%) individuals correctly completed and returned two different FIT devices, with 38 (5.2%) CRCs detected. Median f-Hb for individuals diagnosed with and without CRC were 258.5 and 1.8 µg Hb/g faeces for OC-S and 318.1 and 1.0 µg Hb/g faeces for HM-J respectively. Correlation of f-Hb results between OC-S/HM-J over the full range was rho=0.74, p<0.001. Using a f-Hb of 4 µg Hb/g faeces for both tests found an agreement of 88.1%, at 10 µg Hb/g faeces 91.7% and at 150 µg Hb/g faeces 96.3%. A total of 114 individuals completed and returned two OC-S devices; correlation across the full range was rho=0.98, p<0.001.ConclusionsWe found large variations in f-Hb when different FIT devices were used, but a smaller variation when the same FIT device was used. Our data suggest that analyser-specific f-Hb cut-offs are applied with regard to clinical decision making, especially at lower f-Hb.

The stress response is a natural reaction by the body, against potentially harmful stimuli to enhance the chance for survival. Persistent activation of the stress response can cause changes to homeostatic mechanisms. The study of stress neurophysiology, in the evaluation of the manifestation of disease in the body, suggests that these chronic changes have detrimental effects on sub cortical structures. Furthermore, there is much scientific support for the notion that chronic activation of supraspinal systems will lead to maladaptation of homeostatic mechanisms, causing the impairment of processes within the body, and ultimately leading to visceral disorders. The chiropractic profession for many years has alluded to chronic change of neurophysiological pathways as a potential explanation of visceral disorders, but the profession has typically described these in terms of somatovisceral or viscerosomatic reflex activity. Change in supraspinal neurophysiological efferent activity is increasingly being used to explain "stress" related disease. The chiropractic profession should consider investigating such stress responses by conducting spinal manipulative therapy trials that evaluate supraspinal effects of manipulation. Such research may help elucidate key mechanisms associated with the change of visceral disorders noted by some chiropractors following manipulative therapy.

No abstract

No abstract